• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Why does India always get a pass?

B

bionic77

Member
J

Jumeira

Banned
MikeMyers said:
Are you an Indian who lives in India?

I've always been curious to hear the demonetization experience from someone who was living in India at the time.
Click to expand...

It was pretty bad. My wife who is Indian told me her family had to queue up for hours at banks who only had a limited amount of money to exchange daily, so if you were lucky to exchange your money you'd only get to change a small amount. Now for a country that carries out transaction almost completely in cash, the government screwed over alot of people by implementing a broken process. Life savings stored in houses/safe now useless, the lack of guarantee from banks combined with a short deadline made things difficult. My wife's family hold a special distate for Modi, they echo the same sentiments that he's a cunt. They're from Bombay.

I've not visited India, from what my wife told me I'd rather not at the moment, outside of family obligations. Class discrimination is something I find difficult to swallow, there's a bunch of social practices that would be hard for me to ignore, though it seems rife in South Asian countries such as India/Pakistan.
 
W

wachie

Member
MetalliCabombination said:
This. The difference is that he wasn't elected out of spite for a community.
He (modi) was elected out of spite for the largest and oldest political party of india.
Muslims in india are the largest unified minority, the hindu majority on the other hand is divided into dozens of subcultures. As such targeting the muslim votebank was the surest bet to power and this is what the aforementioned party had been doing for the last 40 or whatever years. Let me reiterate, these people won with overwhelming majorities for decades until this guy popped up flipped the tables.
The party mentioned above always took steps to keep hinduism down a notch while giving additional privileges to the muslim minority.be it in the form of reservations, monetary aid for pilgrimages, promotion and sustainence of extreme religious beliefs, . To this day, a large sector of the poor muslim population in remote parts of the country doesn't attend schools but is taught in certain madarasas which focus solely on religious education. And certification from such places are actually accepted when enrollment into higher education or certain jobs.
My post is not meant to berate the beliefs of a community btw,everyone has a history of how they arrived at their culture or sensibilities and i have no right to question it.
Its meant to berate a party that ruled for decades and had a popular yoga guru beaten up in the middle of the night because he brought up some ills done by the said party in an interview while a lecturer who openly advocated extremist jihadi beliefs was defended upon prosecution.
The reason modi is popular isnt because he got people killed on the streets its because the riots he's infamous for took place in a highly volatile region within days of him assuming power in that state. Accounts say religious communities imposed curfews on their on own in those areas.
And in the last 15 odd years since, there hasnt been a single riot or a case of communal disharmony in that state and he's been elected every single time.
The riot move, assuming he did get people killed effectively killed any chance of his party ever coming back to power in the national scene because of the vote bank he alienated.

He wasnt banned to travel to us because he's goddamn hitler, he was banned upon the request of the same political party i mentioned above based on the same incident i talked about above.

I spent half of 2016 and some part of 2017 in india as apart of my job and according to my ex colleagues people even hate modi's own party. But the thing us their last pm, who was an economics doctorate from the london school, upon being questioned about joblessness and poverty literally made an emergency statement on national television where he said money doesn't grow on trees so fuck off.
He was like a trump who barely did anything but made a trump like statement every two years.
On the other hand they see modi as someone who is to an extent capable of looking beyond religious votebanks even if its at the cost of some perceived radicalism.

In any case, thats it for my rant. It bothered me a little seeing claims of rape being a part of culture because most the people i met there were genuinely nice and sensible.As in every country with economic issues and racial diversity, there are bad apples, the overpopulation doesnt help. But this isnt something you can fix with something like criticism of western intervention. Itll just have to be allowed to wash away with time as influence of good education and lowering levels of poverty(hopefully) .
Believe it or not, their is actually far more popular among educated youths than he is among the elderly or religious extremists who grew entirely in the shadow of the big political party.
And as a half latino, i can tell you the 'racism' there doesnt have shit on what we have here. Yes at times youll be made to feel different but ill be damned if i ever even got a bad stare because of my nationality or skin color let alone go through shit thats been going on here of late.


I was there when it happened. In the city i was in people had hassles for a day or two and then switched to cards and digital payments entirely which isnt nearly as prevalent as it is here.
Cant speak for the suburban regions tho.
Click to expand...
This is such pure distilled bullshit.

On the Gujarat riots and following violence
So, the pogrom of 2002, which Prachi referred to, very rightly, was on Modi’s watch. It was—you know, it was poor governance, at best, and brutal, at worst. You have almost 2,000 Muslims’ lives being killed in reprisal violence after a despicable burning of a coach, which was actually allowed to, in rhetorical terms, to be seen as if Hindu nationalists were being burned and attacked by Muslims in the city of Godhra. But for virtually seven months after that, you had reprisal violence and the state just looking on. Modi was chief minister then. And to date, he has not really apologized or even expressed regret for that massacre.
Click to expand...

On Modi's US ban
You see, this was a very, very successful campaign launched by Indians, expat Indians, based in the United States, who actually campaigned there on the issue of the 2002 massacre being a genocidal carnage, and argued that for a man who was chief minister of the state, he should not be allowed to visit the United States of America. And, therefore, the ban came through, and the ban was subsequently held, repeated even as he rose and became more and more powerful.
Click to expand...

On Modi's wins following the riots
What we need to remember about Modi is that within a three—or, within five years, he won two or three—three successful elections in the state of Gujarat on the back of the massacre, which tells you something quite frightening about Indian democracy, and possibly all democracies, that we actually go on a—we travel a very, very—walk the razor’s edge, if you like, that democracy is the will of the people, but the day democracy becomes the rule of the mob and mobocracy and majoritarianism, and you can actually whip up mob hysteria through an election process, which Modi has successfully done in 2002 itself, after the massacre, 2007 and then in 2012 again, that is what is a really worrying signal as far as Modi and Trump are concerned, because they represent, in a sense, the democratic will of the people, but they also represent subversion of democratic institutions, which are checks and balances to majoritarianism and supremacism within democracy.
Click to expand...

Modi's background
Modi is different from Trump in the sense that I know that Trump’s father had links with the Ku Klux Klan, different in a sense that Modi’s grooming, political grooming, and entire growth has been with an organization called the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Now, people just know a little bit about this. There have been a lot of academic studies and a lot of real issues down at the ground when we had communal violence breaking out. The RSS is an outfit that is protofascist, that does not really believe in a constitutional democracy as India is now. So Modi, in a sense, is today a very popular leader, for sure, but he comes from the grooming of the RSS that believe in a supremacist India, that believes in differentials in citizenship.
Click to expand...

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/6/26/indian_pm_modi_was_once_banned
 
S

Sanjay

Member
Indians government gets a pass, not its people.

The government tries to be good and more western like with its liberties it gives to its people, and why western states give then a "pass"

But they just eleclected a Trump like cunt and so much corruption.
 
G

ghostofsparta

Member
G

ghostofsparta

Member
Sunster said:
I never used modern slavery. because the slaves in India are slaves not something less.
Click to expand...

sorry wasn't talking about you when I mentioned modern slavery. The article you posted repeatedly uses the term. From the excerpt, it sounds like it's peonage:

Particularly in countries such as India and Pakistan, nationals - often including entire families - are enslaved through bonded labour in construction, agriculture, brick making, garment factories and manufacturing.
Click to expand...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...l-Slavery-Index-2014/articleshow/45178623.cms

Though it does mention human trafficking so I take it back.

I'd love to read more about it. Any more credible reports?
 
Sunster

Sunster

Member
ghostofsparta said:
sorry wasn't talking about you when I mentioned modern slavery. The article you posted repeatedly uses the term. From the excerpt, it sounds like it's peonage:



http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...l-Slavery-Index-2014/articleshow/45178623.cms

Though it does mention human trafficking so I take it back.

I'd love to read more about it. Any more credible reports?
Click to expand...

yes that term always bothers me a tad. I think maybe it's for people who think slavery is only chattel slavery and nothing else.

in addition to my prior sources here is a short nyt article, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/01/world/asia/global-slavery-index.html

no escaping the added "modern" apparently .
 
kittoo

kittoo

Cretinously credulous
MikeMyers said:
Are you an Indian who lives in India?

I've always been curious to hear the demonetization experience from someone who was living in India at the time.
Click to expand...

I don't know about him, but i live in India and work at a bank. I was in the thick of it. Did people have to suffer a bit? As in standing in line, sometimes for long hours, to get their money deposited etc? Yes. Were there a few rich ones who were able to get their black money deposited back? Yes.
But general public was ecstatic with the move. It's not about temporary pain or failure or success of the move. It's about a leader who was willing to take such a risk. People loved it. He was at least trying. It might've cost him next elections, yet he went through with it. Post it India's tax base swelled, digital transactions got a jump.
Would Indians rather have a leader who won't change anything? No. We would rather have someone who tries radical things. Success or failure is secondary.
 
kittoo

kittoo

Cretinously credulous
MetalliCabombination said:
This. The difference is that he wasn't elected out of spite for a community.
He (modi) was elected out of spite for the largest and oldest political party of india.
Muslims in india are the largest unified minority, the hindu majority on the other hand is divided into dozens of subcultures. As such targeting the muslim votebank was the surest bet to power and this is what the aforementioned party had been doing for the last 40 or whatever years. Let me reiterate, these people won with overwhelming majorities for decades until this guy popped up flipped the tables.
The party mentioned above always took steps to keep hinduism down a notch while giving additional privileges to the muslim minority.be it in the form of reservations, monetary aid for pilgrimages, promotion and sustainence of extreme religious beliefs, . To this day, a large sector of the poor muslim population in remote parts of the country doesn't attend schools but is taught in certain madarasas which focus solely on religious education. And certification from such places are actually accepted when enrollment into higher education or certain jobs.
My post is not meant to berate the beliefs of a community btw,everyone has a history of how they arrived at their culture or sensibilities and i have no right to question it.
Its meant to berate a party that ruled for decades and had a popular yoga guru beaten up in the middle of the night because he brought up some ills done by the said party in an interview while a lecturer who openly advocated extremist jihadi beliefs was defended upon prosecution.
The reason modi is popular isnt because he got people killed on the streets its because the riots he's infamous for took place in a highly volatile region within days of him assuming power in that state. Accounts say religious communities imposed curfews on their on own in those areas.
And in the last 15 odd years since, there hasnt been a single riot or a case of communal disharmony in that state and he's been elected every single time.
The riot move, assuming he did get people killed effectively killed any chance of his party ever coming back to power in the national scene because of the vote bank he alienated.

He wasnt banned to travel to us because he's goddamn hitler, he was banned upon the request of the same political party i mentioned above based on the same incident i talked about above.

I spent half of 2016 and some part of 2017 in india as apart of my job and according to my ex colleagues people even hate modi's own party. But the thing us their last pm, who was an economics doctorate from the london school, upon being questioned about joblessness and poverty literally made an emergency statement on national television where he said money doesn't grow on trees so fuck off.
He was like a trump who barely did anything but made a trump like statement every two years.
On the other hand they see modi as someone who is to an extent capable of looking beyond religious votebanks even if its at the cost of some perceived radicalism.

In any case, thats it for my rant. It bothered me a little seeing claims of rape being a part of culture because most the people i met there were genuinely nice and sensible.As in every country with economic issues and racial diversity, there are bad apples, the overpopulation doesnt help. But this isnt something you can fix with something like criticism of western intervention. Itll just have to be allowed to wash away with time as influence of good education and lowering levels of poverty(hopefully) .
Believe it or not, their is actually far more popular among educated youths than he is among the elderly or religious extremists who grew entirely in the shadow of the big political party.
And as a half latino, i can tell you the 'racism' there doesnt have shit on what we have here. Yes at times youll be made to feel different but ill be damned if i ever even got a bad stare because of my nationality or skin color let alone go through shit thats been going on here of late.


I was there when it happened. In the city i was in people had hassles for a day or two and then switched to cards and digital payments entirely which isnt nearly as prevalent as it is here.
Cant speak for the suburban regions tho.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the post.
People will still go on about 'Modi is Hitler' and all, and your post will be ridiculed. But I always wonder if westerns can't see how their thoughts and ideas aren't really even close to the reality as they are formed by headlines and articles (which have their own biases and agendas), and not by actually knowing the country or the people. When you are talking about country as complex as India, years of experience wouldn't cut it, let alone reading some article on internet. Yet people have such sure opinion of Modi and India (Modi is like Trump lol) that they refuse to believe the contrary even if posted by someone from India or who has deep experience through the thick of it.

People like to say BJP is 'Hindu nationalist' and 'terrorists' and what not. That is exactly the kind of language which got Congress (the main opposition and party that ruled for ~65 years) out of the government. If you call BJP 'Hindu nationalist', then Congress would be more than 'Muslim nationalist'. The post quoted is right. Congress went to extreme length to appease it's Muslim vote bank. Hell, it illegally jailed a colonel of Indian army on charges of 'Hindu terrorism' after a blast, which had nothing to do with Hindus at all. He was in jail for 9 years without a chargesheet. Congress' main leader said 'Hindu terrorism' was a bigger threat than any other terrorism. The enquiry proved that blast was also Islamic terrorism. And Hindus should just keep electing Congress because somehow they should keep up this facade of secularism in which they get treated as secondary citizens? You want a partial list of how we are treated in India (mostly because of Congress, here goes)-

1. When Muslims burn a whole bogey of hindu pilgrims traveling in a train and kill 59, Congress creates a commettee which decides, despite overwhelming evidence against it, that the fire was 'spontaneous'. This report would later be thrown out by the court as 'made with malicious intent' and 'nothing but fiction'.this incident is what caused riots in Gujarat, Modi's state.
2. Our temples are in government control. All the money from them goes to government coffers. Government decides their management,repair and everything. Does the same apply for mosques or churches etc.? No. We have to petition and petition for new temples, for getting them repaired or arrange functions, all the while mosques mushroom everywhere without any problem. Government even appoints Muslims as trustees of temples. Can that extend to mosques. Never! There would be riots.
3. The right to education only applies to hindu schools. They have to give 30% of their seats to poor for free. It's a fine law with good intent, except Muslim madarssas and schools and Christian schools (which are far more in mumbers) don't need to do this. This has resulted in drastic reduction of hindu schools, depriving us of raising our children in our cultural environment if we wanted.
4. The state provides subsidies for haj travellers, from taxpayers' money. Why? Why should taxpayers, which are mostly Hindus, should pay for a personal religious obligations of Muslims? And does this extend to us? Do we get any subsidy for our functions or rituals? No. We don't even have our temples under our control
5. The state governments of some south states (mostly ruled by Congress or left) give money to recent converts to Christianity! (Yes, you read that tight!). Effectively encouraging people to convert from taxpayers money!
6. Government gives free bicycles, money and and other freebies only to Muslim girls in a few states.
7. The congress government almost succeeded in bringing a law (stopped by BJP) where any riot would automatically be considered the fault of the hindus. If any minotity said (no proof required) that a hindu had harassed him/her in any way, the hindi would be jailed without bail. The hindu wont even know because of who he was jailed. I could land up in jail tomorrow because of anything!

These are just a few examples of how we are treated in our own country by Congress. This is not exhaustive list and doesn't take into account the how the whole government machinery works against us whenever congress is in power. So please, next time you post 'modi Hitler', 'hindu nationalist going backward', know that simple sound bites will not give you just how complex the situation in india is. Most of us Indians don't vote for Modi/BJP because we want a hindu nationalist country, but because we want a country which treats Hindus as equal citizens and not second class.
 
W

Westbahnhof

Banned
Sunster said:
the bolded I can see, Westerners really romanticize India but nothing but horror stories? They must have had their eyes shut during a lot of their time in India. India and China are beautiful countries with tons of things to see, none of which are horrific
Click to expand...

I mean, I think that arriving at some tiny village to give out shoes, before noon, just to see that every single man is drunk, is pretty horrific.
There's no need to go into the "there is nothing horrific" direction. There are glaring problems and horrific things to see.
But judging from your other posts, I might just misinterpret what you meant?
 
W

Window

Member
I don't think it gets a pass at all. Much like this thread, you get contemptuous posts from people who have never stepped into the country and posts of denial with a dash of nationalism from some of those who have. I bet you most people on GAF have no interest in visiting India because of its reputation.
 
M

Mung

Member
It doesn't get a pass. If anything it's gets top much criticism from people who have no fucking clue about the country.
 
A

Always-honest

Banned
Does it?

Mung said:
It doesn't get a pass. If anything it's gets top much criticism from people who have no fucking clue about the country.
Click to expand...

Indeed. all i read is what a shithole it is. With people living in factories (kids even). Garbage on the streets everywhere, dead people floating in the river and gang-rapes. With diarrhea being the nr. 1 tourist attraction.
 
Q

QuicheFontaine

Member
Sunster said:
the bolded I can see, Westerners really romanticize India but nothing but horror stories? They must have had their eyes shut during a lot of their time in India. India and China are beautiful countries with tons of things to see, none of which are horrific
Click to expand...

I'll say that as a westener, visiting with people who know the place and going there on your own result in very different experiences. I've been all around India with my wife and her family and it's always been awesome. Then one time I had to live for a few days on my own in Paharganj and it was fucking miserable. I felt like I had a big neon sign on my back saying 'sucker' the whole time.
 
U

Undrey

Member
JWiLL said:
I totally agree with your post overall, but...they do these types of things and worse in many Arab countries. Women are murdered for "stepping out of line" all the time, even if that just means speaking to another man in passing.

I'd say "Google it", but it's not exactly pleasant reading.
Click to expand...

I am a person who lives in an Arab country and while I hate the culture, it is in no way anything close to what you're describing. I don't know what news stories you've been hearing. Then again, I do live in one of the more (relatively) liberal ones.
 
Necro900

Necro900

Member
If anything, it doesn't get a pass at all since all people know about a fucking 1,3B people country is that "there's gang rape", "omg people bathe in that filthy river" and other hot takes which really should have no place on a board like this one.

It does have its issues, like any country (especially developing ones) in the world, but it's not the shithole you're trying to sell in your post. The amount of generalization and contempt for India showcased in this thread is really something else. How is this allowed?

Also stop watching snuff videos, which are obviously hampering your judgement, especially if you use them to meter the morality of a whole country.
 
P

PnCIa

Member
kittoo said:
I don't know about him, but i live in India and work at a bank. I was in the thick of it. Did people have to suffer a bit? As in standing in line, sometimes for long hours, to get their money deposited etc? Yes. Were there a few rich ones who were able to get their black money deposited back? Yes.
But general public was ecstatic with the move. It's not about temporary pain or failure or success of the move. It's about a leader who was willing to take such a risk. People loved it. He was at least trying. It might've cost him next elections, yet he went through with it. Post it India's tax base swelled, digital transactions got a jump.
Would Indians rather have a leader who won't change anything? No. We would rather have someone who tries radical things. Success or failure is secondary.
Click to expand...
People loved it? They loved traveling for miles to a bank, standing in line for hours and even days? Nope, that does not make sense.
Also, your last sentence here is pure bs. You trying to tell us that most indians want someone who is prone to rash action, no matter the consquences. That does not make sense, either. While many indians are uneducated, they are not stupid.

kittoo said:
Thank you for the post.
People will still go on about 'Modi is Hitler' and all, and your post will be ridiculed. But I always wonder if westerns can't see how their thoughts and ideas aren't really even close to the reality as they are formed by headlines and articles (which have their own biases and agendas), and not by actually knowing the country or the people. When you are talking about country as complex as India, years of experience wouldn't cut it, let alone reading some article on internet. Yet people have such sure opinion of Modi and India (Modi is like Trump lol) that they refuse to believe the contrary even if posted by someone from India or who has deep experience through the thick of it.

People like to say BJP is 'Hindu nationalist' and 'terrorists' and what not. That is exactly the kind of language which got Congress (the main opposition and party that ruled for ~65 years) out of the government. If you call BJP 'Hindu nationalist', then Congress would be more than 'Muslim nationalist'. The post quoted is right. Congress went to extreme length to appease it's Muslim vote bank. Hell, it illegally jailed a colonel of Indian army on charges of 'Hindu terrorism' after a blast, which had nothing to do with Hindus at all. He was in jail for 9 years without a chargesheet. Congress' main leader said 'Hindu terrorism' was a bigger threat than any other terrorism. The enquiry proved that blast was also Islamic terrorism. And Hindus should just keep electing Congress because somehow they should keep up this facade of secularism in which they get treated as secondary citizens? You want a partial list of how we are treated in India (mostly because of Congress, here goes)-

1. When Muslims burn a whole bogey of hindu pilgrims traveling in a train and kill 59, Congress creates a commettee which decides, despite overwhelming evidence against it, that the fire was 'spontaneous'. This report would later be thrown out by the court as 'made with malicious intent' and 'nothing but fiction'.this incident is what caused riots in Gujarat, Modi's state.
2. Our temples are in government control. All the money from them goes to government coffers. Government decides their management,repair and everything. Does the same apply for mosques or churches etc.? No. We have to petition and petition for new temples, for getting them repaired or arrange functions, all the while mosques mushroom everywhere without any problem. Government even appoints Muslims as trustees of temples. Can that extend to mosques. Never! There would be riots.
3. The right to education only applies to hindu schools. They have to give 30% of their seats to poor for free. It's a fine law with good intent, except Muslim madarssas and schools and Christian schools (which are far more in mumbers) don't need to do this. This has resulted in drastic reduction of hindu schools, depriving us of raising our children in our cultural environment if we wanted.
4. The state provides subsidies for haj travellers, from taxpayers' money. Why? Why should taxpayers, which are mostly Hindus, should pay for a personal religious obligations of Muslims? And does this extend to us? Do we get any subsidy for our functions or rituals? No. We don't even have our temples under our control
5. The state governments of some south states (mostly ruled by Congress or left) give money to recent converts to Christianity! (Yes, you read that tight!). Effectively encouraging people to convert from taxpayers money!
6. Government gives free bicycles, money and and other freebies only to Muslim girls in a few states.
7. The congress government almost succeeded in bringing a law (stopped by BJP) where any riot would automatically be considered the fault of the hindus. If any minotity said (no proof required) that a hindu had harassed him/her in any way, the hindi would be jailed without bail. The hindu wont even know because of who he was jailed. I could land up in jail tomorrow because of anything!

These are just a few examples of how we are treated in our own country by Congress. This is not exhaustive list and doesn't take into account the how the whole government machinery works against us whenever congress is in power. So please, next time you post 'modi Hitler', 'hindu nationalist going backward', know that simple sound bites will not give you just how complex the situation in india is. Most of us Indians don't vote for Modi/BJP because we want a hindu nationalist country, but because we want a country which treats Hindus as equal citizens and not second class.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this post. It clearly shows your bias through your "us vs. them" rhethoric. This exactly is the BJPs spiel, but you probably know that.
You are not helping your cause in this environment though. What you are advocating is the good old facistic way of showing a group as "marginalized" which in turn makes it acceptable to kick whoever the perceived oppressor is. You make it sound like india is a sort of Hindu apartheid with muslims and/or christians as oppressors. Pure bs, too.
A good equivalent for Modi would be Erdogan. Riding high on economic success while steadily putting religion in the foreground of politics.
 
kittoo

kittoo

Cretinously credulous
PnCIa said:
People loved it? They loved traveling for miles to a bank, standing in line for hours and even days? Nope, that does not make sense.
Also, your last sentence here is pure bs. You trying to tell us that most indians want someone who is prone to rash action, no matter the consquences. That does not make sense, either. While many indians are uneducated, they are not stupid.


Thank you for this post. It clearly shows your bias through your "us vs. them" rhethoric. This exactly is the BJPs spiel, but you probably know that.
You are not helping your cause in this environment though. What you are advocating is the good old facistic way of showing a group as "marginalized" which in turn makes it acceptable to kick whoever the perceived oppressor is. You make it sound like india is a sort of Hindu apartheid with muslims and/or christians as oppressors. Pure bs, too.
A good equivalent for Modi would be Erdogan. Riding high on economic success while steadily putting religion in the foreground of politics.
Click to expand...

1. It wasn't 'rash' decision. Read about the campaign for inclusive banking (an absolutely staggering amount of accounts opened across rural India), the 'no penalty' campaign for tax evaders and then the decision. Were there problems during it? Of course! I was working at a bank. We worked our asses off for days on end. But everyone understood the intention was good on the part of the government. Could it be turned out better? I am sure. But that doesn't mean we can't appreciate our government actually trying to do something about corruption and black money.

About my second post you quoted. What a fantastic factual retort. Just saying 'biased' and 'us vs them', but did you actually read what I wrote? Can you tell me what I wrote wasn't factual? Can you tell me how it's not biased against the Hindus? No you cant. Just some random phrases about how it's 'biased'. Could you please tell me how wanting to being treated as equals in the country wrong on the part of Hindus?

Your post and specifically the 'Modi is like Erdogan' statement is exactly what I was talking about. You guys have little idea about India, the complexities, the differences between it and other countries, it's government. All you have is an emotional response to something you read or heard over a soundbite. Even when I posted a factual post, all you could post was- 'omg biased narrative modi erdogan', and a little subtle warning that this is a liberal environment where this won't work (even though what I posted was factual and you had no factual response to that). Great constructive response!
 
B

bionic77

Member
Sunster said:
more than 30 million. there are more slaves now than at any time in history. 60,000 are right here in the US

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/10/17/this-map-shows-where-the-worlds-30-million-slaves-live-there-are-60000-in-the-u-s/?utm_term=.249c03cae4dd
Click to expand...
Jesus Christ that is extremely depressing.

I won't say anything else about it because that is not what this thread is about but that is one of the worst things I have learned in a long time. :(
 
R

RustyNails

Member
kittoo said:
1. When Muslims burn a whole bogey of hindu pilgrims traveling in a train and kill 59, Congress creates a commettee which decides, despite overwhelming evidence against it, that the fire was 'spontaneous'. This report would later be thrown out by the court as 'made with malicious intent' and 'nothing but fiction'.this incident is what caused riots in Gujarat, Modi's state.
Click to expand...
This is not what caused the Gujarat riots. The riots were caused by the State of Gujarat failing to stop, rather transparently, the Hindu reprisal mobs breaking out and butchering Muslim civilians. The cops weren't doing anything. Modi as the Chief Minister of Gujarat should have calmed the state, but instead he was giving fiery anti-Muslim speeches. This effectively gave the mobs a free reign.

See here: https://scroll.in/article/658119/fi...l-modi-speeches-made-just-after-gujarat-riots
 
kittoo

kittoo

Cretinously credulous
RustyNails said:
This is not what caused the Gujarat riots. The riots were caused by the State of Gujarat failing to stop, rather transparently, the Hindu reprisal mobs breaking out and butchering Muslim civilians. The cops weren't doing anything. Modi as the Chief Minister of Gujarat should have calmed the state, but instead he was giving fiery anti-Muslim speeches. This effectively gave the mobs a free reign.

See here: https://scroll.in/article/658119/fi...l-modi-speeches-made-just-after-gujarat-riots
Click to expand...

So if there were no burning of the Hindu pilgrims, would there have been riots still?
I am not arguing about whether the police couldve done a better job post the burnings. The riots were the result of the burnings. The scale could or could not be the fault of the police and administration (and that involves the neighboring congress ruled states who didn't send additional forces as requested by gujrat administration). Nevertheless as far as modi is concerned, supreme court freed him of any charge and that's where I would rest my case too. I would not pretend to know better than the court.
 
D

dragonelite

Member
India is still developing and we don't really have textbook examples of a working democracy with a 1.5 billion people.

The only other nation with that many citizens would be China and that is an one party country. China is also still a developing country.

Can't really compare our state of development and human rights with that of India imho.
 
C

Chairman Yang

if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
RustyNails said:
This is not what caused the Gujarat riots. The riots were caused by the State of Gujarat failing to stop, rather transparently, the Hindu reprisal mobs breaking out and butchering Muslim civilians. The cops weren't doing anything. Modi as the Chief Minister of Gujarat should have calmed the state, but instead he was giving fiery anti-Muslim speeches. This effectively gave the mobs a free reign.

See here: https://scroll.in/article/658119/fi...l-modi-speeches-made-just-after-gujarat-riots
Click to expand...
I can't understand the speeches themselves, but the link talks about inflammatory speeches made after the riots were done, not during or before. It seems strange to pin those riots on Modi, particularly since there's been no uptick in sectarian violence since then, despite him being in power for 15 years now.

It's possible Modi is secretly a Hindu version of Erdogan, and is just strategically holding back on implementing his sinister religious agenda for decades, but it's also possible his haters are simply wrong. He, personally, seems way less corrupt and incompetent than previous leaders.
 
P

PnCIa

Member
kittoo said:
1. It wasn't 'rash' decision. Read about the campaign for inclusive banking (an absolutely staggering amount of accounts opened across rural India), the 'no penalty' campaign for tax evaders and then the decision. Were there problems during it? Of course! I was working at a bank. We worked our asses off for days on end. But everyone understood the intention was good on the part of the government. Could it be turned out better? I am sure. But that doesn't mean we can't appreciate our government actually trying to do something about corruption and black money.
Click to expand...
So, indians do not want a leader to whom success or failure is secondary?

kittoo said:
About my second post you quoted. What a fantastic factual retort. Just saying 'biased' and 'us vs them', but did you actually read what I wrote? Can you tell me what I wrote wasn't factual? Can you tell me how it's not biased against the Hindus? No you cant. Just some random phrases about how it's 'biased'. Could you please tell me how wanting to being treated as equals in the country wrong on the part of Hindus?

Your post and specifically the 'Modi is like Erdogan' statement is exactly what I was talking about. You guys have little idea about India, the complexities, the differences between it and other countries, it's government. All you have is an emotional response to something you read or heard over a soundbite. Even when I posted a factual post, all you could post was- 'omg biased narrative modi erdogan', and a little subtle warning that this is a liberal environment where this won't work (even though what I posted was factual and you had no factual response to that). Great constructive response!
Click to expand...
This post still reeks of us vs. them.
I dont deny that some of what you wrote in your list is true. Compiling a random list of "inequalities" does what exactly? I can not verify which one is true or false, point number 1 sounds like the poorest excuse for a mass killing i have ever heared though.

India is a country still dominated by a caste mindset. Religion plays a major role in politics, Modi put it in the forefront and is riding on the perception of inequality, and you bought into it. My comparison with Erdogan is spot on, if you look at the broad strokes you will see the similarities.
I don´t deny that there is fuckery from more than one group within the country, that does not mean it needs to repeated endlessly. Consider that in a country where religion is so important and has led to a lot of violence in the past (consider Operation Blue Star as an example), it may be a good idea to increase protection of minorities.
 
kittoo

kittoo

Cretinously credulous
PnCIa said:
So, indians do not want a leader to whom success or failure is secondary?


This post still reeks of us vs. them.
I dont deny that some of what you wrote in your list is true. Compiling a random list of "inequalities" does what exactly? I can not verify which one is true or false, point number 1 sounds like the poorest excuse for a mass killing i have ever heared though.

India is a country still dominated by a caste mindset. Religion plays a major role in politics, Modi put it in the forefront and is riding on the perception of inequality, and you bought into it. My comparison with Erdogan is spot on, if you look at the broad strokes you will see the similarities.
I don´t deny that there is fuckery from more than one group within the country, that does not mean it needs to repeated endlessly. Consider that in a country where religion is so important and has led to a lot of violence in the past (consider Operation Blue Star as an example), it may be a good idea to increase protection of minorities.
Click to expand...

About demonetization, you keep taking one or two words. I showed he planned and it wasn't a rash move.
Look at it like this-

Other govt- do nothing- things stay same.
Modi- tried demonetization- didn't work as planned (maybe some fringe benefits)- things stay same.

Should we jump on him for trying? Should we rather have a govt which does nothing?

About the second point. My first point about riots wasn't that the report cause riots. Maybe there was some confusion about my language. I meant the burning of hindu pilgrims caused the riots.
Would we be not angered when a government brings a report, a blatantly false one, absolving all who burned those pilgrims just because the accused were Muslims and the victims were Hindus? How do you not see that as a wrong?

It's not about the list. It's about showing that Congress was aligned against us for so long and so blatantly. It pushed the hindus in a corner and led to the rise of BJP. Sure minorities need protection but should it come at our cost at every turn? Would you accept a law where any minority can accuse a majority of harassing and he/she would be locked without any recourse, even though there wasnt any proof? Would you be ok if, for example, majority had to pay for personal religious obligations of the minority? Should we be ok with a government (congress) which locks up innocent people for 9 years to prove that there is something called 'hindu terrorism', when the blast was done by islamic terrorists? How does government controlling hindu temples and money (and not of any other minority) somehow provide more security to the minorities?
You are against discrimination, but can't see that this is also discrimination? Because it's against Hindus, who are in majority, it can't be discrimination?
 
W

wachie

Member
kittoo said:
I don't know about him, but i live in India and work at a bank. I was in the thick of it. Did people have to suffer a bit? As in standing in line, sometimes for long hours, to get their money deposited etc? Yes. Were there a few rich ones who were able to get their black money deposited back? Yes.
But general public was ecstatic with the move. It's not about temporary pain or failure or success of the move. It's about a leader who was willing to take such a risk. People loved it. He was at least trying. It might've cost him next elections, yet he went through with it. Post it India's tax base swelled, digital transactions got a jump.
Would Indians rather have a leader who won't change anything? No. We would rather have someone who tries radical things. Success or failure is secondary.
Click to expand...
General populace was ecstatic? What sort of alternate reality is this?

People, to a lot extent the lower class are still suffering from the move. The only people applauding it are the Modi bhakts, which are the equivalent of the alt-right support for Trump - fuck yeah to all his policies and Modi can do no wrong.
 
kittoo

kittoo

Cretinously credulous
wachie said:
General populace was ecstatic? What sort of alternate reality is this?

People, to a lot extent the lower class are still suffering from the move. The only people applauding it are the Modi bhakts, which are the equivalent of the alt-right support for Trump - fuck yeah to all his policies and Modi can do no wrong.
Click to expand...

What better proof can I give you than elections? BJP (Modis party) won in a landslide in state be elections held in the biggest state of India after demonetization.
Look up for Uttar Pradesh elections 2017.

If you want a proper survey, here you go-

https://www.google.co.in/amp/m.time...oter-poll/amp_articleshow/55566700.cms?espv=1

But hey, if you want, please ignore facts just because you hate Modi and then call me biased and bhakt.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
kittoo said:
So if there were no burning of the Hindu pilgrims, would there have been riots still?
I am not arguing about whether the police couldve done a better job post the burnings. The riots were the result of the burnings. The scale could or could not be the fault of the police and administration (and that involves the neighboring congress ruled states who didn't send additional forces as requested by gujrat administration). Nevertheless as far as modi is concerned, supreme court freed him of any charge and that's where I would rest my case too. I would not pretend to know better than the court.
Click to expand...
Riots could have been prevented, but the institutions failed and Modi let them. Thats my point. The criminals who burned the Sabarmati Express should be held accountable but it does not mean a violent pogrom in response is okay or normal. The state of Gujarat failed and that rests on Modi's feet.
 
W

Westbahnhof

Banned
This is the first time I've heard of Modi, and I'm not qualified to say anything about him, but I'll say this:
"The people approve" is a shitty quality indicator. Look at Duerte.
This whole "but look at his approval" seems pretty weak.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Chairman Yang said:
I can't understand the speeches themselves, but the link talks about inflammatory speeches made after the riots were done, not during or before. It seems strange to pin those riots on Modi, particularly since there's been no uptick in sectarian violence since then, despite him being in power for 15 years now.

It's possible Modi is secretly a Hindu version of Erdogan, and is just strategically holding back on implementing his sinister religious agenda for decades, but it's also possible his haters are simply wrong. He, personally, seems way less corrupt and incompetent than previous leaders.
Click to expand...
So saying anti-Muslim shit in a speech after a genocide targeting Muslims is somehow okay, but not during when its being carried out? Do you even know whats going on in India? Muzzafarnagar riots? Gau Rakshak vigilantes'? Modi has clearly electrified the rightwing religious, ethno-nationalist bloc and is thriving in it. Watch this documentary by the same guy on Gujarat violence (with english subtitles) and tell me the state was not responsible: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c0ZvADtrDPM
 
W

Window

Member
RustyNails said:
So saying anti-Muslim shit in a speech after a genocide targeting Muslims is somehow okay, but not during when its being carried out? Do you even know whats going on in India? Muzzafarnagar riots? Gau Rakshak vigilantes'? Modi has clearly electrified the rightwing religious, ethno-nationalist bloc and is thriving in it. Watch this documentary by the same guy on Gujarat violence (with english subtitles) and tell me the state was not responsible: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c0ZvADtrDPM
Click to expand...

I'm no BJP apologist and do believe their propaganda is strong and does incite discrimination (and their links to RSS do no favours) but has there actually been an uptick in religious violence since Modi took over as PM?
 
Q

Quixzlizx

Member
bionic77 said:
Wow that is a crazy statistic.

I assumed slavery was pretty much wiped out in 2017.

I am afraid to ask how many slaves there are worldwide...
Click to expand...

There are slaves in the US/West. What do you think sex trafficking is?

And I don't mean this as a whataboutism post. Just a reminder that slavery takes more forms than chattel plantation workers.
 
T

The Futurist

Member
So this took a turn.

Didn't really expect this to turn into a Modi thread.

Anyway, I was really frustrated and angry after was shown that video.

I didn't bring up Pakistan because I don't give a shit about Pakistan. Of course in true Indian tradition, Indians feel the need to bring Pakistan into every discussion and try to divert attention from the problems we are actually talking about.

Keep at it guys.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Window said:
I'm no BJP apologist and do believe their propaganda is strong and does incite discrimination (and their links to RSS do no favours) but has there actually been an uptick in religious violence since Modi took over as PM?
Click to expand...
Yes
In recent months, there’s been a series of assaults on Muslims, Christians and Dalits in the country. Three liberal writers have been killed and human rights groups and activists are increasingly intimidated and harassed.

Many believe Hindu extremist groups are behind all these incidents and enjoy the tacit approval of the current Narendra Modi-led BJP government.

Social activist Shabnam Hashmi’s NGO Anhad is documenting the events. She says the figures point to an alarming trend: “The way these cases are happening, in quick succession and the manner in which the atmosphere is being vitiated – particularly with the help of non-state actors who appear to have been let loose to do whatever they wish and wherever, is extremely worrying. It’s not only about minorities it’s an assault on the country’s diversity and pluralism. It’s not that these things didn’t happen earlier, but we have recorded more than 1,000 cases in just one year and we see a meticulous planning in each case. It’s a multi-faceted attack targeting communities on the one hand by polarizing them and spreading hate and the intellectuals and institutions on the other. Everyone who disagrees with them is under attack.”
Click to expand...
https://fsrn.org/2015/10/religious-...india-see-uptick-in-hindu-extremist-violence/
 
C

Chairman Yang

if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
RustyNails said:
So saying anti-Muslim shit in a speech after a genocide targeting Muslims is somehow okay, but not during when its being carried out? Do you even know whats going on in India? Muzzafarnagar riots? Gau Rakshak vigilantes'? Modi has clearly electrified the rightwing religious, ethno-nationalist bloc and is thriving in it. Watch this documentary by the same guy on Gujarat violence (with english subtitles) and tell me the state was not responsible: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c0ZvADtrDPM
Click to expand...
No, I don't think Modi using anti-Muslim rhetoric (and I'll trust you that it is that) is ok. I'm saying that if you want to blame Modi for causing sectarian violence, you have to show cause and effect. If he incited people before or during the violence, that's evidence for that. If he said these things afterward, your entire assertion makes no sense. And like, what the hell has he been doing for 15 years after that?

I just looked up the Muzzafarnagar riots on Wikipedia. Strange that you'd blame it on Modi when it took place in 2013 before Modi was elected Prime Minister, in a totally different state, under the control of an opposition party. This is some "where was Obama during Katrina?" level shit. The Cow Protection groups similarly have existed and caused violence for a long time. That type of violence has risen, but Modi's specifically condemned it.

If you want to liken Modi to Trump, show some damn evidence. Statistics for the whole country, not specific incidents. In the US, there has been a clear, documented spike in hate crimes after Trump. In India, there hasn't. There's sectarian chaos in various forms, but there always has been, and there probably will be for decades to come.
 
S

shaneskim

Member
parmanu said:
If it were muslim majority then it would be catastrophic, there would be no minorites left to speak of (just look at the dramatic reduction in number of minorities in Pakistan and Bangladesh over years). India-China would be seeing regular military clashes along border, Xinjiang would be burning.

Poeple don't realise how huge India is, 1.3 billion people with diverse ethnicities, castes, backgrounds, languages, cultures, religions, mindsets, customs. Though a large population has come out of poverty over the years, huge population still live in pathetic conditions. Despite all of this it has been relatively peaceful and a democracy (except couple years in 70s) since independance. It is not easy to govern it.
Click to expand...

The irony is you are quite literally giving India a pass by saying 'it could be worse...'

State sponsored pogroms in 1984 and Gujurat, with the latter being waved through by the man that went on to be the country's PM just expose the dirty underbelly of the broken, caste ridden society.

Great to visit though, especially Kerala 👌🏾
 
A

Aters

Member
1.5 million children die in India every year due to malnutrition, yet India exports grain rather than import. Something is definitely not right there.
 
kittoo

kittoo

Cretinously credulous
Chairman Yang said:
That article keeps saying there's an uptick, but doesn't actually cite any statistics to support that.
Click to expand...

That article is based on data by someone (Shabnam Hashmi) who made false stories during riots, her ngo siphoned funds meant for relief of riot victims and who was convicted by court for this. Her ngo was banned.

Nevertheless, a much more exhaustive article with all the stats you could want about it is below. I request you to go through it make your own mind (the tldr is that it hasn't risen post Modi).

https://www.newslaundry.com/2015/10...al-under-modi-the-numbers-will-disappoint-you
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Chairman Yang said:
No, I don't think Modi using anti-Muslim rhetoric (and I'll trust you that it is that) is ok. I'm saying that if you want to blame Modi for causing sectarian violence, you have to show cause and effect. If he incited people before or during the violence, that's evidence for that. If he said these things afterward, your entire assertion makes no sense. And like, what the hell has he been doing for 15 years after that?

I just looked up the Muzzafarnagar riots on Wikipedia. Strange that you'd blame it on Modi when it took place in 2013 before Modi was elected Prime Minister, in a totally different state, under the control of an opposition party. This is some "where was Obama during Katrina?" level shit. The Cow Protection groups similarly have existed and caused violence for a long time. That type of violence has risen, but Modi's specifically condemned it.

If you want to liken Modi to Trump, show some damn evidence. Statistics for the whole country, not specific incidents. In the US, there has been a clear, documented spike in hate crimes after Trump. In India, there hasn't. There's sectarian chaos in various forms, but there always has been, and there probably will be for decades to come.
Click to expand...
My bad, Muzzafarnagar happened too close during the elections and I forgot it happened prior to Modi's term. However, there is ample evidence of communal violence uptick since Modi's election. I dont want to say just google it, but just google it. Everyone in India agrees about the rising communal violence. TV people talk about it. Here's one article:
NEW DELHI: India has seen a near 25% increase in incidents of communal violence in the first five months of 2015 under the NDA government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, compared to the corresponding period of the previous year when the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance was in power.
Click to expand...

But I fear you will downplay this just like everything you downplay everywhere when it comes to Muslims being victims.
 
Y

Yeoman

Member
The Futurist said:
We point fingers at middle eastern countries like Saudi Arabia because they don't let women drive, Iran because they don't let women go to soccer games, or North Korea for brainwashing an entire population, but for whatever reason no one really says anything about India.
Click to expand...
Because the people of the United States and Europe have been subjected to negative rhetoric directed towards Middle Eastern people for almost a century now.
Virtually every form of media be it video games or movies portrays them as enemies, and they are the only group of people on the planet where it is not seen as politically incorrect to discriminate against them.
The president of the United States could never be Middle Eastern it simply cannot happen.

It's fucked up but that's what you get after decades and decades of concentrated efforts of demonisation.
https://vimeo.com/56687715
 
C

Chairman Yang

if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
RustyNails said:
My bad, Muzzafarnagar happened too close during the elections and I forgot it happened prior to Modi's term. However, there is ample evidence of communal violence uptick since Modi's election. I dont want to say just google it, but just google it. Everyone in India agrees about the rising communal violence. TV people talk about it. Here's one article:
Click to expand...
My googling tells me that violence was high in 2013 (before Modi), lower in 2014, higher in 2015, and lower again in 2016.

Am I wrong with this? If not, can you see why it's not a super-convincing case that Modi is the next Trump or next Hitler? (Although it remains to be seen if he'll be the next Erdogan.)

I don't know how you can say everyone in India agrees on this. Indian posters in this very thread don't agree on it. Modi's rhetoric doesn't seem to jive with it. The various media outlets I've googled don't agree on it.

RustyNails said:
But I fear you will downplay this just like everything you downplay everywhere when it comes to Muslims being victims.
Click to expand...
Kind of a crappy thing to say and accuse me of. I think Muslims ARE victims worldwide including in parts of the West, to an increasing and dangerous degree. I even agree that their status in India could become precarious. Doesn't mean I won't call out bad evidence or questionable facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Partition of India 70 Years on
2 3 4 5
224
27K
nampad replied
  • Locked
India PM's push to get people to use toilets finds resistance in villages
2
77
12K
itsbenoclock replied
  • Locked
FP.com: "Why Is Pakistan Such a Mess? Blame India."
2
79
12K
MikeMyers replied
  • Locked
BBC: Why is human waste falling from India's skies?
34
5K
Ding II replied
  • Locked
Some stories of recent anti-catholic violence and threats?
28
2K
rivv3r replied
Top Bottom