Monday, July 16, 2007

Spanish translation on Hitler

I am learning spanish these days. Thought that translating the blogs would be a good practice. So here is a translation of one of my previous blogs.

Leo un libro sobre Adolf Hitler y encontre algunos de sus pensamientos sobre propaganda eficaz muy interesante. Su comprension de la psique de las masa es extraordinario y explica, a alguno extension, su exito en movilizar opinion publico en su favor.

"Ya que la muchedumbre tiene solo un conocimiento pobre de ideas abstractas, sus reacciones yacen mas en el dominio de sentimientos, donde el origen de sus actitudes positivas y negativas es implantado. ... Los suelos emocionales de sus actitudes proporciona la razon para su estabilidad extraordinaria. Es siempre mas facil a luchar contra la fe que contra el conocimiento. Y la fuerza motriz que causado las revoluciones mas tremendas del mundo nunca ha sido un cuerpo de la ensenanza cientifico que ha ganado la influencia sobre la multitud, pero siempre una devocion que los ha inspirido, y a menudo una especie de la histeria que los ha instado en accion. Quienquiera quere a ganar el apoyo de la muchedumbre tiene que saber el llave ese abrirá la puerta a sus corazones. No es objetividad pero un voluntad decidido, apoyado por fuerza donde necesario."
"Las facultades receptivas de la muchedumbre son limitadas muy, y su concepcion es debil. Por otro lado, ellos se olvidan pronto. Toda propaganda eficaz tiene que limitarse a unas pocos necesidades, y entonces tiene que expresarse en unas pocas fórmulas estereotipadas.

"Cuando usted miente, dice las mentiras grandes...que en una mentira grandes ahi es siempre una cierta fuerza de credibilidad; porque las multitudes de una nación siempre son corrompido más fácilmente en los estratos más profundos de su naturaleza emocional que conscientemente o voluntariamente, y por lo tanto en la sencillez primitiva de sus mentes ellos les caen a víctimas más fácilmente a la mentira grande que la pequeña mentira, ya que ellos si mismos a menuda mienten en los asuntos pequenos, pero se avergonzarian recurrir a falsedades de gran escala. Nunca lo venirían en las cabezas a fabricar falsedades colosales y ellos no creerían que otros tendrían el insolencia para deformar la verdad tan infamemente... la mentira groseramente insolente siempre sale vestigios detras de ello...aún después ha sido clavado.'

Sobre todo, nunca vacila, nunca matiza que usted dice, nunca concede un pulgada al otro lado, pinta todos sus contrastes en blanquinegro. Este es el "
muy primero la condicion que tiene que ha ser satisfacido en cada tipo de la propaganda; una actitud sistematicamente unilateral para con cada problema que tiene que ser tratado con....Cuando ven un ataque intransigente contra un adversario, el pueblo siempre lo han tomado como prueba que bien esta en el lado del agresor, pero si el agresor iria sólo hasta la mitad y fallar de empujar en casa su exito....el pueblo vera sobre este como un indicio que el es incierto de la justicia de su propia causa.

Man creates God

God created Men or Men created God? This might help you in answering that question. It is about a 'chor baba ka mazar' in Patna where thieves come to pray so that 'jab kaam karne jaayen, chori karne jaayen, to safal ho ke aayen'. One guy that explains the faith of the devotees is particularly enjoyable.

Follow up video: Have trouble getting a passport, or failing in exams? Go to passport baba!

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Link to article "swallowing shame"

There's a nice piece here titled "swallowing shame". People who have appeared for a US visa interview can somewhat relate to it. There's a difference in perspectives of someone from a developing/underdeveloped Asian/African country and of someone from USA.

Monday, July 9, 2007

Just choose one, anyone

I saw CPI General Secretary Mr. A. B. Bardhan defend his party's decision to support Mrs Patil's candidature on CNN-IBN Live. But rather than defending her in face of the charges raised, he explained his party's decision thus:
1) She's a woman.
2) It does not matter what her personal beliefs are. After all, the president can not make any policy decision. (Mrs. Pratibha Patil's plans of not being a rubber stamp President are sadly vanquished, let it be known to her.) So she doesn't need to recant her decision as the Health Minister in 1975 to forcibly sterilize people with hereditary disorders like heart diseases, diabetes, and even poor eyesight, etc. Or that she talks to dead people.
3) There are so many corrupt people in Congress and even more in BJP, the party that is raising allegations against Mrs. Pratibha Patil.
4) He's sure that when she becomes President she'll not claim that she's talking to dead people.

How is he sure about that when she did the same few weeks back? 'Because as a President she'll have to follow the policy laid down by the government.' Implicit in the argument, I suppose, was the assertion that a policy will be laid down by the government that the President shall not talk to dead people and if he/she does so, he/she will not declare that in public.

Some days later, Mr. Karan Thapar interviewed BJP spokesperson Mr. Rajnath Singh with accusations against the other Presidential candidate, Mr. Bhairon Singh Shekhawat.
1) He was suspended for taking bribe as sub-inspector in 1947.
2) He defended his son-in-law when he was accused of trying to obtain compensation for land which he did not own.
3) He lied on the floor of assembly.
4) He quashed cases against him when he was the Chief Minister of Rajasthan.
5) He was an MLA in Rajasthan from 1952 to 1972, and from 1977 to 2002. Still he managed to be a Rajya Sabha member from MP in between, which indicates false declaration of domicile.

To all these charges, Mr. Rajnath Singh's reply was that looking his public life from 1952 to 2002, no one can accuse Mr Bhairon Singh Shekhawat of dishonesty. He repeated this every time an allegation was made. Then Mr. Karan Thapar proceeded to prove that Mr. Arun Shourie's book that purportedly proved that Mrs. Pratibha Patil was in fact guilty of all crimes that she was accused of, was full of 'concoctions and deliberate lies.' Karan Thapar had interviewed Mr. Arun Shourie few days back in which he had agreed with and endorsed virtually every piece of 'researched allegation'. During the interview with Mr. Bardhan, every allegation against Mrs. Patil seemed to be the truth. During the interview with Mr. Rajnath Singh, the same allegations seemed to be 'concocted lies'.

So after watching the three interviews I wonder if it is at all possible to know anything with reasonable certainty. When senior journalists like Karan Thapar can't get their facts right before interviewing someone how is the aam aadmi expected to verify authenticity of allegations and counter-allegations. All we can do is to gorge up sound bytes from the media without being able to distinguish right from wrong, truth from lie. In the end, may be Mr. Bardhan was right. How the hell does it matter who the President is, what his/her beliefs are, whether he/she is honest or not - after all is it even possible to find a prominent politician who's not done anything unethical or immoral? As long as we can prove to the world the changing position of woman in Indian society by electing a woman as President, we'll be just fine.

Sunday, July 8, 2007

I object

"Calling us bollywood is derogatory: naseer, om". Read this somewhere on the web, not for the first time. But with the continuous output of junk cinema in 'Bollywood', I just wondered - derogatory for whom? Bollywood or Hollywood?

Thursday, July 5, 2007

Pre-emptive action

Notice to all students

Coffee, Tea etc. is made available to students for use in this room only. Recently, many items have been disappearing rapidly, cups, coffee, and tea. Due to the increase in supplies, we may need to stop coffee services in the future.

Please drink responsibly

Thank You


The above notice is placed in the common room in my department. Now why is this here? Because it has been in the common room every single day for the last 3 years and I thought a change of place would be good. Talk about preemptive action! Not to mention giving new meaning to the phrase 'please drink responsibly'.