I was quite busy with the publishing of my English-Vernacular digital magazine titled KALEIDOSCOPIC HUES. What I have written in this digital magazine, if it could be read and understood by native-English speakers, would really jolt them into a thundering awakening. However, the sad part is that unless it is very carefully translated, most of the very minute and delicately thin information it contains, would never arrive in English. So much is the intellectual divide that exists between English and feudal languages. When I write something in the native Indian vernacular, and someone translates it into English, the real gist can literally vanish.

I publish this English-Vernacular digital maazine to spur the same thought contents in the Indian peninsula. For, what is going to trouble England in days to come, has been troubling the peninsula since times immemorial.

I had a computer hard disk failure. So all the images I had kept for this posting has been lost. Many images of comments I had taken screenshots of, have also been lost. However, they are all in the various Clouds I use. However, I do not have the time to find them as of now.

Let me commence the Part 4 of this serial post. Continuation from last post……

Let me mention something more about this nonsense called democracy. Even though modern democracy as seen installed in such contentious nations as India, can be claimed as installed by the English administrators, there is a bit more to know. All feudal languages do have an innate dose of democracy embedded within its communication codes. It is connected to ‘respect’. The individual who has more subordinates, whom he or she can address in the pejorative, is the higher leader among equals. It literally means that a parent who has more children is a more higher person than a parent who has less number of children. From this perspective, in feudal language social systems, there is an innate urge to have more children.

However, modern democracy has created other terrible social logics inside ‘democratic’ nations. For instance, in India, it is a known information that Muslims have been categorically told by their religious leaders to have more children. At least three. This has created a huge demographic imbalance or change. In many areas, where Muslim populations were significantly small in numbers, currently have huge Muslim populations.

In recent years, the Hindu leaders woke up to the implications. They have desperately urged their followers to have more children. However, that only spreads the warfare.

The church leaders of the Christian populations have recently given a religious command that all parishioners should have a minimum of three children, if not more. Even without all this kind of exhortations, it was amply clear to everyone that the power mechanism in democracy is connected to population explosion. It is a wonder that policymakers in England seems to have no inkling of these very simply ideas.

England, which is a very small island, from where all ideas of decent social interaction, driving, codes of precedence, words of polite addressing, regrets and apologies, and much more came out is about to get overrun. There is a very concerted program going on to hoodwink the English populations.

This can be illuminated thus: The problem that most of these immigrant-sending nations have, is some error in their social and formal communication. What is this error, or why it is so, cannot be understood by native-English speakers. For, they get to know only the translated version of all communication in these social systems.

It is like this: A mighty fine dog is walking alone. He moves into his own social world. Other dogs come and meet him. It can be seen that he has his own levels of personal dignity, ways of interaction, and detachments from and attachments to other dogs. Suddenly another dog comes into the scene. He tries to make some social moves. This mighty fine dog springs on him, and literally tries to murder him. One might even see the dogs dividing into two groups and letting loose a fight. What has gone wrong?

Something undetectable to human senses has irked the mighty fine dog. Some equally undetectable item has created a fracture in the social ambience and the dogs have divided into fighting groups. I should mention that this is exactly the same situation when one sees terrible social problems in feudal language nations.

In the allegory used, the new dog must have said something like, How are you? or When did you come? or Where is your wife? or something similar. Is there anything that a native-English speaker might find erroneous in these words? There will be nothing.

However, when the same words are written in feudal languages, there are various items that can create terrible distresses and mental trauma. Many words have varying indicant word levels. Each of them connects a human individuality to various groupings. The words used in various comments about native English speakers, such as ‘lowest scum in society’ etc. and such words as slut, wastrel, filth, untouchable, stink etc. are connected to some of the indicant levels. However, this very powerful fact is never known to a native-English speaker.

Feudal language speaking social systems are places of terrible mutual stabbing, belligerence, antipathies, mutinies, back-stabbing, human repulsions, and much much more. The root cause repulsion that native-English speakers feel for feudal languages speakers is really a natural reflex, quality individual should feel. In case anyone doesn’t feel this repulsion, it only means that he or she is gullible or hoodwinked, or has no innate quality in him or her. In fact, human beings in feudal languages social systems themselves express their repulsion for each other, either privately or at times, in a most vocal manner. These are literal truths. It is this repulsion that makes them make haste to escape to English nations.

What happens in English nations is a social experience, that cannot be understood by native-English speakers. Feudal languages speakers find that they can start communicating in pristine English. And this pristine English is quite different from both their own native feudal language and also from their own national version of English.

There is only one YOU, HE, SHE, HIS, HER, HERS, THEY, THEM &c. And also, they can address anyone with the name with a Mr. or Mrs. or Miss prefixed. It is a communication level, only the real royalty can practise in their own native lands. Everything is quite easy and straightforward. The ease of living in a pristine English social system for a feudal language speaker can be equated to a sharp knife entering a piece of soft butter. And the native-English speakers quite gullible fool. No guile and no cant.

A bit more information on this aspect can be given. In India, when computers first appeared on the social scene, it was found that even those who had been academically considered as low intellectually were showing accomplishments in this gadgetry that seemed like wizardry. However, those who knew the techniques of using the keyboard, and the various software, were quite wary of sharing their knowledge with others. They would never divulge anything in a straightforward manner. Each query would be misguided into unnecessary routes. I remember the days, when I asked one youngster computer-operator to show me how to Bold a word in MS Word, using the keyboard shortcuts. He simply did it fast and moved off. As if what I was seeking was some Category Z State Secret.

This type of misguiding is everywhere in India. Everyone is wary of another person getting any information. For, information can literally lead to enhancement in indicant word. Indian words acts in a relative manner on the social scene. Beyond that, the feudal hierarchy in the indicant words powerfully limit a person’s ability or right to ask or seek an information. If a lower indicant person asks a very powerful technical information, he will be literally teased in a manner that his self-esteem is erased in the full view of everyone.

Now, in English nations, the experience is just the opposite. Anyone can ask, and there is literally no mental barriers to block information. However, what is appearing on the English social scene, are persons from the other side of the protractor. Every angle of social relationship is from an angle that can be mentioned as negative, or opposite.

Moreover in the ordinary communication inside feudal languages, the native-English speakers do continually get defined as ‘low class scum’, ‘filth’, ‘stink’, ‘repulsive’, and more, especially if they are working under feudal language speakers, or are subordinate to them, or are doing jobs that are predefined as low-class in feudal languages. The greatest disservice that these persons who have swarmed into England is doing is that not even one person has had the moral duty to mention that this rabid distortion of pristine-English social system and innate human dignity is being done. In fact, the whole nation of England stands fooled. It is like rodents gnawing up the foundation of a huge building, and no one aware of it.

I know that what I am speaking is of the most explosive content. Yet, I speak the truth.

One of the most powerful arguments against blocking the entry of outsiders inside England is that Englishmen had ‘invaded’ all other nations.

This is an actually a false talk which should be understood for what is it intended for. The intention is to use this argument to force a breach for the outsiders to enter. English colonial empire was not built by a conquering army from England. I can speak of immense incidences in the Indian peninsular region.

The first information that has to be borne is that in the Indian peninsula, the population was not ‘one’. It was a lot of different levels of populations. Each fiercely holding the lower ones, in claw-like grips using the carnivorous word codes. By positioning each individual and groups of individuals in various levels of YOU, HE, SHE, HIS, HER, HERS, THEM, THEY &c. And also by limiting their right to speak back or question, or to ask, or to discuss, with or about the senior populations, huge groups of populations were kept in shackled locations. Till the advent of the English traders.

The advent of the English traders changed everything. There was no specific law & order machinery that treated everyone on equal level of dignity. Moreover, personal security was tied to the ‘respect’ one extended to the local feudal lord. The issue here was that ‘respect’ is a very complicated machine. A minor feeling that one person has not been respectful enough can lead to his limbs being cut.

All traders had their own private security men to guard their wares. However, when the English traders recruited the lower class persons as their security guard or as army soldiers, it was to change the social system in the peninsula forever. For the first time in the known history of the region, the lower classes came into contact with a communication software which did not erase personal dignity in a lower positioned person.

Those who got recruited got changed into a social elevation that was not possible for others. At the same time, it was to create heartburns in many others. The higher dominating classes saw lower class individuals who bore a new kind of personal stature and dignity. This was an issue of acute danger. The danger was accentuated by the fact that the officials of the English East India Company had a very low opinion of the feudal classes of the peninsula.

As to the lower classes themselves, their caste leaders and other seniors saw the emergence of higher grade individuals in their own castes as a danger to their own positions. It should be understood that the oppression of the lower castes is facilitated by the active collaboration of the leaders of the lower castes, who need the support of their senior castes to maintain their leadership.

There is another point to be understood here. The lower classes and castes are actually numerically more powerful. Yet, they cannot join together to overthrow the mantle of the higher classes. The main obstacle to this is the effect of the feudal languages. Which more or less keep on dividing the individuals, in a mood of mutual antipathy and competition. This is a complicated machinery and cannot be dealt with here.

Here I would like to mention that even though anyone can say that the nobility of England is also of the same kind, it would not be the truth. For, there are quite a few powerful differences. Again, I cannot digress into that here.

However, I would like to say this much. The higher classes or castes of the Indian peninsula are and were not what one can define as ‘elite’ classes as one would understand the word ‘elite’. When one mentions the English nobility, even though I am not quite sure as to how much ‘English’ they were, they still have been affected by the egalitarian codes of English. So that, their feudalism has no connection to the feudalism as seen in the Indian peninsula.

In the Indian peninsula, not just the feudal dominating class, but even any dominating class has no radiating ‘quality’. The English nobility has been affected by the pristine English language. The Indian feudal groups and all dominating groups have been affected by the native feudal language codes.

So when a person defined as ‘lower’ in Indian languages, approaches near an Indian feudal class, what he experiences from this nearness is not mental or physical elevation, quality enhancement or intellectual development. What he experiences is the exact opposite of all this. He is made to feel dirty and a stink. He is informed that he is a lesser being.

Now, when I say this, readers might remember the scene in the movie Titanic, when Jack Dowson sits with the higher class passengers on the ship. And later he is blocked when he tries to re-enter without invitation. Well, the vibrant truth is that in an Indian language situation, this kind of interaction cannot be contemplated without a lot of other verbal aspects being adjusted. In fact, the lower positioned persons would not really allow himself to be thus invited unless, he is something of a higher person in his own group.

This kind of discussion cannot give an insight without having information on the verbal codes in feudal languages. Just see this picture of the real status of a common worker in the southern parts of the Indian peninsula (c.1890).

[Image taken from E. Thurston’s Castes and Tribes of Southern India] Even though people might think the issue is the nudity, it is not the real trauma that these females faced. The terror was in the crushing words of addressing and referring.

Compare the first image of the ‘free’ people of the Indian peninsula who were the servants of the native higher classes, with this image of ‘suppressed’ servants under the English folks. This second picture is from the same period as the first.

The absolute fact is that English colonialism was not created by the English nobility, but by the English common folks. Pristine English is the language of the English common folks. Whether English nobility is hereditarily connected to English or to Continental European languages is not known to me. However, I understand that the English Monarchy is not fully English, but is connected by hereditary to Continental European nobility. However, the language of the English common folks has moulded the nobility to a supreme levels of finesse.

What I want to mention here is that the argument of the swarming in migrant folks that England invaded all the other nations is to be taken with a pinch of salt. It is not true. English colonialism did not invade nations. It was not exploitative.

This last statement of mine might shock even English academicians. However, that is the truth. Even during the East India Company rule, there was no looting. There were an immensity of temples, palaces, households etc. which could have been looted if the Company was hell-bent of economic plunder. This never took places, other than during battles, and wars. It might be intelligent to understand that the vast majority of the soldiery was natives of the peninsula. It was quite wise always for the English administration to take ‘possession’ of valuables than to make it available for looting.

As to Englishmen growing rich by going to the peninsula, it might be true that in the initial part of the Company rule, individual officials have stood on the pinnacle of social structures wherein money simply gets garnered. This is something that happens even now in India.

Just join the Indian government service as some low grade ‘officer’. This person need not ask for or demand bribes. All Indian government offices collect bribes through a network of agents. This bribe is divided among the officials in a proportion that is pre-set. For instance, one of my family relatives was in the registration department as a Sub registrar many years ago. Since she belonged to the erstwhile Madras Presidency Civil Service (British colonial administration), taking bribes was not known to her. However, later she was posted to the Travancore areas, where traditionally the officialdom takes bribes. This part never had experienced English administration. She refused to partake of the daily bribe collection. The bribes are collected from the public by the document writers, who handover the total amount to the office in the evening hours. The bribe is collected from the public, citing this much for the Sub Registrar, this much for the Senior Superintendent, this much for the Junior Superintendent, this much for the Head Clerk, this much for the Upper Division clerk, this much for the Lower Division Clerk, and this much for the Peon.

However, at a much later date another official from the department said thus to me: ‘Even though she did not take the bribe, the specific sum will be collected in her name. And if she doesn’t want it, it will be divided among the others’.

This is how, the so-called money taking for the early English officials took place. When Englishmen were given charge over some part of the administration, their subordinated would use their names during the routine exploitation of the common folks. Naturally, a minor percentage would be reach up to the top. That was the age-old system.

Now, let me examine the claim that there was massive one-sided economic plunder to facilitate the interests of the industrialists of England. It is true that during the Industrial Revolution in England, the wealthy people did try to copy the social designs of nations in the Indian peninsula and elsewhere. In the peninsula, the common people were treated like dirt and cattle.

But then to concede that the English officials in the Peninsula were acting at the behest of the industrialists of England is not possible. The general policy was to protect the common people, the animals and the forest wealth. Much work and efforts was done to find out the ancient literatures of the place, which had more or less vanished. Every possible effort was made to create official records. In fact, there were no official records in the peninsula. Roads were laid. Police stations were set up. Lower castes were given the chance to improve their lot by means of English education. Railways were set up. Dams were built. Human living conditions were constantly improved. The greatest creation might be the Post Office. It is not that it is an idea no individual in the peninsula could come up with. In fact, there were other substitutes for mails, used by the financially rich classes. However, the idea that anyone, even the lowest individual, has the right to send mail, was planted by the English administration. To the traditional rulers here, the very mention that their servant classes desired to send letters would have evoked boisterous laughter.

It is true that immigrant populations in England can also create many things in England if they are given the domination of the place. However, there is difference here. In the Indian peninsula, the higher dominating groups could also have created all that has been bestowed by English colonialism. However, they had one very vital information that the native-English speakers never received. That is that the lower castes and classes of the Indian peninsula were also quite intelligent and capable, if given the right inputs. However, it was known to everyone in the peninsula that if the lower man was given information and rights of articulation, and personal dignity, instead of being grateful, his descendants would use their newly acquire positions to displace their patrons and to bring them down to subjugation and servitude. This vital information never seems to have entered the minds of any native-English speaker.

For instance, the teaching of the English language to the common man in the Indian peninsula. All Indian leaders know that it was the worst foolishness of the English. Very few Indians who know English would like to allow other Indians to learn English. Yet, the English colonialists were simply foolish, in that sense.

Moreover, there is vital piece of information also. The natives of the peninsula who entered England were not the natives of the peninsula who stood by the English rule. One was the exact antonym of the other. However, when discussing English colonialism, both are bracketed as one and the same. It is a foolish situation.