A rejoinder to wyatt earp

Quotewyatt earp The foreign worker and economic prosperity, A thinking in construction

[QUOTE]The influx of far too many alien cultures into the English populous will and has changed forever the delicate balance that made up our way of life. Your viewpoint on this complex issue is quite refreshing and to the point, although your descriptive use of words (virus, delete, neutralise or quarantine) may raise a few woolly liberal eyebrows. [/QUOTE]

Hi wyatt earp:

That was a beautiful understanding of my viewpoint.

[QUOTE]has changed forever the delicate balance that made up our way of life.[/QUOTE]

Beyond this, let me state that there is a very noble level of delicacy in the English systems. Earlier, when the English came first to India, there was a general level of understanding that they were soft, effeminate, and more or less gullible and vulnerable. Such usages like please, thank you, good morning, good night, excuse me, I beg your pardon, I apologise, and so many other such terms, could have added to give such an impression.

My position is very difficult to convey. If I am not very careful in my use of words, I may be misunderstood as an apologist for some repugnant White sensibilities, or something more sinister. Yet, I am sure that the Ku Klux Klan and such other organisations would always see me as the outsider.

My problem is that I did discern at a very early age that there is a definite difference in English, and its systems.

As to the influx of non-English scenarios into Britain. It is like what one can say is the nonsensical reservations given to lower castes in India, to jobs where actually persons with acutely finer sensitivities are really required. (Also, there is a tremendous lessening of standards for recruitment in the open merit also). Yet, when one sees them in functioning, after becoming at home in the superior environments, they are found to be more effective at a personal level. Their cruder communication methods are more assertive and hence effective; yet, they lack the finer understandings of what is the spirit that the whole organisation stands for. In no time, everyone starts imitating their style of functioning, much to the pain of the general public.

Here again, this metaphor is having problems, for the higher castes in India are also not so innocent.

Coming back to the English scene, I must admit with a deep sense of ridiculous inappropriateness, that I had spent sleepless nights many years ago, thinking of what can happen to England when it becomes swarmed with non-English social functioning. It was not immigration that was disquieting, but the fact that it was being encouraged with no understanding of many themes that are everyday knowledge in non-English social set-ups.

[QUOTE]has changed forever the delicate balance[/QUOTE]

Newer social experiences really change a person. Yet, the general refrain seems to be that newer social experiences add to the growth of the language and society. Does it? I do not think anyone with some sense would allow a floppy or CD to be opened in his computer without first seeking for viruses. Allow me to say that languages are software programs with very gigantic power. Moreover, many do have viruses imbedded in them.

In India, everyone is wary of mingling with others of doubtful social hereditary. In addition, everyone likes to quarantine his or her child from persons, who they believe are from doubtful social status. In small villages, it may not be practical to do so. Yet, where it is possible, it is done in a severely crude manner. For example, think of the English schools; they go overboard to see that their students do not have any opportunity to be in any level of interaction with children from other lower level schools. And the fact is that the vernacular school children do carry a greater level of relative social negativity, imposed on them by the society. And this negativity is not only infectious, but also, crude.

When US removed the social barriers on Black and White mixing, it definitely had a cumulative negative social effect. Now, am I not in really dangerous grounds? Yet, I need to bring out my understandings in very clear terms. Otherwise, I stand in danger of being misunderstood.

I need to say that what propels America (the US), is the English language, and the fact that it was a nation created by English speaking people. What is so great about the English-speaking people is that their communication system carries a lot of interpersonal dignity, which is entirely absent in many other languages. This factor allows almost everyone to function to the best of his or her mood.

So not only the integration of the Blacks, but also such social systems as of the Italians etc. have really brought in malignancies to the English systems in America. Yet, due to the fact that many linguistic groups converge on America, English systems endure as the common medium; yet, in years to come, the power of English to maintain the cohesiveness may be stretched beyond its strength of endurance.

Integration should aim at the diffusion of positive themes, not the infusion of negative ones. For example, instead of just simply allowing the unguided opening of doors to many others including those like the Italians, an understanding that they should be first made to absorb the refine-ness in English should be insisted on.

The integration of Blacks and others like the Italians have definitely boosted their mental and physical capacities, much beyond what they could have achieved in their native lands. In this sense, what America has done is a wonderful thing. Yet, this should be done in a way that the original society, which lends the training, is not spoiled. In the case of the Blacks, the gamble did pay off, since basically the society still lingered on in English. However, when other languages start lingering around in the social scene, then the so-called cultural integration means the overpowering of the English mood.

This is where careful planning, and deep understandings are required. In this issue, one should not muddle the thinking process with allusions to racial and other meaner themes. The thinking should be clear on what is good and what is bad. Education is not just science and maths, but should aim for the implanting of positive cultural themes, and deleting of malevolent cultural inputs. Moreover, it does not mean the condoning of doubtful cultures, just to present one’s liberal stance.

Actually, I do believe that even though the Blacks of America did have a certain level of relative negativity, considering that they came from crude African nations, and were made to live as slaves and servants for a long time; the comparative level of negativity brought in by nationalities like Italians, Japanese, Chinese etc. could be of more relative power. For the Blacks of America, were living in a certain level of English for a long time; while the others mentioned were coming with fresh socially, and mentally stigmatising language formulas in their brain.

As for the issue of Blacks, there is also a need to bear in mind the acute difference between the Blacks who were natives of America since the times of slavery, and the Blacks who emigrated from Africa in recent times. The former has, more or less, undergone British training possibly through surrogates, while the latter carries the themes of African social set-ups, as embedded in the thinking process and language.

In India, people are so crude to the extend of openly alluding to a person’s caste or financial or positional inferiority with an astounding ferociousness. No one finds anything wrong in it. But where has the English nations arrived? To even say the word ‘White’, ‘Black’ etc. is repugnant. Why? A sort of blindness to realities, or a false sense that certain realities are unmentionable.

I need to quote from another post in this site: Crime against humanity-Iftikhar

[QUOTE]On top of that they have been discouraged to learn Arabic and Urdu, making them cut off from their cultural roots. They are unable to enjoy the beauty of Urdu literature and poetry. They are unable to have a good communication with their parents and elders.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Respect and tolerance of different religions, cultures and languages are essential for positive community cohesion.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]The Imams from the sub-continent are already well versed in Urdu, Arabic, and Persian on top of their mother tongue, Punjabi, Bengali or Gujrati and other regional languages. Now they have to learn English as an extra burden. Urdu is a social and emotional language of the Muslims from the sub-continent and Arabic is their religious language. They are in a better position to serve the Muslim community in Arabic and Urdu so that they could feel at home in an alien British society. [/QUOTE]

Before commenting on this let me say that I do not have anything against Islam. In fact, I feel that if this faith is kept to a level of individual devotion, it may have a singular level of spiritual effect.

I need to take the theme away from its religious wrap. For, these are the very words that I more or less foresaw many years ago. Persons who come from very malignant social set-ups, actually they are eager to escape from their native social set-ups, after having arrived, start dictating terms.

There is, no doubt, a singular level of beauty in the languages mentioned. Yet, this beauty lies entangled in a strangling social mindset.

[QUOTE]Respect and tolerance [/QUOTE]are not there in these languages for others; only for the superior.

[QUOTE]Urdu, Arabic, and Persian on top of their mother tongue, Punjabi, Bengali or Gujrati[/QUOTE]

These aforementioned languages can really kill the English societies. In many of these languages, there is no dignity of labour; in fact no dignity to any other person other than whom they treat with reverence.

To put the theme into more perspective, rather than beat around the bush using technical words, let me say: Just the words: thu, Ne (lower forms of ‘you’) etc. and equivalent words for him and her found in many north Indian and south Indian languages, can really bring in horrendous social effects on to the English social scene. And once they are present in the English social areas, I do not know how an English youngster or worker would be able to react to it or withstand its horrible effects. Other than by reacting violently.

[QUOTE]English could become social and emotional language if Muslims start moving in and around pubs, night clubs and frequently changing partners. This is what the British establishment want them to do in order to become the integral part of the British society[/QUOTE]

I find it interesting the there is a certain resonance with these words, to certain words in my book.

[QUOTE]Recently, that is around six months back, a man who is now residing in the USA came back for a few weeks. He lives with his wife over there in the US. Both are computer professionals.

He told his friend that the White men are not good. For, if they come and invite them for any party, then they invariably look at his wife also, and invite her also for the party. At the party, they try to dance with her.[/QUOTE]

There is a matter of perspective. When I talk to others about the English world, their invariable connection is to what they perceive as ‘free sex’. There is no family life, every women is a nymphomaniac etc. All very interesting stuff.

Do the other native societies lack behind in this aspect? In India, very few people trust their wives enough to allow them to mingle with other males, even in respectable themes. There are other reasons other than sex also, here.

In Bombay, there are around 100,000 women in prostitutions, many forcibly enslaved into it, with official connivance. The officials, including the police, would tell you (with a juicy smile of reminiscence) that this nefarious trade is necessary for the safety of the natives of Bombay. Otherwise no woman can walk safe on Bombay roads.

As I said, there is a matter of perspective. When I think of the English world, I do not bother much about free sex, racial bigotry, colour difference etc. For, all these things are very much present in my own nation, only everyone is mentally attuned to them.

What I see is the dignity that comes to the individual, from the English language, the freedom of movement, the feeling that one is not a servant of the bureaucracy, the colourful dressings, the straight posture that comes to the physique, the general dynamism in the air, the unassailable dignity of the working class, the tremendous amount of international experience from a higher perspective that exists in the English writings, the classical writings that contains sharp insights, the sublime fairy tales, the children’s stories where children exists in a very mature mood as compared to vernacular children’s stories etc.

For experiencing all this, I do not need the approbation of a White man. I get it even if I am racially discriminated. Moreover, in the English language, I can feel and react to the mental offences directed at me. In my own language, if I am shown any such thing, the appendages also arrive that I am entitled to such discriminations.

Then there is the changing face of the British citizen. When the Tsunami hit, on the BBC came the news of ‘British doctors of Asian origin’ working in a place. The next day, the text was corrected to ‘British doctors’. One saw persons distinctly Asian, not only in looks, but also in gestures and attitudes. The original description was more apt, but now politically impolite!

There was news of Britons being freed from Guantanamo prison by the US. Again, the faces were invariably non-British in the traditional sense. All these things, pains persons who look up to Britain as a role model. It is not the colour. When one says British, there is an undercurrent of a mental demeanour that should be visible.

Persons who can live in Britain only after changing it into their native societies, should better get out. Or, at least encouraged to go back to their native nations, where they may possibly find the social scenarios they desire.

Beyond all this, what is the route through which many malignant social themes entered into the English social life?

Talking about the Islam religion, even though I am not well versed in the philosophies it holds, it is generally believed that this is one religion that upheld the notion of universal brotherhood. Yet, since this religion has spread through language and cultural set-ups that are the very negation of this theme, I fear that at the moment it may reflect the philosophies of those systems also. In my book, actually I did mention a few words in this regard:

[QUOTE]It was seen by English historians that there was something about India that weakened the people. They found that strong races from outside India, once they settled in India, lost their former grandeur and strength. People who came from races, which had overrun the whole of Central Asia, once they became Indians, lost their power to repeat the same feat again. Various theories have been put forward to explain this. Some of the English historians blamed the weather, which was considered hot. Some said it was because the Indian philosophies affected them. Some claimed it was because Indians were vegetarians. However, the real explanation lies in the Indian languages.

Let us take the case of the Muslim conquerors who came from outside. They came with fierce ideologies of equality and brotherhood, which itself lend to the cause of unity and commonness of purpose. They remained strong as long as they kept aloof from Indian culture and language. The moment they settled down and started adopting Indian languages and behavioural pattern, division and sense of insecurity crept into them. Once the individual had to mingle with the native crowd on a level of equality, these problems magnified. And once Indianised, the whole system in an environment of severe communication gap, where every person is under pressure to act impulsively to protect the respectability of his own position, declined and deteriorated.[/QUOTE]

Now it may be noted that actually Arabic and Persian are not Indian languages. Yet, there could very be some other negative features in these languages also, considering the inconsistent social atmosphere in many of the nations having these languages.

Now, I must admit that it is not just the seeming libertinism exhibited by the women over there that is causing the consternation in the non-English crowd. Actually a lot many things do cause mental trauma, and at the same time, cause much happiness also, to the same immigrant person.

A lot of insight can be got from the following words:

[QUOTE]They are unable to have a good communication with their parents and elders. All of them suffer from Identity Crises resulting in mental, emotional and social problems. We have lost three generations and fourth one is in the process of loosing its linguistic, Religious and cultural Identity.[/QUOTE]

The strangling communication structure of the Indian languages, that can literally keep an offspring as a sort of enslaved possession is deleted when the language becomes English. The very word ‘You’ in English can displace a lot of strings and holds that the parental side enforces on their children.

In fact, when I brought up my child in English, I did have a very enlightening experience. When she started talking, one day she addressed me with a ‘you’, in the same way as I was addressing her.

The various persons who were with me at that moment (all speakers of vernacular) were shocked beyond belief. I address my child with a ‘you’ and she addresses me with a ‘you’. Where then is the fabled structured Indian family relationship here? For them, it was a moment when all family relationships seemed to have stalled into reverse gear.

Many of the emotional problems, can be traced to the fact that the parental generation desperately tries to bring the strangling hold they also endured as children, from their parents. However, this is not possible in English, as all such strings disappear in this language. There can be real competition, as each side finds different versions of family connections in different language structures.

Yet, it must be mentioned that all the positive communication afforded by English is liked by these persons; but they cannot tolerate the same, when it is emulated by those traditionally considered in their natives societies to be their inferiors.

To sum up, I would say that if Britain is aiming for multiculturalism, then it is heading for a lot of historical problems with unforeseeable results. If it is aiming for the installing of English cultural themes in the minds of all persons there, then it is still on safer grounds.

[QUOTE]may raise a few woolly liberal eyebrows[/QUOTE]

I must admit that the English person is still the most tolerant person, when it comes to standing for the other man’s viewpoint. However, he still should have his mental existence in a fully fortified arena, as he has invariably strived to live, when he was domiciled outside his home nation.

There is no contention that the average Englishman is a better person than an average non-Englishman. No, for I have found that when approached individually, most people are innately good. Yet, when they come as a group, a new social personality, different from the individual personality, comes to life; and defines him/her differently.

Along with this, the fact that sense of fair play, honesty, commitment, word of honour, punctuality, integrity etc. do have a peculiar unidirectional vector component in most of the nations, from where most immigrants arrive, also need to be understood. This direction is solely towards persons or positions of reverence; and does not exist towards other ordinary mortals. The sheer strain that the English society must have borne as it got twisted by the pull and power of this exotic mental functioning as it got activated at various points in the society can only be imagined; and needs to be studied.]

As to the malignancies that now stalk the English social scene, they need remedy from within the English society. Not from a diseased and contagious outside.

Moreover there is the myth of the evil British colonial empire that needs to be tackled.