Egypt is used to bread riots. It is used to the Muslim Brotherhood trying to assert itself and being very throughly beaten into submission. What is happening today is neither a bread riot nor part of the Ikhwan's cunning plan. Rather, it appears, both the ruling elite and the protesting crowds are bidding for the support of the boys in the barracks.
It is in this context that President Obama- but not holier-than-thou Hilary Clinton- has an element of benign leverage.
A Junior Officer brokered settlement between the rulers and the protestors might be able to get the West and other regional stakeholders to kick in massive increments in resources so as to manage a transition to...pretty much the sort of thing you had before but with El Bardadei doing a P.R. fan-dance to disguise the fact that he and his ilk have no power..
If Obama shoves Hilary aside and really takes charge of this- showing the boys in the barracks that Egypt matters and that his famous address to the Muslim people in Cairo was more than mere rhetoric- then, it may be, his benign leverage can be used to facilitate the sort of structural change Egypt needs.
Will it happen?
So no change there, then.
Manmohan is a ruthless sex machine who has slept his way to the top (and I don't mean just by dozing off during lectures or Cabinet meetings and so on).
Indeed, last year, I warned America of what would happen if Michele invited that bounder to the White House. While she was busy in the kitchen preparing the makki di roti that fuels his raging satryriasis, the slutty Sardar banged her husband breathless and charisma bereft.
Ultra articulate, egg-head, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, currently in Davos, on the other hand, is just a turbaned tampon.
Why does Wikipedia not tell us these things anymore? Political Correctness gone mad- right?!
Personally, I blame David Cameron.
He must cut the apron strings of Brussels even if this means giving up breast feeding George Osborne.
Von Mises, like Wittgenstein, was an assimilated (indeed his father had been ennobled) Austrian Jew loyal to an incompossible Empire.
As he point out, in his 1919 work 'Nation, State & Economy", the Hapsburg Empire had no further legitimating ideology, or principle of coherence, other than the claims of the ruling dynasty. He says- 'in the last forty years of its existence, the Empire was, with a few transitory exceptions, more or less anti-German and often draconically persecuted relatively harmless utterances of German national sentiments, while far sharper speeches and deeds of the other nationalities enjoyed benevolent toleration, the state-supporting parties among the Germans always kept the upper hand. Up to the last days of the Empire the Germans felt themselves the real champions of the state idea, citizens of a German state. Was that a delusion, was it political immaturity?'
India, today, from the perspective of the U.P.A, looks rather like the Hapsburg Empire. It coheres because it is the inheritance of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty. The only anti-national forces that are to be 'draconically persecuted' are Hindutva outfits. Indeed, according to Wikileaks, Rahul Gandhi is said to have denounced home-grown Hindu extremist groups as a bigger threat to India than Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba and Muslim militants during his conversations with US Ambassador Timothy Roemer.
As a matter of fact, what Mises does not mention is that it was the Jews, not the Germans, who were the most loyal of the Hapsburg subjects- German irredentism was not the inconsequential schwarmerei he took it for.
Indeed, Hitler's main selling point, in his Mein Kampf, was that the Hapsburgs used their alliance with the fuck-wit Kaiser to quiet their own German population- in other words, Germany wasn't to blame for starting the War- them Slav-loving Hapsburgs were. This was the one original thing Hitler could add to the program the German Army was paying him to publicize and agitate towards- viz. the 'stab in the back' theory- i.e. the Army didn't lose the War at all. What actually happened was, some random Jewish guy, running late for Shabbos, mislaid it and then lied about having ever had the thing in his possession in the first place, shrugging his shoulders and rolling his eyes in that way they have and like totally getting in your face when taken to task saying things like 'yore Momma so fat... my wrist watch is what I lost fisting her- howsabout you get in there and get it back for me- hunh?."
Which is not to say that Count Schlieffen and Eulenberg and the Kaiser an all the other assholes at General Staff, including the always ludicrous Ludenndorf, weren't all a bunch of tutu wearing, gay, clockwork toys ceaselessly buggering each other till their brains turned to shite.
In the end, Hitler almost pulled off the dream of the Austrian German Nationalists- viz. enlisting Prussian military might to maintain German dominance over Slavs in the former Hapsburg territories.
Since the more clear eyed of the Austrian Jews- even those who started off as Pan-Germanists like Viktor Adler- ultimately saw the writing on the wall- Prussia might be safe for Jews, but a truncated German Austria could never be so- vide Schonerer, Karl Leuger and, actually, a whole bunch of self-hating kravatenjeden silly-arses- so these guys wanted some Socialist Utopia- where Universalism would replace Nationalism, or else they wanted a Night Watchman State, such that no collective was cognizable and only Individual Economic agents remained. Since stuff like Order and Respect for Private Property was crucially dependent on States not getting up to the sort of shenanigans that States always get up to- so, like, mebbee?, the Gold standard and no fiat money and other such Karl Kraus krankishness might strait-jacket the State such that its Power only exercised itself to curb its own burgeoning.
Von Mises was one such twat- a long lived twat- one, moreover, associated with two of the most repellent and long tonguedly self twat battering female nutjobs in history- viz. Ann Raynd and 'Alan' Greenspan- but he intended no harm to India specifically, as opposed to America- so R.I.P bro- as for Israel, you wouldn't have liked them horny handed sabras anyway- and like fuck they'd have touched your shite.
If India breaks up nicely and sweetly, like sugar cubes dissolving in tea- Von Mises is relevant to India. It won't. This is a mother fucking catastrophe waiting to happen.
Mises didn't do mimetics- mirror nuerons- he didn't understand States, he didn't understand people- but he was a survivor. Think Brunlo Betthelheim who parlayed a PhD in Aesthetics (which he only got coz he was so mother fucking ugly that the girl he liked insisted he get a Doctorate coz otherwise people would have said she only married him for his money) into some sort of Psychoanalrapist role buggering the brains of Moms of autistic kids (Mom's place is in the wrong).
Does Von Mises have admirers in India? Deeply silly ones, yes.
My advice to them- get out while you can.
I've just received a marriage proposal- conditional upon my turning Muslim
The offer is made by a lady estimable enough on all points- judging by her self-description- the only particular furnishing pretext to pause being her assertion that she is 'modest and wears hijab' and thus nobody's 'blonde arm-candy'. (I suspect my suitor is American.)
This gave me a dynamite idea for a new type of Hijab or Burkha, or whatever it's called, with 'My other three wives are Blonde Arm Candy' stenciled on its back, like bumper stickers declaring your other car to be a Porsche.
Incidentally, I always rejected the thesis of Salman Rushdie's 'Veils suck' article- his own marriage would have been saved had he kept on the Brown Paper Bag de rigueur amongst South Asians back in the Seventies which, it is tragic to note, the rising generation of affluent, I-phone owning, young people now turn up their noses at, especially in France, where Monsieur Sarkozy has felt obliged to bring in legislation banning these new-fangled fabric hijabs- the first step, no doubt, to introducing strategically placed holes in the cast iron Parisian pissoir- enabling the male half of that loathsome race to propagate itself without injury to the aesthetic sensibilities of its females.
Amy Chua is a Professor of Law at Yale. She has written a book proving the superiority of Chinese Mothers- who beat and humiliate their daughters, presumably while driving- to Western Mums. Except, that's just hype. The truth is, Amy was a wimp and chickened out once her younger daughter hit puberty and got the weight advantage.
I need hardly mention the great superiority of Indian mothers to Chinese mothers. Notice that neither of Amy's two daughters are Professors of Anything Anywhere though both are already in their teens.
An Indian Mommy would have ensured that her daughters received PhD's while still in nappies and gained tenured Professorships by the time they could walk.
But only if married to a Panda daddy.
What is a Panda daddy?
A corpulent, idle, brain-dead, hereditary Indian politician who has dozens of N.G.O's and Colleges and Co-Operatives and so on under his patronage.
Poor Amy. All that effort- and for what? So her kids score well in Math and play Mozart?
Compare her to Sonia. Better than being a Tiger Mommy, she married a Panda Dad.
"In having graced us with his presence and given so amply of his talents and his time, Prof. Chatterjee has displayed, not personal generosity merely, but- pray pardon the pun- professional joenerosity!'
It was, the late, Vice Chancellor Soundarajan Malaiperumal, still referred to as the Mahaffy- Oscar Wilde's whilom mentor and mirror of wit- of Mysore, who addressed this charming compliment to Prof. A.M. Chatterjee on the occassion of his resignation from the Annamalai faculty.
The audience of under-graduates, which included my esteemed Great Uncle, the late 'Hitler' Sheshadri, became utterly incontinent with laughter at the pickled Vice Chancellor's piquant paronomosia.
Prof. Chatterjee, however, was not amused.
Indeed, his appreciation of Tamil humor had declined in inverse proportion to his perfervid umbrage at the College magazine's incorrigible and ergodic exegesis of Common Report's reiterated assertion that his research on Shakespeare's role in the management of the Mermaid was motivated entirely by a, characteristically and exclusively, Bengali preoccupation with the erotic possibilities suggested by not the human upper, but the hilsa lower, half of that mythical beauty of the briny Deep- ribald comment regarding which dominated the dissertations of the Doctoral candidates under his supervision, to the permanent depravement, it is tragic to note, of their vegetarian commitment in later life- as, per example, 'Hitler' Sheshadri, my revered Great Uncle, whose habit of raining down rotting fish-heads, from 'the Gods',upon sub-standard performers secured his position as the doyen of the Carnatic Music Critic fraternity- that too at the lowest recorded tariff of professional perjury.
Taking up teaching duties at Calcutta, Prof. Chatterjee- happening to rescue a child-widow from the flames of a Suttee fire (a habit his Cambridge education had inculcated) - absent mindedly averred, perfunctorily apostrophizing Enlightenment, to his still unassuaged anguish at his Dravidian debacle while haranguing the little girl. The South Indian habit of laughing heartily at the boss's bad puns- especially when they were entirely meaningless- like 'joenerosity'- had cut his heart to the quick. The feudal mind-set, the practice revealed, militated against his dreams of progress for India. The little girl- glad that she hadn't been rusticated for being caught smoking a cigarette- lucky for her, the Professor had swallowed her story that, being a ghoti Refugee, this was the only means to self-immolation her in-law's stratitened means permitted- was profoundly impressed by the great Scholar's diatribe.
There and then, she resolved to leave India and become a Professor at Columbia. That little girl's name was Gayatri. By her own dogged efforts and no inner direction- other than that afforded by her own feral instincts- she strategically out-sourced and tactically espoused a rare breed of Spivak- for reasons now opaque- such, then, being the Spirit of the Times- but rather bridle than bridal- with the breaking of that hymen- a Chakroborty, alas!, she restively remains. But, no, more, not a mere Chakravatin, it is as an Avenger- so to speak- of Prof. Chatterjee, that mightily she has risen.
As a scholar of Yeats- that 'landless landlord'- she steadfastly scorned to acknowledge the truth of what Joyce- that 'shiftless tenant'- had had to say to him, and, by the same token, failed to see that the highest wit is characterized by irrelevant allusion, the highest criticism distinguished by impassable, incompossible, cognition, the highest literary theory not neither literary nor theory- like her own work- but, itself heteroclite to its project, being univocally linked to its object by but- as per example- my great Uncle 'Hitler' Sheshadri's unceasing belly laugh at the Vice Chancellor's 'joenerosity'.
Tuirgen is a Gaelic word usually translated as 'investigative birth seeking'- in essence, it is the notion that the soul reincarnates as all other souls without any change in what actually happens- this in turn gives rise to the notion that higher levels of consciousness consist of seeing all other souls as being one's own soul at a previous or future level of spiritual development such that though no life history is altered, the 'karmic' result is different on each iteration of what Nietzche called 'eternal recurrence'. In ergodic theory, Poincare's recurrence theorem deals with the time for a dynamic system with conserved Energy to cycle back to a certain state (or close enough to it). Indian concepts of pralaya and so on could be viewed as being similarly motivated.
The big question for Indian Theists was how to make room for God when karma was sufficient to do all the heavy lifting.
Perhaps, the Indian fascination with Combinatorial number theory arises from this.
A few months ago, President Patil presented the Fields Medal to a young Israeli Genius- Elon Lindenstrauss (his father is the co-author of the Johnson- Lindenstrauss lemma)- who ' has made far-reaching advances in ergodic theory, the study of measure preserving transformations. His work on a conjecture of Furstenberg and Margulis concerning the measure rigidity of higher rank diagonal actions in homogeneous spaces has led to striking applications. Specifically, jointly with Einsiedler and Katok, he established the conjecture under a further hypothesis of positive entropy.'
Does anyone else think this is suggestive?
Or is it rather the case that Life is what constrains us to the idiocy of evolution?
This is Baroness Flather speaking in the House of Lords- 'The noble Lord, Lord (Swaraj) Paul, said something about Indian culture . I do not know which Indian culture he was speaking of; I do not know of that culture. The only Indian culture that I know of in this regard is buying honours, which certainly is Indian culture. I hope that it does not apply to him.'
Contra the noble Baroness, buying honors is part of Universal culture, what is specifically Indian is only doing so when it can become the basis of an act of utterly gratuitous infamy. The point here is that honours which can be bought are no honours at all. Only that title which is freely bestowed, that too seconded by popular acclaim and elite acknowledgment, is considered honorably won, provided of course, it commemorates a genuine and lasting fraud upon the public or the the invention or refinement of a source of mischief certain to be fatal to the commonweal if allowed to burgeon unchecked.
The context of the Baroness's outburst was Lord Alli, perhaps the only Gay /Muslim/ Afro Caribbean/Asian/Multimillionaire/Working Class Peer- notwithstanding certain persistent rumors about Lady Thatcher whom I can personally assure you is not Muslim but Saivite- trying to play the race card on behalf of 3 Asian peers who'd gotten caught in the expense fiddling scandal.
Incidentally, the Baroness's ancestor was Sir Ganga Ram- a great engineer/ agriculturist/ philanthropist- who certainly didn't buy his knighthood.
A Supreme Court Judge explains why India will break up here.
Justice Katju is an expert on Mimamsa hermeneutics- at least, he's written a book about it- and has hit the headlines for some controversial remarks delivered from the bench.
According to the article, the Judge said 'India will break up if questions on language, religion and caste are given importance and divisive tendencies allowed to grow.'
Since questions of language were and are given importance- viz. linguistic reorganization of the States, rejection of Hindi, or anything else, as a National link language- questions of religion were and are given importance- viz. reservation on the basis of religion not economic standing for Muslims, different Civil Code etc- questions of caste were and are given importance- reservations for S.C and S.T are written into the Constitution and O.B.C's too receive reservations- it is difficult to see how India, according to the Judge's logic, has survived at all.
Another question has to do with this business of 'allowing' divisive tendencies to grow. To whom, specifically, do these 'divisive tendencies' currently apply for permission to grow? Who is actually doing the 'allowing' here?
Is the Judge saying that someone or something shouldn't have 'allowed' the D.M.K in Tamil Nadu to focus on Language and adopt a separatist policy on that basis? But who was it who shouldn't have done that allowing?
The Judge made these remarks while addressing the students of Ambedkar University. Are we to take it that Ambedkar shouldn't have been 'allowed' to focus on Caste or that divisive caste based politics like that of Kanshi Ram and Mayawati shouldn't have been 'allowed' to grow? Is this the purport of the Judge's comment?
"Jawaharlal Nehru and his colleagues rose above the madness of communalism that had engulfed the country immediately before and after the Partition and declared India a secular, democratic republic," the Judge said.
But, Nehru and his colleagues did not prevent Partition. Proclaiming India a secular, democratic Republic changed nothing on the ground. Recall that Jinnah made a similar declaration to the effect that a person's creed would not be held against him; indeed differences of caste and creed would melt away, in Pakistan.
What Mimamsa can we apply to make sense of Katju's speech?
Essentially he says X will happen if Y happens. But Y has already happened. True, there is a hysteresis effect, we may term this 'apurva'- such that the result is not already fully visible. But it is bound to occur, and in many important senses, it has already been accomplished.
Ergo, India's breakup is inevitable, indeed, has already occurred but has not yet crossed the threshold of perception.
The learned Judge also informs us that 'India is basically a country of immigrants since barring some eight per cent tribals, who alone could be called the original inhabitants, the rest were immigrants'.
The Judge has a reputation for citing Wikipedia as an authority. In this instance, however, the internet is not at fault. The notion that 8% of the Indian population evolved wholly on Indian soil- and that these people are the tribals- is so preposterous that no nutjob on the internet has ever asserted it. If the Judge is correct, then the 'out of Africa' hypothesis is wrong. Ancient India had a species of ape from which a human species (one moreover able to interbreed with our own) evolved spontaneously. This is sheer lunacy.
What is the correct Mimamsa interpretation of the Judge's claim in this instance?
I don't know.
'Science and Technology can alone win the war against Poverty', the Judge has said, adding that Youth should develop a scientific and rational outlook that gives precedence to logic and reason.
Was India cut off from Science and Technology? Is that why it lost 'the war against Poverty'? Do Indians lack a 'scientific and rational outlook that gives precedence to logic and reason'?
It seems, the learned Judge is Exhibit A in proving his own case.
Kipling's Gadsby- like Fitzgerald's Gatsby- is a bit of a booby though cast in what might appear a heroic mold. Gadsby is a Captain in the Cavalry, Gatsby a bootlegger turned millionaire. Both are undone by women. Gadsby- this is the declasse, the vulgar, aspect of Kipling- is frankly and utterly thrown into a blue funk 'afraid with every amazement' by the memory of his wife's bout with cholera and his baby son's little cough.
He commits the ultimate sin- watering his horse 'to take the edge off' before riding to parade.
Gatsby- but I forget what happened to Gatsby- my memory is he wasn't married to his inamorata and so it was probably 'Wealth' or 'Social Privilege' or 'America' or some other such abstraction that did for him.
I suppose some Post Colonial / Queer Studies nutjob has vomited on this story of Kipling in some learned journal. What gets me is the 'afraid with any amazement' attaching itself to, not the bride- still partaking of nursery teas at the beginning of the play- but the groom, 33 years old at the time of his final harrowing and renunciation.
Dunno how Kipling does it- fucker makes Xtianity profound and elemental and humiliatingly human when, surely, everyone else proved long ago that it was a great stinking pile of Sexist crap, not to mention Racist- I did mention Racist didn't I?- well, take it as read if I didn't- and fucking up the Environment big time and the sustainability of the Global Warming of those pesky Palestenian's illegally occupying Gazza's football strip.
The story of the Gadsby has got to be one of his worst- but if it redeems the Xtian wedding service... how come a fucking 2 anna reporter from fucking Lahore or whatever gets to do this?
Is there something else going on under the surface? The 'afraid with any amazement' references Abraham and Sara- the Church is the bride of Christ- in 'Under the City Walls'- District Commissioner Petit, engaged in putting down a Mohurram riot, quotes the words of Caiaphas -'it is meet that one man should die for the sake of the people...' I suppose, I could also mention 'the Church at Antioch' or Free-masonry- even Literature as a Free-masonry as in 'the Janeites' and so on and so forth.
Or, maybe, the simplest explanation is best. Kipling wasn't an utterly shite human being, despite being a bloody good writer.
I've just found out that the Japanese banned meat- at least that of 4 footed animals- for almost a thousand years. Thanks to Buddhism, they concentrated on slicing each other up with Samurai swords rather than chomping down on steaks with a fork and knife. Then, as part of their post-Meiji westernization- which pretty much put the kybosh on their deeply spiritual cultivation of internecine bloodshed- they sought to popularize meat in a bid to improve the national physique.
I don't know whether Dr. Swamy eats meat- his unrelenting pugnacity suggests otherwise- but I do know he doesn't drink.
This I consider a national tragedy.
This was a very bright, very precocious, lad growing up in the arid atmosphere of post- Independence New Delhi's politico-bureaucratic wasteland, for whom drink was incumbent as a religious duty- like that of Balram, picking up his wine pot and his plough and walking away from the Kurukshetra conflict- except our hero never got that far into Hinduism, preferring a Harvard already utterly alien to true Purushartha, let alone Artha Shastra.
Had Swamy spent his adolescence getting into drunken punch-ups with all and sundry, his natural combativeness might have mellowed, permitting his undoubted talents to have had a less damaging impact on Indian politics. In saying this, I judge him on no evidence other than that he himself supplies on the Janata Party website.
Reading his articles, a picture emerges of a very bright, very brave, but fundamentally confused man who devoted his life to a style of politics that was but the sowing of a confusion worse confounded.
In vernacular Spiritual traditions, Narada Muni, the Sage Narada, is divinely gifted- in that he receives the vision of the Lord in youth- but this blessing is also a blight for he is doomed to remain without that vision for the remainder of his mortal span. This double aspect of Narada- precociously blessed to be but retrogressively blighted- is, perhaps, the source of the notion that Narada spreads mischief wherever he goes- as must any talent that too early and too consummately flowers- for, transcending its roots, it has no further function save as Eris's fruit.
This is not to say that Dr.Swamy was himself like unto that apple of discord for which the Hellenic Goddesses jealously contested- though to read his articles, Swamy, deems himself so- all yearn for him and disclose their true desire to him alone. Indira needs him as a sort of tutor to her kids, Kamaraj wants him for the Tamils, JP needs him as a way out of the dead-end of Sarvodaya and a return to politics, Morarji needs him as a counterweight to the drunkard Vajpayee, Charan Singh wants him because he wants to become a Brahmin, or at least get his book on the Harvard Econ Reading list, Chandrashekhar needs him because he wants to become Prime Minister and only Swamy can bring that to pass, Rajiv needs him because he needs to be defended against his cousin Arun and ... and...actually, it turns out, Rajiv needs Swamy to defend his memory against everybody, including that K.G.B agent, Sonia, and that L.T.T.E agent. Priyanka, and ...urm...everybody and everything because you see Rajiv wan't using Swamy- No! Perish the thought! In fact, nobody ever used Swamy. Not Deng Xiao Ping when he invited Swamy for a meeting in 1981- don't you know Deng only wanted to hear Swamy's beautiful Chinese phonetics (child's play to him because he'd learned how to say 'Aiyaiyo!' from his dear old Mum) & this had nothing to with China's recent drubbing at the hands of the Vietnamese, or their need for a Trade Deal and World Bank money and so on- no, it was to hear Swamy's- Aiyayo! so beautiful no?- Mandarin that Deng communed with him. But, you can be sure, Swamy was quick to squeeze Deng into the concession of a great strategic advantage to India- yes! permission for a couple of hundred Hindu pilgrims to make the trek to Mansorovar in Tibet! Don't you see, this was the greatest triumph of all! Every one knows Chinese are ruthlessly suppressing Buddhists, but see! this clever Brahmin has scored off against those silly Shramans like that Dalai Lama chap!
This wouldn't matter if Swamy had used his guanxi to make money promoting trade and industry and so on. But, Swamy tells us, he isn't into money. That's all very well, but those guys from the P.R.C, they are big-time.
The way the Chinese and the Indians start getting along is through guanxi- everybody making money- that factory owned by the P.L.A, this bogus Defense Housing Colony on our side- that's when you have an 'all weather' relationship- look at the guanxi integration of Musharraf's Pakistan and the P.L.A- the kidnap of some Chinese hookers triggers an Army raid on the Lal Masjid! (why? Its a guanxi network that runs from Generals to Triads to the local massage parlor or drug trafficking long distance truck driver) I know, the true story might be quite different- but the fact that the Chinese nationality of the hookers was played up as an explanation for Army action tells its own story.
I'm not saying opening up the Mansarovar teerth was a bad thing. In fact, religious tourism is something both countries can really work together on- precisely because of the quick profits from prostitution and fucking over those 'immoral' tribals in order to rape the environment and so on.
The fact is, China isn't in the business of giving India any thymotic breaks and will retaliate swiftly against pi-jaw- but corrupt guanxi relationships are a different matter.
But Swamy couldn't be the point of contact because (I believe) he is clean.
More is the pity. Ties between Nations arise in the same manner as Karmic ties- not by duty done and integrity maintained- but by lust and greed and intoxication and delusion.
But precisely because Swamy never got over his infatuation with the great pi-jaw peddlers Gandhi, J.P and so on- he never understood Artha Shastra- actual Political Economy. Nor, to my mind, did he understand what the Paramacharya was trying to open his eyes to.
What to do? Indians are like that only.
The irony is that, later on, China invited the next Kanchi Sankaracharya- an honor they denied even the Pope!- and the reaction was- See! Swamy has truly served Hinduism! You may say, he 'used' the Chinese- but, the fact is, he just so damn intellectually superior, it's like a law of Nature!
True, some ignorant fellows in South Block whine that it was a propaganda coup for the Chinese- they were showing how tolerant they are of all Religions- and, as for that invite to the Shankaracharya, that was the final straw which precipitated the crisis which put the fellow in jail- but, actually, that was all karma you know. Nothing to do with the Chinese being able to run circles around 'clever-clever' Brahmins like Nehru and Swamy- not at all. Why would you even suggest it? Oh, I see. You didn't get a PhD from Harvard at the age is 22. Well, you're just stupid aren't you? Shut up and go watch a Jayalalitha film.
It's still not too late for Swamy. Someone send him a bottle of black label and tell him its Ganga jal or cow's urine or whatever. Once he's had a few, mention to him that if Manmohan really didn't act malafide because, as an Economist, he didn't know from Law- then how is Raja guilty? The guy don't know from Econ, mechanism design- evolutionary game theory and Ken Binmore and such- which Manmohan does know about.
But Swamy's P.I.L and tactical slanders are nothing but 'champerty and maintenance' (okay, I know shite from Law), the arch-intriguer is intriguing again on the behalf of parties even more worthless than those he has previously, so futilely, served.
Fuck is wrong with him?
What's your verdict?
Nutjob or Narad Muni?