ah ... so the elite priest class uses the historically oppressed poor class as "vote banks" to perpetuate their own agenda and power. Welcome to progress for India. (now now, this kind of thing happens EVERY where. My point is that they happen EVERY where to some degree. So let's not be silly and assume the superiority of some spiritual system by wishing away all the ugliness)
Hindu Economic Principles
- Thread starter Yuvrajjj
- Start date
Read about the rulers of India.... Muslims for a thousand years, British for few centuries and now the Gandhis (Parsi- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsi). Indira Gandhi took the title Gandhi to win support from the masses which worshiped Mahatma Gandhi. So the Elite Rulers have not been Hindu Brahmins for a very long time! :eek:
And IMHO this is totally off topic.
I thought Indira Nehru wed Feroze Gandhi (no relation to Mohandas Gandhi) so she had legitimate reason to be called Indira Gandhi.
Given that the original post is basically off topic so far as economics is concerned, we might as chat about these things in general. After all, he proposes some special status to the hindu way of thinking. Thus, it's certain germane to discuss what exactly is the historical basis for all of this.
That being said, while the caste system is not an exclusive hindu practice, it is one of its defining features(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India#Caste_system_among_non-Hindus). Whatever the practical origin, Hinduism is at the very least compatible with such a practice. This is changing, and perhaps in the next decades will be as antiquated as the notion that Christianity is completable with slavery. However, it does show that Hinduism has no monopoly on spiritual righteousness over other religions. Its moral code is not necessary better than the rest.
That being said, while the caste system is not an exclusive hindu practice, it is one of its defining features(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India#Caste_system_among_non-Hindus). Whatever the practical origin, Hinduism is at the very least compatible with such a practice. This is changing, and perhaps in the next decades will be as antiquated as the notion that Christianity is completable with slavery. However, it does show that Hinduism has no monopoly on spiritual righteousness over other religions. Its moral code is not necessary better than the rest.
Hmm lets see - rely on encyclopedic knowledge or an anonymous idiot named Trader#21...
Tough decision...
1. Feroz Faredoon Khan changed name to Feroz Gandhi and Indira Nehru to Indira Gandhi. That family continues to rule India after giving up their family name. It's hard to consider consider leaders of one of the world's most corrupt nation as innocent. (http://election.rediff.com/intervie...iss-black-money-can-take-india-to-the-top.htm)
2. Parsi rule the corporate world in India- Tata, Godrej, Punewalla etc.
I have traveled extensively in India. Indians- including the large no. of Muslims and Christians who are converted from Hinduism- are very racist in general. There is bickering and bitching among north indians, south indians, those from north-east, from maharastra from bihar etc.
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Attack-on-north-Indians-in-Mumbai-rock-Parliament/279655/
www.asomganaparishad.in/article/The Islamization of the Northeast.pdf
Cast distinction is a form of racism as well. It's better to attribute castism to Indians rather than the current and corrupt form of Hinduism.
Earlier I had great interest in Hinduism and Chanakya Neeti that I mentioned has been very influential in my philosophy. Will post later about that. No religion or institution can have monopoly on spiritual righteousness.
There are plenty of reference which indicate zero and Pythagoras theorem first mentioned in vedic slokas.
http://www.gap-system.org/~history/Projects/Pearce/Chapters/Ch4_2.html
http://www.vedah.com/org/literature/maths/mathsInIndia.asp
Pyhogas theorem and triplets were used frequently in construction of temples. There is plenty of evidence to agree that the ancient Indian subcontinent civilization was far more developed than it's Chinese counterpart. However the Brahmins and Kshatriyas became highly corrupt after 7th century. That was later followed by Muslim Invaders who burned libraries, temples and murdered scholars and skillsmen for few centuries. The west first came in touch with the greeks and then chinese and hence the widespread mention of greek and chinese names. If you're a bit interested in philosophy history of downfall of hinduism might be of some interest. A very large and populated nation has history of being ruled by a handful of outsiders.