This is getting very chaotic indeed, but...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
It would be an understatement to believe that the foreign funding was totally altruistic.
Many of those involved in the antinuclear movements certainly perceive themselves as altruistic. In their own minds, they are saving the planet from the scourge of corporate capitalism. That's an agenda, but it isn't a government agenda or a unitary "Western" agenda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
DFID is Govt funded and it supports the NGOs in India.
What do you mean by "the NGOs"? Which NGOs? There's a huge spectrum there, ranging from finance for small development projects with minimal or no political engagement to pure research to open advocacy and support for radical political causes. Some NGOs get government funding, others don't. Some openly loathe their governments and are intensely disliked by those governments. US NGOs involved in environmental and antinuclear campaigns have been monitored by the FBI, suspected and even accused of criminal and "eco-terrorist" activities. They do not get (and would not accept) government funding. They do raise funds, and they do support anti-nuclear campaigns all over the world. This is not some government or "Western" agenda, it's an agenda driven by a particular social philosophy that has attained a substantial following in much of the west.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
I think the term, “Conspiracy Theory” has been overused and is but a cliché and cover all for anything that does not suits one’s own perceptions.
It's an accurate description of what has become a pervasive trend in much of the world: widespread belief, often absolute and unquestioning, in propositions that are supported by neither logic nor evidence. It's a fascinating trend, often supported by the internet, which allows believers to construct a closed circle of superficially credible websites that tell them what they want to hear.
I have no doubt that US-based NGOs fund antinuclear groups in India and in many other places. The same happens in the indigenous rights movement, the environmental movement, the animal rights movement, the feminist movement, etc. We routinely get foreign activists blundering into local movements and trying to offer support. They're often annoying and genrally utterly naive, but they are in no way the cutting edge of some generically "Western" conspiracy to undercut the Philippines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
The project remained in limbo for a decade due to the political and economic upheaval in Russia after the post-1991 Soviet breakup. There were also objections from the United States.
And from this you deduce that protests in India are funded by the US Government? Isn't it more likely that money is coming from groups like Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth. groups that the US Government wouldn't touch with a barge pole? That's what these groups do, they are quite open about it and quite proud of it.
That does not mean that these groups would directly fund Maoist rebels. Some of the individuals in them might want to, but the groups themselves would be very careful: direct support of violent movements would, if exposed, dramatically reduce their ability to raise funds.
The idea that the US Government is funding Maoist rebels is too absurd to countenance. If we heard that the CIA was funding a covert hit squad to whack Maoist sympathizers, that might be more believable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
While there were protests in India, where the US oriented PM of India was equally livid about the protests being foreign funded, it also found widespread sympathy in western nations.
Protest do get widespread support in Western countries: that's why NGOs are able to raise the money they raise. This does not mean the support is institutional or that it comes from government. Many of the people involved are deeply suspicious of government and see it as an antagonist, along with the much loathed bogeyman of "the corporations".
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
It sure makes one wonder as to what prompts far away western nations to be livid about India’s development plans when they are not funding the same? Should they not be more concerned about themselves acquiring nuclear submarines and adding to their nuclear stockpile?
Many of the same groups hold the same kind of protests against nuclear moves in their own countries. These groups act on their own, generally oppose their own governments, raise substantial cash from sympathizers, and are globally interconnected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
One wonders as to why there was no western outcry that Japan should close down all its nuclear power plants since it is an earthquake and tsunami prone nation and disasters like the last nuclear plant accident due to the tsunami could affect the world.
There is an active antinuclear movement in Japan and it is actively engaged with similar movements around the world. I don't know if it receives funding: it's well established and able to raise funds domestically, I'd guess antinuclear groups in Japan are likely to be funding those in other countries, rather than receiving funds.
There's no generic "western outcry" against nuclear power in either Japan or India. The anti-nuclear movements oppose it, as they do everywhere. They are not "The west" in any generic sense, they are a group of people with a passionate, in some cases obsessive belief and the will to campaign for what they believe in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
would any organisation claim that they are being funded to pursue an agenda that has covert aims tweaked in its moralist and altruist façade?
Is there any evidence of government support, or are you simply assuming that all foreign NGOs are government-funded?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
Amnesty International is an over rated organisation with its own agenda.
Of course it has its own agenda. That doesn't make it a tool of the US Government or of "the West". Where I live Amnesty International and similar groups are believed in military circles to be tools of international communism. Same complaints: they complain about government abuses but ignore those of the rebels, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
It is easy for one to comment that the Govt blames others for their ills.
Governments do actually do that, all over the world, on a regular basis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
Indeed the Govts are responsible for neglect that leads to such insurgencies, but then you may like to think it over as to what would be the cost of organising an insurgency.
Has anyone actually been accused of funding insurgency? Who, and to what extent? All I've seen is a claim that Indian NGOs diverted foreign funds to support protests. That's by no means incredible, but it's a far cry from funding insurgency.
I've also expressed curiosity about where Indian insurgent movements get their money, especially if it's true that the fighters are fighting for pecuniary benefit. Claims that the insurgency is directly funded by foreign NGOs or governments, though, have to be supported by some kind of evidence or at least some kind of logic. There's simply no reason for the US or any western government to fund Maoist insurgents in India.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
Look at organising an insurgency in terms of patching up the organisation, organising the publicity, weaning over sympathisers, having overt front men and organisation espousing their cause, training and equipping the underground soldiers for their cause, organising and funding the logistics of such Army and also other front organisations and so on and so forth.
Self-sustaining insurgencies have existed, especially in their early stages. Foreign funding or ideological support can advance an insurgency, but they can't create one, not unless the domestic conditions exist. Governments would be well advised to address the domestic conditions instead of blaming foreign subversion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
One does not require a high level of dissatisfaction to start a revolution.
So people pick up guns and start shooting at vastly superior forces just because some foreigner wants them to? I don't think so, not without some pretty powerful motivation on a local, personal level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ray
The West will use all instruments in the book to ensure best to form a class who are alike in thought, --a class of persons foreign in colour but Western in tastes, in opinions, in morals and in intellect.
What you're not recognizing is that "Western" encompasses huge variety. There's the "West" of the tea party and the west of the Occupy movements, the west of Exxon and the west of Greenpeace, the west of the IMF and of the anti-globalization protestors and all stripes in between. Governments juggle and dance to try to gain support and deflect opposition from as many parties as possible. Different factions compete aggressively for followers, all over the world, and link with the like-minded all over the world to advance their own agendas.
It's impossible to speak of a unitary "Western" agenda because no such thing exists.