I've been reading the interesting debate on Goa social indicators, comparison of development between India and Portugal, possible effects of Goa's integration into India in 1962 etc.
I firmly stand for those who post balanced and factual postings, basing and confirming their stats and views with credible sources. Portugal is a country like any else, having its problems, having its own development progress (or not) etc. The same applies to India. But there are some rules which we all should respect in this discussion. Some people seem to be too excited when they talk about this whole issue. On both sides.
One one side, those who perhaps have a profound nostalgia for "other times", like so many people have around the world, like some Indians even have today for the British times (of course, a minority and very old), like some Portuguese for the Salazar dictatorship times (of course, a minority and very old).
On the other side we have people who ignore this subjectivity completely and grew up with a certain kind of 100% truths, and thus resist (or radicalize) when they start realizing that some things are quite more complicated than they thought.
Examples on both sides: "Goa is essentially catholic and a portuguese corner in India, Portuguese civilized Goa. Goans are essentially Europeans and superior to Indians" ///// "Goa came back to India in 1961 and was always Indian, India developed Goa in a superior way, Portugal colonized and almost destroyed Goa".
These individuals, on both sides, when confronted with the denial of these "truths" they always believed in and which sometimes form the basis of their thinking about the other (Portugal, Goa, India, West, East...), tend to radicalize their speeches, attack personally, forget to check their sources, and, in general, liberate their profound and primitive hate on something or someone. That's why we should perhaps adopt a more diplomatic tone (like Rui Colla�o has been doing, giving an unfortunately rare broad-minded view on these issues, on the "portuguese side").
Some examples (I think we all agree - why is another question - that hate against Portugal coming from the Indian side is stronger than hate against India coming from Portugal):
Gabe Menezes probably looking up on Google (http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au/~leccles/speech1.html) a suggestive title (Portugal's shame) of a serious academic paper, but not even giving the trouble of reading it (or he completely misunderstood it).
Bernardo Cola�o, focusing on the good things the portuguese seem to have given to Goa remembers "white-washed churches", missing the point when the discussion is about development.
Tim de Mello: "Just because we, "the silent majority" do not actively contribute to this debate, does not
mean we do not have a point of view." Trying to induce everyone is with Miguel (or with whom ever) he is forgetting that a silent majority is never a majority, not even on the Internet. A silent majority is silent, though you can't possibly know what they think.
I do hope this debate may help us:
- to get to know more about the "other" (may it be Portugal, India, Goa etc.)
- and by that to destroy these old myths, on both sides, that still resist in some minds.
Regards to all, Constantino
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
##########################################################################
# Send submissions for Goanet to [EMAIL PROTECTED] # # PLEASE remember to stay on-topic (related to Goa), and avoid top-posts #
# More details on Goanet at http://joingoanet.shorturl.com/ # # Please keep your discussion/tone polite, to reflect respect to others #
##########################################################################
