Amartya Sen: The ignoble laureate – Sandeep

Sandeep Icon“Amartya Sen’s lengthy chronicle of skulduggery was to simply show why A=Arafat and A=Amartya. Like the dead Palestinian terrorist state-head who rewarded his loyal minions with power and position, Amartya Sen has used his Nobel Prize as both an academic and political pulpit to further both his economic and political ends throwing shame, fair play, ethics, and even basic decency to the winds.” – Sandeep

Amartya SenThe Nobel Prize lost any trace of respectability or merit ages ago. Apart from a few branches of pure science, the Nobel is simply a fancy title that converts obscure and spurious academics and nonentities into overnight millionaires and Universal Experts whose only strength lies in their ability to kiss the bottom that gets them the bounties. Of course, the Nobel isn’t restricted to just that: it includes a whole gamut of such phonies belonging to various categories—from politicians to terrorists.

Name some famous Nobel-winning names that begin with A. Two names immediately come to mind: Arafat and Amartya. The former was a gold-standard terrorist who won the Nobel for Peace, and the latter was a gold-standard academic obscurity who won the Nobel for Economics. Arafat asserted his terrorism in both word and deed and thus earns our respect because he was at least honest about his avowed intent to destroy Israel using sheer terror.

Here’s where Amartya poses a problem. He’s so versatile that you never know what to make of him: an agnostic, an arguer, an orator, an intellectual, an identity-explorer, an economist, a Buddhist, a Communist, or simply a species from Madagascar that has a projectile tongue and changes its skin colour on demand. His record is both impressive and scary. He won the Nobel for Economics. He’s always on tour lecturing about everything other than economics. He claims to also be a Sanskritist. He speaks glowingly about China’s cultural revolution. He writes books about argumentative Indians. He explores the nature of identities. He heads a panel constituted to revive a prestigious ancient Indian university.

Yasser ArafatGiven that he’s such a multi-faceted incomprehensibility, I’ll settle for the last: Amartya Sen is best defined as a species from Madagascar that has a projectile tongue and changes its skin colour on demand. That’s a biologist’s language. In the layman’s tongue, that species is called a Chameleon.

Amartya Sen is a classic example of mindless and uncritical celebrity worship in the academia, which naturally spills over to the media and public consciousness. This itself is an ugly by-product of a larger phenomenon. Over the years, someone who receives significant recognition in any field suddenly becomes The Expert on Everything. The Nobel being the most significant recognition has thus become the only qualification for such people who instantly become Mr/Ms Know-it-All and attain a Divine Right to indulge in unqualified snobbery.

Which brings us to the question nobody ever asks: what exactly is Amartya Sen’s distinction apart from writing reams of stuff on economics, which nobody reads much less understands? Nobody is grudging his Nobel. However, there are some vulgar mischief-mongers who unfairly sully the fair professor’s name by calling him Mister Rothschild and spread atrocious rumours that the Rothschild name had a lot to do with Dr. Sen getting the Nobel. But let’s not hit below the belt. However, this question is fundamental and necessary because Sen is projected as an expert on everything from ancient India to Hinduism to Sanskrit to Islam to Buddhism to society to philosophy to foreign policy, and is taken seriously. What exactly is his qualification and competence to head the ambitious and well-intentioned project of setting up the Nalanda International University, whose aim is to revive the glory of the original Nalanda? What’s your bet that he’d still be languishing in obscurity at Cambridge instead of doing what he’s doing now but for the Nobel?

It’s precisely because these questions aren’t asked that Sen gets away with—apart from terming Mao’s genocide of his own people as making “great strides”—being a casual apologist for Islamic terror.

… that’s quite different from using religious divisions for purpose of a sectarian division, and for purpose of perpetrating violence on people who do not share the religion but have another religion.

But that is not confined to Islamic – what you now call Islamic – terrorism. That is a very small group of people of the Muslim faith who happen to take a particular view about how to advance it; I think the vast majority of Muslims don’t take that view … the “global war on terror” is not our language, of course. When we refer to it, we call it the so-called “war on terror”

And in 2006 this self-confessed agnostic strongly urged Tony Blair to implement a policy, which calls for the takeover of Britain’s schools by the Church so the kind padres can catch ‘em young and begin to enforce strict mind control. In his own words,

Christian schools “are perfectly acceptable” but other faith schools “are a big mistake and should be scrapped if the Government wants to encourage a unifying British identity … Christian schools have evolved and often provide a much more tolerant atmosphere than a purely religious school would. A lot of people in the Middle East or India or elsewhere have been educated in Christian schools. A lot of my friends came from St Xavier’s in Kolkata — I don’t think they were indoctrinated particularly in Christianity.”

St. Xavier's College, KolkataWhich is another reason we need to be very wary and scared of Amartya Sen’s creed. His staggering hypocrisy is also dangerous: here’s an agnostic who openly, emphatically endorses religious schools on the assumption that such schools would promote a “unifying” (sic)” national (British) identity. As “evidence,” he claims that Christian schools provide “tolerant atmosphere than a purely religious school.” One wonders whether Sen even realizes the absurdity of his self-contradictory statement — if it’s a Christian school, it is by definition, a religious school unless you’re talking about an out-and-out religious seminary where only hardcore Christianity is taught. Sen’s hollow and fraudulent claim that Indian Christian schools provide an atmosphere of tolerance shows that a Nobel entitles you to lie shamelessly and still smile with confidence. This quick laundry list shows the delightfully tolerant atmosphere of Indian Christian schools:

  • Making it almost impossible for non-Christians to get admission unless they convert or belong to the Rich and the Famous club in society
  • Showing the Hindu students their place by employing various methods (see the subsequent bulleted points)
  • Prohibiting Hindu girls from wearing any adornment or mark that the school regards as Hindu on the school campus
  • Enforcing Bible studies in the guise of Moral Science, a compulsory subject mandated by almost all state boards
  • Insisting on speaking in English—I know a friend who was fined repeatedly in school for speaking in Kannada or Hindi.
  • Derogating the Hindu religion—and India as a country—in the guise of admonishing an errant student—I’m both an eyewitness and recipient of “bloody Indian!” and “bloody Heathen!” admonishments.
  • Glossy pamphlets stuck on the notice board describing the kindly exploits of this or that Reverend Eminence’s latest success in spreading the Love of God to remote villages, which were languishing under the Heathen religion.

St. Augustine's High SchoolAbundant tolerance no?

If anything, Amartya Sen is one of the most eminent instances of what Christian education does to Hindus (or followers of “Pagan” religions). The mind control that Christian schools indulge in is as incredible as it is multi-pronged. Years upon years of sustained Christian brainwashing culminates in drilling a feeling of unshakeable, lifelong shame into you. The result: the “Pagan” student ends up hating his religion, his country, and worse, himself, and the only way of overcoming this shame is by harping abuse on precisely these things. This is one of the explanations why Amartya Sen is Amartya Sen. Needless, you can find a million mini-Amartya Sens-in-spirit all around you whose worldview is primarily, immutably shaped and therefore distorted, by Christianity. Like an undiluted Christian fanatic, even those who claim to be agnostics, atheists, and religion-haters refuse to admit even the possibility that an alternate worldview based on different but sound principles can exist.

Even if we grant some lease to Sen’s open call for Church brainwashing of education on the grounds that he was trying to bootlick the British by out-Britishing them, he still sounds insincere. Let’s transport Amartya Sen to India and apply his words in the Indian context.

Hindu schools “are perfectly acceptable” but other faith schools “are a big mistake and should be scrapped if the Government wants to encourage a unifying Indian identity … Hindu schools have evolved and often provide a much more tolerant atmosphere than a purely religious school would. A lot of people in … [USA or Europe] or elsewhere have been educated in Hindu schools. A lot of my friends came from Narendrapur Ramkrishna Mission School in Kolkata — I don’t think they were indoctrinated particularly in Hinduism.”

What’s your wager that he would he make a speech of this sort? Actually, he won’t need to make such a speech because he’s already preempted this requirement by asserting that a “lot of my friends came from St Xavier’s in Kolkata — I don’t think they were indoctrinated particularly in Christianity.”

Subramanian SwamyHowever, hypocrisy is the least of Sen’s long list of sins.

Amartya Sen is also spineless. This powerful Harvard Professor who has wide contacts in the world’s political firmament preferred to remain mute when he should’ve actually used his position to uphold free speech. This selfsame Harvard university dumped Subramanian Swamy because the powerful Academic Mullahs in Harvard’s administration were pissed off with Swamy’s DNA article, which had angered the bloodthirsty Oil Oligarchs of the Middle East who now fund the Madrassa on the Charles.

Prof. Gopa SabharwalOf late, Sen has also added mooching and opacity to his list of sins. His adventures as the head of the Nalanda University revival project is one unending saga of elaborate hoax at taxpayer expense. A measure of Amartya Sen’s dangerous power is how he managed to ensure that India’s former president APJ Abdul Kalam resigned from the Nalanda Mentor Group. Not content, he also made sure that Kalam’s resignation remained a secret as long as possible. In a classic case of the tenant usurping the owner’s property, the Nalanda project, which was Kalam brainchild, has now been hijacked by the likes of Amartya Sen, who has mooched the Indian taxpayers of a gargantuan 17100000 Rupees till Feb 2009 in travel and accommodation bills alone, and he has shown zero Abdul Kalamprogress in return for spending all that money. Actually, let’s correct that: the only progress he has shown so far is writing a letter to Pranab Mukherjee (who was then the External Affairs Minister) to smuggle Sen’s favourite minion, Gopa Sabharwal as the Vice Chancellor. This letter, written on Sen’s Harvard Letterhead, was the only “due process” that Sen followed to get this woman, who’s neither qualified nor competent, to be a Vice Chancellor: she was merely a reader in Lady Shri Ram College. Ever since, Gopa has been drawing a princely salary of Rupees 5,06,513 per month.

Amartya Sen’s lengthy chronicle of skulduggery was to simply show why A=Arafat and A=Amartya. Like the dead Palestinian terrorist state-head who rewarded his loyal minions with power and position, Amartya Sen has used his Nobel Prize as both an academic and political pulpit to further both his economic and political ends throwing shame, fair play, ethics, and even basic decency to the winds.

Every platform or organization that has engaged and plans to engage him stands equally guilty of partaking in his sins. – The Rediscovery of India, 29 June 2012

11 Responses

  1. I’m warning you Amartya sen. God will punish you.


  2. He is phony and a congress coolie.


  3. The Nobel Memorial Prize for Economics

    Controversies and Criticisms

    Some critics argue that the prestige of the Prize in Economics derives in part from its association with the Nobel Prizes, an association that has often been a source of controversy. Among them is the Swedish human rights lawyer Peter Nobel, a great-grandson of Ludvig Nobel.

    Nobel criticizes the awarding institution of misusing his family’s name, and states that no member of the Nobel family has ever had the intention of establishing a prize in economics.

    According to Samuel Brittan of the Financial Times, both former Swedish minister of finance Kjell-Olof Feldt and Gunnar Myrdal wanted the prize abolished, saying “Myrdal rather less graciously wanted the prize abolished because it had been given to such reactionaries as Hayek (and afterwards Milton Friedman).”[23]

    In his speech at the 1974 Nobel Banquet Friedrich Hayek stated that if he had been consulted whether to establish a Nobel Prize in economics he would “have decidedly advised against it” primarily because “the Nobel Prize confers on an individual an authority which in economics no man ought to possess… This does not matter in the natural sciences. Here the influence exercised by an individual is chiefly an influence on his fellow experts; and they will soon cut him down to size if he exceeds his competence. But the influence of the economist that mainly matters is an influence over laymen: politicians, journalists, civil servants and the public generally.”

    Critics cite the apparent snub of Joan Robinson as evidence of the Committee’s bias towards mainstream economics, though heterodox economists like Friedrich Hayek (Austrian School) and Ronald Coase (associated with New institutional economics) have won.

    Milton Friedman was awarded the 1976 prize in part for his work on monetarism. Awarding the prize to Friedman caused international protests by the left,[30] Friedman was accused of supporting the military dictatorship in Chile, because of the relation of economists of the University of Chicago to Pinochet and a controversial six-day trip[31] he took to Chile during March 1975 (less than two years after the coup which deposed the democratically elected president Salvador Allende). Friedman himself answered, that he never was an adviser of the dictatorship, only gave some lectures and seminars on inflation and met with many officials including the dictator Augusto Pinochet in Chile.

    Four Nobel Prize laureates – George Wald, Linus Pauling, David Baltimore and Salvador Luria – wrote letters to the New York Times protesting the award to Friedman in October 1976.[33][34]
    The 1994 prize to John Forbes Nash caused controversy within the prize’s selection committee because of his history of mental illness and alleged anti-Semitism.[35] The controversy resulted in a change to the rules governing the committee during 1994. Previously, members of the Economics Prize Committee members did not have any limit to their term of service; they now serve for three years.

    The 2005 prize to Robert Aumann was criticized by European press due to his alleged use of his research of game theory to justify his stance against the dismantling of Israeli settlements from occupied territories.



  4. Amartya Sen and the ayatollahs of secularism – part 3

    Dont know if there are two more parts But this one is a hard knock on Sen


  5. If you keep suppressing Hindus & Hinduism, there is a limit to which they can take the B.S. Ultimately, something will have to give. What will it be?


  6. Amartya Sen ‘lost Indian-ness’ after dumping Bengali wife for foreign brides: Swamy – ANI – Yahoo News – Tue 23 July 2013

    New Delhi: Reacting to Amartya Sen’s comment on Bharatiya Janata Party leader Narendra Modi that expressed his concerns towards the prospect of the Gujarat Chief Minister becoming the Prime Minister of the country, Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy in a shocking comment today said that the nobel laureate was not Indian because he had separated from his Indian wife and married two foreigners.

    “Amartya Sen is not Indian. He had lost his Indian-ness after he left his Bengali ex-wife and married two foreign females. He has lived abroad and only visits the country for a couple of months, which cannot make you Indian”, Swamy said here today.

    Additionally, Swamy alleged that Sen was ‘meddling’ into the political affairs of the country to bail himself out of the corruption charges against him at Nalanda University. In 2007, the Government of India appointed Sen as the chairman of the Nalanda Mentor Group.
    Yesterday, Sen told a television channel during an interview that Modi could have done more for Gujarat’s education, health and for secularism, instead of focusing solely on physical infrastructure development in that state.

    Referring to Modi, Sen said “I think I would like a more secular person to be prime minister. I would not like a prime minister who generates concern and fear among minorities. That is the primary reason. I am in favour of someone who looks at social administration and not just business administration seriously. That doesn’t mean that I don’t see what he has done and why people admire him.”

    Sen went a step further in saying that as an economist he didn’t approve of the ‘Modi model’ of governance saying, “I don’t think the record is very good. I don’t have to be a member of the minority in order to feel insecure. I could be a member of the majority.”

    Sen said:”We Indians don’t want a situation where the minority feel insecure and could legitimately think that there was an organised violence against them in 2002. I think that is a terrible record and I don’t think Indian Prime Minister as an Indian citizen … Of who has that kind of record. No, I do not.” (ANI)


  7. It is wrong to refer to Amartya Sen as Nobel Laureate. There is no Nobel Prize for economics. It is the ‘Nobel Memorial Award’ instituted by a group of Swedish banks.

    It is a bogus Nobel. We could equally institute a Nobel Memorial Award for astrology. That doesn’t make the recipient a great scientist.


  8. Let us not be too much concerned about the religions. What followers of other religions are doing or what they ought to do must be confined to the religious heads of the different religions. As a matter of fact Hindus getting converted to Christianity is primarily because of their background. Conversions are maximum in poor and underprivileged. An empty stomach knows no religion and the one who gives him bread is his God and he belongs to him and I feel there is nothing wrong it. Why we do not find a mother teresa amongst the hindus. Actually we are in the habit of speaking too much and doing nothing.If religion has got anything to do with the society then in Hindus it would have been impossible to find a Hindu food adulterer, a rapist hindu, a hindu family who puts their daughter in law for dowry,a hindu swamy who is more interested in sensual pleasure than the heavenly pleasure, A Hindu raping the innocent girl,A hindu criminal , a hindu liar. No sir we do not understand the basic essence of religion and what it is all about.Do we outcast such people from our Hindu society .We have given social acceptance and have socialized the crime.What we all need today is 100% tolerance, a crime free society, food for all,shelter for all, medicine for all, education for all and a better sense of brotherhood. Religion divides and love unites.Let there be only one religion and that is the religion of Humanity and total love. Love the creatures of God and God will love is what bible preaches. How many christian follow it?

    But I must appreciate Mr. Sandeep for his revelations about Mr. Amartya Sen. How can a man of his stature appoint a non-entity like Shabbarwal as vice chancellor of upcoming University on Great Nalanda Pattern and can spend crores on his travelling from the granted fund for University. ts really a serious matter and needs investigation.


  9. bose you’re a typical bong trying to cover up for your fellow bong’s anti hindu tirade. you people stink so bad that i sometimes wish you didnt even exist.

    now i know why everyone hates you lazies, cos besides being pseudo intellectuals you are also anti hindu. i would love to meet you someday in the filthy city of kolkotto where you mosquitoes live and breed.


  10. I went to a very old Cristian School in Bengal, established 200 years ago, where 99.99 percent of the students were Hindus. No body had tried to convert us.

    In front of our school there was a very old Madrasa, established more than 200 years ago; 100 percent of the students were Muslims.


  11. “what exactly is Amartya Sen’s distinction apart from writing reams of stuff on economics, which nobody reads much less understands?”

    Can you understand or ever read the works of other Nobel prize winners: Einstein, Bohr, Leontiev, Kanarovich, Frisch, Merton, Stone etc etc?
    I bet you have never heard of them either.

    Most Nobel prize winners take rest after doing some important works in their fields and do nothing for the rest of their lives.

    Amartya Sen and others from Bengal who could not get Nobel but worthy of it (PC Roy, JC Bose, SN Bose) wrote all their lives on many different subjects.

    Thus they are not just scientists, but intellectuals.

    We do not like Muslims or Christians to build their schools to convert people; in the same way British dislikes the Muslim Schools all over Britain to create more Jihadis.

    Amartya Sen said that in a more refined language, otherwise some Ayatollah will declare Fatwa for his head.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: