So it is not about race !

interesting analysis There are articles in teligraph that finds people going to 5 decades back to endorse a story of race and progression – the story that Obama mentioned. This article says there is more to the division… the supposed race division pales in another division – one that is more powerful.

In India the typical Neheruvian socialist, Macaulayites are etc hypocrites, Amartya Sens worked for a life about poverty to land in london and eat stinking meat there…some of these imperial slaves have partnered with Canadians to sponsor maoist terrorism in India. The Maoists are a collage, where anglicized macauliyans use the villagers for doing the actual killing. These macauliyans are university professors or dirty politicians waiting for their next trip to/award from china or US.

–Update-
A former communist supporter for Obama Is it for race ? Or something else has power to transcend whatever Obama has promised…Considering Macaulayites, and nepotisim of Neheruvian socialists, one could remember the delusion of their transcendence. This is no rationalism. SICKular – yes, because of the rational interpretation of SICKularism.

— —

An unlike place for Obama criticism… The secret no child left behind plans are every where… all over the world… from leftists antiques, It is possible to see how every one has appropriated these words, and copycats speak it simultaneously as their own enlightenment ! This is democracy but we have no idea who in the hell is deciding this. That article has devil in the details… No child left behind is about introducing politics in schools, it is about giving control of schools to racial and muslim groups. Once a racial boundary is drawn, they use children ( no children left behind, when there is one post of president), women etc to mount a serious accusation. It is not defending an unknown principal in a school, it is about understanding the Neheruvian pattern.

A random link that partly mentions how it has been about race. The first two links in this post are mere attempts to look at differently, to raise different questions …it is and it is not..so could there be something else that is not being focussed properly…. The brotherhood mentioned in that article is another hoax, sometimes it is not brotherhood…examples are in the same context, who is opposed by a more faithful brotherhood.

so also observes this article – it is/isn’t race:- His glamour explains a campaign paradox: how a man who wrote a race-conscious coming-of-age memoir about his search for a black identity could be touted as a “post-racial” candidate. The allure of his origins obscured his own account of his inner life. – I don’t think glamor is the precise explanation…though this author defines glamor as some form illusion- a word that I have also used above. This author writes very well.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: