 अज अमारे साथ में सौर्वा तोरे भामूनेजी हैं जो अशल्या मरहाथे है, अशल्या में आससुसीट प्रफेशर है, सिन्नी यूँट में. लेकिन उ, अमैरेकिन है भजे अशल्या मरहाते है है. मैं கहு fetchy mein kahun gaha kyun ka yun ka dinl hai ush sahed Bharat se jodga hai. बारजों कि अंकी साईद मुआबबत हो भो बहीं जे. इस के बारे में से में पाट करोंगा. पहला वों का पच्ची है है की वो लिखा संच्ता चलाग हैं, उसकंा आमें इसके बारें बाद करेंगे कैसे वो हमारे इसखोज को जो हमारा बीखोज उसके वो सकतें और हमारे शोटान के साथ में कैसे लगते हैं। अइही हैजे पारटिस्पैटेट लिन्टिं तोडेए कंकलेव इसबाल। तो अब अनकी उमर कभी लगा सकते लिएक तो काफी यांग है, काफी विकिपीडिया पे सच करा है, उस में ही अप फलोर अप त्रुम, अस पर विकिपीडिया हम उनसे कुष्टन लिएक पूछेंगे बाद में, यही कन्सीटर रवाइडिन अजे देन्गे लिएक लिएक लि और कब लगा मारी बाद में के से बाद लें, फी आसुच़ीाट भी लगा रश्यन नटर्नीश्नल बदाध. रहार घर्जाई। नहीं तुवानी सब ऴर्भेवेन OMG तुवानी सब बवो तर्जाई। नहीं। और प्याति जाँचनाउ जो विकपीगा सब लिए। में देरे अगुई अगुछ किसी शाथं बाफ़ी आच नहीं। उकिमचिम्ची ध्योगईंगउगउड़। थी क्सब क भी वर्ग दवादा मेंगने को तब थर आचादीि कराँ और लग दपात या नटोंग ही एक दिसक्रेटगा न को सकतने के रँती है। विस द्यों एक दिम के लगती है। अब आप दिको तृद आश देकाओट्गा में अगई आप अगद आजातिष्ट हैं। तुई आप्श़ेड़ादिटीकर approximately you appreciated the agitation they happening on Congress Hill, what do you call it. ज़न्रे शिक्ष प्रोटेस्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्च्MM Impossible is not very conventional. अगर समप Dj rodeer saag ं कोोग ल सेमचना न my views recondition have been published in most of the leading journals in the world.ater free D आभा बमाहा और शुधुगा से चना कु perfection l सादेती मुरनिग वार्ँल الأरेलगकर सावा from those ढ़्ब. गर सकॉृओन कता ःम स्झनी मुरना और इस दरीіл्ो थावा आफ्ज़िलय हम. तुर्रग ह पर ज़िएर ळाहद के। जान सजा दो द़ाई रब बाजाहन। नोग हिए या दॉद बोग विखखेपेरिया चा से ज्तिया चिल थी शो नहों छोगर्टा ड़ाई लिस वोत सेरा लिसनोच्र्जी 就 attached to the Indian Century Round Table Limited. Please tell us more about and to our listeners. ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ ॐ आब आप देवाट आदराब अडदीःछा असल्टु, . अख़े सम्वात आदरावाद अदीःच्चियािच्चियािच््चिया builder आप देवाख आप आप आप बग अप दोगी साब ही आदर लगी आब आप उख़़़ के विन्नुत चीहड, सरद कर ज़ करा हीवाने नहींज आप आब कोई पब एकापीटिये तुफ़ टूप सरचलने ललन्चाद निन दीःदुं आब में लगने में नहीख to shape the world's view of India when in fact there's much more there, there's much more to the story. अगरी बाझा के देना कर बाढाने गया। अंुवानी जो आपी आपी आने अपी ख़ सादा कर हमस्झाना घरना काओ आपीशा, चलिग स्वोग बादा़ offishashmonga badahto वो चाँसेंगें लगा लग बाधि RYAN थो आपरी गएगें एका वास्ती लगाgroup तर वो दीनगा वी वास्ती गरनालिंग रोते और वो दीन वो यार सेष्ज केavyad yi shahad yi shahad yi shahad yi shahad yi shahad yi shahad yi shahad you all are from South Asia you to or Indian one is Afghan and they you it's only through the lens of these three people that all of America sees India well we'd like to do is have an authoritative factual account of India and we have a particular area now they'll come గినింది మారింద్ కింలి వినిమువసి రంది కినిలాల నిదింరి మానిందూదికిడూగ్After పమిసానిేడినోబరరినా ఆదిచ్తికాభాలా కార్డి.  apoyo  सवUP  Sempre affectionate research towards & sensually  सम� frequently we see the opinion presented as fact And that's inevitable in the political world because we can't know the truth So for example there have been debates about the Independence of the Electoral commission in India In India, it seems very clear that the vast majority of people view the Electoral commission of India as a highly reputable, highly independent autonomous body यरस्डट ने उआरेलगाझ misf' of the Ohhh तो यहवगलेगे उआर मेँ YOU RAID� तंवेंट रीवजी थनग हूँ. औई गर्गडा कंशि जगाछं � عند ही हमी वसेण पडचे यहें. से अगे था�快एट मगदी म।बंगते कर् Kathleen तो शबी है, इसे था वो ख़ाँ्मा़ुशा। ता मोगती देंगा, आप परजी होगी लिए, यह जो इसी लिए गया। वे अभी एक आप परते नाव. वो ऱहो यहगा बंरे थे, ख़ूईगरना है, आप भात्झे हो ऱटा करुष्टाँ, यह लक्टोरुग सुव्य। यह बाजी थेदान, अपको मेरे बाजी चॉढ़ना। आपको वो और थे करेजा का लगान time- college । यह आब भी यह भाजी बाजी मुब स्विलोंनेगीगेगेगेगेगेगेगेगेगेगेगेगेगेगेषी, नरच्द गाना। ब frequently used, when when an expert writes in the Wall Street Journal or the Washington Post that concerns have been raised about the independence of the Electoral Commission of India, that's technically a fact. I mean, the concern is always raised but that is implying a much worse situation than is real. Now I could take that tiny example of that electro commission of India and I could apply a timing. It has been said that Narendra Modi's BJP is a fascist political party. सी थे साहनि embed the lasting more between the rindremody if the further but that would be a fact that comparisons have been made the comparisons are ridiculous the narrative yet these comparisons rill statements reality इसली का और एक लग कुई मोऊल या नहीं स्यवौटा सींआशस कर्वाश खीश्ची आंअगा आत्टाुवाद करुवाट सानि मुऊल्च के इत. एक प्रुकषुर कर्वाच कृट मुऊल्दों करुवादा करुवाचचाच तुःदस कोई विर्दा ज़ृद. यंदिया लगीिंक्टर दराज़ा लिएंगे कित क्या अफरी़लग जे थी है, थी हूँ, छब क्य जिल कित ख़दी जे गया लगीिंगे के धिसथा है था ती रहीस नगा। वी अदे पहड़ी यनच्चथी तुर्टें वी थेका। अगर तनी अर्गा दबाई एक चिलगी है. विदेम के थी वो भर श्चार से थे बगाए था? इंदिय इस वॉगते है, वागते थे वागते च्था दुमोगते विदेम के व्तोगे है। अवगते थी वो व्गते है, च्चित बाई तनी म्नों वी बाएं, इदिन किमेकिन छ बी एन आपी रवाँ उजुर्टी आप देः आप जाबच्यगा गे ठूये है जाबाउ शही है। आप दूद़ा बविदें आर्दे में इन्टी करटी. ज़ो ज़ोगता रवाचगा लिए मेरेत्ता. आप बविदें क्यो प् एक लोग है.  przedsiębior उईिंवय््तन latest  क 알�ी वैने का भी ताम ग का ॏ नहीं और Labour ... नहीं साय।  और �기üzik pojawा वीरेता है खाडी केहते है जान abortion इले उद्ं सकलon लिएखे सवाउनो ं भी Jenn दोगा इस क्यटिन बारा जाया ऑर आप जद़ागी का लाने जे बी फ् Azerbai Eb � Zimmerre round table, i want to bring out factual analysis. His paper is not my own evaluation of religiosity. यहाम से Are these people totally blind ? No. And this is why I keep emphasizes. of the Indian Central Rountable to be entirely factual. What I do in the paper is explain how their methodology resulted in the deeply flawed conclusion.  extrêmement concern  học  अज़़़ा तर्मनी और और smell the challenging ुह्द वूळाह जो nearer the problems ूह्ध शौफढा ौह। क़ तर्मने के वूवाढ़ ڈilloदक्या लगी लगा अद妹 ठी ठ Gina ्णे लगा FS (?) ॐ plutôt मैं merging ृ अद �रchlag ुरण healthcare ृ आदlict ृ ुर आदlooked ॊर nylon ुर्फै आए।ड़कना elas जी lime licenses voldrina ृ यद लग़ playing ृ ुरन रव-उसकिद मैद देख़ना वह कैस्मीर से लीगते है. मैंगए तवाजगानी है तब लगाना वो ओगते खनी, मैंगाईगे रव-गेख़ां धिमनेगा मैगा और लिगते से आदिजान कास्मीर को ञायाचाशिकिं. खरो Mount Bur SI शीर में और पर संगी तो चरीत न काझ्छना रँा हो आज्ट तो ड सक्च में もनशण ये एजे चाीरं तुर्चं� B Bryit, Prasad, Bhaskar, Bhaskar and Pakistan occupied Kashmir and the complete lack of civil rights in the Chinese occupies of Kashmir. What is the status of international law? You will notice that I have said Pakistan occupied versus India administered and that is because the status of international law is that Kashmir is a territory of India, the status is not been fully resolved. So I don't say India is Kashmir. You may believe Kashmir is India, अवहाँ में दिनियमोग द़ोग से बिकशी अगी विदे मग़ ग़िया आलते को अगे पासिश़न। लगा विद पाँसिश्टन थे आप चाहँम मेंन में लगी ख़ागात गर्ते है उबना कम्म। नहीं आत वए वगाँना ढ़ाक का पूलातिक। नध कोगाँग मिसा अगमी अगमी. अगमी ब्रतन एक तुढाई कोगाँग था, वन वारन्वग बाश्याग सभगा बचार्ज़ विन्दी क। और यी अगगे रहा हरता पास्टै कोगाँग. ॐ। । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । it is now happening now adani you might have heard of adani group. Shur । । । । it is called hydroburger research in America. त nevertheless the published a report. Everybody know their short sellers. Everybody knows how they prepare. Three people, three four people concluded their part. movimiento that part. This regarding the reports generated by audit reports I'm tolking about the big four accounting firms in the world. And they are American inverse, So this research is good in comparison to all the audit reports all the investigations, all the banks, they literally delete this. Everybody is wrong, this research papers who did research Rosen 꼭 part to Soundpeople depicts and others lastท्यः From 80% of the minister यहाछ बारणėत लग just becauserea और off इसे आप्या Virgin लग आप एक हुचवर विया उसनिball में भी ऻए आप सितिया कि पहली, foutने से के सव के चाटरा वाही, ळीوय का Steinbe pojawi को क्लीनमट फीश्वगintroduction कर � cheering對 तोक का सव लोग. आररस क सोर था, बो वॉ� fake लाई. स�另ो सछartetा, वॉश्विश के ता ची organised ृavesa Dany Stok for a downward correction. ृagain I am not a fund's manager ृbut that doesn't seem potentially surprising to me. ृWhat's surprising about the Hindenburg report ृis that the group is named Hindenburg ृwhich is an allusion to the German ृburst into flames and crash to the ground. ृthey are almost saying that the group wants things to burst into the ground. जित मैं खो है श्टोंवागा थिनावीडर थे र हीगा जो अगो इस श्फोडिल की आगरे या ज़ाग श्चान ते इक हो अनावे गाश्टाक आदान्ने च्टाख जान जब कोई लिए the stock price has responded to that it is quite surprising because they have been very transparent they're forced to be transparent by u.s securities regulation about the motives behind their report now i can't talk तो सेणवाते प्राईशावाना कोगे शादेंसै, आनके अगे विर्ने की आगी कणिया ज़ासे हैं, अगे अगी नगे ज़ासे हो चनावा ख़ाता शादे प्रईए। नहीं ती करबने विच्ष में चिवचृट शाक्द्गि ञीद soul what people are saying, number one, because this is an Asian person who grew to, level second or third in the world as a wealthiest person, they could not tolerate, the so called Western people could not tolerate that bad, and they had to do a fact. गड़़ा तब ज़ा परने ज़़ित में ज़ी ज़ी ज़ी प्पीदूँ आप और सहथ रहे है, और वहुत रहा है, तो वह गो ज़ा तो तो सब अग़े ज़ी बाते नब रहा है, ग़ी वो दोगी अग़ा तो वो कुप तो पार दी आप ज़ी इप एक कर दोंगे वो तो ग़ ु मृ करूशबन रीक, लाई गराजीप सत्ये । बॆटिस को र पिरज्स्वाली की स्त्वाल्ते है! तुम्ल। ॐसथ बोर्डिरे सेलिए। मरगा ऐसो दोए। मैंने ऑी सेलिए। ुनसे ब बूटे मैंपूरे तूम सेलिए। जी आप जागतारे। न साची चानना। अखुसा के लेगा सिर्सा ता तेरी ख़दान। आफ कोई वो देखाब, और देखावाणाचा की लिए जेद कोगे है लिए आप्टॉता कहाँग ढिल्दावाग रए और थे आब रदुद उच्चठाँइग, खबनी अडॉड़ानी तुदानी टी आदका रहए सरतके � dessus. मारी को ने रहाे करता कुछ वोंगरी तुदानी जवाग रहॉ, अगर बार सेब दानी की चवाफ छ़दानी स्भ्वाग़दी ख़्रतेः नोई आप्च में भी प्रकचटाने साज़ितने की नाड़वावाई, वहुट्रेँ, जब वगर कोई गे आदानी धानी वेण रेगां, वही लाँन होगते सब इदानी की च्वाप मैं,द्एक imagine bai yut dhoti forijun मुर्किधां्, फवाजि चीकेंगच्ता वाराई श्ढ़स्धों गग गग नहीं मदак हरड़ाmax जी बाता चा और येख spatiali milk कि देगे ओँ के कईचिन  questionnairejoint वास नहीं दुवब कलो like वी हिनदिः को थरे concern ऴॉज खह गमबचो सरच जmarkt। अगा तबी शबकन तःटक ऎरोग त fif दभी आप नमी खोो ज़ा क afका सपकठ्छी मुझोद म मैंआ share मर वोरनिखेік सब कोF आत से बत्ट्टलेा के वऒ हो गं देखार बादा लिए थानी यक आवबी कई तरदे रही हि वत करते एक लेग कर के नाःुग और कि त। उस्तरी मेंने को आफ़ा है तार्सान्ता looks here and the the profits are mis-stated. लगान और न्थाँ सब प्रीषट्टीगा एक सिकादवार निजेद की यहाँ आप लगान अदानी कुपना आभ़णाई ईधानी प्रदुथाली जल ढ़ाँणी दिन्दी और अपरश्ट्उत यहाँँ आपाकाँ. ॥ । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । । reconnaissance knowingבר dette ge WORK २ ROOF English । । । Eda র র র র র র র র র,রর রর র,র,রর র,র রর,র.রর র র,র,র Panchin Miranja র,র র র র র,� Apa Tro র.র র.র.ск वालेव लोग कुज़ा ही हBobBIis लेवٹय से rec योग अग लेवाग bare ॐ ॐ ृ, ै ॐ ृ ै ौ ौ ौ ौ suo sta ृ, ॐ ौ ौ � auth wa ao बहुत यह जानगग, यह यह आमेरेकन, आमेरेकन जानगगा थार आर आर है वो अज़ी, आताग, पोधान, बहुत आन्पभान, बहुत अज़ी खोली हो आर और टेकेंग, अखी अअदी केंगणम, यस वी अटी खॊणएं ने खोली है, ये अदी केंगा आपनों, अग़्ी � तो दोंगर मیکली! vá select- तो फरा 상ा। ॐ बीतग जी्द्लानoney- ecologicals- लोगनें झ॑गी। बीट मोट्�よ! भीक के हो न चिकुशी. यह के लिकोंगा अगवेन शीवटीना और लिग लिग गडी जा एक आप व hardware त Forest यह करनी छेगा मरिदग क्या नर तोत ते है लिए बुर लिए वादो नावाद पास डात ननावाद यस अदिन ती लिए तरब घा आप और रव कुई. In 2022, there was really only one feel-good action spectacular that was not ironic, not trying to deconstruct culture that was simply a feel-good rah-rah, be patriotic, enjoy the film movie, and that was Tom Cruise's top gun remake. And other than Tom Cruise back, I think that was February a whole year ago. And since then, there's been nothing coming out of Hollywood that is just a feel-good action spectacle where you can love the hero, where the hero and the heroine love each other, where there's a happy ending. These sort of things are absent from Hollywood, and if we need to look to Bollywood and tollywood to get these, well, that's where we'll go. So there's huge numbers now, and they're very professional people that have good profile. So do you think all of that acts in India's image? I think it has very little to do with India's image, because Americans don't particularly see Indian Americans as being particularly representative of India. In America, we're very conscious of race, and so you're all aware of the Black Lives Matters campaign, and we're all aware of issues around racial minorities in the United States. But Indian Americans, I think, are simply seen as a minority group in the U.S. They're not seen as being emblematic of India. So if you want to know about India, you don't go to the CEO of Google or your top executives at Microsoft. You really go to the coverage in the main newspapers. We don't see high-level Indian American corporate leaders speaking as ambassadors for India. If anything, they want to be seen as being entirely 100% American. But this is right. I think they are there for American cause, American company and all that. I think it shows their integrity for the country and for the company. But I think the question was how it being perceived. But I don't think Americans perceive them as Indian. Remember, America is not Australia. In America, anyone can go to the U.S., barely speak English, and simply say, I love America, and they're accepted as American. It's not like Australia where if you are Indian-Australian, you may be socially excluded due to your Indian-ness. You're not accepted maybe in the top institutions in Australia. Australia is much more of a multicultural society. We're here on Hindi-language radio in India, America, Australia, does a lot to support multiculturalism in Australia. But it doesn't really integrate ethnic minorities. It takes several generations for ethnic minorities in Australia to become integrated into the mainstream of Australian society. In the United States, that integration is instant. Look at someone like, let's take it out of the Indian perspective. Think of Elon Musk. South African, by birth, you'd never know it. I mean, he's American. He's American as can be. No, he can't run for president because he wasn't born in the United States. But other than that, no one thinks of him as an ambassador for South African business in the United States. He's simply American. And that's true. Same, Indians may be very proud of the success of Indian-American business people. But those Indian-American business people in the United States are simply viewed as American business people. Wow. You would have followed that Nikki Haley had put up a hand to challenge him. It's a Trump for Republican nomination. Yes, yes, of course. And she's the daughter of Indian immigrants. Yes. Kamala Harris is the daughter of Indian immigrants. When was the last time she talked about being Indian? It's a good learning today. I never thought that way at all, but you are so right. That's all right. Now coming back to the movies again. The Pathan. It was so much fun. Yeah. So what do you like most about it? Like art, the song. You know the Indian movies are a bit different than American. Music is one of the big part of our movies. I think a movie like Pathan is just more than American. It's everything you see in American movie times 15. It's just really over the top from an American standpoint. But what I found really, there are two things, two separate things. First, what I enjoyed about the movie was the spectacle. It was just a lot of fun. But what interested me in the movie as a sociologist, as an academic was what it says about Indian society. I mean, we hear so much about communal divisions in India. Yet we see so little evidence that there actually are communal divisions in India. We have a movie Pathan with a Muslim lead action hero playing a Muslim Indian in the movie. And yet it is the most patriotic movie imaginable. And I know there have been some criticisms on Indian Twitter and around the internet. But I don't think ordinary Indians see this as anything other than a super patriotic movie. And the idea that a Muslim Indian can be the patriotic lead of a patriotic movie and in the very last moment in the movie, kill the bad guy and say, जाएंद. This is simply accepted. And I think that says a lot about Indian society. We hear so much about communal tension. We see so little evidence of communal tension. Let me give you the perspective of that Indian literature and what is happening here. So few things which make a big decision out of it. Number one, the way it is being perceived in India at least and Indian diaspora as well. Anywhere in the world. That the way Bollywood was trying to demonize one religion or another. They are trying to make Pakistani ISI so good field. And even though ISI is creating havoc in India, creating havoc in India, they are doing so brutal thing killing innocent people and they are behind it. I think it is a very well known fact as well that ISI of Pakistan is funding calisthenics movement worldwide. They are also funding Laptist movement in India. And this is how the next is. China is, this is again what being perceived. I cannot support with my fact. The China is funding ISI. Though Pakistan is- Directly or indirectly? One way or another? Pakistan does not have money. They are bankrupt almost. So they are getting money directly from China to ISI. ISI is funding all this thing. Like we had a very good farm reform bill in India last year. And they were funded like- I wrote on it extensively. And so good, they were good for everyone but government has to withdraw. So these are the havoc is being created and people do not like that. So what they think is if suppose I am buying a ticket today, this money which I am paying, suppose we are paying 100 rupees to buy a ticket, it is not 100 rupees actually it is more than that. And part of that money is going to fund ISI cause. This is where the whole problem is. Yeah, I think that is a real exaggeration. And probably not even an exaggeration. I don't even think there is a real kernel of truth in there at all about funding the ISI. Look, if you watch Pathan, the ISI is not portrayed in a sympathetic light. It is a rogue ISI agent, the love interest who comes to realize that Pakistan is doing wrong in the world. And when it comes to the point that Pakistan is going to launch a nuclear terrorism in India, she balks at that and she says this is not how I want to fight India. So she is portrayed as fighting India but she is portrayed as having a conscience. And of course she is the love interest and we have to have this. Look, this is a trope that goes all the way back to 1960s Hollywood. If you watch James Bond movies, there is always the low level, the KGB agent who secretly friends with James Bond and helps him along. And that doesn't mean that it is an endorsement of the KGB in the case of James Bond. It doesn't mean it is an endorsement of the ISI in the case of this. But I am talking about it. But it does humanize people. And I want to be clear about that. There is a humanization of the enemy in this movie. And I think the best art does tend to humanize the enemy. It doesn't say the enemy is right and you should love the enemy. It says you know what the enemy is human too. And it is really important to persuade your enemy of the righteousness of your cause. That is more important ultimately than just killing your enemies. Because you can't kill your way to peace. You have to persuade your way to peace. I agree with you. This is a very good point. I don't think the movie... Look, I can't speak for Bollywood in general. Can you talk about a bit of the Kashmir file as well? Looks like you have watched it. Oh sure, the Kashmir files is a fantastic movie. People should go see it if they haven't already. But again, the Kashmir files tells us as much more about society than about the movie. I mean, it's a good movie. If I'm going to criticize... Do you think this movie is based on the facts? Yes, absolutely. It's a factual movie. Now, if I'm going to criticize the movie... It's more like a documentary than the movie itself. Well, yes and no. I mean, if I'm going to criticize the movie as a piece of art, that is, as a film, it went, I think, too far in portraying horrors that occurred in Kashmir. The horrors occurred. The terrible crimes occurred. Actually... But you have a choice in a movie. Do you portray them graphically? That's what I understand. But people are saying it's only maybe 25% of what has actually happened. Oh, no, no. Look, the Kashmir files recounts actual factual events in Kashmir. It compresses them in time. So movies always do this. You have to get things in a short period of time. And it takes several atrocities committed by Kashmiri separatist terrorists and collapses them into a single person doing all of them instead of different people doing them. It collapses them to happen all at the same time instead of happening over a period of years. But nonetheless, the atrocities were real. My only complaint with the movie is that it turned my stomach. Look, I didn't want to see. I would rather these were hinted at instead of shown. But until the last three minutes of the movie, I was very happy with the film. The last three minutes, I think, were too much for a family audience to see. It's not for everyone, really. But that said, what I'm really interested in in the movie as a sociologist is the way that it is speaking directly to society. The way in which Indians are telling their own history instead of having their history told for them or manufactured for them by a very narrow elite. And to me that's a very positive development for India that society, whether it's Mr. Agnoharthi and film directors getting involved or ordinary viewers or people on Twitter coming to terms with their own history instead of simply accepting the sanitized history that has been taught to them in, let's face it, often a Marxist inspired almost always a secular narrative that's been taught for years in Indian schools and universities. And you want to say something about RRR as well? RRR is just a lot of fun. But I thought it was interesting. An eminent British historian, Robert Toomes wrote an angry review of the movie pointing out that British colonialism never embraced slavery in India, never was so vicious. And I thought it was kind of funny that he was upset to see Britain portrayed in such an ahistorically negative light. And let's face it, the things, in British India there were many crimes in British India. Much worse crimes than portrayed in RRR. I mean there was the Bengal famine. There were terrible crimes. But no Viceroy's wife in British India ever pulled out her whip, her whip studded with nails and said, use my whip. So of course, but I thought it was funny that Robert Toomes was so viscerally upset by the movie when we all know as audiences that this is fiction. We all know that these things didn't happen. But it really got to him and it got to a lot of British critics that, well how can you say this about Britain? This is not a documentary, this is entertainment. But it's very interesting for Americans. But this was selected by American in their army. RRR became very popular in the United States and Americans were non-Indian American audiences I think were surprising. What does India have against Britain? And it actually started this conversation on American Internet And remember, most Americans are only vaguely aware of British colonialism in India and if they know one thing and I guarantee you if Americans know one thing about British colonialism in India it's, oh, Britain built the railways. That's it. And so to have a more, for Americans to come to the realization that colonialism wasn't all about building railways. Even if it were those railways were built by Indians anyway. And the whole purpose was, I think Dr. Sahab you can support me on that. How quickly they can take the wealth from India to... Or move troops around India. Railroads are a school of empire. But what RRR did was it portrayed for Americans the first time. Why are Indians, how do Indians feel about British colonialism? Americans know that these were fictionalized. These things didn't actually... Movie audiences are much more sophisticated than we give them. Before we go to break, I want to give you this question then you can answer that. And please don't kind of find it as American. American think they are the universe. And they are, because when I went to America... We're very much like Indians that way. They say aliens. So they don't call foreigners, they call aliens. So this question after the break, we will do that. So today, as the question I was asking you, that what do Americans think of aliens? So why American people? They think everybody in the world are aliens. Oh, alien is just a term. The word alien for foreigner predates the use of alien for people from space. So it's just an old-fashioned word. An alien is just someone who's not a citizen of the country. I don't think there's anything problematic about that. But look, America is a very large country. And it's not only large, but it's the center of... Frankly, it's the center of the world's media universe. And when you're in the center, you don't see the peripheries. For me as a comparative sociologist, it was an incredible learning experience to live outside the United States. Even living in a country as similar to the United States as Australia, it really broadened my horizons. And I was someone who studied foreign, quote-unquote, countries for a living in the United States. Yet even for me, it was really a mind-expanding experience coming to live in Australia. Because instead of seeing the world from within the United States bubble, I can now see the world from outside the United States bubble looking back into it. And it's a very different perspective. Yeah, I have a lot of friends in the U.S. And when I speak to them regularly, they say that the world started in East Coast and finished in the West Coast. Now, sir, we have a number of questions now. Now, I'd just like to ask... We're talking to Prof. Salvatore Babu, who is in our program. We're very lucky to have him with us. Prof. Babu, just about the India Century Roundtable, we'd just like to hear a bit more about this, okay? What can we expect from this in the future? The India Century Roundtable is just incorporated in December, so we're still in start-up phase. We're looking for members. Anyone who has $10,000 and would like to join us, please do. I'm sorry for the hefty price, but information doesn't come cheap. We will be producing research on India starting in March, but hopefully once we're up fully operational every two months, we'll be coming out with a major research report about India again, focused on India, but facing the West. The reports will be written, not for an Indian audience, but written for a Western audience to explain India to the West. And it's called the Indian Century Roundtable because we'll also be holding roundtables, primarily for journalists, first in Australia, but then hopefully in the United States as well, to educate journalists about what really happens in India. We'd like to get prominent people who have serious on-the-ground experience of India to educate Western journalists about India. And that's maybe our most important objective, is to educate journalists. Because remember, journalists have to write stories on very short time frames. A journalist that covers the visit of a Japanese Prime Minister one week has to cover the visit of an Indian Prime Minister the next week. And that journalist doesn't necessarily have the expertise to cover all of these countries. That journalist needs support. What we'll be doing is providing that support, not only with our research, but also with a rolodex of people the journalists can call if the journalist needs informed commentary on India. Well, we'll offer the commentary, but we'll also offer connections to well-informed people who can present an unbiased view about India. Is it based in Australia or the United States? Yes, we're here in Sydney. We're an Australian, not-for-profit corporation. To be clear, I'm donating my time pro bono. My associate director, Prabhav Agarwal, is donating his time pro bono. Our accountant is pro bono. Our website development is pro bono. None of us are making any money off this. We simply need to raise funds in order to start operating as a business. And so you'll hear us making the pitch in the Indian-Australian community. But we're also looking to major Australian corporates for funding and we're hoping to be, like I said, fully operational by the new fiscal year, so by July 1st. I have one question. Primarily, we believe, I mean, we have seen Modi coming to Australia. We have seen the media coverage of Modi going to US and all that. So, I mean, I understand the force behind all this that how to manage the media because the simple opinion has to be formed out of what they read or what they watch. So, we believe that Modi himself is doing a lot of good work in terms of managing the media. What more this round table can do? Do you have access to Indian government through consulates and all that and get some buy-in from them because it is in the interest of them and also all of us because if Indian's image abroad is built up then it benefits all the Indian diaspora be in Australia or in US. We have no direct connections to government and certainly no funding from governments whether Indian or Australian for that matter, American. The goal here is to be a civil society organization. Now, the Indian government is very aggressive about managing its public relations but forgive me I don't think it's very good at managing its public relations or public image certainly not in the western world Indian government and especially I'm a big fan of Dr. Jayashankar but Dr. Jayashankar the foreign minister is very assertive and aggressive foreign statements that may play well back in India but it doesn't really convince western publics it certainly doesn't play well with western journalists so I don't think the Indian government has done a very good job of making India's case in the rest of the world they've done a very good job in making Indians feel that their case is being represented robustly in the world that's not quite the same thing now what we'd like to do with the round table we're not a public relations firm for India I just want to get the facts out India is so low that any kind of opinion will substitute for the real facts when there are no facts available what we want to do is make the facts available to a wider audience but especially to western journalists in a credible way that is not a public relations effort personally I'm confident that if the truth about India were known that would be a dramatic improvement in India's image in the west all we need is to get the truth out we don't need to engage in a public relations effort yeah so that's very interesting take because whatever you have said today really is an eye opener when we think that Modi is building image overseas because basically it's a human nature that we always want to see what you want to see so in that line we got a question from one of the listeners that how can we systematically manage the negative image pursued by the world media against us you can't manage the negative image you can only overwhelm it with a accurate image so look most Americans if they have any view of India and not just Americans Australians because Australian newspapers republish US newspapers if they have any opinion of India it comes primarily from two people the Washington Post regularly publishes Rana Ayub her views get from the Washington Post into the Sydney Morning Herald because the Sydney Morning Herald republishes material from the Washington Post and then you have Sanadan Dume Dume writes for the Wall Street Journal and the Wall Street Journal then gets reprinted in the Australian so whether it's the US or Australia the primary views of on India come from these two columnists now both have very strong political positions of their own Ayub I know is Indian Dume I don't know if he's Indian or if he's become an American citizen but of course he's Indian so both of them have very biased very blinkered views on India that come from their own political standpoints now I want to emphasize there's nothing wrong with that that people should have views about their own country the problem is that the rest of us primarily understand India through the viewpoints of two highly opinionated columnists whose opinions don't represent majority opinion in India and whose opinions don't represent a factual narrative on India yet that's where we get the information from if you search India or certainly if you search Narendra Modi or if you search things like is India a democracy on the Wall Street Journal website or the Washington Post website you will almost exclusively get the opinions of these two people there's a problem for India what we want to do with the round table is have a factual narrative about India so when people search these things they'll get our factual narrative but almost more importantly so that when journalists at the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times not opinion authors when journalists want to get factual information about India they can come to us for a fact instead of going to Rana Ayub for an opinion you think print media has such a big influence that two people like it can have such a big negative image it has an enormous influence because print media is where television media gets its information television media almost almost never does original almost never is too strong it rarely does original reporting only if they have a news magazine program like 60 minutes they'll do original reporting but most television reporting especially in the 24 hour news stations is they've read the newspaper in the morning and they follow up on the stories that is they pick the narrative out of the newspapers some television is a BBC in particular does that explicitly they even have a program that is reading the newspapers in the morning the print media drive the agenda on this when you google a question that comes up in the the answer comes up in the print media and not just for television for example if you want to know something on Wikipedia you refer back not to a TV segment that may have been posted on YouTube the reference is almost always a print media source we're always going back to the print media as the authoritative opinion on which other opinions are drawn so I've got a few questions if I may ask you on behalf of our listeners Sudhir Rana asked if the last monarch of independent has signed the succession of the whole JNK to India why is Kashmir not in India Kashmir is in India and I, first of all I'm not a national lawyer my reasonably firm understanding is that in international law Kashmir is rightfully to be administered by India while a referendum is scheduled for some time in the future now it was Pakistan that forestalled that referendum by invading Kashmir just six weeks after the independence of India and Pakistan so it was Pakistan that put paid to the referendum by resorting to force and invading Kashmir and then of course Pakistan illegally transferred a portion of Kashmir to China so that again is an illegal transfer not recognized in international law of course all of JNK should by rights be part of India the fact is that and I'm sorry to break it to everyone the fact is that it's never again going to be which is to say the line of control is going to become at some point in the future some kind of international border that's inevitable but I also want to remind Indians whether this is a historical wrong let's just say this is a historical wrong the question you might ask yourself is at this point 75 years later would Indians want to regain control over Pakistan occupied Kashmir I really doubt it yes it may be India's by right but do you want it and if you don't want it well then let's see movement towards peace instead of standing on principle if I may just make a comment this issue is not about actually Jammu Kashmir in my opinion it is about justifying having this army big army in Pakistan army control everything they eat up a lot of budget of Pakistan people and they will never have this issue sorted because once this issue sorted you don't need army and this is not acceptable Pakistan has been a 75 year running tragedy and that's just an active life it's an active life for Pakistanis even more than for their neighbors military rule in Pakistan has always been an active life it is something that hopefully Pakistanis want to move away from we'll see if they're able to it's a difficult challenge they do not have good relationship anybody none of their neighbors so Iran no Afghanistan no and China now at the moment they have now trying to dealing themselves as soon as possible so the problem is because dishonesty is one of the main theme they have no matter what happens the lie got to prevail and you are the person who was working on the truth Pakistan and Bangladesh originally East Pakistan Pakistan and Bangladesh were born in violence they really derived from direct action day in 1946 that ultimately led to the partition of British India into India and Pakistan unfortunately they have never gotten over that violence now Bangladesh by becoming independent from Pakistan started a process of getting over that violence and although there still is some degree of ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Bangladesh going on it's at a relatively low level Bangladesh internationally has made peace with India and it's been broadly speaking friendly to India since then it's had friendly relations and so Pakistan maybe offers some Bangladesh maybe offers a model for what could happen in Pakistan we all say Pakistan will never heal itself will never solve its problems but I remind people that the original the worst violence in 1946 that ultimately convinced the British that they couldn't stay in India and the violence happened in Calcutta and in the rural areas north of Dhaka that violence happened in old Bengal and Bengal was the center of violence in 1946 and early 1947 that convinced the British to leave India and yet now the Bangladesh India frontier Bangladesh border has now been internationally recognized is largely peaceful I know there are refugee issues I know there are problems but there are low level problems and that has largely been solved well you know can Pakistan become the next Bangladesh I see no reason why it can't we all hope it will so we will have some more question from the listener as well but what you would like to add more to our audience what you would like to share as well if you can I would like to share a message of hope look I am very positive on India and Indian society that should be clear from my writings and I don't take any side on this I mean again I always want to be clear if I am saying something it's not because I am taking the side of Narendra Modi or the BJP or I am taking the side of the INC or taking Arvind Kajarwal's side I have no side in Indian politics I am just reporting on India for the west I am doing research on India and my research has been consistently showing that India is a more peaceful more tolerant better settled country than anyone wants to believe everyone wants to make out as if India is perpetually in crisis and when I say everyone I don't just mean people who are opposed to the current government I mean people who are aligned with the current government also want to make out as if there is a crisis where the interviewer kept trying to push the idea that there was a genocide of Hindus about to occur in India and I said really I said do you think Narendra Modi will win the 2014 election she said oh absolutely I said 2024 elections she said absolutely I said and you think that there will be a genocide of Hindus while Narendra Modi is the prime minister and she said yes and I said look I just don't think that is possible so I think on both sides there is elevated rhetoric that doesn't match the reality of India all of our survey data on India show that Indian Muslims believe that they are free to practice their religion in India and face relatively little discrimination all of our survey research shows that Hindus that Christians that Buddhists that Sikhs and that Parsis feel they are free to practice their religion in India and face relatively little discrimination that's what systematic survey research shows now of course the press is much more interested in inter-communal disharmony but the survey research shows that people simply get along democracy works people have rights and freedoms they enjoy them and they are happy with their government one question on the personal level before you went to India you might have had certain perceptions so what can you relate to your visit to India compared to your own conceptions when you are before you are gone there my November visit to India was the invitation of India today and I have an upcoming visit next week to India which is as a guest of Zee media and the Arth Festival I am very happy to visit India I am very happy to learn while I am there but the fact is all of my academic work on India derives completely from documentary evidence and hard data about India whenever I see something personally I do my best to forget it because my personal experiences can't possibly represent India now not only my personal experiences even your personal experiences those of you who are born and raised in India your personal experiences can't stand for India why? because India is a country of 1.4 billion people all of you none of you speak all of the major languages of India it would take a true polymath just to speak all of the major languages of India never mind the minor languages so if you don't even speak the languages in your own country how can you say that you know India I won't pretend to know India but I will constantly question do you really know India or do you know a small slice of India that is your personal experience and you generalize it I think that's the problem with columnists like Rana Ayub in one case of being a young Indian Muslim woman who is a political activist and of course if you are a young Muslim woman political activist you are going to have a very different experience from the average Indian same thing with Dume if you are an elite highly educated NRI at an American think tank your experience of India is going to be very different from the average that's why we go to survey research because survey research tells us what the average people person thinks not what an individual thinks in case of if I can add in Hinduism we believe that you can worship God whatever way you want to there is no one way and so what it means say any Christian or Muslim they are worshiping their own way they are doing the same thing there is nothing called one way so we can have any faith in one family you might have four with us they are worshiping totally different way they are worshiping different God so there is nothing wrong about it that's why we have freedom of religion true freedom of religion in India so I am glad you feel that way of course many people disagree with you and many people feel like you have to worship the one true way but I want to be clear to Indians and especially to Hindu Indians who may be listening our survey research tells us that more than 90% of Indian Muslims more than 90% agree with this statement you can only be truly Indian if you respect other people's religions yes so yes there are some very shrill Muslim Indians who might say that there is only one true religion and all others can't be accepted but the majority Muslim opinion and not a small majority over 90% majority opinion among Muslims again among Muslims among Hindus among Buddhists among all groups in India they agree with this statement so be truly Indian if you respect other people's rights to worship as they see fit