[Dear valued member, The name of our site is mukto-mona, not mukta-mona. We keep only selected scholarly articles, features, critical reviews, interestingMessage 1 of 21 , Mar 14, 2004View Source[Dear valued member,
The name of our site is mukto-mona, not mukta-mona. We keep only selected scholarly articles, features, critical reviews, interesting discussion etc. in our web (mukto-mona.com), and our forum (firstname.lastname@example.org) is for any general discussion and debate. Members can discuss on any topic among themselves in our forum.
Vinnomot (vinnomot.com) is also another popular site, but difference is it has no forum for discussion. Vinnomot is an independent web-site (and run by independent authority). All articles are generally published in their opening pages. Vinnomot mainly focuses on Bengali readership, whereas Mukto-mona has a lot of non-Bengali members and readers as well. You can send your article/comment etc. at vinnomot@... (not yahoogroups) directly if you want to publish in their site.
This message is asking for some information..
As I am newcomer here, I would appreciate if someone tells me how the
editorial policy works here. mukta-mona the yahoogroup and mukta-mona.com
how are they related? Also does the editor check the contents before the
mails are posted? I have found that it takes quite some time after I sent
the mail before it appears in the yahoogroups. Also the editor put my e-mail
to him on the homepage, is it also the norm here?
After browsing a vinnomot and mukta-mona and seeing same writers writing in
both I am a little confused. Do I have to browse both sites to keep myself
updated? Then, if the editors take some pain and display the posting date of
an article and classify the articles into commentary/news/essay etc would be
Abdullah Al Amin
Dear JR-da I don t know why you react so sharply to my e-mails when I advocate for secularism. Everybody knows that I hate religious fundamentalism of allMessage 1 of 21 , Mar 15, 2004View SourceDear JR-daI don't know�why you react so sharply to my e-mails when I advocate for secularism. Everybody knows that I hate religious fundamentalism of all kinds. I condemn the minority appeasement policies of the "secualar"/"communist" parties. Any one who reads my mails carefully should know this. I am bothered when Islamic fundamentalists attack Dr. H. Azad. I am bothered when I see the news that members of the Durga Bahini have blackened the face of the director of a play. Any kind of intolerance bothers me. Are you not bothered at all with what is going on in India? Your attitude seems to be like this: "O kichhu na. Orokom ektu-adhtu hoyei thake. They are nothing comparable to what the Islamic militants are doing" I cannot solace myself by uttering these words. Many people including Amartya Sen and Khushwant Singh�(you saw the articles and reacted sharply)�feel my way. Many sensible people are worried that the way the Hindu fanatics are behaving will cause immense damage to the Indian national integrity. I don't know why you tend to take this so lightly.2.�Going after the Islamic fundamentalist criminals is one thing and anatagonizing the entire Muslim community is another. The latter is suicidal for the Indian society in general. I think secularism is a path�emphasised by all the great people in India. Rabindranath, Vivekanada, and so many other great people. I don't know what wrong I do in your eyes when I preach secularism.3.�If you are not a secularist,�do you then support�domination, even in slightest amount,�(socially, culturally, politically, etc.)�of a religious minority by the religious majority?�Would you like American Christians to dominate the non-Christians only because they are the majority?�This is secularism. I don't know what wrong is with that. I don't know why�you have to overreact!4. Again, if you read my mails carefully, you should know I never compare the Taliban with BJP. I have immense respect for Vajpayee. On the other hand� I have no respect for� Mollah Omar. Even my personal judgment is that BNP is not less a Muslim nationalist party�than BJP is a Hindu nationalist�one (remember my mail on Hazarika that I sent a couple of weeks ago). Don't you think Shiv Sena, Bajrang Dol, RSS, Durga bahini, VHP, and many more that already exist or are being born everyday are comparable to the Taliban?5.�BNP thinks Jamaat is�nothing but simply a junior partner in the coalition.�But if you look at the BD political scene, you will see how the python Jamaat is swallowing BNP gradually. When I look at the Indian political scene, I�see a similar horrifying picture.�If you say "O kichhu na", I will ask you to look at it a little bit more carefully.6.�You have mentioned "a big picture". Hazarika, Naipaul, maybe Rudra too, see that. But there is another picture which is "bigger than that". Insight and foresight of a "scientist" may not be sufficient to see that. I guess compassion is also necessary. Vivekanada, Rabindranath, Gandhi, Nehru (I mentioned just a few) had it.7. Terry Eagleton (remember the article I sent about a year ago) and Dr. Sirajul Islam Chowdhury (in a recent article which also I circulated) have argued that a scientist and a "booted-suited" man enjoying all the modern amenities and fashions can also be a fundamentalist. Probably Dr. Shamsher Ali is a good example. I liked SIC's explanation. A scientist is a rationalist. She talks with data. She uses a holistic approach to understand the problems of a society. Politics, economics, sociology, psychology--- every thing should be�there. That way you can avoid the danger of a one-sided explanation. A blind man cannot see the entire elephant. He can see only piecewise and end up with wierd conclusions.��8. JR-da, let me finish by asking you again the same question: Is preaching secularism so bad that you have to undergo sleep deprivation and send me a mail� questioning its utility for the pluralistic society?�9. See you next week when we will talk more about it. Regards.-----SC�
jkrudr@...> wrote:Subimal,�Please do not reply to emails the way you did, specially in a public forum such as this BMADFW email-group. It does not look/feel good�when you do not even address me in any fashion.�Let me try to make sense as I answer your questions. Don't be upset, try to be a good sport.�I am not a hindutvabadi, I am not a secularist. I do not think one has to be 'something' to talk about anything. It sounds like if I don't get 'stamped', you don't understand what I say. Would not that be a severe limitation of human brain? However, if you insist, I am a scientist.�Why do you think that if I shun secularism, I become a fundamentalist? I normally do not shun secularism. But if a secularist thinks that all non-secular persons are the same, then that is wrong. It is a wastage of resources to drag BJP along with the�TALIBANS.�I am not a pessimist, why should I be? Does that mean I must also run after a gold deer?�If VSB is not for me, I would not feel diminished. But VSB must realize that being secularist for the name sake is not enough.�The precursors to a liberated soul are exposure to science, diversity, debate, and the BIG PICTURE.�I think you intend to do a great job along that line. Aim of my email was to express the fact that you easily get caught up with the hindutvabadis. I think that hindutvabadis are not the most menacing force for humanity or to world peace right now. I do not have any soft corner for hindutvsbadies.�I do not also feel idebted to�my Fundamentalists Brothers of Bangladesh.�I know BJP propagates hindu philosophy the way Republicans here propagates christian values. It does not mean BJP is changing indian constitution into hindutvabad. I may not agree with them, but they are very democratic and very civil. While I do not accomodate fundamentalism, I can accomodate and celebrate this freedom of theirs.�I hope I have illuminated you with my thoughts.�Regards, JR
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107919804320754591-search,00.html?collection=autowire%2F30day&vql_string=Outsourcing%3Cin%3E%28article%2Dbody%29 THE WALLMessage 1 of 21 , Mar 15, 2004View Sourcehttp://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107919804320754591-search,00.html?collection==autowire%2F30day&vql_string==Outsourcing%3Cin%3E%28article%2Dbody%29THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE, MARCH 15, 2004
MORE WORK IS OUTSOURCED TO U.S.
THAN AWAY FROM IT, DATA SHOW
By MICHAEL M. PHILLIPS
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNALWASHINGTON -- Despite the political outcry over the outsourcing of white-collar jobs to such places as India and Ghana, the latest U.S. government data suggest that foreigners outsource far more office work to the U.S. than American companies send abroad.
The value of U.S. exports of legal work, computer programming, telecommunications, banking, engineering, management consulting and other private services jumped to $131.01 billion in 2003, up $8.42 billion from the previous year, the Commerce Department reported Friday.
Imports of such private services -- a category that encompasses U.S. outsourcing of call centers and data entry to developing nations, among other things -- hit $77.38 billion for the year, up $7.94 billion from 2002. Measuring imports against exports, the U.S. posted a $53.64 billion surplus last year in trade in private services with the rest of the world.
Under government accounting, when a U.S. company opens a technical-support center in India that handles inquiries from the U.S., that is considered a U.S. import of services. When a U.S. lawyer in New York does work for a German auto company or a New York investment banker works on a deal for a Japanese company, that is an export of services.
The numbers suggest that congressional efforts to restrict outsourcing by U.S. companies may backfire, if they provoke retaliation by U.S. trading partners. Economists also say that U.S. service exporters -- insurers, for instance -- might lose some competitive edge if they can't use foreign suppliers for call centers or other back-office operations.
"If you try to protect and limit outsourcing, you will have a negative impact on the exports of service activities, which generate a lot of jobs," said Catherine Mann of the Institute for International Economics, a Washington policy research group.
Despite the developments in services trade, the current-account deficit, the most inclusive measure of the U.S. trade gap, hit another record in 2003, reaching $541.8 billion, or 4.9% of the gross domestic product, up from $480.9 billion in 2002, or 4.6% of GDP. The increase came even though the deficit for the final three months of year narrowed to $127.5 billion, from $135.3 billion in the third quarter.
The white-collar trade issue has risen to the top of the political agenda and has led to legislative proposals to prevent outsourcing, or expose it when it occurs. Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the likely Democratic presidential nominee, wants U.S. companies to reveal to callers that their telephone inquiries are going overseas. Others in Congress legislation to restrict government contractors from sending work abroad.
Politicians have largely ignored the jobs created in the U.S. when Americans sell white-collar services to foreign customers.
"I can understand why members of Congress are responding to what a lot of constituents feel, and I can understand why their constituents feel that way because there has been so much publicity about the potential loss of jobs," said J. Robert Vastine, president of the Coalition of Service Industries. But, he said, "a lot of it is hype, and one of the big problems in this debate is there hasn't been enough analysis."
In addition to hiring more U.S. businesses to provide services, foreigners doubled last year the amount of money invested in U.S. companies, plants, offices, stores and other facilities. That foreign direct investment swelled to $81.98 billion in 2003, from $39.63 billion in 2002, the government said.
Write to Michael M. Phillips at michael.phillips@...
Updated March 15, 2004 1:56 a.m.
Dear- 1)Indira Chakrabarthy, thanks so much for not having misunderstood my stance on Taslima s silence. I will try to soon send you original Bangla commentsMessage 1 of 21 , Mar 15, 2004View SourceDear-
thanks so much for not having misunderstood my stance on Taslima's
I will try to soon send you original Bangla comments made my Somoresh
Majumdar (assuming you can read Bangla).
A novelist of such fame and stature who produced well-praised Bangla
literary pieces such as "Gharbadharini"/"Kal Bela"/"Kal
Prush"/"Uttaradhikar" should have thought twice before making such a
degrading and demeaning comments. It shows, many of our so called
proressive writers are for woman's rights only in words. Taslima did
a great job portraying their double standards/hidden hypocracies in
her memoirs. Funny is the fact, they couldn't deny much of what she
wrote about them except screaming "hers is low quality
literature/trash", as if, they were the only licensed authority to
detremine what makes a good literature.
the person you forgot the name of w.r.t. comments on Taslima's
silence is none but myself. Already I repeated many times, I am a
supporter of Taslima to a great extent but not a blind one. I
didn't "drag" her simply to degrade her reputations. In case you
didn't notice before, I'm a humanist of thoroughly skeptic origin,
and don't believe in any cults whatsoever.
(You may read my response on Paul Edward's comments on "New religion
of Ali Sinha").
It's easy these days to be known as a scholar while maintaining a
position that In Bangla we call "dhori mach, na chui pani" (I'm sure
you understand the underlying connotations). More later.
love and reason,
a humanist activist/writer 24/7
Re: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/message/15756 Instead of imitating the Monsantos and Novartises of the world, the government should instead spendMessage 1 of 21 , Mar 15, 2004View SourceRe: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/message/15756
Instead of imitating the Monsantos and Novartises of the world, the
government should instead spend that allocation developing beneficial
nematodes that can attack and kill the larvae of borers and other beetle
pests. Once in the soil, these nematodes increase. Of course, developing
these will create only one input for ag consumers to purchase, whereas
thransgenic crops will create many such products. It's the money.
The Union Minister lamely says that "the scientists while developing
transgenic crops should ensure that their efforts are not directed towards
changing the basic inherent quality of the crops endowed by nature." What a
laugh. Scientific studies in USA, UK, and EU already show that such
transgenic crops pollute genetically related conventional seeds via pollen
sharing thanks to wind, insects, etc. Embarking on the transgenic road is a
sure way to ensure that the various species of non-transgenics now in use
will be doomed. Thus, seed purchases will just add to farmer costs.
Usually such transgenics are patented, so a royalty on their use is paid and
they may not be saved and used again, upping farmer costs considerably. "Buy
new each year" is the command of the greedy corporations that will probably
end up getting the patents based on prior government research and
development, analogous to what happens here in the USA.
Dr. Vandana Shiva, the Indian scientist who's worked the hardest against
going the trangenic road, has thus been outmaneuvered. See her website on
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/nondini/ojouktik_juddho.pdf ... Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly... Ping your friends today! Download Messenger NowMessage 1 of 21 , Mar 15, 2004View Sourcehttp://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/nondini/ojouktik_juddho.pdf
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now