Fatalism and Poverty in Pakistan and Bangladesh

[biswa]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

I would like to start a parallel discussion on the causes of poverty in the subcontinent. The idea is to objectively measure and compare statistics for Pakistan, Bangladesh and India (because let's face it: all three countries are poor).

This should be done purely from a socio-political and historic viewpoint. Unlike in other threads there should not be an underlying religious, atheistic, or casteist agenda. In fact I would like to debunk the idea that religion or caste is the cause of poverty.

Let us try to be scientific about it and think about experimental factors and controls. In fact the three countries are historically very similar in many factors, except for religion. If in fact we can show that all three have arrived at a similar situation in spite of different religions, that would indicate that religion is not a factor.

Let us cite data from well-known sources to support our conclusions rather than be captive to one person's whims and opinions. To start it off let me list the per capita incomes of these countries (all from Wikipedia):

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD]Country[/TD]
[TD]Per Capita Income (US $)[/TD]
[TD]GDP (US $B)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pakistan[/TD]
[TD]2851[/TD]
[TD]210[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bangladesh[/TD]
[TD]1700[/TD]
[TD]282[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]India[/TD]
[TD]3703[/TD]
[TD]1846[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

At least by these measures it appears that none of India's religions are making it poorer than its neighbors. Maybe we should look for other factors.

 

[prasad1]

I agree with your idea of the post, but the heading is wrong. There is no fatalism in this statistic.

 

[biswa]

Ok, it is coming.

Fatalism is a cultural / social phenomenon, so it is harder to get statistics. However let me start with the following. I have personally heard people from Pakistan and Bangladesh use the following terms:
Inshallah - God willing
Khuda Hafiz - God be with you
Subhan Allah - God is pure
Allah hu Akbar - God is great
Mashallah - Thank you God

Note the repeated invocations of God's name in very common every-day circumstances. Note that there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Saying "Hai Allah" is exactly the same as saying "Oh God", "Hey Bhagwan", "Perumalee" or "Murugaa"

Maybe this is what others call fatalism, or falling back on God at the slightest opportunity, but that is how people are, not only in India, but in other countries as well. It is not particular to India culture or religion, but is prevalent in Bangladesh and Pakistan as well. In other words, there is nothing wrong with any of us. We are all equally fatalist.

 

[Yamaka]

I would like to start a parallel discussion on the causes of poverty in the subcontinent. The idea is to objectively measure and compare statistics for Pakistan, Bangladesh and India (because let's face it: all three countries are poor).

This should be done purely from a socio-political and historic viewpoint. Unlike in other threads there should not be an underlying religious, atheistic, or casteist agenda. In fact I would like to debunk the idea that religion or caste is the cause of poverty.

Let us try to be scientific about it and think about experimental factors and controls. In fact the three countries are historically very similar in many factors, except for religion. If in fact we can show that all three have arrived at a similar situation in spite of different religions, that would indicate that religion is not a factor.

Let us cite data from well-known sources to support our conclusions rather than be captive to one person's whims and opinions. To start it off let me list the per capita incomes of these countries (all from Wikipedia):

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD]Country[/TD]
[TD]Per Capita Income (US $)[/TD]
[TD]GDP (US $B)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pakistan[/TD]
[TD]2851[/TD]
[TD]210[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bangladesh[/TD]
[TD]1700[/TD]
[TD]282[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]India[/TD]
[TD]3703[/TD]
[TD]1846[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

At least by these measures it appears that none of India's religions are making it poorer than its neighbors. Maybe we should look for other factors.

I like this Thread also... and the Title. Thanks for bringing the FATALISM...

I can understand that Believers don't like to read "Religious FATALISM" which is the 800 lb gorilla in the front and backyard of every Indian house! Lol. That's fine with me.

I need one clarification in the data presented (I understand from where it came!)

If the GDP is U$1846 billions produced by 1200 million people in India in a year, then how do you get the per capita INCOME which is a fraction (may be 70-80% of GDP) to be U$3703?

Are you not following the Official Rate? If you do the so-called PPP, then it is a bothersome one. Because PPP will not be accepted by any Banker (including WB or IMF) due to spurious assumptions and methodology used. I don't like PPP (this is for only politicians and Nationalists) and not for ACTUAL world trade and monetary transaction.

You will be talking politics here, not any scientific accounting, IMO.

Please enlighten me.

 

[Yamaka]

Ok, it is coming.

Fatalism is a cultural / social phenomenon, so it is harder to get statistics. However let me start with the following. I have personally heard people from Pakistan and Bangladesh use the following terms:
Inshallah - God willing
Khuda Hafiz - God be with you
Subhan Allah - God is pure
Allah hu Akbar - God is great
Mashallah - Thank you God

Note the repeated invocations of God's name in very common every-day circumstances. Note that there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Saying "Hai Allah" is exactly the same as saying "Oh God", "Hey Bhagwan", "Perumalee" or "Murugaa"

Maybe this is what others call fatalism, or falling back on God at the slightest opportunity, but that is how people are, not only in India, but in other countries as well. It is not particular to India culture or religion, but is prevalent in Bangladesh and Pakistan as well. In other words, there is nothing wrong with any of us. We are all equally fatalist.

I fully agree with the argument here... religiously speaking India, Pak and BD are the SAME. One follows the Sanathana Dharma and others follow Islam..

Please continue developing the argument... I like the start very much.

Cheers.

 

[Yamaka]

This is also a very interesting Thread.

My only concern is some faceless COMMUNAL ACTIVISTS will try to hijack this to wage a communal warfare here!

Please watch out, because the author is not a Pak or BD (my assumption is he is a TB) !!

Good luck.

 

[Nara]

.....Let us try to be scientific about it and think about experimental factors and controls.

[...]

At least by these measures it appears that none of India's religions are making it poorer than its neighbors. Maybe we should look for other factors.

Dear biswa, if you want to be scientific about this, you need to have a control group that is free of any religion at all. Just comparing one religion with another can't justify letting religion off the hook.

Disclaimer: I don't think religion is the reason for poverty in India. U.S.A. the richest country in history, is one of the most religious countries on earth, even more than India IMO.

Cheers!

 

[Yamaka]

Dear biswa, if you want to be scientific about this, you need to have a control group that is free of any religion at all. Just comparing one religion with another can't justify letting religion off the hook.

Disclaimer: I don't think religion is the reason for poverty in India. U.S.A. the richest country in history, is one of the most religious countries on earth, even more than India IMO.

Cheers!

Dear N:

I like what you said in the first para very much... the methodology.

Clearly, I don't agree with your "Disclaimer". I know you have been very quiet on this subject...

Let's agree to disagree on this "Disclaimer"... and leave the matter there! Lol.

However, I would like to listen to you as to the reasons for Poverty, if any, in India, Pak and BD. (and Haiti, most of Africa, Central and South America etc etc)

Take care.

Peace.

 

[prasad1]

Ok, it is coming.

Fatalism is a cultural / social phenomenon, so it is harder to get statistics. However let me start with the following. I have personally heard people from Pakistan and Bangladesh use the following terms:
Inshallah - God willing
Khuda Hafiz - God be with you
Subhan Allah - God is pure
Allah hu Akbar - God is great
Mashallah - Thank you God

Note the repeated invocations of God's name in very common every-day circumstances. Note that there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Saying "Hai Allah" is exactly the same as saying "Oh God", "Hey Bhagwan", "Perumalee" or "Murugaa"

Maybe this is what others call fatalism, or falling back on God at the slightest opportunity, but that is how people are, not only in India, but in other countries as well. It is not particular to India culture or religion, but is prevalent in Bangladesh and Pakistan as well. In other words, there is nothing wrong with any of us. We are all equally fatalist.

Are you saying that belief in God is fatalism? So not believing in anything and saying that the victims are responsible for their situation is their own doing is not fatalism. Ultimately the karma theory also says the same thing, so that is not fatalism. Either you or someone or something is responsible for the situation one finds in. Majority of the people in the world feel that they are limited and something other than themselves is controlling their destiny. If we believe in Dollar, even that says that "in God we trust".

What is your definition of the word Fatalism?

If we are not responsible for our destiny, and there is no God, what is responsible for my present situation?

 

[zebra16]

Disclaimer: I don't think religion is the reason for poverty in India. U.S.A. the richest country in history, is one of the most religious countries on earth, even more than India IMO. Cheers!

I am in complete agreement here. I also note that you have raised this point more than once in the past. I am amused by the adroitness with which this issue is being skirted around by almost everyone.

Regards

 

[C RAVI]

Ok, it is coming.

Fatalism is a cultural / social phenomenon, so it is harder to get statistics. However let me start with the following. I have personally heard people from Pakistan and Bangladesh use the following terms:
Inshallah - God willing
Khuda Hafiz - God be with you
Subhan Allah - God is pure
Allah hu Akbar - God is great
Mashallah - Thank you God

Note the repeated invocations of God's name in very common every-day circumstances. Note that there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Saying "Hai Allah" is exactly the same as saying "Oh God", "Hey Bhagwan", "Perumalee" or "Murugaa"

Maybe this is what others call fatalism, or falling back on God at the slightest opportunity, but that is how people are, not only in India, but in other countries as well. It is not particular to India culture or religion, but is prevalent in Bangladesh and Pakistan as well. In other words, there is nothing wrong with any of us. We are all equally fatalist.

The above is very much common and obvious in GCC countries. The countries that are rich and prosperous. Why there is no Fatalasim and poverty in those GCC countries??

All most all the locals in GCC countries have more than 1 wife and atleast 2-3 children from each wife. For them too it's God Giveth Children and Man Taketh.

InshaAllah - Gods' wish..


Why this "InshaAllah" has not created FATALISM & POVERTY in these GCC countries?


Even if the whole lot of INDIA91% get's into U.A.E. (if at all that's possible given the size of the land), the local residents would never suffer poverty. Because the systems are as such. They will earn more and more money by providing sponsorships to Indian treaders and by filling up man power requirements to many companies that would consider establishing their operations in U.A.E.

The King/Ruler bothers for the betterment of his country and country men.

CORRUPTION & EXPLOITATION has no existence in this country. They exploit only those who are not the sons of the land.


They would not say InshaAllah, poor Indians need money and so have come over here to take from us. So let them take what they want and let us sacrifice our luxury.

-----------------------------------------

The size of the land of the country, the poppulation of the country, the natural rescources of the country, the educational / agricultural/ industrialization / productions / manufacturing capabilities of the country etc..etc.. leads to the different standards of that country.

With what is available, if there exists good Goverence and absense of CORRUPTIONS & EXPLAITATIONS, the country and country men would have better ways towards grogess and would have better living/survival and acheive the status - Developed Country.

India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and many of the countries in African continent have FATALISM & POVERTY due to CORRUPTIONS & EXPLOITATIONS. This root cause has swallowed the hopes of these country men so much that they have got their senses erased that otherwise could have let them know what's the smart living for themselves.

 

[Yamaka]

Are you saying that belief in God is fatalism? So not believing in anything and saying that the victims are responsible for their situation is their own doing is not fatalism. Ultimately the karma theory also says the same thing, so that is not fatalism. Either you or someone or something is responsible for the situation one finds in. Majority of the people in the world feel that they are limited and something other than themselves is controlling their destiny. If we believe in Dollar, even that says that "in God we trust".

What is your definition of the word Fatalism?

If we are not responsible for our destiny, and there is no God, what is responsible for my present situation?

Yes, it's important to define as to what exactly we talk about here -

Definition of FATALISM:

"

The ​

belief ​

that ​

events ​

are ​

determined ​

by ​

an ​

impersonal ​

fate ​

and ​

cannot ​

be ​

changed ​

by ​

human ​

beings."​

This means all things and events are PRE-DETERMINED, as such humans can't change anything...
​

I strongly believe WE are responsible for our "destiny". There is no God, no Poorva Janma Karma and as such worshiping a human-like personal God is just waste of time, energy and resources.

Maybe, the prayers, poojas and bhajans -PPB- could potentially give some "solace" at the time of doing this rituals...soon after all this "nice comfortable feeling" withers away... hence many people constantly do PPB, as a form of addiction.

This is the view of a self-proclaimed practicing Atheist.

Of course, ALL Believers will agree that the Religious FATALISM is the core of Religiosity....

More later...

Cheers.

 

[Yamaka]

Hello Ravi:

My response in bold letters below -

The above is very much common and obvious in GCC countries. The countries that are rich and prosperous. Why there is no Fatalasim and poverty in those GCC countries??

Assuming GCC is the oil-rich Gulf Coast Countries, I think the petroleum reserves, which most GCC citizens believe is the Gift of God to Prophet Muhammed and his followers. That God giveth the Pertoleum, hence their life is prosperous.

All most all the locals in GCC countries have more than 1 wife and atleast 2-3 children from each wife. For them too it's God Giveth Children and Man Taketh.

InshaAllah - Gods' wish..


Why this "InshaAllah" has not created FATALISM & POVERTY in these GCC countries?

Petroleum reserves!


Even if the whole lot of INDIA91% get's into U.A.E. (if at all that's possible given the size of the land), the local residents would never suffer poverty. Because the systems are as such. They will earn more and more money by providing sponsorships to Indian treaders and by filling up man power requirements to many companies that would consider establishing their operations in U.A.E.

Please do the math. You will get a different picture. Insert 1100 million people in the math, and give some time of about 35 years, and find what happens to the natural resources of UAE!
The King/Ruler bothers for the betterment of his country and country men.

CORRUPTION & EXPLOITATION has no existence in this country. They exploit only those who are not the sons of the land.


They would not say InshaAllah, poor Indians need money and so have come over here to take from us. So let them take what they want and let us sacrifice our luxury.

If you believe Corruption & Exploitation is non-existent in GCC, you are terribly mistaken,IMO. It may not be the "retail" type... but there is "wholesale" corruption there. You need to LOOK for at high places!
-----------------------------------------

The size of the land of the country, the poppulation of the country, the natural rescources of the country, the educational / agricultural/ industrialization / productions / manufacturing capabilities of the country etc..etc.. leads to the different standards of that country.

With what is available, if there exists good Goverence and absense of CORRUPTIONS & EXPLAITATIONS, the country and country men would have better ways towards grogess and would have better living/survival and acheive the status - Developed Country.

India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and many of the countries in African continent have FATALISM & POVERTY due to CORRUPTIONS & EXPLOITATIONS. This root cause has swallowed the hopes of these country men so much that they have got their senses erased that otherwise could have let them know what's the smart living for themselves.

Because of poor Education... why poor Education? Too many people to feed and cloth, kids drop out of schools very early! Why too many people? Religious FATALISM, as simple as that!

Again, Corruption & Exploitation is there because of poor Education, poor skills and POVERTY.

 

[Yamaka]

I am in complete agreement here. I also note that you have raised this point more than once in the past. I am amused by the adroitness with which this issue is being skirted around by almost everyone.

Regards

Dear Z:

Here is my own view, after living in the US for about 33 years (in IL and TX):

1. It is estimated that about 20-25% of US population is of Religious Conservatives. These people stick to their "Gods and Guns" no matter what!

2. The rest are "Religious wannabees" - most of whom consider religion as a Cultural Link to the Distant Past... these people think of Christmas MORE of a gift-giving day from Santa Claus than thinking of Baby Jesus.

They may go to Church very infrequently..during birth, death, marriage and occasional "Christmas Mass" etc.. In India91% things are very different.

3. About 90% of women in the US use contraceptives and other birth control tools. This includes practicing Catholic women too.

I am talking about Religious FATALISM in the context of most of India91% not using contraceptives and birth control tools to limit the size of their family.

That's all.

Regards

Y

ps. "In God We Trust" written in currency and other places just shows the historical relevance of the country. Here again "God" here may mean "Nature", and not Christ or Allah or Krishna/Rama! Lol.

 

[prasad1]

What determines the family and country into which one is born? And why are innocent children born into poor families or war-torn countries?
The Law of like attracts like or the Law of Attraction determines the family into which one is born and the country. There must be similarity between the human being and the family into which he is born. That family too is a small unit that forms the larger society that we call countries. Each of us do not belong to our families or country by chance. A great orderliness is in play guided by the Law of the Attraction of Homogeneous Species!
What determines the family and country into which one is born? And why are innocent children born into poor families or war-torn countries? | Life's Experiences Explained

 

[C RAVI]

What determines the family and country into which one is born? And why are innocent children born into poor families or war-torn countries?
The Law of like attracts like or the Law of Attraction determines the family into which one is born and the country. There must be similarity between the human being and the family into which he is born. That family too is a small unit that forms the larger society that we call countries. Each of us do not belong to our families or country by chance. A great orderliness is in play guided by the Law of the Attraction of Homogeneous Species!
What determines the family and country into which one is born? And why are innocent children born into poor families or war-torn countries? | Life's Experiences Explained

YES!!! No doubt at all.

That's what KARMA is all about.

At the same time I believe fully that folks wrapped in FATALISM & POVERTY in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indian, African countries or anywhere in some or other ways are all into spirituality of their own kind with certain belief system, to look for the mercy of the GOD.

Even if these folks don't resort to spirituality of their own kind ( with their belief - rebirth due Karma / answerable on Judgement day, whatever), expecting mercy and grace of the God, they would still be locked up inside the Gates of Hell of sufferings due FATALISTIC Corruption and Exploitation in these countries.

If FATALISM due Corruption and Exploitation in certain areas is the God's choice, than it's in the hands of the Gods only to bring about the changes for betteerment of the Souls.

As per my belief, it's all the rule of the nature/Super Natural Agent/Ishvarah-Ram-Krishna-Muruga-Durga-Allah-Jesus/Absolute Reality/All omnipotent-omniscient-omnipresent whatever one may call, that is playing a justifiable game for each sole and all the CAUSE & EFFECT(Corruption/Exploitation/Poverty etc.etc.//// Justice/descipline/moral goodness/righteousness etc.etc) are all administered as and when required-where and how required.


Irrespective of whether Religion/Spirituality is followed or atheism is followed, enlightened & righteous Souls (WE educated/fair minded/rationally intelligent and non corrupt people) should make the possible attempts to REFORM other Corrupted souls to work towards fairness and righteousness so that they would not continue with their FATALISTIC Corruption and Exploitation.


As enlightened righteous souls, we can atleast do that as the efforts of Humans for the betterment of all fellow Humans with the Grace of the Gods OR Law of the Nature(that may not be considered same as God).

 

[Nara]

....They may go to Church very infrequently..during birth, death, marriage and occasional "Christmas Mass" etc..

Dear Y, let us look at it from another perspective, being an atheist is not an impediment in India, we have had them as CMs and PMs.

But, in the U.S. atheists are shunned. President Bush Sr. famously opined atheists are not Americans.

In the U.S., atheists in politics must hide it, otherwise you can't get elected as dogcatcher. There is only one openly atheist among all of 535 members of Congress, though over couple of dozens are supposed to be ones secretly -- they don't want to be outed due to fears their atheism will be used as a weapon against them come election time. Why, even our President Obama is certainly some kind of non-believer, yet he puts on a show of being a religious man in order to not lose the election on that count.

It is true that free-thought and rationality is on the increase in the U.S., but that is not what your point is, is it? Your thesis is, religious belief is the main culprit for poverty in India, and I am afraid that thesis goes against the overwhelming historical evidence from all corners of the world.

I reject religion on rational grounds, (and the fact freedom from religion opens us up for a truly happy and blissful life). Therefore, I think it is incumbent upon me to stay true to rationality, which means I must refrain from making claims that fly in the face of rationality, namely empirical evidence. This is not a matter of opinion to agree or disagree with, it is a matter fact, historical fact.

Cheers!

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Y, let us look at it from another perspective, being an atheist is not an impediment in India, we have had them as CMs and PMs.

But, in the U.S. atheists are shunned. President Bush Sr. famously opined atheists are not Americans.

In the U.S., atheists in politics must hide it, otherwise you can't get elected as dogcatcher. There is only one openly atheist among all of 535 members of Congress, though over couple of dozens are supposed to be ones secretly -- they don't want to be outed due to fears their atheism will be used as a weapon against them come election time. Why, even our President Obama is certainly some kind of non-believer, yet he puts on a show of being a religious man in order to not lose the election on that count.

It is true that free-thought and rationality is on the increase in the U.S., but that is not what your point is, is it? Your thesis is, religious belief is the main culprit for poverty in India, and I am afraid that thesis goes against the overwhelming historical evidence from all corners of the world.

I reject religion on rational grounds, (and the fact freedom from religion opens us up for a truly happy and blissful life). Therefore, I think it is incumbent upon me to stay true to rationality, which means I must refrain from making claims that fly in the face of rationality, namely empirical evidence. This is not a matter of opinion to agree or disagree with, it is a matter fact, historical fact.

Cheers!

Dear N:

I hear you.

Yes, for political office self-proclaimed Atheists are shunned in the US.

Because most people expect the elected officials have some understanding of a POWER beyond our control.

It could very well be Nature. I know the politics of it... the Religious Conservatives will demagogue the issue and defeat the candidate somehow.

My thesis is simply this -

Poor skills due to poor education is the main reason for poverty in India. Population explosion at the family level among India91% is the practical reason, which takes us to the Religious FATALISM in the MINDSET of the poor parents.

Hence I hypothesize that Religious FATALISM is the root cause of POVERTY in India.

Most others say it's Corruption, Poor Politics etc.... I disagree.

That's all.

Cheers.



ps. If US is one of the most religious countries in the world, how come Barack H. Obama was elected as the POTUS, when his religiosity was doubted during the Primary as well as in the General Election? Cheers.

 

[Nara]

ps. If US is one of the most religious countries in the world, how come Barack H. Obama was elected as the POTUS, when his religiosity was doubted during the Primary as well as in the General Election? Cheers.

Because Obama is an excellent politician, he is capable of selling snow to an Eskimo.

which takes us to the Religious FATALISM in the MINDSET of the poor parents.

Y, you are using a curious term, "religious fatalism" (RF), what is it? How is it different from other kinds of fatalism? Is your thesis restricted only to RF? If so why? If not, why not?

You say this is your hypothesis. As a fellow-rationalist I think you will agree we are not allowed to simply come up with hypotheses out of thin air, there must be some rational basis. What is the rational basis for your hypothesis? Do you have anything beyond your hunch?

Given RF has existed as far back as we can see in history, and the fact that, that did not keep those societies from being materially wealthy for their times, what is so different with the present day RF that you wish to hypothesize it is the root cause of poverty? Also, why is this present-day RF selectively affecting only the poor, keeping them in abject poverty, but does not affect the rich, they seem to be getting richer and richer?

Cheers!

 

[prasad1]

Definition of FATALISM:

"

The belief that events are determined by an impersonal fate and cannot be changed by human beings." ​

There are too many mistakes in this definition and Karma theory.
There is no impersonal fate, its is very personal fate. It can be changed for future not the past actions. It is like a cow being tied with a very long rope in an empty field. The cow has the liberty of grazing anywhere, except it can not break out of the length of rope.
Similarly we have liberty of choosing within the bounds of karma. It is arrogant to claim that a child can determine by choice how it is born or what fate it should suffer. There is so much uncertainty in this world, and not see that we are a just a mere speck in the universe, is egoistic.

 

[prasad1]

Elvis Presley - In The Ghetto ( That's The Way It Is 1970).avi - YouTube

ELVIS THE KING : IN THE GHETTO
LYRICS :
Elvis Presley | In The Ghetto lyrics · · // (​

2:45

) · ·
(words & music by scott davis)
As the snow flies
On a cold and gray chicago mornin
A poor little baby child is born
In the ghetto
And his mama cries
cause if theres one thing that she dont need
Its another hungry mouth to feed
In the ghetto

People, dont you understand
The child needs a helping hand
Or hell grow to be an angry young man some day
Take a look at you and me,
Are we too blind to see,
Do we simply turn our heads
And look the other way

Well the world turns
And a hungry little boy with a runny nose
Plays in the street as the cold wind blows
In the ghetto

And his hunger burns
So he starts to roam the streets at night
And he learns how to steal
And he learns how to fight
In the ghetto

Then one night in desperation
A young man breaks away
He buys a gun, steals a car,
Tries to run, but he dont get far
And his mama cries

As a crowd gathers round an angry young man
Face down on the street with a gun in his hand
In the ghetto

As her young man dies,
On a cold and gray chicago mornin,
Another little baby child is born
In the ghetto


Tell me who is the cause of the situation.
By the way It is not in the Indian Subcontinent.​

 

[Yamaka]

Because Obama is an excellent politician, he is capable of selling snow to an Eskimo.

Y, you are using a curious term, "religious fatalism" (RF), what is it? How is it different from other kinds of fatalism? Is your thesis restricted only to RF? If so why? If not, why not?

You say this is your hypothesis. As a fellow-rationalist I think you will agree we are not allowed to simply come up with hypotheses out of thin air, there must be some rational basis. What is the rational basis for your hypothesis? Do you have anything beyond your hunch?

Given RF has existed as far back as we can see in history, and the fact that, that did not keep those societies from being materially wealthy for their times, what is so different with the present day RF that you wish to hypothesize it is the root cause of poverty? Also, why is this present-day RF selectively affecting only the poor, keeping them in abject poverty, but does not affect the rich, they seem to be getting richer and richer?

Cheers!

Dear N:

Thanks for spending some of your time on this topic.

1. I use "Religious FATALISM" to stress the FATALISM propounded by organized religions like Hinduism, Christianity and Islam. More importantly, here in this context, that India91% not using birth control tools like India9% or others.

You already know what FATALISM is (given in my response above).

2. A hypothesis in Social Science (as the topics of Poverty, Education, Equal Rights etc) is offered by an educated guess after observing a phenomenon or a process for a long period of time.

In India, as I have said before many times, economic prosperity was at its zenith during pre-Vedic, pre-Puranic period of Mehrgarh, Harrappa,Mohenjadero and other places of Indus Valley Civilization (7000 BC to 1500 BC).

Then, came the Vedas, followed by Purans. Later came Koran and Bible. Slowly the Society was in the choke hold of RF.

And, poverty slowly started growing inexorably.

You may argue that they were independent events... There need not be a correlation or causation.

Yes, it is possible.

Before I go further on this hypothesis, I want to hear your hypothesis addressing the topic: Why India91% is poor or dirt poor?, if any.

And your Solution to the problem, if you also see the way I see it.

Cheers.

 

[Yamaka]

I would like to start a parallel discussion on the causes of poverty in the subcontinent. The idea is to objectively measure and compare statistics for Pakistan, Bangladesh and India (because let's face it: all three countries are poor).

This should be done purely from a socio-political and historic viewpoint. Unlike in other threads there should not be an underlying religious, atheistic, or casteist agenda. In fact I would like to debunk the idea that religion or caste is the cause of poverty.

Let us try to be scientific about it and think about experimental factors and controls. In fact the three countries are historically very similar in many factors, except for religion. If in fact we can show that all three have arrived at a similar situation in spite of different religions, that would indicate that religion is not a factor.

Let us cite data from well-known sources to support our conclusions rather than be captive to one person's whims and opinions. To start it off let me list the per capita incomes of these countries (all from Wikipedia):

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD]Country[/TD]
[TD]Per Capita Income (US $)[/TD]
[TD]GDP (US $B)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pakistan[/TD]
[TD]2851[/TD]
[TD]210[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bangladesh[/TD]
[TD]1700[/TD]
[TD]282[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]India[/TD]
[TD]3703[/TD]
[TD]1846[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

At least by these measures it appears that none of India's religions are making it poorer than its neighbors. Maybe we should look for other factors.

My interpretation of the data is

1. All these countries have nearly the same (approximately) per capita income, if official rate is used.

If there is any minor difference, then it can be attributed to Democracy in India and Military Rule in Pak and BD during at least some of the periods since Independence.

2. We must compare the per capita income of these countries against China, a known Atheistic country.

If we do, then the difference is very stark: China has at least 3X more per capita income, as of today than India.

But there are other variables also: One Child Policy, One Party CCP Politics, State Capitalism etc etc.

Where are we going with this, anyway?

 

[prasad1]

Ms. Biswa,
Where are you

 

[Nara]

....1. I use "Religious FATALISM" to stress the FATALISM propounded by organized religions like Hinduism, Christianity and Islam. More importantly, here in this context, that India 91% not using birth control tools like India 9% or others.

You already know what FATALISM is (given in my response above).

Dear Y, this Stanford University site gives three kinds of fatalism as follows, but state that the third kind is not called fatalism these days:

• by appeal to logical laws and metaphysical necessities (“Logical or Metaphysical fatalism”)
• by appeal to the existence and nature of God (“Theological fatalism”)
• by appeal to causal determinism

If you are willing to accept this classification, I would like you to clarify whether the connection you hypothesize is common to all three kinds, or does your hypothesis differ for each kind.

2. A hypothesis in Social Science (as the topics of Poverty, Education, Equal Rights etc) is offered by an educated guess after observing a phenomenon or a process for a long period of time.

Given the history of India, the only educated guess one committed to rationality is allowed, is "fatalism" is independent of wide-spread poverty. But you are taking the opposite view. This is what is puzzling to me, from a rational POV.

In India, as I have said before many times, economic prosperity was at its zenith during pre-Vedic, pre-Puranic period of Mehrgarh, Harrappa,Mohenjadero and other places of Indus Valley Civilization (7000 BC to 1500 BC).

Then, came the Vedas, followed by Purans. Later came Koran and Bible. Slowly the Society was in the choke hold of RF.

And, poverty slowly started growing inexorably.

From the archeological evidence one can perhaps guess the pre-Vedic IVC was prosperous, equal to, or may even exceeding, contemporaneous civilzations elsewhere in the world. But I have a problem with your characterization that RF was slowly increasing its choke hold over time. So, let me pose the following two questions:

1. What evidence do we have that IVC was relatively free of RF?
2. On what basis do you say IVC marks the zenith of economic prosperity in India? India has seen several golden ages of peace and economic prosperity long after IVC, Gupta dynasty, Pallava Period in the south, Raja Raja Cholan, Vijayanagar, and then there was the Mogul empire that was the wealthiest empire in history at that time.

So, the basis you claim for your hypothesis is unacceptable on two counts, (i) role of RF during IVC is unknown and (ii) India saw many golden ages of economic prosperity irrespective of whether RF stayed the same all along or its choke hold gradually increased.

Before I go further on this hypothesis, I want to hear your hypothesis addressing the topic: Why India91% is poor or dirt poor?, if any.

I don't have any firm hypothesis, I don't want to simply conjure up a hypothesis without solid rational basis. However, I am very skeptical about your hypothesis, after all RF has been with us in India for a long time, and, based on all accounts, we have had long periods of immense wealth for that epoch. The wide spread poverty is rather a modern phenomenon. So, I know RF is unlikely to be a cause, let alone the root cause.

I don't have any solid hypothesis, but I can offer my guesses, just my speculations. I offer three, (i) break up of the feudal/caste system, (ii) population growth, (iii) political system/corruption.

I reject the feudal system and reject caste system even more, but the system provided for everyone in a way similar to the slave system of USA that provided for the slaves. We can do much better and must.

To address population growth we need to clearly understand the underlying causes. If we say it is RF, then we have to design solutions on that basis. That is simply impractical as we can't even begin to objectively define what RF is, and how to handle it.

On the other hand, if we take a rational look at the problem it is not difficult to see that the major causes for large families include lack of education and lack of economic opportunities. These are more objective measures and objective solutions can be devised, and are being devised. Today, it is difficult to see large families like a generation ago, across the board, in Tamil Nadu.

We also need to keep in mind that in India birth control is not a religious issue, at least among Hindus, if it was, how would you explain female infanticide/feticide? Infanticide is in Mahabharatam itself, goddess Gangai threw her new born babies into the river Gangai, except the last one.

Cheers!