Brexit ruling: A rejoinder to User flayman

This is a rejoinder for User flayman. The preceding conversation that led to this rejoinder can be seen on this link

After re-reading your posts, I thought I would write a slightly more detailed rejoinder.

I will go through them one by one. However, before that I might as well give a broader perspective of what is happening.

The discussion on this issue has the problem of it working out just the technical aspects of a very minute element in the national history, when actually the whole history of the nation is being dismantled on every aspect.

The wider perspective is that GB and also all the other native-English nations have been quite gullible and foolish since the very beginning period of colonial years. And totally gullible and foolish after the WW2. I will leave that topic here, for it is quite a very big topic.

When going for a razor sharp technical examination of the present quandary with regard to Brexit, the scene is comparable with that of a doctor putting full focus on the minute aspects of a minor disease, when actually the whole body is infected with all kinds of malignancies.

QUOTE: Her Majesty is effectively the claimant, and she won.” END OF QUOTE.

Isn’t it quite obvious that academic detailing and defining have brought in some kind of mad levels of understandings?

These kinds of utter nonsensical academic derivations are what has been the undoing of all native-English nations.

Any totally formally-uneducated person on the streets in any location in the world can see through the nonsense. For, Her Majesty has not won in any sense of this word in almost all languages.

This more or less reflects the history of English colonialism.  For in most colonial locations, it was a most welcome event for the local populations. However, there were the traditional upper-classes of these locations inside England to redefine everything into similar absurd visualisations.

QUOTE: I’m not sure about the issue you raise of wiping out the English political entity END OF QUOTE.

From inside England, the nation might seem quite formidable and unassailable. However the universally mentioned fact in most other languages is that England is very small and can be encroached upon and devoured in pieces. All that has to be done is to enter in minute numbers as would termites and to eat up the vitals. This is going on in a very rapid way as of now.

I am privy to conversations in languages which native-Englishmen cannot understand, wherein it is very openly mentioned that England is more or less up for grabbing.

Continental Europe might be the least of problems for England. And yet, see the tremendous preoccupation that England has to be engaged in to mitigate this minute issue.

It should be mentioned that a more or less precise prediction as to what would happen with regard to this Euro-Connection had been done at least a decade and a half earlier. See these links



There is something about English and Englishmen (and women) which is more or less unique. It has nothing to do with DNA or genes or genius, or pedigree or ethnicity. It is that they speak native-English and used to be connected socially and by family to Englishmen and women, of whatever class.

I can’t deal more about this here. I can only say that this uniqueness is that in all kinds of communications, it gives a sort of elevated personal stature to the individuals.

In feudal language nations, a similar kind of stature is condoned, if seen in a higher. However, if exhibited by a person defined as lower in such nations, it can be treated as rank impertinence. And can stir-up a sort of homicidal mania in the other-side.

If England joins Europe as an equal, this very specific factor would create a huge social communication irritant across the continent (a few European nations would be exceptions).

Being a superior outsider to a social system and being part of the system are two entirely different experiences in feudal languages.

In fact, this feature of English social communication has indeed created many problems for them even during the colonial period.

Unacknowledged Englishmen who displayed their native communication stature had their limbs and lips cut in the South Asian subcontinent, which was erroneously called India.

See this narration by James Scurry who was made a servant of some subordinate staff of Sultan Tipu of a minor kingdom in the South Asian subcontinent.

As of now, the situation is getting more dangerous. See what happened to the British sailors who were taken to a police station in India.

A native-Englishman or child under a feudal language speaker is quite a different person from a native-Englishman or child above a feudal language speaker. These are all powerful information about which England has no idea at all.

QUOTE: fast transactions of today does not really apply to the business of legislature, END OF QUOTE.

QUOTE: it does arise out of a history of the absolute power of the monarchy such as it once was in feudal times. END OF QUOTE

Well, this is the tragedy that modern-day democracy has heaped upon native-English nations. Even though you might speak about the great dictatorial powers of autocratic monarchs, the fact is that if the monarchs and the people are both native-English speakers who live and interact in pristine-English, both these terrors you mention are actually in the realm of pure fantasy and imagination.

All the great political and social issues mentioned and discussed in England with precocious diligence are actually mere nothings. What is experienced in feudal language nations have nothing to do with these ludicrous levels of intellectual meditations. What England debates are of issues, which if taken in comparative terms, of mere 2 cm ambit, and that of feudal language nations are of 1km ambit.

In fact, there is no correlation with the various thoughts on social studies, political studies, international relationship studies, and even psychological studies, between a native-Englishman’s ambience and that of a feudal language speaker’s mental and social ambience.

This is one of the terrible truths that are withheld from the purview of a native-English mind. What gets conveyed is lost in the translation version.

The above-mentioned item has nothing to do with individual goodness and badness.

The above is only one minor aspect of the quoted item.

The words ‘absolute power of the monarchy’ and ‘feudal times’ are at best totally un-understood or under-understood items.

The wider issue is that the item called Legislature is most evidently a very dangerous and wasteful entity, as per your quoted words. What a monarch decide and act upon in a few seconds or minutes or hours or days, has now been stretched beyond all logical lengths of time and expense. All to choose just one from most probably two possibilities.

I can propose that democracy in native-English nations has gone insane, useless and totally dangerous to the kingdom. In fact, democracy is good in England only if it contains only native-Englishmen. If outsiders, whose mind and quite powerful mental links are not understood, are allowed inside the apparatus of English democracy, terrible despoilment of the nation is in the offing.

When I mention ‘quite powerful mental links are not understood’, I know what I am speaking about. However there is no conceivable manner in which I can convey this information to a native-Englishman or woman. For, it is like an animal trying to convey its social experience to human beings. There are things that have no corresponding items on the other side.

If it is the fear of a despotic English monarch that is inspiring this traumatic item called legislature and democracy, it is indeed a very tragic understanding. Ancient English monarch had their own terrors to deal with. And they cannot be compared with an oriental or African or even a Continental European monarch. There are differences that cannot be defined in a few words.

[King Richard of England was not an English king, and did not speak English, I am told. I speak of English monarchs, who speak natively in English.]

The best way to study English Monarchy is by first understanding what is different about pristine-English from feudal languages. The next item would be to totally disconnect English monarchy from other monarchies when taking up the study. The next item would be to understand why Englishmen and women were different from others.

QUOTE: This does not mean that the referendum is invalid END OF QUOTE.

The word referendum might mean something like an opinion poll. However, it has its defining power. For instance, the people of Kashmir have been demanding for a referendum since 1947, when the British-Indian army (handed over to the new nation of India) marched into the location and occupied it. If Referendum was just an opinion with doubtful value, India would have conducted it.

However, India will not do it. Unless there is some intervention by providence and Nemesis.

QUOTE: It does not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, END OF QUOTE.

Speaking of the two Referendums done in the last few months in Great Britain, take the first one. If the pro-independence side of Scottish referendum had won, would it have been treated in a similar tone?

I am sure that within a couple of months of the results coming out, Scotland would have been apart.

Now, take the second one. If the pro-Europe side had won the referendum, would the argument that the government need not mind the referendum results that be acceptable?

Well no!

These types of arguments and counter arguments are best suited for some academic debate forum. To allow such things to dictate national policymaking is the tragic side of democracy in a planar-language nation.

QUOTE: The judiciary is subordinate to Parliament. The government is subordinate to Parliament. At the end of the day, even the Queen is subordinate to Parliament if Parliament in its supreme capacity passes law that abolished the monarchy END OF QUOTE

This is Political Science in its worst attire.

When the national enemies have gathered at the national borders, to depend upon and to spend time on such useless textbook ideas of national structures and command lines is being utterly treacherous.

Take up an alternative vision of the kingdom.

A totally different version. One which should shock the outsiders into tremulous disquiet.

It is England. Three other nationalities are connected to England on their own will, and at the pleasure of England. That is, if England does not want them, they can be disconnected.

England is a kingdom and not a nation. People are not citizens, but subjects.

The kingdom’s language is English and only English. No feudal languages are allowed inside. For, feudal languages spread social disarray, discrimination and inequities which are not detectable through English.

The kingdom is owned by the kingdom.

The Monarchy heads the kingdom. People joined to each other in pristine-English are attached to the Monarchy as subjects.

The Monarchy stands for the kingdom and its native people.

The monarch is the supreme dispenser of all rights and justices.

The monarch will decide which outsider can be given subject-hood and for how long.

People who indulge in subversive activities can be exiled by the monarch.

Political decisions are taken by the monarch, not on the basis of protracted legislative and judicial processing. But on a very time-based agenda, focusing on the exigency of the moment and the issue.

People who speak against the native people can be exiled by the monarch. People who had spoken against the native people can be stopped from entering the nation.

Let the parliament be placed as an advisory body.

Dissuade party-based elections. For, it only leads to the splintering of the social fabric. Beyond that, outsider vested interests can misuse the situation to gather a lot of rights for themselves. In fact, democratic election is actually a breech through which outsiders can take-over the kingdom.

When one reads the terrible ideas above, the visuals of some terrible barbarian despotic rule could emerge. But then, the fact is that when pristine-English is the national language, no such thing will happen.

QUOTE: nor set a time limit by which a vote to leave the EU should be implemented. END OF QUOTE.

During the colonial times, there was a fabulous farsightedness in the English colonial administration everywhere and at times in England also. This was due to the fact that decisions were taken on the spot and implemented.

The above quoted words are the issue. The referendum’s actual agenda when seen in words do bespeak a lot of deficiencies. There should have been a very pointed wording on what it wishes to accomplish. Words which do not lead to a logical conclusion are useless. There should be very specific wording on what the results can mean and what it cannot mean.

To read and enjoy the utter lack of logic in the sentences does not help.

To conduct a national event which at best has no judicial or statutory value and has a lot of loopholes for the outsider lobbies to perch upon, is a very useless activity.

QUOTE: which enables the electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in its policy decisions. END OF QUOTE

Has the British government gone so insipid that it couldn’t understand that if only a public opinion to influence a policy decision was all that was intended, there are indeed online public opinion gathering website which does this work fabulously. Is there any difference between for instance this and what the referendum did?

In other words, does the EU Referendum have only the same value? Both are dealing with terrible themes, both connected at the code levels on comparable codes.

QUOTE: But those who would criticise these judges END OF QUOTE

There might be a broader item here. A judge is just an individual. However, one would not treat judicial decree as a nondescript individual’s opinion. For, he or she is part of a statutory machine.

If this be so, what is wrong in visualising the monarch also as part of a huge statutory machine, with similar and yet much more powerful rights of deciding?

One problem with discussing the English monarchy is that it is easy to identify the monarch with an individual. However, it is not an individual but an institution and a statutory position that it is.

It decides. Fast and precise.

And this decision-making entity is much less expensive than the gigantic machinery of democracy which is leading the nation to hopeless confusions, unending debates, erosion of national sovereignty, bad decisions, social and civic infightings and much more.

Democracy can lead England to subordination to nations like India, China, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Japan etc.

Be forewarned.

As a last word on Europe, it is in a hopeless situation. All brought about by senseless democracy. However, their own monarchies were not that good also. For many of these nations had languages with at least a slight hue of feudal content.

An England under an English Monarch would be quite a powerful entity. Maybe Continental Europe might seek to submit to its protection. Others might also.

However, not to this mixed-breed England that is being sponsored in the current carnival-like atmosphere.

And look those realities. There are British (sailors) subjects imprisoned in India. There is no time in England to even think of these things. A very boisterous mood of entertaining, yet useless and dull intellectualism has gripped the kingdom.


Software codes of mantra, tantra, witchcraft, black magic, evil eye, evil tongue &c.

Along with a brief commentary on Edgar Thurston’s OMENS AND SUPERSTITIONS OF SOUTHERN INDIA has been published on Amazon Kindle.

Interested readers can download for free OMENS AND SUPERSTITIONS OF SOUTHERN INDIA on this link

Interested readers can download for free the book  on this link

This is not a book on any occult art. Instead it is a writing that proposes to take up the possibility of there being a real machinery behind the working of so-called mantra, tantra, evil eye, black magic, voodoo etc.   This book does not teach any of the above mentioned arts.

Yet, it does try to find a pathway or opening by which we can find or enter the supernatural arena from where the supernatural software codes of reality and life is designed and maintained.

It is a writing that tries to discuss a probability that is not connected to material sciences. Instead it proposes to examine the possibility of there being a supernatural software application location wherein reality might be seen in the code view as well as the design view. These two views are apart from the real view, which is the physical reality.

The ultimate aim of this book is to propose a pathway via which we can approach the supernatural software location, where all of reality, life, living organisms, brain software &c. are designed and maintained.

This book is not a sudden writing on any impulse of the moment.  I wrote my first book on codes in languages, March of the Evil Empires; English versus the feudal languages, around 1989. The final version of the book was completed around 2000. In the concluding part of that book, I did hint about the possibility of there being something akin to a software background to reality. And that, languages are software applications with varied capacities.

In around the year 2005, I wrote a series of posts in a GB website on the same subject. It was basically a lot of unconnected themes all pointing to the same theme. This I later published as a digital book under the name: Software codes of reality, life and languages.

Then my next major book on the subject came out with the name: Codes of reality! What is language?  

Here again the same theme of connecting the idea of there being a software realm behind reality and that languages have software codes which can directly connect to  the software of reality was elaborated. The focus was on languages being sort of software applications through which physical reality could be influenced.

Still, the theme was going forward only in very brief paces.  A few years ago, I had to write a series of posts for supporting the contentions of Homoeopathy, by basing the ideas from my understandings. That Homoeopathy does work on the principle of a software program rectifying the software of life and human body.  The book title was: The machinery of Homœopathy!

Recently I happened to read Edgar Thurston’s Omens and Superstitions of Southern India. It was at that time that I pondered upon reworking out the arguments from the perspective of mantra, tantra, black magic, witchcraft etc.

The first thing I did was to create a very readable form of this book. As I went on doing that work, I could get to read the book also.

This present book is being promoted as a Commentary on Omens and Superstitions of Southern India.  However, only the last part of this book really is a sort of commentary. Even in that part, it is not exactly a commentary. I merely quoted some sentences from his book and elaborated upon them as per what I wanted to convey.

Edgar Thurston’s Omens and Superstitions of Southern India is definitely a great book.  My writings do not aim to go against that book. This book of mine does contain a lot of mentions about Thurston’s book.

This book commences by mentioning OMENS AND SUPERSTITIONS OF SOUTHERN INDIA. However, it moves beyond to a wider ambit. It returns to Thurston’s book at the end as a commentary.

However, a mention of Thurston’s book can be felt all along.

I have used a few images from other old public domain books. These images are mainly taken from my own collection from such books. Due to some issues, I do not have the exact record as to where I got some of the images. I believe such images to have been taken from Edgar Thurston’s Castes and Tribes of Southern India.

ANSWER to Leo1239150


Since I am from the South Asian peninsular region, which is currently occupied by Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, I can speak with a level of profundity on the subject that cannot be done by any outsider to the region. See this Telegram Channel

What you have queried is what is doled out by many years of insipid formal education and by other media including the films.

I can quite easily repudiate everything claimed by these centres. However, the subject matter is quite huge and complicated. And to counter all the fraudulent claims, it would require at least 200 thousand words. Since that is not possible, I will merely list of the things on which you can ponder on at leisure. In case, you want more details, I am willing to elaborate, as soon as I get some spare time.

The following list headings will give you ample things to think about.

  1. There was no India before the formation of a cluster of regions in the South Asian subcontinent, brought together by the English East India Company
  1. There were more than 2000 kingdoms of various sizes, including a few of relatively big size before the setting up of British-India in the region.
  1. Not only was there no single population in the region, inside each kingdom, there were various populations, each very powerfully suppressing the one which came under them.
  1. The English East India Company did not actually conquer any kingdom with a British or English army. In most cases, there were only a few Englishmen who were quite enthusiastically supported by the huge quantity of lower class populations.   [Example: Robert Clive’s first success was with 20 Englishmen and around 180 natives of the peninsula]
  1. If at all the English East India Company did suppress anyone, it was the traditional oppressive feudal classes and the kingly families.
  1. When the English East India Company was dismissed and the reins of rule taken-over by Queen Victoria, there was a change in attitude to the local small-time kings and kingdoms. They were treated as ‘equals’ by the British Monarchy. This more or less was a traitorous action towards the lower classes of the various locations. They, who had supported the Company rule, suddenly found themselves pushed back to the subordination of the local rajas and ranis.
  1. Even in the best period of the British rule in the peninsula, only less than half of the subcontinent was ruled by England. The rest was under the various independent kingdoms of the peninsula. They had their own extremely corrupt bureaucracies and terrible caste systems.
  1. In English-ruled areas, the officialdom was honest and incorruptible. There was no caste-based suppression of any individual.
  1. The British rule in the peninsula was actually an English rule. Even though there were Irish and Scottish elements (I do not know about Welsh) in the British administration, in effect it was solely and purposefully an English rule. And not an Irish or Welsh or Scottish rule.
  1. English language is a planar language. Almost all languages of the peninsula are feudal. This means in each word and sentence, a person can be defined as stinking dirt or as golden featured, in all ordinary communication. English does not have these codes. Hence for the first time in the history of the 2000 and odd kingdoms, a new egalitarian social communication came up.
  1. Speaking about Gandhi, he was not actually from British-India. He was the rich son of the prime minster of Porbunder kingdom. Many persons with means did move to England to enjoy the life and social communication there at that time.
  1. British-India rupee had an exchange value (I am told) of 7 USD at that time. That means British-India was quite rich.
  1. Rich people sent their children to England to become connected to the English society there. Some of these people did join some college or club and promote Free India movements. Actually they had no support base in British-India or in the various independent kingdoms. Some of them did even go to the extent of signing formal agreement and such things on behalf of the ‘people of India’ with no evidence to prove that they had been given such rights by anyone.
  1. Actually there was no ‘great’ Freedom struggle in British-India or in the independent kingdoms.
  1. Due to the English intervention in the independent kingdoms, many caste based discriminations had been abolished in the independent kingdoms.
  1. When Queen Victoria proclaimed the Slavery Abolishment Act, the order was enforced not only in British-India, but also in all the independent kingdoms. Millions of traditionally suppressed populations received liberty.
  1. Due to the feudal content in the native languages, there was no need for any chains to enforce slavery. It is in the words. This is a concept that English cannot understand. From this perspective, the so-called Negro slavery in the US was not actually slavery. It was one of the best social enhancement training in the world, freely given to low-quality populations. In other words, being a slave in the Confederate States of USA would actually be a divine blessing to millions of under-classes in most places in Asia and Africa of contemporary times.
  1. Even though in school textbooks, it is shamelessly taught that the British rule was exploitative and thieving, actually it was the opposite. The locations under the English rule were quite safe and secure.
  1. The English rule did not work for looting British-India. Instead every effort was made to consolidate and protect all natural resources.
  1. Trade was free in British-India. However, in the independent kingdoms, trade was monopolised by the government. People were forced to sell their commodities to the government warehouses. To get adequate payment for their items, they were forced to pay bribes. Many people resorted to smuggling their commodities into British-Indian areas. The kingdoms imposed heavy punishments to stop this.
  1. The English rulers brought in the concept of public education. This provided to the children of the non-feudal classes an opportunity to study for the first time in at least 2000 years!
  1. Even though the traditional social bosses tried their level best to block it, the English government promoted English education to all those who desired to have it. This led to the intellectual development of the lower classes. However, the English administrators did not understand that they were providing this to very cunning populations, who traditionally had all practised the art of deceit and suppression on all those who came under them. Those who received English, tried to see that others did not get it.
  1. Almost all of the national governmental revenue was utilised to build up infrastructure for common use, in a land with zero infrastructure for the common man.
  1. Roads, bridges, schools, colleges, universities, medical colleges, museums, dams, water supply, police departments, judiciary, postal department, hospitals, veterinary hospitals, warehouses, public rest houses, public toilets, Sanitation department, industrial training, export of goods, import of goods, land registration, for the first time, the common man’s right to own land was established, &c. &c. &. The list is long. I can’t remember everything. I forgot to mention Railways.
  1. During the Second World War, 3 million soldiers from the peninsula region stood stolidly under the Union Jack. They were betrayed by Clement Atlee, the Satan. They were handed over to feudal language speaking officials of the newly formed Pakistan and India. Even though a huge amount had been handed over for the pension benefit, nothing was given to them. Many went into terrible penury.
  1. In 1919, an Irish military commander crushed a communal strife in Amritsar with a sort of unwarranted shooting, in which around 150 people died and many were injured. He was Irish. So his natural reaction to the local feudal languages would be more pre-emptive. For Irish also is a feudal language, I think. In 1947, a terrible communal rioting took place in the northern parts of the subcontinent, when the location was summarily divided into two nations.  No military leader did any shooting. One million people died –burnt or hacked. Women were taken hostage and molested for days.  No native ‘leader’ was bothered.
  1. Native leaders of both Pakistan and India were novices at best and cunning politicians at worst. They were simply handed over the huge number of administrative and military apparatus by the stupid British Labour Party politicians.
  1. Both Pakistan as well as Indian leaders immediately used the newly received parts of the erstwhile British-Indian army to intimidate all the kingdoms in their proximity. Many did not surrender to these intimidation. The political leaders send their armies to capture the kingdoms.
  1. Even now, there are many rebellions going on for so many decades. The freedom fighters are dubbed terrorists and tortured in small-time police stations and army garrisons. Women folks suffer most. No media dare report all this.
  1. The tribal populations who had nothing to do with the formation of the new nations did not know that they had literally been handed over to political systems which they had no affinity for. They were literally plundered by the local police and forest department staff. Their women were forced to produce hybridised children. They were taught the languages of the various Indian states and addressed in the pejorative part of the word codes.
  1. Gandhi is currently taught to be the ‘father of the nation’. However, there is no such mention in any statutory writings. Both he as well as Nehru was in the midst of terrible scandals connected to certain clandestine affairs in Gandhi’s ashram. The newspapers were full of it, with some even bringing out cartoons about the shady affairs. In fact, Gandhi was a burden for the new nation. He was killed in an unexplained incident which was quite cunningly described as the handiwork of Hindu Communalism. Hindu Communalism had nothing to gain from Gandhi’s death. Nor was there anything that could spur and antipathy for Gandhi.  However, his death gave Nehru a much required prop up. For, there was a real terror that Nehru would not become the prime minister. In fact, the Congress party did not like both Gandhi as well as Nehru. It wanted another local leader to be the PM. However, Nehru was at home in England, having studied there. He could manage from that side. British Labour Party was acting as a fool and a national traitor, as always.
  1. Currently around 90% of the Indian population live worse than slaves. However, you would not get to converse with them. They are maintained in the lower part of the languages. Naturally no one wants them to learn English. Once they learn English, they would start having claims and rights. Like the blacks in the USA.
  1. Now, about your word ‘equality’. The word as understood in English has no corresponding word in feudal languages. This is one of the most dangers that England faces now. It does not understand the others who speak other languages.

The above-mentioned words I wrote on the spur of the moment. In case you did read the whole listing, and you have a query, I would be happy to elaborate.

The total compensation that India, Pakistan and Bengladesh needs to pay England can be seen on this Telegram Link.

To know more about Gandhi, follow this writing of mine.

For knowing about Feudal languages, follow this link

A British protectorate over Europe ?

I am not getting time to continue my writing under the heading : Empire England versus the Evil England.

However, since the Brexit issue is heading on to a grand finale, I thought I would mention the retort I got from a commentator, when I posted a particular wording in HuffingtonPost on May 24, 2012. 

I am posting the lines as it came into my email inbox. The first line is the quote he took from my words:


Andrashka � May 24, 2012 at 7:27am�

“Actually, a Europe with headquarters in London, based on English wouldn’t flounder”

Are you proposing a British protectorate over Europe ?

I’ve read some dumb things today, but your comment takes the cake.

Linguistic unity as a sure-fire solution to economic problems…. *sigh*



Actually, I should have been more categorical. I should have used the word ‘England’ instead of Britain. Britain currently looks increasingly quite un-British.




Divine language versus those with satanic disposition


Here I am taking a detour from my planned route. This has been caused by the discussion I had with veteran09 in the last post.

He mentions thus: QUOTE: I have heard other people rejoicing in Shakespearean Composition; and of The King James Bible too. I have not seen, as yet, the wonders of Our GOD given Language, as I believe others like yourself can SEE !!! END OF QUOTE

I have been mentioning the issue of languages being software with very powerful compositions that can literally reach out to the capacities of actual softwares (mantra) in the physical world, in human social life and in defining both anthropological features as well as animal dispositions.

I am not a Shakespeare fan. However, this does not influence my contention that the works of Shakespeare has nothing to do with my contentions. In fact, even though Shakespeare writings do contain awesome content features, there is no saying that these kinds of things, or even more, are not there in other human languages and in the currently un-detected literary content in animal communication systems.

In fact, the beauty that I can discern in some of the literary creations in the native vernaculars around me is spellbinding, and not even contemplate-able in English. Yet, it is like saying that the mesmeric melody that is embedded in the howling of the jackals can be enjoyed in full only by jackals. To enjoy the beauty that is there in the local vernacular literary creations actually requires a mental, physical and attitudinal transformation into a human being of the native type to some extent. For a native-English individual, there is no gain in arriving at this transformation, just to enjoy this transient beauty.

I am aware of the style of writing in King James Version of Bible. This again is not the point here. In fact, when people mention all these to mention that beauty of English, they are actually deluding the native-Englishman and leading him astray.

I do not know how to explain what I am contending. Let me try.

Decoding a single negativity

I am just mentioning the police department structure over here.
1. DGP (Director General of Police)
2. IGP (Inspector General of Police)
3. DGP (Deputy Inspector General of Police)
4. SP (Superintendent of Police) / AIGP (Assistant Inspector General of Police)
5. ASP (Assistant Superintendent of Police)
6. DySP (Deputy Superintendent of Police)
7. Inspector of Police
8. Sub Inspector of Police
9. Assistant Inspector of Police
10. Head Constable
11. Constable

The hierarchy is clear. It is quite a simple positional hierarchy, which can be understood in English.

However, that is not the only hierarchy running through the line-up of actual persons in a feudal language world. It may easily be noticed that all the individuals in the chain of command are connected in the software of English by very singular codes of YOU, HE, HIS, HIM, HIS, SHE, HER, HERS, HER, THEY, THEIR, THEIRS, THEM, WE, OUR, OURS, US &c.

This is a very candid area of difference. In a feudal language, each one of these individual word links does come in a multiplicity of words. For instance, in the languages of the northern parts of the subcontinent, for the English word YOU, there is this array of words: Aap, Thum and Thoo. For languages of the south, the word array can be Saar (Thaangal), Ningal and Nee.

Actually there are more. I do not want to insert confusion here by bringing in the whole lot here.

Looking at the southern version of the languages, the police hierarchy can be mentioned as for each link in the command chain as Thaangal towards the top and Nee towards the bottom. However, this is a very simplistic version. The reality is much more complex.

The terror in the scheme of things is that actually in private locations, the individuals in the link do not really follow this ideal hierarchy of words. For, when their officers are junior to them in age, the juniors do use the pejorative words for referring to their seniors. I leave this point here. It will lead to another location if I follow this path.

Now, if we look at each link in the command chain, top is the Golden ‘Thaagal’ and the bottom is the degraded ‘Nee’.

That means that there are there eleven layers of this code link: Thaangal-Nee. The top man naturally will have golden features, and the bottom man will have a lowered standards. Beyond that, each layer can be connected to any layer in the command chain. This means a Thaangal on the mountain peak to a Nee in the gorge.

If this ideal situation continues, the constable is at the bottom layer. He or she has the most negative mental disposition in the language code layer.

At this point, I need to stop.

And then mention these two items.

When one moves socially at the level of the DGP, IGP, SP etc., the constable-level looks quite mean and dirty. However, that is not the exact truth. At each level, the individuals do garner people to be below them. That is, a lot of people whom they can address as Nee (degraded).

Here, they are the leaders of these subordinated people. Each level of subordination reflects in the mind, mood and expression of the affected person. That is why, in India, the class of people who traditionally are upper-class (via caste or profession or financial acumen), do generally have superior looks, while the downtrodden ‘Nee’ group have a distorted facial and physical features.

However, the essential social terror is in going under the lowest of any hierarchy. That is, being abused by pejorative words (Nee &c.) by a DGP or IGP or even SP can be borne. However, being addressed as Nee by a constable can be an unbearable mental taunt. It is worse than being touched by an untouchable individual in the caste hierarchy.


Picture taken from Castes and tribes of Southern India by Edgar Thurston.

Point for extrapolation: Lower castes, though suppressed, are actually very crude, rude and quite oppressive at their own level to those who come under them. Coming under them is worse than being directly under the upper castes.

It is a complicated world.

This is where English stands divinely supreme. There are no terrible hidden codes that can literally pour excrements into the depth of a human soul.

When mentioning stories of the great ‘freedom struggle’ in ‘India’, historians purposefully leave out the great liberation that the lower class received by just being under the English rule. For, being under the great ‘Indian leaders’ was actually an experiences of being transported back to the excrement part of their communication, for especially the lower classes.

In fact, the actual experience of the English rule, as experienced by the natives of the subcontinent differed due to a variety of reasons, including where in the language codes their stood. Beyond that there would be marked difference in the way the different constituents of the Great Britain were experienced in the subcontinent: viz. the English, the Welsh, the Irish and the Scots. And also, Continental Europeans also did piggyback ride inside the location, using their white skin colour as a serviceable camouflage.

PS: I have dealt with only a very small part of the huge software codes inside a feudal language. There is a huge domain remaining.

2. Look at this image of British sailors arrested by Indian policemen. It might give some hint as to why the natives of the subcontinent rallied under the English. NEWS

3. I do not want to go into the language code issues in this write-up. For a lot of things are there to be mentioned, apart from the language-code issue.

Philosophising towards cataclysmic irrelevance!


I am speaking of the South Asian peninsular region, which is currently occupied by Pakistan, India and Bangladesh.

On reading the last three posts, the reader might get an erroneous feeling.

That I am promoting a feeling that the history of the various places in the subcontinents as well as of the English interaction with the society was connected with kings and queens and princes.

It is not true. The south Asian peninsular region which was to become British-India in history was populated by a huge number of populations. When modern insipid historians speak about the history English colonialism, they miss this very essential component.

It was this component that stood as the pivot, which levered up the English rule, and pulled down the ancient oppressive rulers of the 2000 and odd locations in the subcontinent. Yet, they and their aspirations remain unmentioned in current-day history writings.


Picture taken from LINK

It is my intention to bring focus on what really happened in this South Asian subcontinent that English colonialism simply rode up to the towering heights, on the swelling emotional support that this un-mentioned component lend to it.

To do this, there would be a need to go into the intimate details of what really happened. Such vital details do not show up in desultory academic statements that now are crammed in school textbook histories. The aim here is not to write another useless academic history book.

Along with this, there might be a parallel need to contemplate upon pristine-England, quite green and fair, of the yesteryears. That is, till about the end of the 2nd World War. Even though VICTORIAN-age is what is generally mentioned with rare adulation in this regard, there need be no doubt that even before the advent of this age, England was always better in various items, when compared to other geographical locations of contemporary times.

If anyone thinks that there are historical evidences of many misdemeanours that took place in England, in the medieval and ancient times, the only retort that should be offered is that most other geographical locations with much more terrible delinquencies, simply did not have any system of keeping historical records at all.

As Somerset Maugham once mentioned, the newer generations do not know anything much before the day they were born. There was an England that was different from the England that manages to survive today.

The current-day England is something that can be mentioned as overrun by many things that should never have been allowed unsupervised entry.

On one side, it is burdened by an overwhelming and overbearing clasp of an historical guilt, promoted by all insidious persons with real ulterior aims. That of being a nation that had looted many nations in the world.

On another side, even though it had spearheaded the blossoming of scientific and industrial growth, everything seems to have slipped into the hands of low-quality societies, who have barged in, with a very ferocious mood of competition and conquest.

The England of yore was a land of instinctive trainers. The tone of the social system was soft and refined. Now, the presence of outsiders with very boisterous traits are more or less erasing the quaint quality of Englishness, and possibly redefining human behaviours.

It is indeed true that in the South Asian subcontinent, the earlier English traders were looked upon as effeminate and quite soft. Yet, the power of harmonious enterprise that this afforded to the English side was apparent only when the native kings tried their attacks on the serene English trading centres, using totally uncouth and boisterous rowdy folks under them.

However, as of now inside England, this very high stamina and yet quite soft social communication pattern is being distorted by a non-English social training which is slowly diffusing inside.

On another side, technical toys and gadgets that silently import mental intentions of totally alien-to-English social systems might be training the new generation. And posterity.

Then there is the problem of utterly unbridled pornography spreading terrible social disconnection in the land. Pornography in itself is not the problem. For, English pornography is not an unknown thing in England, even during the heights of the Victorian era. However, it would have been good if alien cultures are not allowed the leeway to redefine male – female social relationships.

Apartheid on populations that define non-reclusive female as ‘sluts’, would have been correct. But then, current-day academic studies have more or less negated all social intelligence under the barrage of a totally un-understood idea of ‘human equality’.

Then there is the US. It has become a great English nation run totally amok. With so many anti-English vested interests taking command over everything including the English language, and inputting errors into everything that the US had received from the heritage of England.

No true native-English nation would dare to claim preponderance over England. It then becomes the heights of silliness. Current-day US is a burden on England. Hopefully, there is solace in the offing, before long.

At another location, there is British democracy gone insane. The very PM demanding the surrender of the kingdom to extra-national lobbies and oligarchies, run by historical enemies.

Totally gullible persons have shoved themselves into positions of policymaking. They are falling for the deceitful ploys of population lobbies, which have a much focused aim of conquest. Any sensible policymaker should know that when extra-national interests showcase a sympathy-garnering story or picture, it is just a gimmick and a tool for hoodwinking the nation into deluded and idiotic complacency.

Technical skills, talents, expertises, geniuses &c. are dime-a-dozen in many nations. However, none of them can create an England. If they are all allowed to rush in, what remains is not a nation of great talents, expertise, skill and genius. Instead what would come about would be an unbearable nation, from which all persons of soft refinement would have to run off.

Down the slippery slopes of irresponsible desultory philosophising is the call for abolishing monarchy in the kingdom. People who do it do not know what they are proposing. The political structure of England has evolved over the centuries. Each and every individual subject in the kingdom is connected by slender, yet powerful strings to a central focus. It has now become a fashion to disparage this focus of emotional conjoining. The senseless aim seems to be to turn England into a wasteland. There is much to be mentioned about the unforeseen dangers in pulling down the grand apparatus of English monarchy.

England has a very unique heritage. It is connected to the supernatural language software it is in possession of. Even though various populations all around the globe have taken this software hostage, and are dismantling and manhandling it, to suit their own nefarious purposes, this software has been delivered by providence to England. There is much to be said about this possession.

It is the divine duty of England to remain pure and pristine.

To be continued…

The wider streaks of Anglophilia, historically!

The aim of this writing is not a paraphrasing on Anglophilia. However, since this theme has been touched upon, I will try to mention a few things more.

I had written commentaries on two books of the English Colonial period, pertaining to a small kingdom in the southern-most end of the South Asian peninsular region. Currently this kingdom is occupied by India.  The books are Travancore State Manual written by a native historian (V Nagam Iyya), and Native Life in Travancore written by REV Samuel Mateers of the London Missionary Society. Both books belong to the commencing years of the 1900s.

I do not belong to Travancore. I think I was interested in the sociological aspects of the populations therein.  However, when I went for reading the first book, a very ferocious input that struck me was the very evident pro-England stance of the most prominent personality in the book. That was the king (Marthanda Varma) who created the modern kingdom therein.

I am simply inputting the quotes from the book here:

  1. In 1750 A.D. the French attempted to form a settlement at Colachel. It does not appear that they were successful. In the next year the Rajah of Travancore wrote to the King of Colastria ‘advising him not to put any confidence in the French, but to assist the English as much as he could’”.
  2. On his deathbed, this is the advice given by the king to the heir to the throne:

“That, above all, the friendship existing between the English East India Company and Travancore should be maintained at any risk, and that full confidence should always be placed in the support and aid of that honourable association.”

  1. The two armies met near Calacaud and after a very hot engagement the army of Maphuze Khan was put to flight. But the Travancore army, however, retired home to avoid causing offence to the English Company.

In the same history, there is another remarkable event. The queen of the kingdom asking an English East India Company official (Col Munro) to become the divan (Prime Minister) of the kingdom.

QUOTE: Rani wrote that “there was no person in Travancore that she wished to elevate to the office of Dewan and that her own wishes were that the Resident should superintend the affairs of the country as she had a degree of confidence in his justice, judgement and integrity which she could not place in the conduct of any other person” END OF QUOTE

The fear of treacherous usurping of power is there as an undercurrent in the subcontinent since times immemorial. It is there in the history of how Sultan Tipu’s father (a Moroccan) became a king.  It is there in the history of all kingdoms including that of the Mugal kings and of the kings of the Slave dynasty of Delhi.

However, there was a Lucifer in the offing in England, arriving to negate all this trust.

Many years ago, I simply did a search for the word: ENGLISH in a pdf book of Mein Kampf. I had expected a torrent of profanities on the English from Adolf Hitler. It was a big surprise that Hitler had the feel of an anglophile. For throughout the book, there is a grudging admiration for the English. How it later changed into a mood for conquest of England is not a mystery to me.  There would be ample codes in the German language to do that.

I remember reading somewhere many years ago, the frank admiration that Bismarck had for England, while he had a brooding disdain for the French.  I think he did say something to the effect: The friendship of France will not compensate for the displeasure of England. (I write from my memory).

Then what about Napoleon? In-spite of all his ambitions on England, when he was in dire straits, he dared to approach only a British ship. If he had done the same with anyone else, including the Prussians and the Russian, it goes without saying that he would have been beaten into a pulp then and there.

Remember what happened to Mussolini.


If Hitler had been surrounded by an English army, he would not have committed suicide. If Napoleon had been surrounded by a Russian army, he would have committed suicide.

A note: Non-English world is an entirely different world. If policymakers do not know the ingredient of this contention, they are literally walking blindfold, taking the English nation to its doom.