„I also want to encourage anyone who has been affected by hurricane Ka, uh, Karina...“

—  Laura Bush, Misremembering the name of the hurricane that had struck New Orleans http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPk-pMMPA_I
Laura Bush photo
Laura Bush
primeira dama dos Estados Unidos de 2001 a 2009 1946
Publicidade

Citações relacionadas

Gloria Estefan photo
Henry Rollins photo
Publicidade
Oprah Winfrey photo

„I don't want anyone who doesn't want me.“

—  Oprah Winfrey American businesswoman, talk show host, actress, producer, and philanthropist 1954

John Heywood photo

„Ka me, ka the, one good tourne askth an other.“

—  John Heywood English writer known for plays, poems and a collection of proverbs 1497 - 1580
Serve me, serve thee, one good turn asks another. Part I, chapter 11.

Stephen King photo
Franklin D. Roosevelt photo
Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands photo
Alex Salmond photo
Lixion Avila photo
Indro Montanelli photo
Franz Kafka photo
Alice Walker photo
Arun Shourie photo

„And anyone who maintains anything to the contrary is a fascist out to insinuate a unity, indeed to impose a uniformity, where there has been none.“

—  Arun Shourie Indian journalist and politician 1941
Context: Caste is real. The working class is real. Being a Naga is real. But ‘India is just a geographical expression!’ Similarly, being a Muslim of course is real – Islam must be seen and talked of as one block of granite –... But Hinduism? Why, there is no such thing: it is just an aggregation, a pile of assorted beliefs and practices –... And anyone who maintains anything to the contrary is a fascist out to insinuate a unity, indeed to impose a uniformity, where there has been none. That is what our progressive ideologues declaim, as we have seen. In a word, the parts alone are real. The whole is just a construct. India has never been one, these ideologues insist – disparate peoples and regions were knocked together by the Aryans, by the Mughals, by the British for purposes of empire. Anyone who wants to use that construct – India – as the benchmark for determining the sort of structure under which we should live has a secret agenda – of enforcing Hindu hegemony. This is the continuance of, in a sense the culmination of, the Macaulay-Missionary technique. The British calculated that to subjugate India and hold it, they must undermine the essence of the people: this was Hinduism, and everything which flowed from it. Hence the doggedness with which they set about to undermine the faith and regard of the people for five entities: the gods and goddesses the Hindus revered; the temples and idols in which they were enshrined; the texts they held sacred; the language in which those texts and everything sacred in that tradition was enshrined and which was even in mid-nineteenth-century the lingua franca – that is, Sanskrit; and the group whose special duty it had been over aeons to preserve that way of life – the Brahmins. The other component of the same exercise was to prop up the parts – the non-Hindus, the regional languages, the castes and groups which they calculated would be the most accessible to the missionaries and the empire – the innocent tribals, the untouchables.

Laurell K. Hamilton photo