Awesome! This #map shows the population density of the 1.4 billion cows that live on our planet. Source: https://t.co/0n5fek1fA8 pic.twitter.com/tT5psAopuY

— Simon Kuestenmacher (@simongerman600) July 27, 2018

I have been wondering this the past week is that how and why did India become vegetarian. Was it simply a theological quirk or were there some geohistorical reasons for it (the cow was such an economic necessity that it made sense to forgo protein). Was it also an Aryan feature or Dravidian or does that question make no sense?

Another thought that came to mind was that would ancient Indians have been wealthier had they been avid meat-eaters. If there had been lesser resources to go around the population densities would have been lighter perhaps but of course this pales in comparison to bad leadership.

As an aside I definitely concede the fact that more often than not local leadership is almost always better for the population than foreign dynasties. Therefore Hindu dynasties probably were better for India than Muslim ones simply because India was home for the former. The Mughal’s great accomplishments were in art and architecture, which may be very well for posterity but didn’t make them a match for the modern age in contrast to the Safavids who built Iran into a successful nation state.

I would hazard that Ashoka was probably a better Emperor of India than Akbar simply because the former gifted the world India’s most successful export, blue-eyed Buddha (believe it or not the Buddha had blue eyes). We sometimes forget that Buddhism probably ranks as India’s greatest accomplishment in the wider world; it transformed all Eastern religions and became the dominant philosophical paradigm for so much of the ancient world. It’s reflective of Western bias that Indian academics and historians are more concerned with ancient India’s influence on the modern West; the Mitanni were a footnote in history compared to the great accomplishments of Indic civilisation in the East.

However the reason why I think India never really matched China in national identity, sovereignty and political cohesion (even when the Chinese were ruled by foreigners they still managed to maintain their cultural coherence to a very great and recognisable extent) is simply because of caste. The greatest faultline in South Asia, after creed, is caste and that made Indian society vulnerable to foreign despots. The court of Mughal Kings is littered with Brahmins and Rajputs and let’s not forget Urdu was an invention of Khatris and Kayasths. The Brits didn’t only come up with divide and rule; the fissures were inbuilt Into Indian society.. The Sikhs achieved the dominance they did was because they welded a caste-light community to achieve assabiyah, which the different children of Brahma frankly eschewed from time to time. This is something to thank Pakistan and the Muslims; they are such a galvanising force for Hindu society to reconsolidate and shed away such internal divisions..

Interesting Links:

Food Writer Becomes A Butcher To Better Understand The Value Of Meat

Pakistan elects first non-Muslim in modern history to general national assembly seat

Only catastrophe truly reduces inequality, according to a historical survey

Spats does give some good points that West Punjab (and by extension her Indus peripheries) were outside the pale of Vedas.

However the key question is the question of the Siraiki language.

* More than Urdu being an “Indian linguistic invasion” into the Indus; the Punjabi language also seems to be a Hindawi pushback from the East into the Lahnda speaking West.

* The remnants of Lahnda, which descends from the same Prakrit as Sindhi, are Hindko and Seraiki.

* In a way Lahore functions a bit like Delhi in diffusing a more Gangetic/Indic bias to the Indus region; one Seraiki leaning website claimed that the invading Sikhs brought Punjabi into the Punjab.

* The Punjab and Sindh are disproportionately influential provinces and “Seraikistan”/Bahawlapur would dramatically rebalance the federation (Pak Punjab hasn’t had its Haryana moment yet).

* The question of Gilgit-Baltistan, Hindko and Pathans in Baluchistan raise up more dilemmas as to provincial rebalance.

* The historic Indo-Gangetic axis, the GT road, is Kabul-Lahore-Delhi-Dhaka. Perhaps if our great British overlords had adopted a more sensible approach to the Subcontinent we could have seen many Indias based on these great cities. I don’t know what would have been equivalent cities in the South; Mysore, Hyderabad?

Some interesting links:

A language buried by Partition

WIKITONGUES: Lillotama speaking Seraiki

Morali Laal : A Hindu living in Pakistan

Reham Khan speaking Saraiki

The Seraiki Subai Bandwagon

As an English medium Indian, for a while, I was taken in by the ‘corrupt politicians’ are the problem narrative. I thought that any news about them getting taught a lesson, losing power or even getting incarcerated was good news. For some other members of my class, it went much further. I remember reading news about a Bihar politician dying. But what I recall most is the frustration of the few commentators who actually knew about the politician’s work and were trying to pay homage to him, but getting overwhelmed by the ‘good riddance’ type comments most Indians of my type were expressing.

This narrative remains predominant in the English medium class in India even today. With a preponderance of STEM graduates, who are not accustomed to critical thinking and subjective analysis, the ‘great man’ narrative is easy to fall for when it comes to explaining (and solving) social problems. Every achievement is the result of a ‘stern’, ‘uncorrupt’ leader, while every shortcoming is because of ‘corrupt’ or ‘weak’ politicians.

The politics of newly politicized, upper middle class South Asian youth thus revolve around a ‘great man’. The manifestations of this are of course, Narendra Modi in India, and Imran Khan in Pakistan.

In India, with its deep levels of politicization, the influence of the upper middle class is not that great, but played no small part in getting Narendra Modi elected. Modi has moved things since he came to power, demonetisation, GST, RERA, insolvency act, ease of doing business and so on. But a Congress government with the same kind of mandate (a full majority) would have done exactly the same things, with the exception of demonetisation. More importantly, there isnt a single program or policy of the Congress that Modi has substantially altered, be it NREGA (hated by economic conservatives) or RTE (hated by extreme Hindutva folks).

Modi, like any smart politician knows that politics in a feudal and agrarian society like India revolves around patronage. And the key to this patronage is massive state spending on rural development, agrarian subsidies and government salaries. In every budget that the Modi government has presented, the proportion of spending on these patronage enabling items has remained unchanged from previous administrations. Corruption is simply the informal channel that actually makes this money trickle down.

In Pakistan, even though the proclivities of the English class are similar to their Indian counterparts, the situation is different. The scope for patronage spending is already constrained by the high budget demands of the army, its control of key economic sectors and the need to service existing debts. From this perspective, one can speculate that the conflict between Sharif and the army was a structural consequence of the demands of South Asian patronage politics on the one hand, and the vested interests of a small, but powerful group of people (the military). It is not clear what will enable Imran Khan to sidestep this reality. His party is filled with turncoats from other parties who know for sure that without patronage power, they dont stand a chance at getting reelected. But he does not seem to have the will or even the inclination to constrain the military.

Only an industrialized economy in which workers are less dependent on local strong men for employment and crisis-support can really alter things. Can kaptaan take Pakistan there faster than India ?

A friend of mine posted this to Facebook and I’m reproducing it below. It’s interesting that Pakistan has a FPTP, like the UK, US, India & Canada. That means that there’s an inbuilt bias for a 2-Party system. At any rate the below is an interesting read. Apparently a Shi’ite lady (PTI) beat a sectarian outfit.

-An absolutely brilliant and inspiring election campaign by Mohammad Jibran Nasir, where he refused to bow down to extremist pressure (ZackNote: he is a Shi’ite and has a bold stance on the Ahmediyya) and never once indulged in condemnation of any community or mud-slinging against any party. It won him 6,462 and 6,109 votes from NA-247 and PS-111 respectively, which in today’s political climate is a huge achievement.

-The first Hindu to be elected to the National Assembly on a general seat: PPP candidate Dr Mahesh Kumar Malani from Tharparkar (NA-222).

FM

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/world-press-photo-critics-rip-into-alessio-mamo-italian-photographers-poverty-porn-dreaming-food-pho-1889399?pfrom=home-lateststories

This is Coloniser Privileger taken far too far!

PM Modi must immediately ban this “fauxgrapher” Alessio Malmo with a lifetime ban and SAARC must follow. I would also ban William Dalyrymple because his faux-Mughal faux-desi act is tiresome but then I’m getting ahead of myself.

The problem with desis is that we bicker over so much trivia (newsflash Nehru & Jinnah are long-dead) that we don’t focus on actually projecting the right image abroad.

India should have given lifetime bans to all of the makers of SlumDog Millionaire and oh yes ask for the Koh-i-Noor. The great mystery of how Duleep’s Singh line mysteriously died out (even when he had 8 children) is a historic tragedy..

Imran Khan of course has made a Faustian bargain and Mephistopheles is probably some shady top-brass general. A few points:

(1.) PTI + Army is the “National” pan-ethnic party of Pakistan that relies on the young frustrated nationalistic religious (but not fanatic) Pakistanis active on social media. As said it’s the BJP equivalent but since Pakistan is an Islamic Republic; the populist right-wing stance is of a different stance.

(2.) PPP & PML are the provincial parties and will have to work some sort of grand coalition deal to survive. The ethnic messy substratum layer of Pakistan that Partition and Paknationalism has tried so hard to erase will form half the country. Pakistani politics must adapt and will be interesting.

(3.) there is no doubt that there has been vote fudging; close seats haven’t been declared. I would imagine there is a PTI wave and approximately 10-20 seat victories are questionable however the PTI has arrived.

(4.) I personally find Imran Khan odd (like the Donald) as Vidhi quipped “Pakistan, like the US, has a thrice married leader.” I find Maryam or Fati much more palatable since women present a gentler side of our Islamic Republic..

(5.) I do think that today has been a victory for Pakistan. Democracy with Mughal characteristics has won the day. I jest but on a serious note; the democratic process is taking seed in Pakistan and the fact that the military are being push behind the scenes is a force for good.

(6.) this is very offensive; after 1948 & 1971, any more meddling in Pakistani sovereign territory is simply unacceptable and I say this as someone who is on the Barkha Dutta/Arundhati Roya spectrum of Pakistan (believe it or not so is Kabir).

(7.) Pakistan’s economy is in a right mess let’s see if Mr. Clean can fix it up but the biggest reason is of course Mephistopheles himself. I’ve seen the Marlow play twice (once with the Game of Thrones chap & Marlow descendant Kit H) and I genuinely can’t remember how the play ends. I’m not going to google it but let the suspense play out; let see how the reality tv version goes..