The stupidity of genius
The main reason for this is that India's elites just never bothered learning from the mistakes of others. At all. Ever. Which is why, throughout that entire debate, I kept coming back to a simple fact of life:
The elites never learn from the mistakes of others, because they keep thinking that they're too smart to be that dumb.
Yes, I thought the same thing- "how the hell can smart people constantly be that retarded???"
You would think that any man with a classical Western education would know this (at least, back when the West actually provided a decent education in its universities- which wasn't all that long ago, in fact). Of course, guess what the leadership of India decided to do? It decided to start granting near-monopolies to various businessmen in order to "advance the national interest". So Tata became the "national" tea company, Ambuja became the "national" cement company, Birla became the "national" steel company, and so and so forth ad nauseam.
The net result? India's economy went down the crapper for forty years, sustained only by its massive domestic market and no small amount of Soviet help. Why, by the way, did India turn to the Soviets for help and emulate their five-year plans and their disastrous economic policies? Because at the end of WWII, the socialists of Nehru's circle decided that they wanted nothing to do with what they perceived to be an imperialist, exploitative Western model of economic planning. (There are legitimate reasons for feeling this way; India during the British Raj was taken for a real ride, much of its national wealth was stripped by the British. The point that such fire-eating Indians keep forgetting is that the British also gave India the entire basis for its national infrastructure- an infrastructure that has sustained the country ever since.)
You understand, I am sure, the irony in the idea that the Soviet Union somehow was not exploitative, manipulative, and openly imperialistic.
Did religion poison those Christian sailors, rowers, and Marines at Lepanto? No; it was not poison to them, but the elixir of strength that gathered them and enabled them to prevail against a religion that was poisonous to them and their way of life. And isn't that odd, too? That such a bright man as Hitchens should claim religion poisons "everything," when the plain historical record, just limiting ourselves for the moment to Lepanto—something a bright man ought to know about—shows that this is not the case?
Hmmm. Perhaps "bright" doesn't mean, after all, what "brights" want it to mean.Trust not in the wisdom of those who believe themselves to be your betters, whether in the government, the media, the education establishment, or anywhere else. Trust instead in your own mind, your own knowledge, and the wisdom and strength of the Almighty. Ultimately, those are the only things you can rely upon in this world- not the half-assed stupidity of genius.
Theft of the word "bright," while it doesn't quite rise to the level of linguistic matricide (the malicious murder of one's mother tongue), so common in PC circles, is still an exercise in intellectual dishonesty. It's hardly the only one. For example, it is often claimed that there's not a shred of evidence for the existence of God. This is simple nonsense; there's lots of evidence, some of it weaker and some of it stronger. Some of it is highly questionable and other portions very hard to explain away. (And one of our favorite bits revolves around just when and how Pius V knew that the battle of Lepanto had been won, at the time it had been won, and in the absence of long-range communications. Look it up. Really.)