Good luck with the next chapter of your life!

Let me lay out my view right from the outset: no offence taken.

I think it is fair to say that your last message talks entirely about me as a person along with an acknowledgment that you do not know me. There is nothing there about the documentary or about Arundhati Roy.

I would like to respond based on my experience online and in life. That experience tells me that no-one likes being talked about by strangers. No-one likes having those strangers tell them that they are this or that. You may want to consider this. You may want to dismiss it. I guess one of the advantages to the anonymity which the Internet provides is that in a scenario like this, I can say that I will never know. I am offering you something which you may want to consider. Nothing more.

With respect to what you say about inaction being something which perpetuates inhumanity via the Reverend Martin Luther King’s quote… As you say, you’ve based it on what I have written here.

It is of no consequence here but I am the most politcally active person I know. I am the one encouraging others to become more so. At the same time, I know that their circumstances are not the same as mine. Some have ill-health. Others have dependents with ill-health. There is a whole host of factors which go into it. We all have 24 hours in the day and a limited life. I think MLK’s reference is for those who suppose that others will make it alright. That is very different from people who spend every waking moment devoted to the things they believe in and who may happen on situations which they can not help at that particular time in their life.

Finally, let me ask you to think about this. I wrote the comment which you first replied to months ago. Once you replied, I spent time replying to you. With this message now, I have done that three times. My replies have been quick and specific in response to your points. Next week, I start a massive new chapter in my life. I may not have had the time to respond at all. What would you have made of everything in *those* circumstances?

Health and peace to you/me/all (my “motto” in life – what guides everything I do).

Regards,
Tom.

Just when I thought I have sparked some passion in you :-), you went right back to:

I may seem a lot of things to a lot of different people. Some may see me as seeing the world dualistically, just like you have suggested. Others may see me seeing the world as shades of grey. Woop-de-doo.

Millions of people support you. Millions of people also support the view, to the death as you say a bit further on, that the Palestinians should feel threatened.

If you saw someone being attacked and dispossessed, do you stop to think how many are in support of that person mistreated and how many don’t support it, or do you attempt to do something about it? At the end of the day, that’s what really matters.

You’re very correct, that I don’t know you. Any shortsighted assumptions I have made about you based on your preceding comments are my mistakes. However, based on just your comments, you remind of a tragic scenario painted by these words:

Man’s inhumanity to man is not only perpetrated by the vitriolic actions of those who are bad. It is also perpetrated by the vitiating inaction of those who are good.

-Martin Luther King

Again, if I have assumed incorrectly about you (entirely based on your comment on this thread), my apologies.

“I had hopes after reading your first sentence.”

If you are looking to me for hope, you are looking in the wrong place. I have hope. It is the last thing which dies. If you want hope though, look within.

“But soon you started presenting both sides of an issue, as if the whole thing is just benign.”

Benign? When did I ever say benign? Benign? Goodness, gracious me. Benign?????

“You seem to be caught in the duality (real or perceived) of things, and as a result are unable to make up your mind. Even a tennis match with its constant back and forth has an eventual outcome.”

I may seem a lot of things to a lot of different people. Some may see me as seeing the world dualistically, just like you have suggested. Others may see me seeing the world as shades of grey. Woop-de-doo. It seems I have made the clarification you asked me for and you have then proceeded to label my view of the entire world. Based on one or two messages? Well, you have that right. From my end, I have no idea why you are wasting your, mine or anyone’s time.

Tennis matches are artificial constructs. The rules, written by humans, necessitate an outcome. Even the 71-69 fifth set marathon played recently. The thing is though: humans are limited in their knowledge. That is the point and I am also making the point that I, too, am limited. Aren’t you? Tell me what happened in the Gaza Strip between 5:32am and 11:47am last Tuesday.

“The Jewish man should feel threatened. Him and his kind have displaced and dispossessed a country of people based on religious fundamentalism. Their actions are backfiring. Cause and effect is a very well established law of our universe.”

You say that the Jewish man should feel threatened. I have no illusions or rose-coloured glasses. Millions of people support you. Millions of people also support the view, to the death as you say a bit further on, that the Palestinians should feel threatened. A war on versions of history then inevitably ensues. Laa-de-daa. There is one thing I know about the past. One thing only. It is gone. Whatever else it is, it is gone. You may as well start talking to people about who started history. Tell me clix, who started history?

“Here is why you can’t find a nice round number of people who can effectively be brainwashed: because it is unlimited. Given effective isolation and deprivation while being able to repeatedly inundate them with limited and falsified information, you can brainwash any number of people simultaneously. That doesn’t mean everybody who is exposed to such circumstances will effectively be brainwashed. Some people by nature and/or nurture (or lack of it) become less trusting of authority, and as a result become immune to the brainwashing.”

I see. Yes. How many can be brainwashed? Of course, unlimited. I’ll ask you a question in a moment. First, let me address your argument.

Less trusting of authority = immunity from brainwashing??? Really? You place authority in the hands of people who sell you food. Literally. You authorise them to determine what you swallow and take down your own throat. If you say that it is in their interests not to poison you, I would say ‘well said’. That is precisely the point I have been making. It is in everyone’s self interest that everyone be healthy and live a life of peace.

Let me ask you a question then. How do you know that you, me, Arundhati Roy or everyone else has not been brainwashed? Proceed.

“Finally, health and peace do not arise in a vacuum.”

Did I ever, ever, for one moment, ever say that they arose in a vacuum? My impression is that you want others in the world to specify what they are on about and then tell them about their limitations. My impression may be wrong. I stand by it until it is shown to me to be otherwise. If it is wrong and I go out in life being wrong, I’ll accept the consequences. In amongst that, I don’t want to ***chase*** arguments. We are typing on a message board here. I couldn’t think of a bigger waste of time than to argue and try to change other people’s mind’s.

If you like Arundhati Roy, more power to you. You don’t like her? More power to you again. If you consider what she has to say, make up your own mind and go about your business, I’d say you were someone worth knowing.

Regardless of everything I have written above, I wish health for you as well as me. I wish peace for us all.

Regards, Tom.

I had hopes after reading your first sentence. But soon you started presenting both sides of an issue, as if the whole thing is just benign. You seem to be caught in the duality (real or perceived) of things, and as a result are unable to make up your mind. Even a tennis match with its constant back and forth has an eventual outcome.

The Jewish man should feel threatened. Him and his kind have displaced and dispossessed a country of people based on religious fundamentalism. Their actions are backfiring. Cause and effect is a very well established law of our universe.

Here is why you can’t find a nice round number of people who can effectively be brainwashed: because it is unlimited. Given effective isolation and deprivation while being able to repeatedly inundate them with limited and falsified information, you can brainwash any number of people simultaneously. That doesn’t mean everybody who is exposed to such circumstances will effectively be brainwashed. Some people by nature and/or nurture (or lack of it) become less trusting of authority, and as a result become immune to the brainwashing. There are many like Roy in India, Pakistan and all over the world. They often show their presence by agreeing with a public figure who voices their collective view of the world.

Finally, health and peace do not arise in a vacuum. They require a just and fair world. A just and fair world doesn’t come about haphazardly. It requires sacrifice, the kind that many have made before us and the likes of Roy are fully prepared to make. The protesters who sacrificed their lives in Egypt last week and those who stand with them understand such sacrifice.

Okay, I will be more direct.

What I am saying is that this issue is complex. I got something out of Roy’s presentation here which I didn’t have before. Knowledge of the existence of the Balfour Declaration is one example. It is an *act* of stupidity though for anyone to claim that they know the world either because they follow or reject Roy’s claims. That is pretty much it in a nutshell.

How many can effectively be brainwashed? I don’t know. I won’t ever know. Why should I spend any time investigating it or pretending I have any sort of answer to such a question?

She didn’t specify it explicitly that she was immune from brainwashing but when you live in India, Pakistan, Israel, Palestine etc and you talk about propaganda setting in on a whole population, well, its hard to then say that you have not been brainwashed. Words like brainwashed and propaganda get bandied about like you are talking about tables and chairs. It is not that simple.

What do I make of the millions of supporters she has in India and Pakistan? More power to them! I respect all viewpoints, be they pro-Arundhati Roy or anti-Arundhati Roy. What is it that we are all looking for here? For me, it is health and peace. With health and peace, all of reality is open to me. What else do I know about health and peace? If you are healthy, it increases my chance of being healthy. If you are living in peace, it increases my chance of living in peace.

My point about the Jewish man that I discussed Arundhati Roy with is this: as best as I can recall, she addressed the Israel/Palestine issue as a win/lose proposition. Being a Jew, he was threatened by this. That perpetuates the problem. Sure, she may be pro-actively seeking peace and more power to her. With time, she will make some gains in that direction. She is also imperfect.

This is what I keep coming back to: hear her view and make up your own mind. Don’t waste everyone’s time saying who has been brainwashed by who, who is right, who is wrong, who is intelligent, who is misinformed. None of us know what happened last weekend a mere 2kms away from our homes. How can we possibly know the world?! In the end, the people who accuse others (whoever it is) of this or that are the, shall we say, most misguided among us. We are all limited. Best to learn and co-operate than to label and alienate.

As for what should practically happen in Israel/Palestine, hard for me to say from the other side of the world. I have been to five continents though. My experience tells me: focus on health and peace. If you do, self-determination will come. Even if it is on an individual person by person level. Self-determination has to come. You alone are ***in the final analysis*** responsible for your own health and living in peace. Those two things are key for all of us. They unite us yet still allow us to live vastly different lives.

Thanks for your message. I hope this makes it clearer.

Thanks for your time.

Regards,
Tom.

What do you think is a good round number of people who can be effectively brainwashed? And where has Roy claimed that she is the only one who has developed such immunity from brainwashing? What do you make of the millions of supporters she has in India and Pakistan?

What’s your point about the Jewish man and the discussion you had with him? Are you saying he and his kind should have a Jewish homeland on account of many displaced and dispossessed Palestinians?

I think you have something relevant to say, but it did not come out in your post above.

You start out by insulting those who find themselves in agreement with Roy as ‘uninformed’ and ‘unintelligent’, a sure way to lose an audience. One gives you the benefit of the doubt and continues to read your comment to find a balance to Roy’s message, but alas! none comes. Instead you sink into a tirade of insults directed at Roy, those she supports, Pakistan (how original!) and even those who oppose Roy (as they lack the media savvy to effectively counter her, according to you). What a confused babble you have become by the end of your diatribe.

Do you want to collect your thoughts and try again perhaps?

But she is not. She is someone who only rants about government’s failures. She is not doing anything for a solution. To the informed & intelligent she has no appeal. Unfortunately, the large majority of people are lazy & are ready to be spoon-fed & believe everything they’re told without making their own informed analysis of the things put forth before them.

To begin, Arundhati Roy is a misguided anti-national. She supports naxals against the government when,clearly, the naxals are evil. There is no other way to describe their actions. Yet this foolish woman cannot see that. Naxalism was created with the sole intention to seize political power. Its ideals are far from being noble. It ruthlessly kills innocent people that do not find favour with it. They demand subservience from people & those who defy them are killed in the most brutal fashion to spread terror in people’s hearts. There is no space for people to raise their legitimate concerns in areas controlled by the naxals. They grab land & property of people by force. They’re a serious threat to Indian national security.I wonder why she supports them. Admittedly, Naxalism was created due to inhuman injustice to poor farmers in West Bengal & Andhra Pradesh by the landlords in the late sixties. But it has grown over the years with the help of state governments(filthy individuals willing to stoop to any level to grab votes & retain power) into a monster. Its aim is far from achieving justice for the poor. Its aim is to get political power by spilling blood. Its an inhuman ideology. But the likes of Arundhati will like the naive to believe that these bloodthirsty ghouls are peaceloving oppressed saints.

She also supports the separatist movement in Kashmir. What exactly is her logic in that ? If Kashmir goes to Pakistan, will it benefit the kashmiris ? No. Pakistan is a hotbed of terrorism & beset with enormous problems. It lives off aid from the USA. Its economy is in tatters. How can Pakistan take care of Kashmiris ? They cannot.

If on the other hand Kashmir gets independence, will Pakistan remain a mute spectator ? It will surely be licking its lips if such a situation were to arise. It can then annex Kashmir to its territories without much effort.

The best bet for Kashmiris is India. With Indian forces in Kashmir, Pakistan cannot dare attack it. Hence they try to use terrorists & propoganda against India to get Kashmir. Sure, the government has been incompetent to handle such issues. But the sensible thing would be to draw government’s attention to that incompetence & ask it to do something about it. But instead, Arundhati delights in making sweeping generalisations & criticisms. They are many more well-informed individuals that can give you a far more accurate & sensible account of situations & the solutions required. Unfortunately, they’re not as media-savvy as this self-absorbed woman.

The biggest problem in India is decisive political will. Incompetent, short-sighted politicians have allowed situations to fester for a long time & done nothing. For them, self-interest reigns supreme.

To win over people is not a very difficult thing to do when you have political power to do it. But politicians are the lowest of the low. In India, there is hardly any political accountability for inaction or incompetence.

People like Arundhati Roy are maligning India infront of the world media thorugh half-truths, falsehoods & selective interpretations of events yet the fools at the Centre do nothing to counter it. They’re busy filling up their coffers, the nation be damned.

P.S. – This website has a large & varied collection of beautiful documentaries & I am indebted to the person who has put it up. A big thank you.

p.s. This lady supports armed Communist rebels against Indian Republic!

You have written a few sentences. Is there anything you want people to take away from what you have written? Given that you went to the effort of writing it, my guess is that there is. What is it?

If all you want to say is that no human being can see or know everything there is to see or know, it is agreed. Can anyone dispute that? Does that mean no-one has a right to speak? If you think that, why write YOUR message?