2ndlook

The Two Wars Of Robert McNamara

Posted in Current Affairs, Environment, European History, Feminist Issues, History, Media, Uncategorized by Anuraag Sanghi on June 7, 2008

Robert McNamaraIn the beginning

In 1937, this young ‘genius’ (supposedly) scored 800 all correct answers in his GMAT test (reputedly, a first in the history of GMAT) – and joined Harvard Business School. Harvard milked this story to sell its struggling business school. In the next 60 years, (as the urban legend goes) only 3 others scored 800 points – all Indians (confirms IIT, Mumbai website).

During WW2

The young ‘genius’ was Robert S. McNamara (ironically, S. stands for Strange). During WW2, he was a part of the Statistical Control Office. Statistics is what the legendary Edward Deming used to increase production and improve quality during WW2 in the USA. Robert McNamara, Col. Charles B. “Tex” Thornton and 8 others were a team that were in-charge of war transportation and logistics. They made these ‘boring’ jobs glamorous – and used their academic excellence to create an aura around themselves.

Robert McNamara

At Ford Motors

After WW2, this team joined Ford Motors. The Ford PR team promoted them as the Whiz Kids, the American press lionized them, even as Ford’s business results were ordinary. This Ford connection was to prove relevant to McNamara’s activity later, we will see. The Ford in charge of the company was Henry Ford II, a direct descendant of the racist Henry Ford, who bankrolled Hitler and funded research into Eugenics – whose most famous practitioner turned out be Joseph Mengele.

The Kennedy Presidency

In 1961, Robert McNamara became Secretary of Defense under President John F. Kennedy. Kennedy’s presidency was marred by more scandals than any other. Joseph Kennedy, JFK’s father made his fortune from bootlegging, many Wall Street Scams – and reputed shorted the market, which resulted in the Great Depression. On the other side was the inspired leadership of Ho Chi Minh.

Sinh Cung Nguyễn - Ho Chi Minh

The story picks up speed

In 1954, the Viet Minh defeated the French Army at Dienbienphu. Eisenhower outlined the infamous Domino Theory – based on Anglo Saxon paranoia that the whole world was against them (unfortunately, not true) and an assumption that Asia was retarded and incapable of making a suitable political choice – and that the Anglo Saxons knew better. The French handed over their mess to the Americans and walked away in 1956. And thus started McNamara’s War.

Fools Rush In Where Angels Fear To Tread

Kennedy-McNamara turned this into a war. Lyndon Johnson (on advice of McNamara) increased American involvement against the Vietnamese – without permission from the US Congress, which is essential as per US constitution. Then began the lies, duplicity, covert operations – directly monitored by McNamara. No wonder, McNamara boasted that “each hour of testimony requires 3 to 4 hours of preparation.”

The Vietnamese had the support of the Russians and the Chinese. American troops increased to 500,000 in this unconstitutional (and hence, illegal) war. Cost to the USA – more than 200,000 dead or disabled. Cost to Vietnam – incalculable.

What McNamara Learnt From Vietnam

Americans lost the Vietnam War. Against a determined enemy (like the Viet Cong), the technological edge that America had was not very useful. Worse, American technological edge, was only temporary. The experience of the Vietnam War, preyed on McNamara’s mind. The Vietnam War brought home the reality that India and China could raise an army bigger than the entire population of United States.

McNamara’s unique contribution to the Vietnam War was ‘body count’

he was so impressed by the logic of statistics that he tried to calculate how many deaths it would take to bring North Vietnam to the bargaining table … (later) he wanted to know why his reckoning had been wrong, why the huge casualties that he had helped inflict had failed to break the will of the men in Hanoi …

His ruminations about this began at the Americans’ April meeting in Washington, where he, Cooper and General Vesser agreed that casualties did not seem to weigh heavily with North Vietnam …. “Was there any consideration of the human cost in Hanoi as they made these decisions?” McNamara asked. “Is the loss of life ever a factor?” He noted that while 58,000 Americans had been killed, the most authoritative estimate — in a September 1995 article by General Uoc — put the number of Vietnamese deaths at 3.6 million. “It’s equivalent to 27 million Americans!” McNamara exclaimed.

To explain this to himself, he remembered … There were some people to whom life was not the same as to us, he reasoned as he stood one evening in the hotel lobby. (Ellipsis, bracketed text mine).

He was right. Only he could have killed an equivalent of 27 million Americans – and still talk about the value of life, with a straight face. For American neo-colonial objectives.

Against America’s temporary technology superiority, the population superiority that the Indians and the Chinese had was permanent. India’ subsequent rise in technology (with engineering skills in software, pharma, automobiles, etc.) and the Chinese rise in manufacturing proved some of McNamara’s ‘fears’ true. McNamara’s legendary quantitative skills made him a convert to The Population Crisis propaganda.

Lester ThurowThe Population ‘Crisis’ Ideology

You win, we lose.

That is what Lester Thurow proposed in his book, The Zero Sum Game. The ‘rise’ of India and China is a threat to America – and the West? In Anglo Saxon terms, the ‘rise’ of India and China is a zero-sum gain.

If India and China prosper, the West will lose, goes the paranoid thinking. Contributory growth as opposed to supplanting growth is an alien concept in Anglo Saxon strategy. Hence, the theory that population is the biggest problem for India and China – was ‘created’ as a development strategy.

The Ugly American Book Cover

How the Developing World was sold this dud

Initially the Carnegie Endowment and the Ford Foundation worked with USAID, (part of the US Government) to sell this theory – specially to the Chinese and the Indians. Since, there was no ‘apparent’ economic or political interest of the Americans, this paranoid construct was given respect as a theory. This lack of ‘apparent’ self interest also helped the ‘Ugly American’ (The Ugly American, by Eugene Burdick William Julius Lederer) to cover his face.

Next, the American economic aid started coming with the ‘population control’ strings attached. It took a while for the dots to start getting connected. At the first whiff of a scandal, USAID, Ford Foundation and Carnegie Endowments handed over this project to the UN, World Bank and IMF. This gave the Population Control programme, the respect it did not deserve.

Paul EhrlichPaul Ehrlich, Robert McNamara, Club Of Rome – False Doomsdayers

Paul Ehrlich’s The Population Bomb (1960 coincided with the start of Robert McNamara’s World Bank stint. Together, the “smartest man” (Lyndon Johnson’s description of Robert McNamara) and Paul Ehrlich did a hatchet job on this. Economists Herman Kahn and Max Singer (of the Hudson Institute) did come out with a alternative model which disproved this theory. Yet in the midst of the din, the furore and the determined PR push by various UN bodies, the World Bank and the IMF, poor Third World countries never examined this theory critically.

The Western world synchronised and the infamous Club of Rome’s The Limits to Growth predictions were released …”the world would run out of gold by 1981, mercury by 1985, tin by 1987, zinc by 1990, petroleum by 1992, and copper, lead, and natural gas by 1993. The end was nigh” intoned the The Club Of Rome (from Reasononline …). This psuedo-academic report was jointly authored by heavyweights – Donella H. Meadows, Dennis L. Meadows, Jørgen Randers, and William W. Behrens III.Reason Cartton - Paul Ehrlich

The venue for the release of this report was carefully chosen – Smithsonian Institute, to give it an air of solidity and authority. This report itself was released with much fanfare, publicity and PR. Yale economist Henry C. Wallich noted, the quantitative content of the model comes for the authors’ imagination, although they never reveal the equations that they used.”

Economist Julian Simon rubbished this theory and made the famous Simon-Ehrlich US$100 bet – against the population doomsdayers. Julian Simon won the bet. Of course, he may bet either because he believed in the continued dominance of the western mode of exploitation or the inability of the rest of the world to stop this exploitation.

Un Helps?The bottom line was that these economists (the Ehrlich’s, The Club Of Rome, The McNamara’s, etc.) wanted the poor of this world to feel guilty about sex, about electricity, about having cattle, drinking milk and eating food.

Western critics (like critics Hermann Kahn and Max Singer) of the population theory were saying “Why bother? Our technology and military, economic might ensure that they (the poor) never lay their hands on the goodies!”

Population Crisis and The Population Problem

Nothing but re-packaged Eugenics programs of Pre-WW2. Hitler made these programs notorious. Hence, family planning and population crisis and population problem became other names for the same programs that killed more than 10 million Jews, Roma Gypsies and others. The repackaging and reselling was supervised by World Bank – under Robert McNamara.

McNamara’s two wars – on Vietnam and population control (of India and China) have both been a disaster. Strange, that a ‘genius’, supported and backed by the world’s only ‘superpower’ and the largest economy, could not achieve much against backward and developing nations like Vietnam, India and China.

The Population Control Network

The Debt That India Owes Britain

Posted in British Raj, Gold Reserves, History, India, politics, Satire by Anuraag Sanghi on December 18, 2007

New Economic Order?

“British government conceded Indian self-rule, they thought this the right thing to do. What would have happened to the Koreans or the Vietnamese if a local Gandhi had tried such tactics against the brutal Japanese kempetai or the French with their mercenaries from Morocco and Senegal? It was not that Gandhi was successful but that the British were forbearing … Gandhi’s tactics only work if the other side lets it …” Christie Davies’ Blog The Social Affairs Unit.

We ungrateful oriental so-and-so

Indians are an ungrateful lot. How can we forget the British and give Gandhi all the credit.

Ever the oriental selfishness. Why can we not sacrifice ourselves for the Great British Empire? Can we even imagine that the Greatest Empire in history had anything but the milk of human kindness oozing out of Britain, at the time of granting Independence. After WW2, even though Britain was on rationing, they let us Browns go independent.

I wonder who put Jinnah onto this job?

I wonder who put Jinnah onto this job?

The end of extraction

Churchill very much wanted the option of squeezing the Brown man at least a little more. Whatever little there was left of the Brown man after the Great Bengal Famine of 1943.

Clement Attlee pointed out that there was nothing left to squeeze. Attlee thought that the cost of squeezing was greater than the value of the extract. After Montagu Norman, Churchill, Lord Willingdon, Neville Chamberlain had finished with the Great Bullion Scam against India from 1925-1945. After the war was over and the Brown man was used in Africa and Europe. They let us go – and allowed us to rule ourselves.

How can we ever repay this debt?

The gift of English language

First, the great benefit of English language.

These stupid Germans, Italians, Japanese, Russians, French, Chinese – they don’t know what we know!! English is the universal language. All other super powers and developed countries (Japan, China, Russia, France, Germany, Italy) use their own languages. They could have been very successful (like India) if they had learnt English, talked English, walked English, read English, cooked English, washed English, done everything in English.

Colonial stereotypes!

Colonial stereotypes!

I must admit, this small, little, disloyal question keeps raising its head, in my head? Why cant the British use that great English language to lift themselves from that terminal decline?

Indian industry

Can we ever forget the Lees-Mody pact which saved the Indian farmer from ruin on 28th October 1933?

The Japanese had stopped purchase of Indian cotton. Never mind that the British raised customs duty for imported Japanese cloth (increasing the cost to the consumer) to protect the Lancashire Mills, which were hurting by the Gandhian (that tricky so and so oriental) boycott.

We ungrateful Indians must further appreciate the British sacrifice and the industrial cost of conceding self-rule to India.

Within 10 years of Indian independence, the British car industry started closing down. British Steel collapsed and had to be nationalised within 20 years (Ratan Tata may revive British Steel finally). British coal mining became unviable within 15 years – and had to be shut finally. British Rail similarly collapsed. It is now making a hesitant comeback after privatisation. British capital goods industry (electrical, heavy machinery, electronics) went out of business. There is no British automotive industry worth talking about.

All due to us Indians hankering for Independence..

Colonial railways

But they did teach Laloo Prasad Yadav how to run Indian Railways profitably.

Should we complain so much, if we inherited a decrepit, run down, accident prone, investment starved railway system with outdated technology from the British? Should we be ungrateful, if this railway system was financed by Indian capital?

Even though it took India 40 years, to modernize the colonial railway system, we should be thankful. Remember, they could have uprooted the rails, and taken away the wagons and engines. After all, Indian Railways was the biggest scrap iron collection in the world at that time.

Till Lal Bahadur Shastri’s resignation – the poor Indian railway-man was routinely blamed for railway accidents – by his British, and later the Indian bosses also. It was Shastri’s resignation, that drew attention to the state of the railways. It was Madhu Dandvate in 1977 who started overhauling railway time tables – and upgraded rail travel from cattle class to IInd class.

Captive markets and raw material

What could the British do without captive markets and raw material sources?

The British let all this go – so that Indian industry could survive. British business manager taught Indian businessmen how to run business competitively – and completely ignored their own business. Today, Britain has very few of the colonial era multinationals. British (The Great Benefactors) said – Go forth, Brown man.

Some biased historians claim that the Britishers said to us Indians, “We know that you can do nothing by yourself. You are useless to us now. You are a burden to us. We have sucked you dry. But, you want to go away from our protective umbrella. Go forth and stagnate at the bottom”, at the time of Independence. I don’t believe that.

Like I don’t believe that the sun rises in the East (it is a conspiracy against us).

Are you not disappinted, Mr.Pukka Sahib?
Are you not disappinted, Mr.Pukka Sahib?

Colonial Indian bureaucracy

We also do not appreciate their kindness towards us!

The other British legacy that we should be very grateful is our colonial bureaucracy. This colonial era bureaucracy, a permanent establishment, has been growing faster than our population – thrives by demonizing Indian politicians. Its corruption is aided by a myriad laws created by the same bureaucracy – for the benefit of Indians. In most states this bureaucracy takes up all the Governmental revenues and leaves nothing but tax increases for us.

The British never intended to benefit from these entrenched laws and bureaucracy.

One reader did point out,

“Look what happens when you let these people rule themselves. The whole of black Africa has become a basket case. The people are ripped off by their rulers, in a far worse way than they ever were under white rule. Many of their citizens long for the return of white rule and the stability that would bring. It’s just a shame they are never going to get it.
All countries in the Middle East, with the exception of Israel, are ruled by thugs who use terror and their police forces to destroy any opposition.”

Indians responded, (in a very disloyal manner), by using the same logic against the British themselves.

By this logic, the way Britain is being run, it will need to be governed by guess who – Indians. Looking at where India was after the end of the Raj – and now, it is clear who is better at governing.

Looking at the ‘decline’ of Britain (what will happen after the secession of Scotland and Wales?) and Spain, after the end of Black Moslem rule, and you know who should be ruling over Britain and Spain at least.

Whatcha say …

How disloyal Indians can be? Imagine, questioning the British themselves? How can they?!

They Didn’t Wipe Us Out – Like ‘Red Indians’ And Aborigines

Recent archaeological (available with me) evidence shows that the British were repaying our kindness. Indians “marwari” seths had lent Queen Bodicea some money about 78 AD during her struggle against the Romans 2000 years ago. The British have never forgotten that. (Only the British and I know this secret story – based on documents to which only I have access in my family custody for 2000 years).

Hence, they did not kill us Indians in the numbers that they killed (more than 10 lakh Kenyans in 10 years) in the Mau-Mau uprising. Or they did not torture and kill Indians the way they killed the Malaysians. Due to this reason, they also did not establish apartheid the way they did in Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) and South Africa. This unblemished record of the British against other people had nothing to do with Gandhiji. Gandhiji’s focus on post-colonial India, had nothing to with the existence of our statehood.

It was all the British legacy.

They let Gandhiji succeed

Just like the Whites in US of America allowed Martin Luther King to follow Gandhiji’s ideology. They have permitted the Negroes to make more progress in the last 30 years than in the previous 300 years.

Similar to the permission granted, by the White Apartheid Regime in South Africa, for Nelson Mandela to become successful. I wonder why his neighbours Robert Mugabe and Joshua Nkome were not given that permission. Lech Walesa’s success in Poland is there for all to see – after the Communist Regimes in Poland permitted these protests to happen.

Why didn’t they just kill Gandhiji

It would have been so easy. The one British failure was that they did not kill Gandhi. That job was outsourced to an Indian “coolie”. This was one thing that they could have done – but didn’t do! In my books, we should be eternally grateful to the British Colonialist for not killing Gandhiji.

PS – If all else fails, there is the path of political assassination. A few days ago, from Washington, USA, someone Googled to ask “why britishers didn’t kill gandhi“. Perhaps, that was one moment in history, when the political leaders of the Anglo Saxon Bloc were momentarily humanised.

%d bloggers like this: