Demographic Politics And Population Growth - 2

[Husky]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->stability in a more generic sense i.e in terms of the couple eventually going separate ways. Basically I am talking about the viability of the union itself rather than the presence/absence of domestic "peace".<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is rather nearer to what the professionals were talking about. Not abusive relationships. (Professionals wouldn't be advising couples in abusive relationships to <i>ever</i> be procreating at all... Either the abusive partner or the one who can't tell they're being abused and still sticks around. The latter would mean that their kid will forever be exposed to the abusive parent too.)

They were talking about the usual stuff: 'if it doesn't look like you two will stay together, don't bring a baby in thinking it will hold together what neither of you can'.

[Guest]

Regardless of what tele-evangelists/professionals say , traditional Indian wisdom says that couples tend to quieten down after having kids. Go and ask any Grandma/Ma , she'll say the same. Now people can hoot with laughter at that if you like. But my own experience seeing a few examples seems to attest this view.

Of course there will be some couples that will go their separate ways even after having kids , but then these cases are probably less in number and hardly has any counter-value here.

Also when I talk about people going separate ways, i mean it as something that in my opinion will happen to most couples ( if they don't have kids soon enough) , rather than a specific instance. hence the term generic was used.

[Husky]

<!--QuoteBegin-Sauravjha+Jun 19 2008, 05:28 PM-->QUOTE(Sauravjha @ Jun 19 2008, 05:28 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Regardless of what tele-evangelists/professionals say , traditional Indian wisdom says that couples tend to quieten down after having kids. Go and ask any Grandma/Ma , she'll  say the same.[right][snapback]83032[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> Wah? No. I know nobody like your grandparent nor any such "traditional Indian wisdom".

My grandparents never had troubled marriages. And they've talked to us often about their lives. They suffered sad losses of people, and also had monetary troubles, but marriage was warm. Next to that, one of my grandmothers knew my granddad since a young age and they had always cared deeply for each other. Their parents had settled the marriage, but 'twas long before determined in Swargam anyways. (My poor Granddad, for about the >10 years after my Grandmother had passed on - day in day out he would talk about her. Like Ramar left behind, with Sita returned to Vaikuntam. What can ya do. Anyways, that pain is over.)


<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But my own experience seeing a few examples seems to attest this view.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->You don't get it. Modern Indians with their progressive views are already too westernised - your comments on matters of 'women's rights' (when no one was even contesting women's rights) shows it. But half-westernisation coupled with half-hearted (ideas of) 'traditionalism' doesn't work. There's no successful blend of the two. You'll find the traditional half losing out to the westernised compulsions. Westernised stubbornness/non-compromise will not work with "let's have kids". In a half-westernised set-up it will turn out more like an Ostrich tactic: "let's have kids, close our eyes and maybe it will all go away". Nothing traditional about that at all.


<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Now people  can hoot with laughter at that if you like.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Can't laugh at the tragedy of your relatives giving you ideas under the confused garb of "traditional wisdom". Like Wilde says (maybe I'm paraphrasing, it's been a while) "Experience is the name older people give to their mistakes." It doesn't make it "traditional" just because your grandparents said it or experienced it. It doesn't make it wise either, certainly not when it antagonises real life situations.

[Guest]

my dear friend you have unnecessarily brought in my/your family into the discussion. while I am glad to learn that your grandparents had a bountiful existence and told you about it , I 'll simply ask you this question, did they have kids early or late?


As far as your comments about India being a half baked society are concerned , I have no issues with it. however the following piece of commentary , shows that you feel that the breakdown of the marriage structure is on account of womens "lib" .

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You don't get it. Modern Indians with their progressive views are already too westernised - your comments on matters of 'women's rights' (when no one was even contesting women's rights) shows it. But half-westernisation coupled with half-hearted (ideas of) 'traditionalism' doesn't work. There's no successful blend of the two. You'll find the traditional half losing out to the westernised compulsions. Westernised stubbornness/non-compromise will not work with "let's have kids". In a half-westernised set-up it will turn out more like an Ostrich tactic: "let's have kids, close our eyes and maybe it will all go away". Nothing traditional about that at all. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Now while I understand your grief at the state of middle class society , the fact is, India has always been an experiment where new and old ideas are attempted to be synthesized . In the case of some invaders this has worked , in the case of some others (your favourite kind) it hasn't been that successful. Okay, i think the word "syncretism" is going to make you go ballistic anytime now.

I continue in the same tradition of trying to make the most of existing circumstances.
Women's rights and the advocacy of procreation are not mutually exclusive. so there is no dichotomy here per se.

[Bharatvarsh]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->These exhortations to go forth and multiply , just show the degree to which religious ideologues are out of sync with economic realities . in any case such exhortations are being actioned upon in Ghettos where the poorest of the poor reside. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This "poorest of the poor" cliche has been overused already, I said it before that the case of Muslims in India is in contradiction to this, in Kerala Hindus are the worst off economically, the literacy rates are almost equal for the 3 communities, Hindus and Xtians have similar birth rates and are well below replacement rate, but Muslims have a much higher birth rate. If "poorest of the poor" are the main driving force behind birth rates then u would expect Hindus with their greater number of poor % wise in Kerala to have the highest birth rate.

There are other states where Muslim literacy is higher than that of Hindus but their fertility is also higher.

Everything in this world is not simply reducible to bread and butter, in this case Muslims are deliberately having more kids to tilt the demographic balance, I said it before, family planning is only desirable if all groups agree to follow it, no way in hell is it good for everyone to follow it when Muslims openly flout it after the 1947 debacle of partition.

Those who forget history will be forced to repeat it, Indians will find out soon when they will have rude awakening in WB and North East.

Check this as an example:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Kerala Muslims are not backward
By Dr C.I. Issac

http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2008/05/fac...ohammedans.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Please read what I have written carefully about the role of ideologues in the whole affair . Co-ordinated procreation requires a particular milieu and that is very much there in these ghettos . Kerala hindus, while not as "prosperous" as their muslim counterparts , do not reproduce as much for the simple reason that they don't have the right "mix" to carry on in such a manner.I must also point out that Kerala muslims have hardly attained first world standards and if they keep replicating the way they do, they will never reach them.


As far as this advocacy of Hindus following suit is concerned , it ain't happening. Not only is it economically imprudent to say the least, it is simply not going to happen. Of course that will not keep people from trying to exhort Hindus to do so. But then who am I to say so?

Forumites, please continue with your demographic projects and continue to "enlighten" hindus. i have a feeling 20 years later when I look at this thread again you guys will be discussing much the same issues and proposing much the same solutions.

[Bharatvarsh]

Atleast we are proposing solutions instead burying our head in the sand unlike some "enlightened" modernists.

So did Kerala Hindus attain 1st world standards?

People who ignore problems will get a rude awakening sooner or later, then 20 years later they will all run and hide comfortably in Hindu majority states (and will resume preaching their "enlightened" ideas that got them kicked out in the 1st place), it has happened before and will happen again. To put it simply, our modernists have no solution at all (at least not anything realistic) but do have time to berate others for trying.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->People who ignore problems will get a rude awakening sooner or later, then 20 years later they will all run and hide comfortably in Hindu majority states (and will resume preaching their "enlightened" ideas that got them kicked out in the 1st place), it has happened before and will happen again. To put it simply, our modernists have no solution at all (at least not anything realistic) but do have time to berate others for trying.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Exactly. But why wait for 20 years? The muslims in Kerala were an even smaller minority in 1921 when they rioted causing wanton destruction and mayhem.

During Tipu Sultan's invasion of Kerala, muslims took over the various holdings/estates of the brahmins and Nairs that fled south towards Travancore. Does this modus operandi sound familiar to anyone?

[Bharatvarsh]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Exactly. But why wait for 20 years? The muslims in Kerala were an even smaller minority in 1921 when they rioted causing wanton destruction and mayhem.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeap but this time I am talking big time expression of fanaticism, like what happened during partition or to Kashmiri Pandits.

Those riots later paved the way for the creation of Muslim majority Mallapuram, there is also a concentrated effort to clear Hindus from the coast, that was why fishermen were attacked at Marad, this maybe part of a larger design where by with Muslim majority on the coast they can smuggle in arms from pakis through the sea.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->During Tipu Sultan's invasion of Kerala, muslims took over the various holdings/estates of the brahmins and Nairs that fled south towards Travancore. Does this modus operandi sound familiar to anyone?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The tactic is to strategically make certain areas Muslim majority and then squeeze out non Muslims slowly through periodic riots, molesting non muslim women or abducting them and other "peaceful" behavior.

If u had noticed, large numbers of Muslims have moved into Tenkasi from Kerala which Tirunelveli borders, this area is being planned to become TN's Mallapuram, it begins slowly like taking over land belonging to the Vishwanathar temple (for opposing it, 4 of the 5 brothers in the Pandiyan family have been killed) and will progress by leaps and bounds.

Islam cannot win in technology or normal war against the West or India so they are banking on their demography.

If u study British India census, you would realize that Bengal only became Muslim majority during the 1st census in 1881, after that if u follow the events and look at the current fate of Hindus in beggardesh, it won't require a rocket scientist to figure out what fate awaits Hindus of Kerala.

I have yet to see our ridiculing modernists propose a REALISTIC solution to the problem, all their time is instead spent on lecturing Hindus to follow family planning while they wet their pants to even step into a Muslim ghetto.

Systems like democracy and policies like family planning only work when all sections of the society agree on some ground rules to be followed, instead in India there is no agreement at all, Muslims may do as they please even if its illegal but Hindus have to bear the burden of "secularism", in such a situation either the system will breakdown or there will be a replacement of the system with an Islamic theocracy in the near future unless non muslims (mainly Hindus) make some tough choices.

[Guest]

Bharatvarsh, I have thought about this issue almost to the point of obsession. There is no REALISTIC (if, by that you mean, something that conforms with modern fashions) solution to this problem, IMHO.

The only solution to this problem (as well as some other issues facing Hindus today) is having more children than 2. I think the ideal number is 4.

Incidentally, I would also like to "interrogate" this concept of ideologues. On the internet, who isn't an ideologue? We all write crap that we hope others will read and change their priorities and values accordingly. So, we are all ideologues . I don't see how one can define this concept, without including himself in the set of ideologues. I suggest that this word is mostly a term of abuse.

As for the aforementioned idea being economically imprudent, I am not so sure. Certainly, it doesn't seem so for most people who are above the poverty level. Even for those below the poverty level, a slight change in their earnings or in their prospects can lead to a dramatic re-ordering of their priorities. So, even a generalized recommendation of Hum-Do-Hamare-Do doesn't make sense.

[Husky]

<!--QuoteBegin-Sauravjha+Jun 19 2008, 07:19 PM-->QUOTE(Sauravjha @ Jun 19 2008, 07:19 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->shows that <b>you feel</b> that the breakdown of the marriage structure is on account of <b>womens "lib"</b> .[right][snapback]83035[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->You <i>must</i> be the funniest person I've read for months. Do you specialise in <b>assumptions</b>? Or is that a role you only play here?

Oh here's another pearl - <b>Assumption</b> 2:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Okay, i think the word "syncretism" is going to make you go <b>ballistic</b> anytime now.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Hysterical. Aren't you a talent.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In the case of some <b>invaders</b> this has worked , in the case of some others <b>(your favourite kind) </b>it hasn't been that successful.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I have a "favourite kind of invader"? Oh wait. That's another one of your <b>assumptions</b>.
Hmmm. Seeing a pattern here. Maybe you're a one-joke kinda guy after all.

[Guest]

I am not surprised that forumites have had a humour bypass . it was only to be expected given their predisposition (another one of my assumptions) towards backing the most preposterous ideas related to social engineering. However like I said carry on folks , you have all the solutions and the best thing about them is that you can spout it from your armchair.

if you think this post is flame bait , it most certainly is. Fortunately the world is not made up of mouse clicking warriors with very "informed" ideas about the world. Let me tell you this: you guys won't even last a proper argument , forget about a riot. I spent a large part of my student life fighting communists and their way of "discussing" things wasn't very dissimilar to the way you guys handle debates. only you do it in the virtual world.

And by the way you guys know jackshit about how things really are and will never know more. you know why: because you don't deserve to. At the end of the day you guys are just a bunch of cowards.

Adios

[Bharatvarsh]

Who is the coward here?

The one who has no solution at all, but keeps writing bs and when challenged tells us some stupid stories of fighting commies acting like some big time war hero.

I never heard of no Suarav Jha the cyber warrior (more like cyber wanker) doing jackshit in India, probably piss in ur pants to step into some Muslim ghetto but hide behind ur PC to spew bs like u r some expert.

Come back when u have any facts to post not ur unsubstantiated bs (like claiming that Muslims in Kerala don't have 1st world standards while Hindus with a much lesser fertility rate are even worse off than them).

Oh and if you think this post is a flame bait , it most certainly is.

[Bodhi]

on the subject of how many children to have, while my opinion sides with vishwas and husky, here is another perspective from viShNugupta:

ekenApi suvR^ikSheNa puShpitena sugandhinA
vAsitaM tad vanaM sarvaM suputrena kulam yathA 3.14

ekenApi suputreNa vidya-yuktena sAdhunA
AhlAditaM kulaM sarvaM yathA chandreNa shArvarI 3.16

ekopi guNavAna putro nirguNena shatena kiM
ekas chandras tamo hanti nacha tArAH sahasrashaH 4.6
(CND)

just one nice tree laden with sweet smelling flowers, makes the entire forest fragrant:
like that also just one good offspring, the entire family.

Just one good son, knowledgeable and noble, (is sufficient to -)
make the whole family delighted, like the single moon during the night

just one good son laden with best qualities, rather than hundred bad ones!
just one moon removes darkness at night, not those thousands of stars.

[Guest]

I won't come back , but you guys will someday come to me.



Adios

Bravehearts

[Bodhi]

saurav jha, pls dont quit the good argument.

[Bodhi]

<!--QuoteBegin-Sauravjha+Jun 19 2008, 11:10 PM-->QUOTE(Sauravjha @ Jun 19 2008, 11:10 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->i have a feeling 20 years later when  I look at this thread again you guys will be discussing much the same issues and proposing much the same solutions.
[right][snapback]83045[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Why! In 20 years, we would have many small vishwases, little huskies, young Bharataputra-s.

[Guest]

The book <b>MicroTrends</b> has some very interesting stats on the demographic trends around the world. I'll recommend people to read it, if not for anything but for opportunities on can see on the horizons.
The book's by Mark Penn - (in)famous for mismanaging Hillary's campaign.

I can't recall all trends he's listed on the demographics, some that I can recall (numbers/details might be bit off as memory hazy on this)
(i) The media age between UK and US today is about 5 years. In another two decades, due to the fertility rate, migrations, it's expected to have a gap of over 25 years. Translation: UK might not be a poodle going into future and there could be a huge divergence between the two in terms of their world outlook.

(ii) Trends of migration and current demographics in Europe are such that it doesn't bode well for future especially in certain communities.
Translation: more Londistan, French riots of last years type etc

(iii) Some 30% of UK couples aren't live-in couples but have romance via long distance

(iv) Some huge percent of Italian grown up males still live in with their mom.

Last two, not related to this thread, but it's another bit of info which might/not have a bearing on future.

Read the book if you can pick it from your local library, the numbers and his interpretations are fascinating. I couldn't find much material online, but I remember that he uses numbers from Pew Research Center so that could be a good start.

[Bharatvarsh]

Thanks Viren, will try to find it, interesting point about UK and US, a reason for the gap is the fact that US now has many illegal Hispanic migrants whose birth rates are higher than both Black and White Americans, but Americans can take comfort that they are also Christians while I can't say the same for dhimmified Europe.

Even if EU countries give incentives for couples having more kids, it could still be the case that the Muslim populations are the primary ones taking advantage of the incentives.

Currently, I have seen estimates of between 20 million and 25 million for the Muslim pop in Europe, if Turkey gets in they are screwed.

The only developed white country with a robust demography is NZ which has a fertility rate of 2.2

[acharya]

<b>
“MDGs hinge on India, China child health care”</b>

Aarti Dhar

NEW DELHI: India and China hold the key to the world meeting health-related millennium development goals (MDGs), according to the United Nations Children’s Fund.

In its report on State of Asia-Pacific’s Children 2008, the UNICEF says unless India makes major achievements in health, nutrition, water and sanitation, education, gender equality and child protection, global efforts at reaching the MDGs will fail. China too needs to make significant strides to regain the early progress it made in child survival.

In 2006, 2.5 million child deaths occurred in the two countries accounting for nearly one-third of all child deaths.
Deepening disparities

However, the region’s robust economic growth, the fastest in the world since 1990, has lifted millions out of poverty. Child survival, regarded by the UNICEF as a key test of a nation’s progress in human development and child rights, has improved considerably. But gains have been overshadowed by deepening disparities in that health care often fails to reach the poorest.

The report also underscores a disturbing trend across the region: public health expenditure remains well below the world average of 5.1 per cent, with South Asia spending only 1.1 per cent of the gross domestic product and the rest of Asia Pacific, 1.9 per cent. In addition, as more services within countries are privatised and the government’s share of health budgets diminishes, public facilities become more run down and health workers leave for better paid jobs in the private sector or outside the country.
<b>
Pneumonia, diarrhoea and malnutrition are the major causes of child death in the region. But vast inequities in income, geography, gender and ethnicity stand in the way of children surviving and thriving.</b>

In India, one in every three women is underweight, putting them at risk of having lowbirth weight babies, which are 20 times more likely to die in infancy than healthy children.

Civil conflict also affects a child’s chance of survival – the two countries where a child has the hardest struggle to survive and thrive beyond his or her fifth birthday are Afghanistan and Pakistan. On the other hand, Sri Lanka, despite its civil strife, has cut child deaths by half since 1990 and stands out as a country that has budgeted well for children.