India @ war with Canada .Which side would you be ?
Jump to Page:
< Previous [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] Next >
"Vibhishan" is technically still considered a traitor even though he sided with the "good" people.
In hindi there is a saying "Ghar ka bhedi lanka dhay" and whenever someone talks about a traitor Vibheeshans example is given.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
You know you are a desi when ........ You spew forth the virtues of India, but don't want to live there...............You've never had a tanning salon membership
Quote:
Originally posted by Big Vee
Man! I have been a citizen for too long. I had no idea that the oath had fine print on it! Do they actually let you put the clauses in or are they pre-printed?
Back in my day, when you took an oath meant you took an oath. No fine print. No "depends on spin". When I joined the fraternity of Canada, patriotism was articulated and even sung in song. Terms like "I will serve and uphold the laws of Canada" and "O' Canada, we stand on guard for thee" were used. It was definately more than a notion. Did you go through a different ceremony?
BV
Relax bud! Firstly the absoluteness of 'patriotism' itself is in question. You were an 'Indian Patriot' who is now a 'Canadian Patriot'. How is your 'patriotism' as absolute as you make it sound? Its already changed once. NOTE: I am not implying the change is right or wrong.
Coming back to the topic. So was Mohammed Ali less of an American that the ones who went to the Vietnam war? What about Cindy Sheehan? Dont tell me you are a die hard republican now
If those examples are ambiguous...What about those reservists in the Israeli army who are concientious objectors to the 'occupation' and who refuse to be asigned on duty there. Are they traitors?
Did you even read what I wrote or you're one of those who needs everything in b/w.? You probably were disconcerted by the 'spin' word I used. You can call it your 'moral compass' if you like
Remember we are not talking in absolute terms of India one day attacking Canada without any provocation. The answer to that would be quite obvious and we would all probably 'stand on guard for thee' for Canada. We are talking about the sides we take depending on the situation e.g facist threat.
One can be a citizen of Canada and still stay out of a war or disagree/oppose with the policy of the govt including any agenda of a war with whatever country...like so many do in the US and Canada. One can also decide otherwise. It depends on 'free will' that is implicit in a democracy. It also depends a whole lot on ones beliefs and ones 'moral compass'...oath or no oath.
Lets consider that your 'once shifted' patriotism is now absolutely locked to Canada, lets test it:
Extend the hypothetical situation such that, due to incessant terrorist attacks all brown minorities are hearded into internment camps. India and Pakistan and other such countries decide to invade Canada to free their people. Whose side are you going to be on? Remember your oath
This scenario is not any more outlandish than India and Canada going to war (which, according to your own statements, seems to bother you when you do ahead and 'judge' others on basis their application for dual citizenship).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended Services- Servicedomino.com
http://www.servicedomino.com
Quote:
Originally posted by Loser
"Vibhishan" is technically still considered a traitor even though he sided with the "good" people.
In hindi there is a saying "Ghar ka bhedi lanka dhay" and whenever someone talks about a traitor Vibheeshans example is given.
Ok..so let me get this right. Loyalty is absolute, however ethics and morality are justified by perception?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Are you there?
By touching upon Vibhishan and Bhishma , we have touched upon both the sides - a person siding the good inspite of his loyalties and the other siding the bad in continuance with his loyalty.
The comparision could nt have been better . I agree that Vibhishana is considered a traitor but he s also considered a noble and good soul. And Bhishma had to (must have )suffer throughout for his unbinding principles and loyalties . Similar to him is Karna but do you prefer him over Vibhishana?
Is it a matter of personal judgment , or are the rules predefined as BL has said -loyalty is absolute . But then is loyalty the uppermost guidance.Or is there 'dharma' beyond loyalty ?
Recall that person who hid behind a bush after telling a passer by not to reveal his hiding spot and the on coming soldiers upon asking the passerby were revealed the hideout ......... I think this problem may be more unnerving especially when the sided with side is on the wrong.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fido.
Posts: 456
Location: Canada-Glorious and Free
Posted on: 22-09-06 00:07:00
Location: Canada-Glorious and Free
Posted on: 22-09-06 00:07:00
Quote:
Originally posted by jake3d
Relax bud! Firstly the absoluteness of 'patriotism' itself is in question. You were an 'Indian Patriot' who is now a 'Canadian Patriot'. How is your 'patriotism' as absolute as you make it sound? Its already changed once. NOTE: I am not implying the change is right or wrong.
I disagree. I was born into a country and i was patriotic. I had no choice for at least the first 18 yrs. But later I chose Canada and I pledged allegiance. Part of the process for me was to return my old passport and "change sides". My patriotism was absolute in both cases. It does not waiver with spin (moral compass). It changed due life circumstances. So the term absolute to me means undivided. Patriotism cannot be divided. And that is what we are talking about. You are either an absolute Indian patriot or you are an absolute Canadian patriot.
Quote:
Originally posted by jake3d
Coming back to the topic. So was Mohammed Ali less of an American that the ones who went to the Vietnam war? What about Cindy Sheehan? Dont tell me you are a die hard republican now
If those examples are ambiguous...What about those reservists in the Israeli army who are concientious objectors to the 'occupation' and who refuse to be asigned on duty there. Are they traitors?
Ahhh... this is where most folks get confused about patriotism. It is not Fascism. Just as we had the discussion on the government taking steps to monitor internet usage, I was vehemently opposed to it. You are allowed to disagree. That is in fact the patriotic thing to do. As I had suggested, the government was taking down one of the pillars of democracy. To get back to the topic, Mohammed Ali and Cindy are no less patriotic than say, George W. In both cases, Vietnam and Iraq wars the American way of life is not directly threatened. I pledged allegiance to the queen and vowed to uphold the laws of Canada. I did that because I have ABSOLUTE faith in the system of democracy and the rule of law. So fighting within the system, with internal forces, for the betterment of Canada, its people, its laws is not a test of patriotism. It is actually a testament to patriotism.
I cannot comment on the Isreali reservist issue since I do not have first hand knowledge.
Quote:
Originally posted by jake3d
Extend the hypothetical situation such that, due to incessant terrorist attacks all brown minorities are hearded into internment camps. India and Pakistan and other such countries decide to invade Canada to free their people. Whose side are you going to be on? Remember your oath
This scenario is not any more outlandish than India and Canada going to war (which, according to your own statements, seems to bother you when you do ahead and 'judge' others on basis their application for dual citizenship).
First, let me say that I find this a VERY hypothetical situation. Outlandish. And I am not talking about the attack from India or Pakistan etc.. I am referring to the racial discrimination on this large a scale. Like I said, I have absolute faith in the system of law. And before we move on let me say that I know that this has regrettably been the reality for some in Canada.
There is no need to be smug, I do remember my oath. I would fight the internment tooth and nail. This for me would be civil war. Both sides in a civil war are patriotic. They both have different views of what their nation should be. Getting help from other nations to fight this civil war would be okay but would not have any effect on my patriotism. This scenario is something the people of Iraq are facing right now. There are factions fighting and then there is the coalition of the willing. Trust me, Iraqis are not suddenly facing a patriotism dilemma. The will never be patriotic to the US/allies.
I hope that helps the folks on CD understand what patriotism is. And with this knowledge, how can you even consider duality of citizenry?
BV
To Loser
"Vibhishan is technically still considered a traitor even though he sided with the "good" people".
If you go by the original Valmiki Ramayana, Vibhishan cannot be classified as traitor.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
My patriotism was absolute in both cases. It does not waiver with spin (moral compass). It changed due life circumstances. So the term absolute to me means undivided. Patriotism cannot be divided.
Read your own sentence. 'To you' absolute means 'undivided at specific times'. i.e: In YOUR judgement/perception...which is the spin or moral compass. The definition of absolute in the 'dictionary' differs('Do they actually let you put the clauses in or are they pre-printed?'
)Also remember the change of stand has been due to your situation. Exactly the same as someone who would fight against/for Canada 'for' what the believe in. Not because of the 'OATH'....read on
Quote:
Originally posted by jake3d
Ahhh... this is where most folks get confused about patriotism. It is not Fascism. Just as we had the discussion on the government taking steps to monitor internet usage, I was vehemently opposed to it. You are allowed to disagree. That is in fact the patriotic thing to do.
I totally agree with you. One can spin/ believe/convince ourselves that both our stands are patriotic. Which is what I meant when i gave the example of the Japanese people pre-post war
Quote:
To get back to the topic, Mohammed Ali and Cindy are no less patriotic than say, George W. .
Agree
Quote:
So fighting within the system, with internal forces, for the betterment of Canada, its people, its laws is not a test of patriotism. It is actually a testament to patriotism. .
Thats your spin and I agree. Likewise the 'internal forces' are assured that what they are doing is a 'testament to patriotism'. e.g: jingoistic republicans in US who believe in the absoluteness of US domination goodness/godliness.
Quote:
I cannot comment on the Isreali reservist issue since I do not have first hand knowledge. .
Trust me they fit into your definition of 'Patriots'
Quote:
First, let me say that I find this a VERY hypothetical situation. Outlandish. And I am not talking about the attack from India or Pakistan etc.. I am referring to the racial discrimination on this large a scale.
Yep thats what I think too. Just as I think about the war between India and Canada that worries you during your judgement trip.
Quote:
Like I said, I have absolute faith in the system of law. .
You should be more specific...'system of law wrt to racism'. Remember that you object to the apparently imminent law on internet monitoring. I had more faith than you back then in the Canadian system of law. Your faith in the system of law is not as absolute(though you could spin it that way)
Quote:
There is no need to be smug, I do remember my oath. I would fight the internment tooth and nail. This for me would be civil war. Both sides in a civil war are patriotic. They both have different views of what their nation should be. Getting help from other nations to fight this civil war would be okay but would not have any effect on my patriotism. .
You have agreed again with my point. Your patriotism is NOT an absolute one to the oath or the Queen. Its to YOUR belief's in what Canada IS/SHOULD/COULD be. Basically, its to your own notions and perceptions of self-interest. You have seen how your 'absolutness' has been accomodating to your life situations and more importantly 'moral-compass'. Trust me, this will keep changing. Absoluteness is death
and the opposite of growth.Using your analogies of a 'loyal and trust worthy man'...Jack Welch is a business man with integrity...that does not mean that he is a man with absolute integrity(he did cheat on his wife). Different situations. The perception of different people to Jack Welch would depend on which spin they 'focus' on. I think both spins are correct.
Quote:
I hope that helps the folks on CD understand what patriotism is. And with this knowledge, how can you even consider duality of citizenry?
BV
This is where you are making the leap and projecting YOUR perception of 'Absolute patriotism'(which is quite situational as proven by you and me) on others. To me the only difference between you and the others(who would opt for dual citizenship if India did offer one) are the extra set of papers. In all other circumstances, as mentioned by many on this thread including you, ones beliefs(as fluid as the situation) would be the guiding force. One would ofcourse have to spin it in a way that is in keeping with their own belief system of 'right' and 'wrong'.
Anything 'absolute'(dictionary definition) be it state, religion, idea or system...is contrary to 'free will' and 'growth' and which are the primary needs of a functioning democracy. The mechanism of change(not absoluteness) is inbuilt in a democracy. Facism fits more into the 'absolute' mode.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended Services- Servicedomino.com
http://www.servicedomino.com
