It seems that Alex Cockburn piece has shocked the neo-lib soul inside Mr. Monroe. However, Mr. Monroe doesn't present statistical evidence that shows Cockburn is "unbalanced" or wrong in his view of India.
=========
Er, Yes.
Cristobel?
I think you're mistaken here.
I don't have a "neo-lib soul" and I'm not celebrating IT or forgetting poverty. If anything, my soul's probably made of composite nanotube fibers.
Let's review the sequence of events...
The thread started here --
<http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20050808/017002.html>
with Ulhas' critique of Alex Cockburn's piece.
Ulhas doesn't like it.
I was wondering -- aloud -- if maybe it (that essay) was disliked because it dwelled too long on poverty issues for his taste and failed to capture other elements of the contemporary Indian scene.
For example, CTV penetration as described by Ulhas here --
<http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20050808/017045.html>
So actually, I don't think your argument's with me at all but perhaps, yes, perhaps, with Ulhas who's taken strong exception to Cockburn's POV.
.d.
-- http://monroelab.net/ <<<<<>>>>> groove to my groove