Tax Withholding Form: Fill & Download for Free

Are you truly asking where is there visible evidence that progressivism (not caps; it’s not a formal organization) once existed!?Wake up and smell the coffee!The fact of progressive politics is front and center and weighing more and more on our lives daily. I would dearly love to turn it all into vestiges, and I think we just might be on the verge of vestigizatizing progressivism.Q & AQ: What was/is the progressive movement? How did it start?A: Blame not Darwin himself but the popularizers of his 1859 The Descent of Man, who cast the message as proof of the superiority of the white race, particularly the Anglo-Saxon strain. Less than a decade after publication, after a costly civil war, Amendment XIV to our Constitution was ratified, granting citizenship in the US regardless of race.This was appalling to… [wait for it…] the children of the very Radical Republican faction in the North responsible for its passage. The sons of the Congregationalist ministers and Republican officeholders who labored mightily to give legal standing to what Lincoln had called Our Ancient Faith that all men are created equal found it all folly. Persuaded by the white-supremacy tracts of men like Herbert Spencer, what was obvious to the generation too young to participate in the war was that the death of more than 600,000 Americans in order to proclaim the “anti-scientific” idea that all races are equal was a gross misstep that needed to be redeemed lest the US become a “mongrel” nation.Q: Whoa! That’s dramatic. So what did these young men do?A: The core of the progressive movement consisted of those who went off to study in Germany, where universities uniquely offered the doctorate of philosophy. German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, a thoroughgoing monarchist, was active in the pursuits that still give him title as the greatest statesman evah!Briefly, what Bismarck did was bring the liberal parties, a grave threat to the monarchy, to heel by simply stealing Marx’s social democratic [the “safe” name for communism] programs and simply implementing them in the name of the Kaiser. That included, of course the numerous social programs (to “bribe the people” away from their increasing loyalty to their employers as a result of rising wages and better working conditions and back to the Hohenzollern dynasty) that would justify Marx’s idea of an income tax. That would be just the ticket to end the liberal parties’ ability to amass wealth/political power. Rather, the money could go to the monarchy with some used to finance social giveaway programs.Well, “bringing the liberals to heel” was exactly what these young men wanted to do.* And they could not help but notice that their German counterparts were studying (a course of political economics and sociology) in preparation for well-paying positions in the new social democratic administrative state, jobs with real power. They themselves had no such stature to look forward to. Their options in the US were the ministry or a professorship.Q: I see where this is going, but what did they actually do?A: At first, they wrote letters, excited letters, back to their learned societies at Harvard and Yale, et cetera, proclaiming the news of the transformation going on in Germany (and what’s the chance we can create jobs for ourselves like that?) It caught on like wildfire among the disaffected generation in the North.With Reconstruction (the stationing of federal troops in southern states to enforce Amendments Thirteen through Fifteen) the contentious issue of the day, the northern proto-progressives rallied to the side of the Conservative Democrats (the southern trunk of the Democratic Party). After all, they were natural allies in understanding the white race superior. The progressive movement was born, effectively handing victory in the Civil War back to the South as segregation, Jim Crow laws and the use of democratic methods to vote away minority rights continued for another century.Q: Yes, but what did they do? accomplish?A: Ironically, the very first progressive foray into politics was a campaign, led by The New York Times in the 1870s to make abortion illegal, but hold on to your horses: We’re still more than a decade away from the Progressive Era, 1900 to 1920, when the big changes occurred.The 1880s and ’90s included a lot of stage-setting. Our leading law schools literally brainstormed to manufacture progressive interpretations of our Constitution and our laws. They formed a number of progressive professional organizations (progressivism being primarily a movement of the elite to protect the privilege of Anglo-Saxon Protestant males). And those professional societies scoured the terrain for positions of money and power. The American Economics Association, for instance, first looked for positions with the giant trusts and industrial conglomerates of the Gilded Age. When they were rebuffed, they turned their attention to punishing them.Two decades after the war ended the Pension Office was busy disbursing payment to veterans. This attracted plenty of rent-seeking progressive lawyers and physicians. They in turn opened the way for economists. Progressives moved into what few federal offices we had, like the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Interstate Commerce Commission.Basically, two propositions guided progressives, both derived from Bismarck: One, science rather than politics should guide government, and, two, they had an indispensable role to play in a modern administrative state supervising, regulating and investigating… well, everything. You simply have to remember that progressives of the era felt that eugenics and phrenology, for instance, were unassailable science to understand that the real agenda was protecting and promoting their own privilege.Q: Okay, can we go on to the Progressive Era? What did they do? What did they accomplish?A: The Progressive Era was all about recreating the Bismarckian administrative state here in America, with one stark difference. Priority One of course was passage of the Sixteenth Amendment making an income tax legal. It would not be possible to create a large-scale jobs program for progressives without a large flow of funds.Bismarck had founded his state apparatus on administering aid programs to the people [hence, his “bribe the people” remark]. This had been the rationale for an income tax in Germany. Progressivism was not just a “whites first” program but pretty much “whites only.” Immigrants and former slaves were referred to as “deplorables,” “undesirables” and “unemployables” (where the meaning was shouldn’t be employed rather than couldn’t be employed). They weren’t out to help those less well off; they were out to help themselves.The programs that progressives had in mind for “deplorables” included birth control, involuntary sterilization, minimum wage (to make sure deplorables could not compete with whites for jobs), progressive schooling (to dumb them down) and child labor laws.** They did not have in mind granting aid from the state.So it was that the effort by early progressives was truly one of trying to create a mandarin class and society for themselves, making themselves indispensible when it came to how things should run. For that reason they focused instead on portraying the enterprise class as shot through with greed and corruption and much in need of being reined in as only progressives could. Numerous federal agencies came into being in the Progressive Era.Investigations and hearings became a major method for stirring up more work for themselves and justifying yet more agencies that could hire them. The Flexner Report and congressional hearings of 1910, left pretty much only those medical schools like Harvard and Johns Hopkins standing, along with two of five black medical schools (deemed enough for the black populace). Osteopathic medicine hung on by the skin of its teeth, providing pretty much the only pathway for Jews, Catholics, women and minorities to practice medicine, as progressive medicine was all but strictly for Anglo-Saxon Protestant males.*** All other schools of medicine were simply shut down. The American Medical Association was established as both an oversight agency and the first major lobbying group for a profession.That went on in field after field, issue after issue, as progressives made themselves the indispensable arbiters.Q: So, what went wrong?A: It all came crashing down with the end of the Great War. For one thing, progressives themselves were appalled that their counterparts in Germany remained loyal to Kaiser Wilhelm II all the way through the war (he abdicated after the war). For another, Woodrow Wilson was an egregious president who had, for instance, Americans executed based on the finding of panels he convened rather than courts!!! He had tens of thousands of his political enemies rounded up by secret police (in the infamous Palmer raids).The man literally became a model to be emulated by both Mussolini and Hitler. He helped the Ku Klux Klan revive right from the White House. But he also single-handedly revived liberalism—the American Civil Liberties Union, for instance, was established to make certain his excesses could never be repeated.The big issue though was passage of the Volstead Act as a result of the Prohibition Amendment leading to the banning of manufacturing alcoholic beverages for commercial purposes. If nothing else it united “immigrant America” (they liked their beer, wine and spirits) against their teetotaling WASP neighbors. By 1920, “progressive” had became a label few wanted to claim.Q: And that was it? Didn’t progressivism revive?A: Yes, under Franklin Roosevelt. Roosevelt’s predecessor Herbert Hoover was very much a progressive, but he floundered during the early years of the Depression and had no instinct for creating a political following anyway. Neither man ran for office under the progressive label. Indeed FDR had the smarts to run stealthily as a liberal (the start of the wrongheaded notion that progressives have anything to do with liberalism).Roosevelt’s problem, besides a massive loss of jobs and productivity, was that even at the peak of his popularity, progressive numbers were half, as a percentage of the electorate, of what they had been during the Progressive Era. In that first wave, roughly four-fifths of Anglo-Saxon Protestants were progressive (the movement spanned both parties), and WASPs were four-fifths of the population. That meant a supermajority, the reason they were able to pass multiple amendments then but never again.This led FDR to make his terms in office largely about adding the state-aid component that had been shunned in the Progressive Era. He would make sure minorities and immigrants voted Democrat by delivering state aid, errr… hold it, that term sounds socialist, so FDR brainstormed with his famous Brain Trust and came up with “Welfare Benefits…” Why, it even sounds constitutional!FDR’s “New Deal” was a further build out of government agencies and programs. The highly unfortunate thing was that, even though we’d had two straight liberal presidents in Harding and Coolidge, no effort was undertaken to dismantle the progressive administrative state. It kept on “business as usual” and ramped up under Roosevelt. When Roosevelt got his progressive majority on the Supreme Court in 1937 (right after getting his gift copy of Keynes’ The General Theory—a primer in progressive economics) he really doubled down on turning us into a social democratic state. Both Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson had denegrated our Constitution right from the White House as a relic document that needed to give way to “modern statecraft.” Teddy’s cousin Franklin took that much farther toward becoming a reality.Q: And so we have our present progressive governing scheme, what is it called? The Blue Model?A: Actually, no. After Roosevelt’s death and the end of the end of the Second World War (together with the onset of the Cold War), the feeling took hold strongly in America that it had been our liberal values that had bested the decadent socialisms of Europe. “Progressive” again became a liability as a political label, a few older Conservative Democrat senators who were also New Deal progressives, like Lyndon Johnson and Robert Byrd, apart.The northern and western wings of the Democratic Party actually became liberal, with John Kennedy the only true liberal ever elected president from that party. They joined the Republicans in cramming civil rights down the throats of the Conservative Democrats, forcing them into the political wilderness by 1968 (no, they did not become Republican… but, in another generational inversion, their children, in school at the time of integration, sure did).****The loss of so many Democratic votes set off a scramble for the survival of the Democratic Party. Johnson doubled down on aid programs as part of his Great Society War on Poverty, promising key southern politicians, “I’ll have these niggers voting Democratic for two hundred years.” Kennedy’s brothers, Bobby and Teddy set their sights on pulling the student-radical movement into the fold with a new round of progressive politics.But this group of progressives was, until the last couple of decades, not even a majority within its own party. Indeed, its numbers had been halved again, down to not much more than a sixth of the electorate. This meant coalition politics big time. And coalition politics is tough especially when stitched together by a scheme as dicey as identity politics. (Certainly, first-wave progressives were turning over in their graves at these developments.)But with Obama’s election the decision was made to go for the last two big missing features of the social democratic state—single-payer healthcare (the better to control the populace) and an end to the right to possess firearms (ditto). The Obama administration even went a long way to reviving a state security and skulduggery apparatus worthy of Wilson.Then, the impossible happened… Trump.The bright future they foresaw with the progressive Clinton stepping into the Oval Office slipped abruptly away leading to a curious widespread disorder—Trump Derangement Syndrome. This was brought about in large part because for the first time in a century and a half we finally have a president intent on dismantling the Blue Model, taking down the Bismarckian social democratic state, and restoring our freedoms, including freedom from being told what to do every time we turn around.Just remember:The reformer is always right about what is wrong.He is generally wrong about what is right.—G. K. ChestertonPersonally, I don’t think that progressives have been “right about what is wrong.” I think it’s all been a self-serving, whaddaya call it? …meme, as in “me me.”* The republicanism of the Republican Party being the pinnacle ideology of liberalism.** Child labor laws were not about protecting children. The era’s interest in all things Anglo-Saxon peaked a fascination with Victorian morality and manners, in which women and children were pedestalized—never to be used as economic units. There were no such Victorian sentiments among immigrants from southern and eastern Europe, for whom family enterprise was simply a commonplace. The laws, often in the form of zoning ordinances, were put in place purely to make it hard for these immigrants to get ahead. Fortunately, most were knocked down in court.*** If you are interested, the Cinemax series The Knick does a deft job of portraying medicine in this period as well as the frictions among liberals, progressives, educated blacks and immigrant Americans.**** And now you know why there were no effective non-southern Democratic candidates for the presidency between Kennedy and Obama. The Conservative Democrats made certain, by simply withholding their votes, that no one could be elected to national office from the wings of the party that had “stabbed them in the back.” By the time Obama was running, most of the Old Guard were dead or in old folks home, and the party could cast their votes for whatever candidate they wanted.

WHY KOSAL STATE IS NECESSARY ?ALAG KOSAL RAEJ KAE'N HELA JE DARKAAR?1-These areas were not with Odisha and were known as Gadjat area. The kings of these Gadjat areas had merged with India not with Odisha. People like Madhusudan Dash, Harekrishna Mehtab and Upakulamani Gopabandhu cunningly merged these area with Odisha in 1936 and again in 1948. Since these areas were with central provinces one century ago and were not with Odisha, then why shall we remain in the clutches of Bhubaneswar-Katak centered people. At that time also people had raised voice for a separate state but the voice remained unheard of. Odisha Govt. is not declaring Dhama Temple , Harishankar, Narsinghnath Temple as potential tourist spot, on the other hand Odisha Govt. had declared Sarathi Baba Ashram in Kendrapada as Tourist Centre.2-Our history is intentionally suppressed by Odisha Govt. We are not taught who built Leaning Temple at Dhama, who built Narshingnath, Harishankar Temple. We are not taught about Bamanda, Sambalpur, Gangpur, Patnagarh, Kalahandi history. They never teach us about Rendo Majhi, Madho Singh, Surendra Sai, Birsamunda. Rather they teach us Jai Rajguri, Chakhi Khuntia, Who built Konark Temple and teach us that Chodaganga Dev, Langula Narsing Deb were our King. It is a cultural murder. Our Kings are Somavansi, Chouhan Dynasty, Kalachuri dynasty, Surendra Sai family and so on. Our language is not a dialect of Odiya rather has a direct link with Sanskrit. Culture, Geography are radically different too. Further we are treated as second grade citizen in Odisha. as Sambalpuria, Balangiria Kondh.3-The Kosali population, according to Census 2001, account for about 39 percent of the Orissa population and the Kosala make-up about 59 percent of the total area of the Orissa state. They contribute nearly 45 percent of total workers and 48 percent of total cultivators in Orissa. Kosala is the source of about 76 percent of net value-added generated in the Orissa manufacturing. In terms of forest resources, it contributes the highest percentage of forestland in Orissa with 66 percent of the total Orissa forest area. Further, Kosal is the richest source of minerals comprising iron ore, manganese ore, base metals (copper ore and lead ore), bauxite, china clay, coal, fire clay, graphite, limestone, dolomite, and precious minerals including diamond in Orissa. In fact the share of Kosal in the total reserve of minerals is 99 percent in the case of bauxite; 100 percent each in the case of coal, dolomite, lead & zinc, and limestone; 30 percent in iron ore; and 28 percent in the case of manganese ore. Its share in the value of mineral exploited in Orissa ranges from 100 percent in the case of Coal as well bauxite to 27 percent in the case of iron ore to 22 percent in the case of manganese ore during 2001-2002. In the case of Orissa’s own tax revenue, Kosal contribute about 39 percent of total sales tax and excise duties each, 33 percent of entertainment tax and motor vehicle tax each, 32 percent of general cess and nistar cess, and 30 percent of land revenue.4-In the infamous backward districts of Kosal region of the KBK (Koraput, Bolangir and Kalahandi) about 68.8% persons live below the poverty line and even the Chief Minister of Orissa recognized the region to be the poorest region in India.5-Apart from manifesting in starvation deaths the acute level of poverty in Kosal shows its ugly face in the form of child-selling. Although the news of child-selling dates back to 1985 when Phanas Punji, a thirty year old woman shocked the nation by selling her fourteen year old sister- in-law Banita Punji to one Vidya Podh for Rs 40 to buy food for her children in the Kosli district of Bolangir.6-The apathy of Orissa government to the incidence of poverty in Kosal region has been most unfortunate in the last half a century. Whenever any news on starvation deaths appears in newspaper the first official reaction of the state government has been to simply deny such incident. The non-seriousness in the government response to the issue of poverty and starvation death in the Kosal had manifested in several cases of improper implementation of the projects sponsored by the central government meant for backward districts of Kosal as noted by the planning commission of India.7-Various poverty alleviation programmes in Orissa have failed due to rampant corruption, unawareness of schemes amongst beneficiaries and wrong targeting of the beneficiaries. In many cases, the poor people of Kosal even cannot buy subsidized rice supplied through the public distribution system (PDS) due to lack of purchasing power.8-The minimal developmental resources meant for Kosal region including poverty alleviation schemes has been systematically siphoned-off from the region to the coastal region through corruption.9-The News Channel, NDTV, reported the acknowledgement of a government official about the system of paying commissions to a whole lot of people including senior officials and politicians even from the funds meant for Food for Work schemesundertaken by the government of Orissa in the drought-affected districts of Kosal.10-The large-scale misappropriation of Central aid coming under various social security schemes can be seen from the famous September 22, 1999 report of the then deputy administrator (Hrushikesh Panda) of the KBK (undivided districts of Kalahandi, Bolangir, Koraput) that had elaborated upon the widespread misappropriation of funds given by the Centre under agreement with the International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD) and the role of the then district collector, two directors of the IFAD project, and many other government officials forcing Central government to withhold theaid to the poverty-ridden Kashipur block of Rayagada. The Hrushikesh Panda report noted that not a single plant claimed to have been planted under the programme can be traced, payments were made against non-existent works, roads were built from no where to no where, estimates of works were recklessly revised and only non-tribals werehandpicked as contractors by the officials.The corruption money going into the account of bureaucrats straightly shifted to the Coastal region as majority of them belongs to that region.11-This failure of the state government in checking corruption and properly addressing the grinding poverty in Kosal and the corrupted role played by government officials who invariably belong to the Coastal region has naturally fueleddiscontentment among general Kosli people that they have not received their right share of development even though they are contributing major chunk of resources towards the state. The then Prime Minister of India, Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayeesummed up the developmental disparity in Orissa as follows:“After touring western Orissa and interacting with the people of the region, I have come to the firm conclusion that the development of this part of the State, although rich in natural resources like mineral deposits and forests, has been neglected. This has resulted in the impoverishment of the people of this region, which has been left way behind by the developed areas of the State… The stark reality of poverty, hunger, starvation, illiteracy and malnutrition that one witnesses in vast tracts of western Orissa is further highlighted by the fact that the bulk of the people who have been denied share of the development cake are tribals... In a sense, western Orissa is the real face of India. It is a matter of shame that fifty years after Independence people should die of hunger; that parents should be forced to sell theirchildren for a fistful of rice”.12-The migrants from the Coastal region are in general economically better-off and educated and they migrate to other states mainly in search of better employment opportunities, and not so much because of desperate search of livelihood in the face of drought or famine, like people in Kosal.13-Recently there has been a phenomenal increase in the number of women including pregnant one joining the flow of seasonal labour migration from the Kosal raising further issues of gender discrimination in wages, women facing increased health risks and threats of sexual exploitation. Several newspapers are reporting cases of sexual abuse of female workers and selling of child labour from Kosal in other parts of India.The Coastal-dominated state government is completely insensitive to our issues and failed to address the real issues faced by us.14-The poor performance of Kosal as compared to the Coastal region in the primary as well as higher stages of education may have resulted from various factors but the most important may have been the relatively low levels of governmenteducational expenditure devoted towards the region as compared to the Coastal region.15-From the point of view of the access to university education through availabilityof educational institutions there has been a very strong sense of educational deprivation in Kosal. It has only one university, namely Sambalpur University,situated at Burla, Sambalpur district catering to the educational needs of 14.3 million Kosali people spread across a geographical area of 98, 034 square kilometers. The Coastal region, on the other hand, host to a total of seven universities with per university catering of 3.2 million Coastal people spreading over a geographical area of63,507 square kilometers. In terms of number of sanctioned seats at post graduate level (MA/MSc etc. and MPhil) there is glaring regional disparity in Orissa. The two major university of Coastal Orissa together have 2081 seat strength with a seat-population ratio of 93 seats per million population whereas the sole Kosali university, SambalpurUniversity, has only 723 seat strength with a seat-population ratio of 51 seats per million population. Inclusion of other five universities to the list of Coastal region will further increase its seat-population ratio relative to that of Kosal.16-One engineering college in Kosal covered about 24 lakh population whereas it covered merely 9 lakh population in the case of Coastal region.17-Kosal goes without specialized research institutions as Central Rice Research Institute (Cuttack), Institute Of Physics (Bhubaneswar), Homoeopathic Research Institute (Puri), Regional Leprosy Training & Research Institute (Ganjam), Nabakrushna Chaudhury Development Studies (Bhubaneswar) etc. are located in Coastal region.18-Kosal has seen relatively low level of quality of education even though it has the backlog of lowest literacy rate in Orissa as compared to Coastal region.19-Kosal has largest percentage of single teacher schools at primary, primary & upper primary, and primary & upper primary & secondary/higher secondary levels of school education as compared to Coastal region.20-In terms of the provision of school infrastructure over region mixed picture emerges. As far as the percentage of student enrolled in schools without building and without blackboard is concerned Kosal appears to be lagging behind Coastal but when considering student-class-room ratio (SRC) is concerned it is relatively better-off.21-The Kosali people really do not understand why their own state people located in the Costal Orissa have opposed the proposal for making Sambalpur University a central university when this only institution is serving the whole of the Kosal region whereas the Coastal Orissa cornered a total of seven universities. The power politics at statecapital favour Utkal University to be made central university as a result of which the proposal to have a central university in Orissa has been lying in official document since long time. These un-helpful attitudes of the state government and Coastal people made Kosali people more aware that educational development of Kosal is not possibleunder the present Orissa state.22-Orissa government largely dominated by the Coastal leaders are ruthlessly insensitive to even the humanly issue like health and the natural solution for this discrimination is being sought in the formation of a new state.23-It is most unfortunate that the people in Kosal region lacked the most basic health facilities which the people in Coastal region are getting, the Orissa government continues to expand relatively more public health services in Coastal region.24-By 2002 the state government has added about 699 PHCs in the Coastal region compared with mere 467 PHCs in the Kosal region. Considering the population coverage per PHC and per doctor one may likely to conclude that this addition is justified as the Coastal region has got a higher figure than Kosal. However this conclusion is misleading as there are large-scale vacancies of sanctioned doctor posts in Kosal.25-In the name of public health services the Kosal has got hospitals from the government without doctors and infrastructures.26-One PHC in Kosal covered about an area of 165 square kilometers as compared to 81 square kilometers in the case of Coastal region.27-The Kosali people got a real shock when the government of Orissa decided to set-up the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) in Bhubaneswar with utter disregards to the public opinion in Kosal. When there is already 4-5 super-specialty medical hospitals are already there in Bhubaneswar and another 2-3 in Cuttack hardly 25 kilometers away from Bhubaneswar and also numerous hospitals with modern facilities in the capital city there was no justification for setting up the AIIMS in Bhubaneswar.Nowhere in the history of Modern Indian states, will one find such an example where a state deprived its 40 percent of population the spatial access to health services merely for the sake of keeping everything in one region.28-Kosal have got relatively low level of spatial coverage by roads as compared to the Coastal region. Road networks cover 164 kilometer of area in the Coastal region whereas it is 138 kilometer in the Kosal region, the shortfall in the coverage is amounting to be 26kilometer.29-In Kosal only 34 post offices per 1000 square kilometers are available against 78 post offices in the case of Coastal region.30-While the number of banking branches in the Kosal region is 5.6 per lakh population and 8.7 per 1000 square kilometer of area it is 6.1 per lakh population and 21.5 per 1000 square kilometer of area in the Coastal region.31-The banking system has provided a per capita credit of Rs. 1255 to the developed parts of the Coastal region which is one and half times higher than the per capita credit given to the underdeveloped Kosal region (only Rs. 820). Malkangiri with Rs. 354, Nabarangapur with Rs. 398, Debagarh Rs. 421, and Sonepur with Rs. 419 represent thefour most lowly per capita credit receiving districts32-On an average, every 8 out of ten villages in the Coastal region are electrified whereas this is the case of about every 6 villages in the Kosal region. The number of electrified villages was not even 5 out of ten villages such as Rayagada, Malkangiri, Koraput, Kandhamal, and Debagarh. Only 19 percent of Kosali household have access to electricity as compared to 27 percent of Coastal Household.33-The Oriya Sahitya Samiti responsible for promoting Oriya language and literature has habitually favoured the Coastal dialect by various promotional schemes like providing cheap financing, publishing and instituting literary awards. The Samiti is bias against the Kosali/Sambalpuri language.34-In the history of modern Orissa one will not find a single piece of evidence where the Coastal people have contributed anything to the cause of the Kosali/Sambalpuri language.35-Contrary to the promotion, most of the video album- making companies like Samrat and Sarthak based in the Coastal region are loose large to bring out Sambalpuri video cds which are devastatingly filthy and distorted by copying Hindi songs and mixing them with Sambalpuri which undermines Sambalpuri as an independent language.36-In the case of dance, while Orissa government is continuously promoting Odissi dance in Orissa as well as outside the state, the Kosali dance received the least focus of the government.37. Peon and Clerk post should be given from the district, but Odisha Govt. made it State wise as a result of which candidates from coastal area are getting job and our boys are moving like vagabonds.And Hence we need a Separate Koshal State once and for all. Jai Koshal, Jai Hind. Share if you fathom the truth.Must read then comment !!!!Jai Kosal

There was time when Imperialist Europe used the 3Cs (Commerce, Christianiy and Civilization) to impose her will on Africa and Africans.Today, modernity or modernization is used by the West to make us all believe that Europe has a patent on modernity.A Eurocentric Problemby M. SHAHID ALAMMODERNITY: HOW WESTERN?In the eighteenth century, when a small number of European thinkers were vigorously making the case for the supremacy of reason in human affairs, they knew – and were often happy to acknowledge – that they were following in the footsteps of Confucius who had preceded them by two millennia.By the end of the century, however, a stronger and more confident Europe had forgotten its debt to the Chinese or any source outside of Europe. Insistently, they began to claim that reason, science and democracy were exclusive to European. It was a strange claim from thinkers who claimed that knowledge should be based on observation and reason – it should be objective.In truth, it is hard to imagine how any society, including the most primitive, could have adapted to their ecology without following – at least intuitively – the scientific method. In practical matters, knowledge unsupported by experience would have proved fatal for societies that were exposed more frequently than ours to life-threatening conditions. Moreover, the Arab scientists were not only practicing the scientific method in their studies on optics, chemistry and astronomy, but in the early eleventh century, Ibn al-Haytham, known to the West as Alhazen, had offered a clear theoretical formulation of the scientific method. Roger Bacon, the putative founder of the scientific method had read parts of al-Haytham’s major work, Kitab al-Manazir, in a Latin translation, and summarized it in his own book, Perspectiva.If democracy is equated with the counting of heads, even the United States – the self-declared bastion of democracy – was counting considerably fewer than half the heads until 1920, when women gained the right to vote. Blacks would not be counted until 1965. On the whole, the counting of heads has come to Europe after centuries of economic progress; it was not the foundation of their progress. Monarchic absolutism was stronger in nearly all of early modern Europe than it was in the Islamicate, whose rulers had only limited control over legislation and, in addition, faced institutionalized opposition from the class of legal scholars.[9] The nomadic tribes in Africa and Asia had their council of elders, were led by a meritocracy, and, while their egalitarianism often excluded women, it generally went farther than in the stratified societies of Europe. The Indians had local self-government in their panchayats. The Pashtoons had their parliament in the loya jirga. The early Arabs could withhold baya – an oath of loyalty – from an unacceptable new ruler.If democracy is defined by its substance, by tolerance – respect for differences of religion, color, ethnicity and phsyiognomy – most Enlightenment thinkers limited its application only to members of the white race. Tolerance has not been a particularly visible European virtue. In modern times, but especially since the Age of Enligtenment, Christian intolerance was replaced by a racial intolerance that translated quickly into schemes of genocide or support for slavery in the Americas, Africa and Oceania.The Ottomans, with their system of millets – which granted a great deal of autonomy to their non-Muslim religious communities – afforded far greater protections to all segments of their subjects. In imposing one set of laws pertaining to the affairs of the family – often of Christian inspiration – modern Western states cannot equal the tolerance of the Islamicate which allowed its non-Muslim communities to order their family affairs according to their own religious laws. Universally condemned by Western writers, the tax imposed by Muslim states on its non-Muslim population was often considered a privilege by the latter since it exempted them from military service. When Western powers forced the Ottomans to grant ‘equality’ to its Christian population, they rioted against this measure in several Ottoman cities.The rejection of priestly intermediation, starting in the fifteenth century, is commonly regarded as the first blow for modernity: allegedly, it freed the European to read the Bible in the vernacular and deal directly with his God. Islam had accomplished this, in a more radical fashion, in the early seventh century; and who is to say that Europeans were unaware of this Islamic precedent, or that there was no Islamic inspiration behind the Protestant movement.[10] Oddly, however, the rupture with Rome also freed Christianity to be nationalized, to be appropriated by the newly emerging states in Western Europe, who proceeded to establish a national church and doctrine, which then sanctioned religious wars, persecution and, no less, colonization and slavery of non-Europeans. In other words, the freedom of conscience in the early modern West was generally more circumscribed than in the Islamicate, where no Church existed to enforced religious dogma, and Muslims were free to live their lives according to the legal traditions of their choice.The inspiration for the central idea of orthodox economics – its vigorous opposition to state interventions – came primarily from the Chinese. In his time, Francois Quesnay, the leading light of the French pioneers of this policy – the Physiocrates – was known as the ‘European Confucius.’ The watch-word that summed up Physiocratic political economy, laissez faire, was a direct translation from the Chinese phrase wu wei. [11] Adam Smith, the putative Anglo-Saxon founder of classical economics, was a disciple of Quesnay. Few orthodox economists know that the language they speak – though not its intent – was invented by the ancient Chinese.Since machines defined modernity – for a growing numbers of Europeans starting in the eighteenth century – it may be worth recalling that many of the machines that led the Europeans into modernity – water mills, windmills, the compass, lateen sail, astrolabe, the armillary sphere, the inner mechanisms of the clock, seed drills, mechanized mowers and threshers, iron moldboard plow, printing press, pumps, the rudder, cannons and guns, and many others – had their origins outside Western Europe, in China or the Islamicate. [12] If they originated in Greece, they were refined and improved for many centuries in the Islamicate before they were passed on to Western Europe.How Colonialism Preempted Modernity in Africa: Táíwò, Olúfémi: 9780253221308: Amazon.com: BooksWhy hasn't Africa been able to respond to the challenges of modernity and globalization?Going against the conventional wisdom that colonialism brought modernity to Africa, Olúfémi Táíwò claims that Africa was already becoming modern and that colonialism was an unfinished project. Africans aspired to liberal democracy and the rule of law, but colonial officials aborted those efforts when they established indirect rule in the service of the European powers. Táíwò looks closely at modern institutions, such as church missionary societies, to recognize African agency and the impulse toward progress. He insists that Africa can get back on track and advocates a renewed engagement with modernity. Immigration, capitalism, democracy, and globalization, if done right this time, can be tools that shape a positive future for Africa.Review of Olúfémi Táiwò, How Colonialism Preempted Modernity in Africa (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010),This well-researched and extensive book explores the possibility that colonialism in Africa may have prevented indigenous cultural self-realization from blossoming into an African modernity. This project of research, that for the author took twenty years, started with questions about the implantation and development of British Commonwealth law in Nigeria, Kenya, and Tanzania. Táiwò asks: Why was it that systems of law as colonial inventions remained under-developed in Africa while they were evolving in other English-speaking countries of the so-called Commonwealth? Were there particular reasons for the non-compliance and ineffectiveness of concepts foundational to British law that were, in fact, never applied in Africa?Táiwò recognizes that “part of the apologia of Africa’s colonizers was that their legacy included the implantation in the colonies of the following concepts:1) a democratic mode of governance built on the consent of the governed2) a system of governance based on the periodic election of representatives3) elected officials who swear to uphold the rule of law4) a constitutional regime in which every citizen is equal before the law5) a legal system that does not try individuals under retroactive laws6) a legal system that does not respect persons based on circumstances of birth or heredity,7) an assumption that the accused are innocent until proven guilty8) trials that are regulated by due process9) a system that affirms and upholds human rights, including the right to life, liberty, and all ancillary freedoms” (2).Their possible legacies are associated with the Enlightenment or modernity; however, they were built into a law that never arrived on African soil.For Táiwò, the crux of the problem is that Africa has not managed to uphold these values in the face of the long-standing dictators, family feuds, and human rights violations that are rampant in the nations previously part of the colonial British (West) Africa. Táiwò though, assumes that his philosophical reflections are valid for French-speaking Africa and Lusophone Africa as well. The general argument posed by this work is that Africans were prevented from exercising their own enlightenment, identified with the possible mixture of colonial and indigenous forms, and that this process of cultural prevention led to a complete failure of the European model of colonial and military institutions within Africa. Nevertheless, Táiwò argues that there was one area in which Africans developed their own modernity and made it possible for the combination of indigenous and European to become African: the area of missions and Christianity.It is clear that the author uses some of the typologies developed by V. Y. Mudimbe in The Invention of Africa (e.g., three organizational types that colonized the minds of Africans: soldiers, colonial officers, and missionaries). Where Táiwò differs from Mudimbe is in his distancing from Mudimbe’s critical challenge to Christian missions as colonial enterprises. Táiwò, instead, argues that the only area in which Africans were allowed to dictate their own development was within the development of Christianity in the 19th century. Through African agents and their own subjectivity, Christianity as the colonial religion became African as suggested in the case of the Yoruba of Nigeria. This part of Táiwò’s work provides an affirmation of the first class work of scholars of African Christianity such as J. D. Y. Peel and the late Adrian Hastings.While this work sets its foundations on the history of thought and the history of law, in its last part it argues for a future for Africa linked to the on-going process of globalization. If the mark of modernity is subjectivity, then to be modern is not necessarily to be Western, according to Táiwò. If the conclusion is short, it is because Táiwò invites other scholars to apply the reading of an African modernity to other African writings and histories within the colonial period, commending others who have already done so; namely, Anthony Appiah, Abiola Irele, and Paulin Hountondji.This is a complex work, highly recommended to scholars of post-colonialism, that leaves one with the same feeling one has when one reads V. Y. Mudimbe: an enormous amount of research and thought that brings order to disorderly passages in the history of African ideas.Dr. Mario I. Aguilar is the Director of Research and Professor with the Divinity School at the University of St. Andrews, Scotland. He is also a board member with the Journal of Postcolonial Networks.…..Africa Must Be Modern: A Manifesto: Táíwò, Olúfémi: 9780253012753: Amazon.com: BooksIn a forthright and uncompromising manner, Olúfémi Táíwò explores Africa's hostility toward modernity and how that hostility has impeded economic development and social and political transformation. What has to change for Africa to be able to respond to the challenges of modernity and globalization? Táíwò insists that Africa can renew itself only by fully engaging with democracy and capitalism and by mining its untapped intellectual resources. While many may not agree with Táíwò's positions, they will be unable to ignore what he says. This is a bold exhortation for Africa to come into the 21st century.https://www.ascleiden.nl/Pdf/workingpaper69.pdfDevelopment as modernity, modernity as development Lwazi Siyabonga LushabaModernist discourse not only places Europe at the centre of the world but erases Africa from the mainstream and banishes it to the backyard of history and epistemology. Where the continent features it does so at the behest of Europe – indeed we are told that our history begins at the point of contact with Europe. Primarily because of this discourse Africa looses its autonomy and essence where nothing about it can be known except when juxtaposed with the West as its malformed copy.Thus stripped of its history, essence and autonomy the continent becomes the ‘other’ of the West defined by what it lacks or what it is not. Doesn’t today modern social theory negatively define Africa as ahistorical, under-developed, pre-capitalist, unindustrialised, pre-modern, etc? As noted above these epithets far from being idle descriptions of what Africa lacks, i.e. history, development, capitalism, etc, serve as signposts of the future, that future being capitalism, industrialisation, development, in a word modernity.The lesson that modernity imparts in this regard is that in order to understand ourselves and our future we should first look to Europe, meaning that Africa cannot be studied as an independent category on its own and in its own terms in isolation from Europe from which it derives its meaning and essence. Today development economics that discipline concerned with underdeveloped societies employs the same method. It contrasts Africa (read as underdeveloped societies) with the West and the deficit between the two automatically becomes its (Africa) development agenda.…As we proceed the point I wish to underscore is that the root causes for Africa’s underdevelopment are locatable within with the larger project of modernity. To discipline our argument we shall in addressing the two questions disaggregate Africa’s encounter with modernity into three time periods, each distinguishable from the other by the kind of relations it engenders between the continent and modern Europe. As we proceed to unravel these relations it shall be possible to isolate the reasons why the converse of western modernity is African underdevelopment. The three time periods of which each is accompanied by a corollary discourse are; the era of early modernity or ‘mercantile capitalism’ (15th – 18th century), modernity proper or ‘capitalist modernity’ (18th – mid-20th century) and the third being the era of late or hyper modernity (late 20th century), - constructs in quotes belong to Timothy Mitchell (2000). Two caveats are called for at this point.…This is perhaps truer of our situation in Africa than most other part of the world where we have for long remained under western tutelage. Through its modernist discourse the West first constructed us as immature pre-moderns, charted our future for us, evacuated us from our reality into floating objects incapable of autonomous thought, and appointed itself our guardians responsible for seeing us through ‘universal’ stages of history. Mercantile imperialism, slavery, colonialism, neo-colonialism and the current neo-liberal hegemony the West exercise over the continent are all processes through which it has held us captive to its guardianship. At no point does it miss the opportunity to warn us about the dangers of attempting to break free from the yoke of modernity, and walk unaided. Don’t we all the time hear the refrain there is no alternative to the neo-liberal democratic ystem?…In the African mind western modernity conjures up three unfortunate centuries of imperial subjugation, slave rape, colonial domination, neo-colonial form of exploitation and the current global imperialism. In the name of modernity we were colonised, robbed of our freedom because were not enlightened. For us to be enlightened we had to be subjected to slavery, our economies mal-formed only then could we be free and enlightened. Because all this happened and we are now enlightened. Thankfully it is the same western modernity that also taught us to value freedom, to resist the idea that we cannot be free and modern without the west, that to be modern we have to be underdeveloped and super-exploited. Africans who risked their bones against slavery in those Frontier Wars of the Cape, popular forces that fought gallantly to free the continent from colonialism, the under-employed, unemployed urban masses and peasants who braved the guns of SAP implementing military and decadent one-party regimes in Nigeria, Algeria, Zambia, etc. and the various forces that today contest the neo-liberal development paradigm in South Africa are all products of modernity.