Podcasts about madras chennai

In this episode of the Dibbly Dobbly Podcast we are looking back at Australia's test series wins in India for our Historical Series. In part 2 we look back at Australia's second test series win in India back in 1959 where Australian captain Richie Benaud led his side to victory. Time Stamps 0:00 Intro 0:16 Introduction to Historical Series 0:50 1959 Australia Test Tour of Pakistan and India 7:07 1959 Australia Test Squad for Pakistan and India 8:43 First Test vs Pakistan, Dacca Stadium, Dhaka 13:39 Second Test vs Pakistan, Lahore Stadium, Lahore 15:23 Third Test vs Pakistan, National Stadium, Karachi 17:55 First Test vs India, Feroz Shah Kotla, Delhi 19:48 Second Test vs India, Green Park, Kanpur 24:06 Third Test vs India, Brabourne Stadium, Bombay (Mumbai) 26:12 Fourth Test vs India, Corporation Stadium, Madras (Chennai) 28:04 Fifth Test vs India, Eden Gardens, Calcutta 31:56 Final Thoughts 37:15 Outro Social Media Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/DibblyDobblyPodcast Twitter Page: https://twitter.com/dibblydobblypod Instagram Page: https://www.instagram.com/dibblydobblypodcast/ Podcast Services Anchor: https://anchor.fm/dibblydobblypodcast Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1Bq4N1bCSesF5L9jsY6wP4 Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dibbly-dobbly-podcast/id1596733214 Blogger Page http://dibblydobblypodcast.blogspot.com

In this episode of the Dibbly Dobbly Podcast we are looking back at Australia's test series wins in India for our Historical Series. In part 1 we look back at Australia's first ever test series win in India back in 1956 where Australian captain Ian Johnson led his side to victory. TIme Stamps 0:00 Intro 0:16 Introduction to Historical Series 1:26 History of Test Cricket between Australia and India 5:31 1956 Australia Test Tour of Pakistan and India 10:16 1956 Australia Test Squad for Pakistan and India 11:59 Only Test vs Pakistan, National Stadium, Karachi 16:07 First Test vs India, Coroperation Stadium, Madras (Chennai) 20:19 Second Test vs India, Bradbourne Stadium, Bombay (Mumbai) 24:30 Third Test vs India, Eden Gardens, Calcutta 27:39 Final Thoughts 31:07 Outro Social Media Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/DibblyDobblyPodcast Twitter Page: https://twitter.com/dibblydobblypod Instagram Page: https://www.instagram.com/dibblydobblypodcast/ Podcast Services Anchor: https://anchor.fm/dibblydobblypodcast Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1Bq4N1bCSesF5L9jsY6wP4 Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dibbly-dobbly-podcast/id1596733214 Blogger Page http://dibblydobblypodcast.blogspot.com

Indra Nooyi joins us this week as our special guest. In this episode we talked about her upbringing and early life, her career including leading PepsiCo, her leadership lessons, making it as an immigrant, and her experience meeting Steve Jobs. Born in Madras (Chennai) in Tamil Nadu, India, Indra Nooyi is an American business executive and former chairperson and CEO of Pepsico. She has consistently ranked among the world's 100 most powerful women. She serves on the boards of Amazon and ICC. In 2007, the Government of India awarded her the Padma Bhushan, the country's 3rd highest civilian honor. For more conversations with creators, builders and thinkers, subscribe to Aarthi and Sriram's Good Time Show - https://www.youtube.com/c/TheGoodTimeShowAarthiSriram

Inspired by media reports of the Turkish government attempting to assert the Turkish spelling of their name, this episode considers strategies of naming/renaming/spelling. Turkey's move is discussed in the context of its history. Simon suggests four categories of renaming: the post-colonial shift to a more authentic local name as with Swaziland/Eswatini or Madras/Chennai; the attempt to be more memorable because one's name is insufficiently distinct as when Slovenia considered Alpe-Adria; the power-play as when a regime rebrands key places (as with Astana/Nursultan) and the names of historical revival such as Israel. Nick argues that part of Czecholosvakia's problem in the mid-20th century was the lack of resonance around its name. Simon notices that some languages have changed names while others keep older names longer. Italians still call Beijing ‘Pechino' (the equivalent of ‘Peking'). Simon recalls the process by which Pakistan invented its name. Nick muses on whether some countries actually need a name change. Simon raises the issue of countries with multiple names (including the UK) and counties retaining a definite article in their name.

this podcast I share my movie going experiences at some of the most iconic theatres in Madras/Chennai and the shift from Single Screen Theatres to Multiplex to OTT

Cinema, Kaaram, Kaapi! In this episode i talk about some of my favourite theatres i have been to in Madras/Chennai

The greatest #India vs #Australia test match ever and only the second ever tied test match. What a match ! Check out a quick mini episode of this great match from 1986 at #Madras (#Chennai), India.

There is no psychological evolution | J. Krishnamurti Extract from Public Talk #3, Madras (Chennai), India, 1979

This is my humble attempt to introduce this sound on a Wednesday in my city (Madras/Chennai) at this fabulous venue, 365 @ Hyatt Regency. I was quite surprised by the response as the entire set is played between 110 - 115 BPM.. Press play and immerse yourself in the calming sounds & notice your head bobbing subconsciously.. and if you like it, please share :)

Stephen Frederic Dale, author of "Babur: Timurid Prince and Mughal Emperor", in conversation with Jaipur Bytes host Lakshya Datta, recorded live at the Jaipur Literature Festival 2020 in Diggi Palace on Jan 27. Stephen is an Emeritus Professor of South Asian and Islamic History and a Distinguished University Scholar at The Ohio State University. He first visited India in 1963 as a Fulbright Lecturer in English at the Banaras Hindu University and returned in 1967 to work in the Madras/Chennai archives to carry out research for his dissertation on the Muslims of Kerala. His published works include Islamic Society on the South Asian Frontier: the Mappilas of Malabar 1498-1922, Indian Merchants and Eurasian Trade 1600-1750, The Garden of the Eight Paradises: Babur and the Culture of Empire in Central Asia, Afghanistan and India, The Muslim Empire of the Ottomans, Safavids and Mughals, The Orange Trees of Marrakesh: Ibn Khaldun and the Science of Man and Babur: Timurid Prince and Mughal Emperor.

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.’ Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company’s decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation’ itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890’s, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white’ and ‘black’ was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.’ Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only’ signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900’s saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world’s population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.’ Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company’s decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation’ itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890’s, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white’ and ‘black’ was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.’ Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only’ signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900’s saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world’s population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.’ Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company’s decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation’ itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890’s, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white’ and ‘black’ was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.’ Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only’ signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900’s saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world’s population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.’ Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company’s decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation’ itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890’s, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white’ and ‘black’ was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.’ Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only’ signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900’s saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world’s population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.’ Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company’s decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation’ itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890’s, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white’ and ‘black’ was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.’ Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only’ signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900’s saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world’s population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often think of South Africa or America when we hear the word ‘segregation.' Or — a popular view — that social groups have always chosen to live apart.But as Carl H. Nightingale shows in his new book, Segregation: A Global History of Divided Cities (University of Chicago Press, 2012), the racial phenomenon is both modern and international. To be sure, laws and informal practices separating individuals by membership in a caste can be found everywhere in the ancient and medieval world. Those with or seeking wealth and power have always sought to preserve or increase their position by disuniting people on the grounds of social category. Yet the idea of “race” and the enduring belief that human beings can be distinguished in such terms has its origins in the rise of European colonialism, starting with British rule in Madras (Chennai) and the East India Company's decision to split Calcutta (Kolkata) into “White Town” and “Black Town.” The word ‘segregation' itself comes from techniques used in Hong Kong and Bombay (Mumbai) in the 1890's, part of a viral “mania” that, Nightingale explains, pivoted around the challenges of mass urbanization and sent the institution north, south, east, and west — even to Latin American cities like Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires, where the distinction between ‘white' and ‘black' was murky at best. This globalization depended heavily on imperialist governments, and often just as importantly relied on multinational corporations (real estate especially) and intellectual networks, which provided in the first case institutional precedent and protocol and in the second rationalization and legitimacy for the pseudo-scientific notion of ‘race.' Yet, as this ambitious work demonstrates, segregation appeared under every form of government, with and without the help of capitalism. The line betweende facto and de jure was often hard to tell or irrelevant. (One might note here, for example, that, contrary to popular belief, most businesses in the Old South were not forced by law to put up those ‘Whites Only' signs.) Indeed, there is more than a bit of paradox and irony in this tragic story. And while the late 1900's saw the rise of powerful movements opposed to segregation, the world's population is now majority-urban for the first time, and still lives with these awful legacies. Attempts to rollback segregation will have to grapple with this complex and global history. Thankfully, Nightingale has given us a very useful starting point. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices