India's Genocide on its own people (ongoing since independence)

[damania]

A lot of information presented applies to the US government so stay tuned!

Arundhati Roy and Gautam Navlakh present: India's Genocide on its own people. Presented in Bombay on 07-02-2010.

There's a genocide going on in India against its tribals, the poorest of its citizens that inhabit the countryside and forests of India and live in harmony with nature . The corporations want the lands which are full of natural resources such as bauxite (aluminum). Therein lies the conflict. Why? Because the locals do not want to sell out their lands which sustain them. Not even for a lot of money.

Skip to part 2 of the video series for the beginning of the speech if you wish.

 

[Yieu]

Well, I would hope that no holy sites would be sold. Then where would I make a pilgrimage to?

 

[dannno]

Wow, that's incredible, but it's nothing new.

Indigenous have their land stolen all the time in developing countries, then they end up being forced to work in sweatshops and some libertarians think that sweatshops are their best option, but they never understand that their real best option (aka first choice) was keeping their land to begin with.

This is one issue that drives people like Hugo Chavez. Chavez understands that the people had their land stolen from them, and that the big oil corporations are benefiting the few while those who once lived on the land are forced into impoverished cities. No wonder so many people across the globe hate "capitalism", because they think capitalism is the equivalent of theft.

 

[damania]

I also have a good video in Dr. Binayak Sen's conviction of a life sentence:
http://www.askbutwhy.com/2010/12/india-tale-of-two-nations-led-by.html

 

[Agorism]

They have a caste system no?

That means not every citizen is equal voting wise.

 

[damania]

They have a caste system no?

That means not every citizen is equal voting wise.

Well, it's not really the caste system stopping the votes. It's political officials trying to stave away any votes that would put them out of business. The video goes into a good example with Nepal and the King who's reign would've ended if the votes were truly free. The King successfully blocked or didn't count the Mao/Naxil votes.

 

[silverhandorder]

Well lets be clear what is going on here. The corps are using government to take land away. Yes we can blame the corps but do not fail to mention that government needs to go also.

 

[Working Poor]

Prayer going out for the ((((maoistpeople)))))

 

[freshjiva]

The caste system exists only as a social phenomenon in tribal areas of India. It is nonexistent in cities and suburbs. The government does not recognize caste ever since Indian sovereignty in 1947, so caste bears no effect on political elections.

It's sad to see the corporations in conflict with the tribals, but you also must remember that libertarian government protects private property. This would instantly solve the dilemma in favor of the tribals if the Indian government were a liberty-protecting republic like the United States once was.

 

[damania]

The lands that are in dispute are actually public lands. When India gained independence, shortly thereafter, the central/federal government declared the public lands to be under their control rather than keeping them under the authority of nobody.

There is a conflict in how the use of the public lands should be viewed. For the tribals, their existence solely depends on them for their daily needs. The Indian government, well it's the politicians, want to exploit them on behalf of the corporations and extract out the minerals which are worth trillions, and of course get the kickbacks. But mining the areas will destroy the flora, fauna, water, and food resources on which the tribals depend. The corporations are ready to share a part of the revenues, but there is no price for which the tribals will settle for. It will mean the end of themselves.

 

[dannno]

The lands that are in dispute are actually public lands. When India gained independence, shortly thereafter, the central/federal government declared the public lands to be under their control rather than keeping them under the authority of nobody.

There is a conflict in how the use of the public lands should be viewed. For the tribals, their existence solely depends on them for their daily needs. The Indian government, well it's the politicians, want to exploit them on behalf of the corporations and extract out the minerals which are worth trillions, and of course get the kickbacks. But mining the areas will destroy the flora, fauna, water, and food resources on which the tribals depend. The corporations are ready to share a part of the revenues, but there is no price for which the tribals will settle for. It will mean the end of themselves.

Ya that doesn't make any sense, they should own the land they live on and harvest resources from year after year. They probably thought it was great when they made the lands 'public' as they thought it meant they belonged to everybody, now the government is just changing it's mind and saying they belong to this person or that business.