B. U. G. S.

I take offense at your statment. So you write an entry which is more proclamation than discussion and then you expect everyone (during a holiday weekend even)to throw themselves to the floor, genuflect like trained puppets, and squawk what a wun-der-full statment you have just made. Okay, fine. From now on when you’ve written one of your declarations of adoration entries I’m gonna’ write:

“Amen-hallelujah-aman! That Bubba Witt’ker fella is might-eee fine! Amen – hallelujah-amen!”

Hi Bob, I’m a new seminarian. I’ve started to put your ideas into practice, specifically the importance of synthesizing complex ideas into hard hitting one-liners (whitakerisms).

Please take a look at these two posts I made at amren and help me sharpen my pen even further. I expect rigourous criticism that pulls no punches. Thanks.

As you read the two posts (reprinted below) note that the whitakerisms I am trying to advance are:

1. White colonialism over Africa allowed the native population to increase five fold, from 100 million to today’s 500 million plus. Thus, four out of five Blacks owe their very existence to Whites and the true basis of their resentment is ingratitude.

2. A majority of Americans has always been and continues to be against immigration. Displacing a people against their will is called ETHNIC CLEANSING. (Optional: Advocating the ethnic cleansing of any group is called RACE HATRED.)

Given the British context of the debate, these whitakerisms were converted into:

1a. British rule in India allowed the native population to increase four fold, from 250m to over a billion today. Thus, three quarters of Indians owe their very existence to the event and the true basis of their resentment is ingratitude.

2a. A majority of Britons has always been and continues to be against immigration. Immigration against the will of the natives is called COLONIZATION. (Optional: Advocating the colonization of any people is IMMORAL.)

FIRST POST:
“Indeed, never before have so few owed so much to so many.”

When the British arrived India’s population was less than 250 million. The medical and sanitation technologies introduced by the British allowed India’s population to increase to today’s 800+ million. Factor in Pakistan and Bangladesh and it’s over a billion.

This means three quarters of them owe their very existence to the British. The word ingratitude doesn’t even begin to describe Ghost’s comments.

Well Ghost, how about the British give back the koh-i-noor diamond and the army wages? Will three quarters of you hand over your lives in exchange?

I can’t tell which is more staggeringly colossal, your debt to the British or the scale of your ingratitude. You should be ashamed of yourself.

SECOND POST:
Ghost wrote:

>”It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt, anonymous at 9:23.”

To quote John Bryant, “The personal insult is the last refuge of the outargued”. What a remarkably fitting introduction to your feeble attempt at rebuttal!

>”I guess you have never heard of Thomas Malthus and the theory of population growth.But how could you, he was not Anglo-Saxon.”

Malthus maintained that increasing overall wealth doesn’t reduce poverty because the poor breed to meet the increased economic carrying capacity. I am astonished you bring this up as it merely validates my point with regard to India. The India/Pakistan/Bangladesh region (which I will hereinafter simplify to just “India”) has indeed seen population grow to meet the new carrying capacity set by the introduction of Western science. Specifically, the region’s population has grown from 250 million to today’s billion plus.

As to Malthus not being Anglo-Saxon, well neither am I. So what? You don’t have to be British to be shocked that Indians, three-quarters of whom owe their very existence to the British, could be so staggeringly ungrateful as to claim the British owe them! And if you don’t think such breathtaking ingratitude has anything to do with you, let me draw your attention to your first post and its conclusion: “Indeed, never before have so few owed so much to so many.”

>”Going by your remarkable logic, the population of Africa, large tracts of which still do not possess basic healthcare and other facilities, would have remained stable.”

Precisely. Sub-saharan Africa’s population increased from less than 100 million to today’s 500 million due to the introduction of Western science which includes (but is not limited to) medicine, sanitation and superior agricultural techniques. This is a five fold increase; being more backward than the Indians, their benefit was correspondingly greater.

>”In fact the Indian system of medicine(Ayurveda) and doctors were so advanced that there is proof of them even performing plastic surgery, dental surgery and the removal of cataracts.”

Good for them. Please encourage Indian immigrants to use Ayurveda medicine as much as possible. The British healthcare system is massively overburdened and any relief would be welcome.

However, the point stands: India’s population growth occured thanks to Western science. If Ayurveda medicine was capable of doing same, the population growth would have preceded the introduction of Western science. Since this is not the case your attempted rebuttal fails.

>”Ill even take you up on your offer to take back ALL Indian immigrants if the British gave us back the money and the crown jewels etc.”

I’m afraid you misread my hypothetical offer. I’ll restate it, please read it carefully this time:

“Well Ghost, how about the British give back the koh-i-noor diamond and the army wages? Will three quarters of you hand over your lives in exchange?”

Please note the operative words “your lives” because that is what you would be grateful for if you weren’t so determined to set new standards of insolence and ingratitude. Your lives. Get it? Your lives. Three quarters of you WOULD NOT EVEN EXIST were it not for the British. I hope I have stressed the point sufficiently because I don’t have time to look up the word for “lives” or “existence” in Indian languages in order to get this point through to you.

>”The cost of paying back just the money would be(inflation adjusted taking the 1900 pound as a base,therefore a fairly conservative estimate) 1012.5 billion pounds or one trillion pounds(American maths) approximately… Will the British kindly pay up?”

For your lives? The lives of 750 million people are worth only 1 trillion pounds to you? I’m astonished you value the lives of your fellow Indians at less than 1,350 pounds each. But then again, having already seen your phenomenal ingratitude it’s going to take a lot more to surprise me.

>”The advent of the British led to a government led brutal suppression of traditional Indian medicinal, land ownership, and economic practices that had served India well for centuries.”

Indeed, this is the point. Superior methods displaced inferior ones in order for your population to grow fourfold.

>”The only reason the British invaded India was for monetary benefit, make no mistake about that.They were monsters, and there was nothing altruistic their deeds.They actively discouraged the setting up of higher education systems as they wanted cheap Indian clerks to serve their purposes.Even the setting up of railways was only for the fast transportation of their goods, the benefit to Indians was only incidental.”

Correct. The British were operating in their self-interest and not in the expectation of gratitude (charity). Which neatly leads to my next reply:

>”Therefore, Mr. anonymous at 9:23, to even think that I should be grateful to the British proves how viciously arrogant you are. Your condescending attitude shines through your post.”

Actually no, it is your INITIAL statement, “Indeed, never before have so few owed so much to so many” that proves how “visciously arrogant you are”. Get it? The only reason we are discussing “gratitude” is because YOU BROUGHT IT UP! Like the British you mention, I couldn’t care less about Indian gratitude and I am not writing to solicit it. The stunning sight of your shameless ingratitude, where you went so far as to claim the British “owed so much”, forced me to respond in order to set the record straight and put you in your proper place. And yes, your condescending attitude, specifically your victimological entitlement mentality, did indeed shine through your first post. Forcing me to again put you in your place in that regard as well.

>”I have nothing against modern Englishmen, but I see absolutely no wrong in Indians going and living there(only Indians and people from other English colonies, and only in England mind you).”

This is contradictory. If you have nothing against modern Englishmen, then you wouldn’t advocate their destruction via ethnic submersion. It further reinforces my point regarding your unbelievable ingratitude; they expand your population fourfold, you pay them back by seeking to destroy their identity.

>”What you gain on the swings you lose on the roundabouts.”

Being aware that you hold the incredible belief that Britain’s rule over India was harmful, I can only take this as an open admission that you yourself regard the current colonization of Britain by Indians as detrimental.

>”Why even your own precious Irish hate the British, and last I checked they were White.”

This is a side issue that is irrelevant to our discussion except insofar as it raises an interesting question. Ask yourself why 5 million Irish are harder to rule over than 250 million Indians. What makes the two populations so different?

>”Kindly disabuse yourself of the notion that oppressed people should be grateful to their oppressors, no matter how much they do for their benefit,”

I agree with every word. A majority of Britons has always been and continues to be against immigration. Immigration against the will of the natives is called COLONIZATION. Hopefully you can now understand why your statement, “Indeed, never before have so few owed so much to so many” is so deeply offensive. Please take your own advice and “kindly disabuse yourself of the notion that oppressed people should be grateful to their oppressors”.

However, though colonization is always immoral, particularly your current attempts against Britain, in the case of India (and other parts of the third world) the benefits obtained were so immense that they form the exception to the rule. Whereas in the case of China and other advanced civilizations colonialism is always immoral, in the case of extremely backward cultures such as those of Africa and the Indian subcontinent, direct intervention is a moral obligation (though this need not be the actual motive). Obviously, once the backward cultures have functioning models of government and social organization as well as access to Western science, the moral case fails and colonialism becomes immoral.

What determines whether a culture is too backward to be left alone is the question of whether their lack of cultural awareness over the importance of sanitation reduces the population to drinking their own urine and faeces. Such populations are disease incubators that represent a threat to all of humanity and saddle outsiders with an obligation to step in. This was the case in India. Indeed, third-worlders ought to work harder at suppressing easily treatable diseases like bubonic plague (endemic in India) instead of constantly whining and expecting others to come back in and solve their problems again. Time to grow up already.

>”and in the case of the British they did precious little.”

More shameless ingratitude. And what’s even more outrageous is the fact that whereas British colonization of India was of colossal benefit to the natives (three quarters of whom OWE THEIR VERY EXISTENCE to the event), Indian colonization of Britain is a colossal detriment that will NEVER increase the native population fourfold, or twofold or in any way whatsoever. Indeed, the only benefit I have been able to identify after an exhaustive search is the introduction of a few recipes. Yes, you read that right, A FEW RECIPES!

At this point, given the level of insolence and ingratitude you have exhibited so far, I wouldn’t at all be surprised if you went all the way and equated the gift of LIFE AND EXISTENCE to a handful of RECIPES. After all, the fact that you have chosen not to apologize for your claim that the Brits “owe so much” but have instead chosen to insist further and even admit that the colonization of Britain is detrimental (“you lose on the roundabouts”) has taken your mindblowing ingratitude to a level there are simply no words for. You should be ashamed of yourself.

———-
Both posted at http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2006/05/a_nation_betray.php