HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hdeshma@eos.ncsu.edu (HARSHAVARDHAN  DESHMANE)
Subject: Re: World Culture and Western Culture
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 05:49:47 GMT

In article <JMC.92Sep28214354@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>Manoj Ghayalod includes:
>
>     Obviously the Western form of democracy is a better system
>     than the others available and India is implementing this
>     system, but the fact remains that no former Western powers
>     ever used their systems to benifit their former colonies (as
>     the orginal poster seems to claim).  But on the contrary all
>     the colonies were ruthlessly exploited.
>
>I did not wish to suggest taht Western powers were very often
>motivated by benevolence, although I would suppose there is
>an element of that in the 1829 suppression of sati.
>Incidentally, that is 1829, and I suppose the Indian leaders
>Manoj Ghayalod refers to were much later.
>
>Motivations were mixed.  Individual desire to make money,
>ego and some benevolence.  Even when there was benevolence,
>part ot its motivation was a sense of superiority.  However,
>the innovations were introduced and were useful, e.g. secular
>universities, railroads and a British style judicial system -
>even cricket.
>
>
>--
>John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
>*
>He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

i guess you refuse to do arithmetic then..universities, judicial systems,
railroads and ...cricket???????????????????
cricket is  a valuable western contribution to native "culture"...
I am sure you are a rational man, and your above statement sounds
just as warped to you, as it does to me.

-harsh
p.s. my curiousity forces me to ask, without protesting, why you
decided to have this debate on sci and soc.history {\it only} ??

-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________
Harshavardhan Deshmane, ECE Dept.                   hdeshma@croc.ece.ncsu.edu
North Carolina State University.                    hdeshma@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.indian
From: uds@wsu-eng.eng.wayne.edu (Seetamraju Udaybhaskar)
Subject: Re: World Culture and Western Culture/ British Misuse Of Sati.
Reply-To: uds@wsu-eng.eng.wayne.edu (Seetamraju Udaybhaskar)
Organization: Wayne State University, Detroit
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 17:34:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.102327.26024@ecrc.de> sanjiva@ecrc.de (Sanjiva Prasad) writes:
>In article <1992Sep28.195542.27175@cs.wayne.edu> uds@wsu-eng.eng.wayne.edu (Seetamraju Udaybhaskar) writes:
>>Did you know all the soldiers in british uniforms were indians.
>>Only the officers were actual whites.  (Not even hybrids-angloindians)...
>>The only time indians saw actual british foot soldiers were
>>near the WW II time....
>Oh, I didn't think that the Indian-born "Rudi-Baba" Kipling would play
>so fast and loose with the facts about the racial composition of the troops
>in "Soldiers Three".  Or are you more inclusive in your use of "Indian" than
>even the most liberal interpretation one normally sees?  

>Sanjiva Prasad,  Guest Magician				E-mail: sanjiva@ecrc.de


I do not know what Soldiers Three is.  But tell
me what in my previous post was ``stretching facts''.  Once, the portugese
and the french were driven out of the subcontinent, almost every foot soldier
of british (not just non-subcontinent originm but pure british origin) were
either made `officers' or returned to britain.  Ever since, (i.e., after the
end of `trade-forts'-period), all `ordinary-soldiers' were sub-continenters...


Seetamraju Udaya Bhaskar Sarma
(email : seetam @ ece7 . eng . wayne . edu)
Xref: sparky soc.history:8581 sci.econ:7806
From: jim@netlink.cts.com (Jim Bowery)
Newsgroups: soc.history,sci.econ
Subject: Re: What was the cause of the 1930s depression?
Date: 27 Sep 92 13:55:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: netlink.97iRRB1w165w
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

> In article <mDaiRB1w165w@netlink.cts.com>, jim@netlink.cts.com (Jim Bowery) w
> > In article <198c94INNhd@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim 
> > Haynes) writes:
> # #Seems like the U.S. stock market crash of 1929 is commonly regarded as
> # #the beginning of the great depression.  Was the crash a cause of the
> # #depression, or did the crash and the depression result together from
> # #some other cause, or ??? 
> #  
> # The 1930's depression was caused by overcentralization of net assets.
> # The over centralization of net assets was created by the supply-side
> # economics of the 1920's starting with Harding and ending with Hoover.
> # The fundamental economic conditions we are experiencing today are very
> # similar.
> # 
> # INTERNET:  jim@netlink.cts.com (Jim Bowery)
> 
> During the 1920s, the Federal Government ran a budget surplus, and
> used it to pay off a big chunk of the national debt.  Today we are
> running a huge budget deficit, and it is dramatically enlarging
> the national debt.
> 
> Very similar?  No, not at all.  It is certainly true that we are
> in perilous times, and our government's unwillingness to balance
> the budget is scandalous.  But the conditions are hardly "very
> similar."

You are right.  They are far more dangerous today than in the 1930s.
The debt has a synergistic effect with the concentration of net assets.

--                    
INTERNET:  jim@netlink.cts.com (Jim Bowery)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!jim
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.sri-lanka,soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.iranian
From: mike@fionn.lbl.gov (Michael Helm)
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.celtic,sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: ice age British Isles (was Re: pre-Kelt Great Britain)
Date: 30 Sep 1992 17:27:19 GMT
Organization: N.I.C.E.
Reply-To: mike@fionn.lbl.gov (Michael Helm)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.128.60

William R. Smith writes:
>wondering if the Ireland and the other British Isles (if the nomanclature
>is incorrect here, excuse me) were islands during the last ice age

For Ireland see O'Kelly, "Early Ireland" (1989) p 8-9; he reports
that some think land bridges to Britain existed until around 10000 years
ago, but others are less sure & think "firm land connections" may
have disappeared 20000 years ago.  [Perhaps other islands existed in
the Irish Sea in the meantime?]
From: steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson)
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Independent US Presidential Candidates
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:03:21
Organization: Lick Observatory/UCO
NNTP-Posting-Host: topaz.ucsc.edu


This may be too political and topical for soc.history,
please redirect followups if appropriate.

	How does Perot's campaing compare with Bryant and Hearst
respectively?

*  Steinn Sigurdsson   			Lick Observatory      	*
*  steinly@lick.ucsc.edu		"standard disclaimer"  	*
*  If you ever have to go to Shoeburyness			*
*  Take the A-road, the ok road, that's the best!		*
*  Go motoring on The A13!	- BB 1983			*
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.indian
From: sp2@cec1.wustl.edu (Sundara Pandian)
Subject: Re: World Culture and Western Culture
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis Mo.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 03:44:15 GMT

      I have been reading replies to John McCarthy's posting     
 and a few writers have commented on British Judicial system
 in India, Western impact on Indian culture, Indian perspec-
 tive of Western culture, etc. Well, I saw one British movie
 " A passage to India "[story by E.M.Forster (sp?) ]  addre-
 ssing the same issues. I liked the movie and this movie may
 give some ideas to those interested in knowing the British
 judicial system in India when India was under British rule.

                                                 S.Pandian
From: bhattach@quip.eecs.umich.edu (sayan bhattacharyya)
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: World Culture and Western Culture/ British Misuse Of Sati.
Date: 4 Oct 92 22:18:40 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI

>
>By British soldiers or mustered native Indian soldiers in British uniform ?
>I could well see a Muslim Indian to violate a Hindu woman, remembering the
>centuries of continuous warfare between Vijayanagar and Bengali f.eg., or an
                                         -----------------------
>oppressed pariah soldier avenging his sufferings to a higher caste widow.
>
>  ++ Tuomas Viljanen                     ++ For a battle like Crecy, you do  ++
>  ++ Lahderanta 20 A 19                  ++ not need a military genius like  ++
>  ++ SF-02720 Espoo 72 FINLAND           ++ Edward III. All you need is an   ++
>  ++ 358-0-592175 or c34657b@saha.hut.fi ++ idiot like the Duke of Alencon.  ++
   

What are you talking about ? "Bengali" is the name of a people and a language
and "Bengal" is the name of a geographical region. In any case there was certainly
never any warfare between Vijaynagar and Bengal at any point of time. Bengal
is in eastern India while Vijaynagar is in southern India. 

There was however a prolonged warfare between Vijaynagar and the neighbouring
kingdom of Bahamani, also in southern India. It is true that the ruling family
of Vijaynagar was Hindu while that of Bahamani was Muslim, but that didn't
have much to do with the war. The cause of this war was more economic and 
territorial , as the cause of most wars usually is.

Please read your history better before you post.

-Sayan Bhattacharyya.
Newsgroups: soc.history
From: cthorne@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Charles E Thorne)
Subject: Re: Battle of New Orleans
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 15:01:47 GMT

In article <qadbrro@zola.esd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
>In article <Buop70.Mxn@cs.dal.ca>, hyde@cs.dal.ca (Bill Hyde) writes:

>> 	The truth is that after twenty five years of war the British
>>	were very tired of it, and wanted peace very badly.

>Right, and a part of that was financial.   The UK had run its 
>credit down during the Napoleonic War by subsidising everyone 
>in sight, and the financial establishment needed to get back 
>to peacetime conditions.

>Also, the war of 1812 was simply much less important to the UK
>than it was to the US.   By the defeat of Napoleon, the UK had
>as much and more than it could handle organizing a European
>settlement that would last for a while, and getting back to
>running its Empire.   Picking a quarrel with the US was very
>low on the agenda.   To listen to some people, you might think
>that the War of 1812 was some huge blot on British history that
>needed avenging.    It wasn't.   It was barely a footnote.  It
>still is.

That's probably true from a British viewpoint, but from the U.S. viewpoint,
the possibility that a larger, more powerful country would want to again
invade (as they did in India) was very much in the minds of U.S. citizens.

It wasn't until the Civil War that the U.S. population approached that
of Britain and there were even fears then that Britain would side with
the South to ensure cheap cotton.

Charlie


Xref: sparky soc.history:8633 soc.culture.indian:32444
From: ngopalas@ho15.eng.ua.edu (Nath S. Gopalaswamy)
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: World Culture and Western Culture
Date: 29 Sep 92 15:34:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: ua1ix.1992Sep29.153431.126458
Organization: The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa

In article <1992Sep29.053846.1643@cs.ucla.edu> panwar@killer.cs.ucla.edu (Ramesh Panwar) writes:
>John McCarthy wrote: 
>
>> However, for
>> about 500 years, say between 1450 and 1950, almost all significant
>> technological advances were made in the West.  
>> There is a world culture today that is mostly a
>> descendant of Western culture.  
>> Moreover, the superiority of Western
>> culture and civilization contributed to Western political pre-eminence
>> almost as much as did the superiority of Western technology.  
>>	Nevertheless, the Spanish victory was substantially a
>> consequence of Spanish Catholicism's intellectual and moral
>> superiority to Aztec religion and ideology.  In the first place, it
>> proclaimed universal religious and moral principles.  
>> 	An early example of generally exploitative colonialism doing
>> good might be the British suppression of {\it sati} in 1829.  

I AGREE WITH EVERYTING WITH HIS IGHNESS Mr. JOHN SAYING. HEATHENS ALL OVER
THE WORLD NEVER TO BE GRATEFULL FOR MOST KIND AND RESPECTFULL LOVE OF WESTERN
WORLD (MAY GOD EVER BLES WEST) WHO TALKING AND QUESTIONING THE MOST EXCELLENT
CULTURE OF WEST ( MAY GOD'S FURRY BE ON TRAITOR PAGINS) ? WAS CHINESE CULTURE
PUT MAN ON MOON OR WAS INDAN YOGA MAKE CARDEIAC SURGERY? EASTEN PEOPLE NOW
TALK BUT TRAVEL IN WASTERN PLAINES, WALK ON WATER IF NOT LIKE WESTERN PLANE. 

NOW DO NOT AZTEC HAV CAR AND MTV? SO SOME PEOPLE GOT DIED, BUT EVERY CHANGE
NEEDING SACRIFICE, WHO CAN NOW LIVE WITHOUT MICROWAVE AND DISHWASHER? OR STILL
WANT TO USE SUNDIAL AND SMOKE CLOUD TO TALK TO MAMMY AND PAPPY THREE MOUNTAIN
AWAY? SO SOME AIDS THINGIE CAME BUT NOW ALL NOT KNOW HOW MUCH VIRUS STUDIES
BEING DONE. BY EXPORTING THE AIDS THINGIE TO MOON SEEING CHINA AND WATER ON
WALKING INDIA WEST GIVING THEM CHANCE TO DEVELOP VIRUS PROGRAM BY THEMSELF,
THANKLESS PEOPLE. I DESPAIRING WHEN THE PALEONTOLOGICAL ASIANS COME TO SENSES
AND THROW THIER HOPELESS SOULS BEFORE WEST, FOR WEST NOT WAIT ANY LONGER TO
FORGIVE, AND IF INDIA AND CHINA GO FOR FORGIVE NOW WEST GIVE 20 PERCENT OFF
EVERY CULTURE LESSONS.

YOURS FIEND,

NATTH,

PS I NOT KNOW TO USE SPEL CHEK ON THIS UNICS SCREEN, SO PLEASE EXCUSE IF I
MISTAKE COME EVERYWERE. LOOKING FORWARD TO GETTING GOOD VIEWS. PIECE TO AL. 

>> 	I have used rather provocative examples in this essay, and
>> perhaps I should change them.  Lest you think I haven't read any
>> contrary opinions, let me finish by quoting the writer Susan Sontag,
>> who may have changed her mind since she wrote the following.  After
>> all, what's an essay without a little racism.
>> 
>>      ``The white race is the cancer of history.  It is the white
>>      race and it alone---its ideologies and inventions--- which
>>      eradicates autonomous civilizations whereever it spreads,
>>      which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which
>>      now threatens the very existence of life itself.''
From: dawar@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Anuj Dawar)
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: Invention of the Novel
Date: 6 Oct 92 02:24:52 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Sep29.182407.25420@nntp.hut.fi> c34657b@saha.hut.fi (Tuomas Viljanen) writes:
>
>I would recall it was the Byzantines who wrote the first novel, "Barlaam and
>Josaphat", though, I don't remember the name of the author. It is dated to
>the 7th century.
>

Interesting that you should bring this up in this context.  The book (also
known as "Travels of Prince Josephat") was produced by one John of Damascus
in the 7th century.  But, he was not the author, merely translating into
Greek an extant Persian text, itself a translation of a Pali text written
in India, probably in the 3rd century BC.  The "Prince Josephat" of this 
tale is, in fact, none other than Gautam Siddhartha, the Buddha.  

John took this ancient Buddhist story and turned it into a Christian 
parable.  The book became so popular as a pedagogical tool in the
medieval church that eventually "Prince Josephat" was canonized.

I can dig up a reference to this story if anyone is interested.

 -A.D.
From: narayana@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Kuram T Narayana)
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: World Culture and Western Culture
Date: 2 Oct 92 19:16:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BvIDJL.KwK
Organization: Penn State Computer Science

In article <BvI1xw.7Js@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca> jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll) writes:
>In article <12570@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>>In article <19764@ector.cs.purdue.edu>, cutchin@cs.purdue.edu (Steve Cutchin) writes:
>>#     While it is probably accurate to say that many new and beneficial
>>#     culture concepts were introduced by the conquering of India by
>>#     the British this in NO WAY mitigates that it was the western cultures
>>#     view of Indians as inferior, backward and heretical that allowed them
>>#     to justify in their minds the slaughter of millions of indians in
>>#     their conquest of India.  Mr McCarthy's EXTREMELY selective view of
>>
>>MILLIONS of Indians?  Even over the two centuries of British colonialism,
>>that comes to at least 5000 Indians a year.  There was a rather
>>famous massacre of unarmed and peaceful Indians around 1919 or 1920 
>>that played a major part in the loss of British confidence, and the
>>strengthening of the Indian nationalist movement.  Several hundred 
>>people were killed in that massacre.  Yet it stands out as one of 
>>the great atrocities.  Why am I skeptical of "millions of Indians?"
>>
>>Could someone provide some more data?
>
>	All  it really takes to  kill a few million colonials is  
>mind-bogglingly  stupid  imposed agricultural policy. Ireland's
>potato famine comes to  mind as  an obvious example of the  
>English managing to starve multitudes in the midst of plenty,
>and I have  dim memories of something similar in 1940s India.
>
>						James Nicoll

The Bengal famine of the early forties is perhaps the most
comparable thing to the Potato famine imposed on Ireland by
the colonial British. Satyajit Ray made a movie on the effects
of the Bengal famine on a small brahmin family! I saw this movie
(made in color) sometime in  76-78.
...kt
Xref: sparky soc.history:8790 soc.culture.celtic:6488 sci.archaeology:2574
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.celtic,sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Who lived in Great Britain before the Kelts?
From: lionhart@netlink.cts.com (Jackie Zucconi)
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 92 21:48:24 PDT
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

mike@fionn.lbl.gov (Michael Helm) writes:

> Mark-Jason Dominus writes:
> >    It seems that the Kelts migrated into Great Britain from the
> >Continent between 500-100 BC.  Was there an aboriginal people there
> >before the Kelts?  If so, what happened?  Were they exterminated?
> 
> First, it's unclear when, or even if, that happened.  It may be
> that Celtic types migrated to Britain & ran out whoever was already
> there; it may be that no Celts, or very small numbers, from the
> European mainland personally migrated.   The archaelogists, from
> what I learned in a recent class, have had a very hard time
> finding any evidence of massive invasion at the time the
> "Celtic" culture starts showing up in Britain & Ireland (which
> is, incidentally, a little earlier than the dates you cite).
> I think they have found some evidence that in iron age times
> some interlopers did show up -- there's a site in northern
> England, I think, that shows a couple generations of more advanced
> Continental-style artifacts that gradually disappear in time, which
> somebody has connected with a historically-attested invasion
> of Britain by the Belgic(?) tribes.

  Would these Belgic tribes be the famous "beeker people" that's I've 
heard about (oh so long ago)? If memory serves me right they were called 
"Beeker people" because the only remains archeologists found were 
earthenware beekers.
                              Jackie

--                    
INTERNET:  lionhart@netlink.cts.com (Jackie Zucconi)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!lionhart
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
Xref: sparky soc.history:8585 soc.culture.indian:32303
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: World Culture and Western Culture
From: ghayalm@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Manoj Ghayalod)
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 01:51:28 GMT
Organization: University of Cincinnati

>	An early example of generally exploitative colonialism doing
>good might be the British suppression of {\it sati} in 1829.  {\it
>Sati} is the Hindu custom of a widow throwing herself on her husband's
>funeral pyre.  Its suppression was triggered by Indian widows fleeing
>to the British to avoid the enforced suicide.  This illustrates that
>the British already had a reputation in India as people to whom one
>could flee to avoid some kinds of injustice.  Before suppressing {\it
>sati} the British argued among themselves about whether the evil of
>the custom justified interfering with Indian religion.
>
Sati was basically eliminated by Indian leaders like Mahtma Gandhi
the British did not want to interfere as they thought hindus would
object thus rock the British rule in India. 
The British had no reputation for justice in India, in fact they
were known to take over Indian kingdoms unfairly and prevent
Indian industries from functioning, that's why most Indians
fought for freedom passionately during the British rule.

>
>	The multiculturalism idea, that all cultural traditions are
>equally valuable is today being overcome at great cost in the former
>colonial countries.  Arbitrarily trying to invent alternatives to
>democracy and capitalism are just as unlikely to succeed as trying to
>invent alternatives to the airplane.

There is an alternative for airplane, helicopter, if you want
to fly further and faster we have rockets.  I don't seem to 
get your point here.

manoj

Newsgroups: soc.history
From: c34657b@saha.hut.fi (Tuomas Viljanen)
Subject: Re: World Culture and Western Culture/ British Misuse Of Sati.
Organization: The Nibelungenlied Incorporated
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 20:48:54 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.170055.11813@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> kavuri@lips2.ecn.purdue.edu (Surya N Kavuri ) writes:
>In article <1992Sep28.072955.15212@sserve.cc.adfa.oz.au>, Christopher.Vance@adfa.oz.au (Christopher JS Vance) writes:
>> In article <1992Sep28.055120.1578@ecst.csuchico.edu> vivek@ecst.csuchico.edu (Vivek R. Prabhu) writes:
>> | The British in reality were not even saviours of the Indian widows.  There
>> | are many examples of the British soldiers having raped widows after having

By British soldiers or mustered native Indian soldiers in British uniform ?
I could well see a Muslim Indian to violate a Hindu woman, remembering the
centuries of continuous warfare between Vijayanagar and Bengali f.eg., or an
oppressed pariah soldier avenging his sufferings to a higher caste widow.
But, of course, there are no excuses for a rape, which is always a crime,
though still lesser crime than an outright murder by cremation alive.

>> | so-calledly rescuing them from the funeral pyres of their dead husbands.
>> 
>> Does that mean that they *weren't* rescued from the funeral pyres?

>    What do you mean by *rescued* ?
>    May be you prefer to being raped than dead, but don't generalize.
>    Not all people are masochistic.  They may prefer being alive and not
>    raped.

I would call letting not the poor woman to be cremated alive as rescuing her.

Of course everyone do rather prefer to be not dead and not raped, but if the
choice is between cremation alive and raping, but let alive, I think most
people will choose the latter. If you choose here death before dishonor, it is
a choice of all yours, though a bit Medieval. But would your wife like to be
pushed into the crematorium furnace along with your coffin if you happen to
die before her ? I would say not, 1000 degrees C is a hell of a sauna. But I
am not an Indian, they may have a different opinion (though I still doubt it).




  ++ Tuomas Viljanen                     ++ For a battle like Crecy, you do  ++
  ++ Lahderanta 20 A 19                  ++ not need a military genius like  ++
  ++ SF-02720 Espoo 72 FINLAND           ++ Edward III. All you need is an   ++
  ++ 358-0-592175 or c34657b@saha.hut.fi ++ idiot like the Duke of Alencon.  ++
Xref: sparky soc.history:8646 soc.culture.indian:32494