Saturday, March 9, 2013

Does disagreeing with Narendra Modi make you a communist?

(scroll down for new update on November 21, 2013)

NO- as Malini Parthasarathy, formerly (update: now editor) of the renowned communist newspaper, The Hindu, tweeted today, but wait ...

On the other hand, given that there are very few Indian communists in this universe who agree with Narendra Modi (NaMo), the following implication holds true.


Prob (disagree with Modi | person is commie ) > Prob (any person disagrees with Modi)
⇒ Prob (person is a commie | disagree with Modi ) > Prob (person is commie ).

In simple language, the theorem states:
Since a person is more likely to hate Modi if it known that he/she is a commie, this in turn implies that the probability that any random Indian is a commie increases if it is additionally known that he/she disagrees with Modi.

In fact, if given additional information that the person also worked for a reputed communist newspaper, this probability goes up even more.  On the other hand, if you try to flip this around to say "You are more likely to be a Hindutva-vaadi  if you agree with Modi", this theorem won't support you much. There are a huge number of Hindutva-vaadis who do not agree, and who agree with NaMo, since support for NaMo is issue-based and cuts across sectarian barriers.

Update November 21, 2013:
After the Tehelka and AAP fiascos in the last 24 hours, we now have a

Corollary to main result

Prob (pSecular | person is big fraud) > Prob (person is pSecular)  

⇒ Prob (person is big fraud | pSecular ) > Prob (person is a big fraud)

in other words, the corollary states:
Given that we are observing with increasing frequency that the biggest frauds of Indian origin being exposed are pSecular cheerleaders, this in turn implies that the probability that a random person of Indian-origin you meet is a big fraud increases if it is additionally known that he/she is a pSecular.  

Hence the phrase "pseudo-secular fraud" is kinda becoming redundant, since being one increases the probability of being the other.

This is not opinion, but a mathematically provable, data-driven result that serves as a warning for gullible Indians.
Here's a short proof from the Endeavor blog:

No comments:

Post a Comment