Pratap Bhanu Mehta's paradigms of cretinism

The cretin Pratap Bhanu Mehta writes in the Indian Express-

As the border stand-off with China deepens, India will have to think of all possible strategic options that give it leverage in this crisis.

No. India should pour troops into the area and bash things out with the Chinese. This has nothing to do with strategy. Only if China genuinely has a manpower advantage should the next strategic step be taken- viz. to mobilize local people and create an economic incentive- e.g. drug smuggling- along with a religious incentive to kill Chinese soldiers and officials and extract money out of Chinese occupied territory. This can be coordinated with other neighbors of China. The belt and road must be turned into conveyor belt of drugs, dissent, and demographic change such that Han China is pushed back over the next 50 years and encouraged to sink into an opium dream.

One element often discussed in this context is new arrangements with a variety of powers.

A border problem should be solved by looking at what's on the other side of the border and making that side hostile to the enemy.

Many strategic experts are salivating at the prospect of an even closer alliance with the US.

But the US is well known to be a shit ally. Who are these 'strategic experts'? Name and shame them.

This is a propitious moment to mobilise international opinion on China.

Fuck off! What can a cretin like Mehta do compared with Kung Flu? Why not say 'this is a propitious moment to get Beyonce to stop twerking and start dancing bhangra?'

The degree of global alienation with the Xi Jinping regime is unprecedented.

But, cretins like Mehta have spent so much time bad-mouthing Modi that India can't mobilize shit.

But can this be translated into concerted global action to exert real pressure on China?

No. Don't be silly. Cretins like Mehta have failed to get 'global action' against Modi though they have lied their asses off about him. Who will believe them if they start targeting China? The fact is they look like Modi. They don't look like the people in the border regions. The reason it is worth our while to fight the Chinese in the mountains is because we don't want to fight them in the plains where economic damage will be greater.

India should pursue all possible avenues.

No it shouldn't. Allying with Islamic nutters would be a mistake. Stick with Buddhists.

But we should also have a clear-eyed view of the limitations of what new alliances or arrangements can do for India.

Who lacks that? India knows the US is shit. It also knows that if it can't beat the Chinese on the basis of manpower then it has to change its Defence paradigm till India's greater fertility and absolute poverty tells upon its softer, richer, neighbor. China's enemies must learn to live off Chinese land.

It is important to remember that international relations are formed in the context of a country’s development paradigm.

Nonsense! They are formed on the basis of its international relations paradigm. Taiwan and South Korea had the same development paradigm as did India and Pakistan. But they had different international relations paradigms. How come this cretin doesn't know that? Where was he born?

India’s primary aim should be to preserve the maximum space for its development model, if it can actually formulate one.

So, it doesn't have a development paradigm. Good to know. Thus, according to the cretin Mehta, it doesn't have an international relations paradigm. What will this great Savants next discovery be? India is not located in South Asia. Columbus not Vasco da Gama discovered India. Real name of New Delhi is New York. Manhattan is actually located in Karol Bagh.

India is not unique in this respect.

So, there are other countries which don't have a development paradigm and thus don't have an international relations paradigm. Good to know. Obviously developed countries don't have a development paradigm, so they don't have an international relations paradigm. Thus if any country has a development paradigm then its international relations paradigm can't involve developed countries because they lack any such things. Thus the thing is useless. Paradigms exist in Grammar because other people talk the language. There is no point having a paradigm if nobody else speaks it.

The US-China relationship may have had its origins in the strategic attempt to create a Sino-Soviet split. But for decades, this relationship was sustained not by a strategic logic, but by the logic of the political economy of development in both the US and China, where they reciprocally depended on each other.

So, China and the US traded with each other. That's what this cretin is trying to say.

What has changed profoundly in the US is the view that this arrangement largely benefitted big business in America at the expense of its own domestic manufacturing base.

No. China wants to climb the value chain. This threatens the profits of high value adding American industries. So America is fighting back.

The political legitimacy of the development model waned,

Political legitimacy just means the politics of the legitimate Government. Trump is the legitimate President of the US. He has made legitimate what was previously illegitimate. As for 'development models', fuck would America need with any such critter?

and it is this fact that will largely be the driver of the US-China relationship.

There is no fact here at all. There is mere verbiage. What drives US-China relations will be, as it has been in the past, US leaders and their Chinese counterparts and how they get on with each other. Does Mehta think Nixon met Mao because of some change in either country's 'development model'? Why is this cretin considered an 'intellectual'? Has he ever once in his life said anything intelligent?

The question for India is not just whether the US has a stake in India’s development, which it might.

No. The question for India is how much off a biffing at the border does China need to back down? That depends wholly on Indian resolve. Nothing else matters. Either India can mobilize not just soldiers from the plains but local people to fuck up China's supply lines and chop off the heads of its soldiers if they wander out of their camps to take a piss or have a smoke, or else this will be a recurring drama- which may be no bad thing if it boosts Army morale and causes revulsion against India's comfortable, Mehta-type, anti-national bildungsburgertum. 

But it is, rather, to ask whether India’s development needs will fit into the emerging US development paradigm.

The answer is no. The US is not stupid. It doesn't have a 'development paradigm'. It may have a few useless cunts who talk in that way but so does India. We ignore those stupid cunts. So do Americans.

Sanskrit and Latin and so forth had plenty of paradigms. But people stopped speaking those languages. Linguistic Development does not occur in accordance with paradigms. This is not to say that there may be empirically verifiable regularities- e.g. Grimm's Law- but they are not paradigm dependent.

Will the very same political economy forces that create a disengagement with China also come in the way of a closer relationship with India?

Who doesn't know that America will defend high value adding industries from overseas competition? In any case, what 'closer relationship' is desired by India? Do we want to join NATO? Do we want to be part of an endless war against Muslims in Muslim majority countries? Do we want Economic integration such that we provide cheap labor and America takes over all our high value adding services? Fuck off.

Some sections of American big business might bat for India; but the underlying political economy dynamics are less propitious.

Who doesn't know that? Trump has spelled it out in unambiguous language. Why is Mehta getting his knickers in a twist posing a question we all already know the answer to.                     

Will the US give India the room it needs on trade, intellectual property, regulation, agriculture, labour mobility, the very areas where freedom is vital for India’s economy?

No. The US will give India the room it needs for talking bollocks about how Modi is a Nazi.  Concentrate on that. That's what you can get paid in hard currency to do. Give up this pretence of knowing about 'development paradigms' and 'international relations' paradigms.

Will a US hell-bent on bringing manufacturing jobs back to the US, easily gel with an “atma nirbhar” Bharat?

'Atma Nirbhar' means self-reliant. India is not importing American jeans and air conditioners etc. It is importing Chinese tat. Replacing Chinese tat with tat manufactured in India poses no fucking problem for the US. Why is this cretin pretending otherwise? The answer is because when he looks out of the window in India he does not see India's poverty. He sees the leaning tower of Pisa and the Eiffel tower and Big Ben. Why? India is actually a European country. Mehta asks the readers of the Indian Express to see things his way-

To see what is at stake, we just need to look at the way in which friction over the development paradigm is driving tensions on trade, taxation and regulatory issues between the US and EU.

This is relevant to India because Mercedes Benz is actually an Indian company. Correct pronunciation of Mercedes is 'Mirchandani'. Benz is a contraction of Bannerjee. Porsche is pronounced Popatlal. Even a child in America is aware of these facts. Why you desis so damn stupid, yaar?

There is sometimes a complaint in the US that India is invited but refuses to come to the table with enthusiasm.

There is no such complaint. Some shitheads may talk bollocks but America doesn't listen to those shitheads any more than India listens to America returned shitheads like Mehta.

There is some truth to this, despite the salutary cultural and political momentum in this relationship.

What fucking relationship? Shitheads talk shite to each other. India needs to stop paying for such shite-fests. We don't need more meaningless drivel. America's great crime against India was its paying for the cretinous Planning Commission's 'turnpike' Development Paradigm. This so impoverished India that we had to use the Planning Commission for the purpose God intended- viz. Corruption.

But the drivers of this have often been legitimate differences over development, including climate change. It has also been that, at various points, that ask was antithetical to India’s other strategic commitments. India was wise to stay out of the war in Iraq, it was wise not to spurn Russia entirely, and it is wise not to throw its weight behind the US’s Iran policy. There is more maturity in the US to understand India’s position. But there is a section of India’s strategic community that sees India’s reluctance to go in with the US, hook line and sinker, as a kind of ideological wimpishness, not a sign of more deeply thought out realism, which it has been.

Fuck the India's strategic community- or rather, let the T.N police shove stuff up their bums till they bleed to death. Don't, for fuck's sake, send them to Ladakh. They will immediately start bending over and demanding that Chinese soldiers stuff things up their bums till they bleed to death. This will cause the Chinese to institute a Magsaysay Award of their own. They will shower such Awards on all our worthless scumbags. What will be the result? India will have to rely on some sadistic cops from T.N to fulfill the exponentially rising demand from our Magsaysay Award type shitheads for more and more things to be shoved up their bum. Needless to say, this is not environmentally sustainable.

It is an odd moment in global affairs, where there is recognition of a common challenge emanating from China, but no global appetite to take concerted action.

Action should not be concerted because of concurrency problems. But it is being taken, the alternative being a debt-trap or else submission in the face of the sort of cyber and other attacks the Australians report.

An interesting example might be the global response to the BRI. Many countries are struggling to meet their BRI debt obligations. Many Chinese loans have become a millstone around the debtor countries’ necks. But it is difficult to see the rest of the international community helping all these countries to wean their regimes away from dependence on Chinese finance.

Why repay the Chinese? Let them take the write-off. You don't wean an addict of opium by getting her on to heroin. Similarly, countries which borrowed money to do stupid shit must be weaned off the habit of doing stupid shit. Meanwhile, the Chinese can whistle for their money.

Similarly, there are now great concerns over frontier areas of conflict like cyber security and space.

Cyber security is an idiographic matter. Concerted action is slow and easier to game. That is why defences in this area should be uncoordinated. Where they succeed they can go viral. Where they fail they don't bring down the network. This applies to Space as well. If one country's satellites are  hacked the others can still function.

It is difficult to imagine concerted global action to create rules in these area, partly because Great Powers like the US and Russia will always want to maintain their exceptionalism. So we are in a paradoxical world where the strategic necessity of the rest of the world to come together on China has never been higher; yet the appetite for concerted action has never been weaker.

Because concerted action suffers from concurrency problems- i.e. everyone wants the other guy to take the costly step.

Fundamentally, few countries are going to put their money where their mouth is.

Thus overall spending on defensive measures of a locally suitable and sustainable type actually increase. The problem with 'concerted action' is that nobody takes essential defensive measures in a timely manner because everybody believes 'concerted action' will occur when required.

The value of global alliances and public opinion in settling our local conflicts has always been limited for two reasons.

No. There is only one reason why gobshittery is useless. It is because it is gobshittery. Any cretin can talk Mehta type bollocks. This puts off those with the will and ability to actually do the needful. Then the crunch comes. Mehta type cretins continue to talk bollocks. But nobody is listening. This means useful stuff either gets done or the whole shooting match collapses.

First, the international community has not been very effective in neutralising low cost asymmetric options exercised by some powers.

For the excellent reason that there is no 'international community'.

This is the tactic Pakistan has used.

But it is a tactic India can and, under Modi, has instrumentalized so as to harm its strategic goals. After all, India's real problem is gobshittery of various types. Pakistan and China have helped India by letting us disintermediate gobshites. America did the opposite. That is why we must never get close to those boring, vacuous, gobshites.

Second, what military options India can exercise, fortifying defences, gaining strategic leverage in areas where we can, is for military experts to decide.

They are doing a good job. It remains to be seen whether India needs to go on the offensive by using asymmetric tactics. I doubt it.

But don’t count on the fact that the world will support an Indian escalation beyond a point.

There is no 'world'.

The efforts of the international community, in the final analysis, will be to try and throw cold water on the conflict; no one has a serious stake in the fate of the terrain India and China are disputing.

The people who live there do. Sooner or later they are going to want to chop of Han heads. Demographic change is going to turn the Belt and Road into a dagger pressed against the heart of Han hegemony. This is the story of the next 50 years.

At the end of the day, India has to manage China and Pakistan largely on its own.

And it has plenty of human resources to do so. What it can't afford is gobshites of Mehta's stamp.

The logic of the Chinese opening so many fronts together is baffling.

Nonsense! Their military needs real time info for their own war-gaming.

Reassuringly, it could mean China is overreaching.

No. Doing this during COVID means there is little risk that things will escalate.

Less reassuringly, it could mean that rather than displaying strategic coherence, China is now a regime that, like so many authoritarian regimes of the past, is willing to damage itself and the world.

Which regime embraced 'Mutually Assured Destruction'? Who did Al Wohlstetter and Herman Kahn work for? National Defence requires a 'threat point' against not just the Enemy but the World. This gives everyone an incentive to not fuck with you.

Such regimes are always harder to handle because it is not straightforwardly interest that drives them.

Which fucking regime has this cretin handled? Why is he pretending he knows what he is talking about? America was never driven by 'straightforward' interests. Until the Seventies, the USSR pursued realpolitik. Then it went crazy and started dumping arsenals on Ethiopia and getting sucked into Afghanistan and so forth. But that was because its leaders were either brain dead or as stupid as shit.

Even as we deal with the military situation on the border, the test of India’s resolve will be its ability to return to some first principle thinking about its own power.

We? Is Mehta secretly a soldier who spends his weekends fighting the Chinese?
The test of India's resolve is its soldier's resolve to biff Chinese soldiers while being biffed by them. That's it. That's the whole story.

There are no 'first principles' involved in the exercise of power.

How does it create the space for accelerating its development — in the long run, the only cornerstone of a defence policy?

'Create the space'? India already has geographical space. It needs to junk stupid labor laws and corrupt inspectorates so as to get out of the way of Growth. Everybody knows this. Development happens when you get young girls out of the countryside into huge factory dormitories. Boys can be sent to biff the Chinese of the Pakis or whoever. They need a different type of discipline. We don't want them spending their time beating up the H.R manager in factories. We want girls to work there. No doubt, some men are averse to beating H.R managers. They too can get factory jobs. But thymotic youth should be biffing Chinks in healthy locations.

In any case, there is zero correlation between economic development and defensive capacity. A poor country has low opportunity cost for deaths in combat. That is why Vietnam prevailed over America and why Afghanistan became neither a Soviet, or American, satellite. Military morale and esprit de corps matter. That is why Mehta-type gobshites should be shat upon. Only courage under fire should be celebrated.

How does it stay true to its greatest strength, its political identity as a liberal, pluralistic democracy?

If this is India's greatest strength, it should simply surrender to the Chinese right now.

How did India, in its quest for global prestige, manage to lose its own neighbourhood?

This is a question which could only have been asked in 1962. It was only then that India was seeking 'global prestige'. Then China attacked while Pakistan was forced by the US to sit quietly. Burma was ethnically cleansing Indians. Ceylon would soon demand India take back the plantation workers. The emerging Nations of Africa decided to emulate China and go down the one Party route. Gandhi-Nehruism became a sick joke.
India learned its lesson then. Don't kill Mehta type gobshites but don't listen to them either. Let the Army biff the Paks and the Chinks by their own methods. Get off the teat of US aid and tell the Yanks to go fuck themselves if they make themselves obnoxious. Also lock up mindless agitators if they defy Parliament.

Our major vulnerabilities are all at home, and so are the solutions.

Mehta represents a major vulnerability that we have at home- viz. utterly cretinous public intellectuals who influence Congress and the Left. But the solution is to disintermediate all deracinated clowns- no matter how dynastic.  Don't listen them, save to mock their stupidity. Appoint them to high Academic positions by all means. How else advertise the worthlessness of the Academic Credentials they peddle?