19 ms·

Contrary to popular belief, at least in my country (India). I feel bad for the citizens of Pakistan. There has not been a single stint of govt that has lasted p

Contrary to popular belief, at least in my country (India). I feel bad for the citizens of Pakistan. There has not been a single stint of govt that has lasted peacefully since independence. A country can never grow without a peaceful transfer of power, and constant political imbalance will just not allow anything to advance. A shared history/culture with us and it's a shame our govts have differences. We fought together to gain freedom and just drifted apart. Average citizens of both the countries, have nothing against each other, but propaganda doesn't just shut up on both sides, and tries to keep riling people up, and becomes the main topic to get elected. A peaceful south Asia, would've been the glorious and powerhouse of the world like in the past.

mc32 3y ago
The whole world seems to be aligning with this type of politicking, unfortunately.
- xwolfi 3y ago
  Not at all: it s not because we have to alternate we should tolerate corruption, and what you see a lot is investigations catching up to criminals. At least as a French even if we sue a few former presidents here and there, I still accept my candidate loses and we try something else for a whole (I vote Macron, as centre right). I dont think the US should count much: they dont really transfer power, there are the same immutable parties that havent welcomed a serious challenger for decades playing theatre while having policy continuity by most standards, bar a few candies for the populace at the edge.
  - mc32 3y ago
    The so-called deep-state exists in all countries that have not experienced recent revolution. The deep state is simply entrenched unelected (appointed) bureaucrats who continue a steady policy who only marginally change course during elected government changes. Only revolutions tend to almost completely sweep out the old and usher in the new guard. In France you have the sciences po graduates. In America we have the Washington Establishment which consists of revolving door politicians|lobbyists. In any case, the world is gravitating to Us vs Them in politics to win by divide & conquer.
n_t 3y ago
[flagged]
- mey 3y ago
  That doesn't preclude empathy for fellow humans, or wishing for a better future.
  - n_t 3y ago
    Please don't obfuscate things here. Both OP and I are talking about Pakistani state. We all are aware that individual (particularly sane ones) have minimal control on government policies.
    - anaganisk 3y ago
      No I wasn't talking about the Pakistan state, I literally said an avg citizen. Calm down, dial down the propaganda and read my comment again.
      - dang 3y ago
        Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- wanderlust123 3y ago
  Lol this is literally propaganda. One could say the same about Modi and his RSS mob. The original post was making a point about humanity, and you hijacked it with your own agenda. Way to go bud.
  - dang 3y ago
    Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: you've unfortunately broken the site guidelines in other cases too, such as https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33906633 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33906633. Please don't do that - we have to ban accounts that do that sort of thing.
photochemsyn 3y ago
[flagged]
- ummonk 3y ago
  While imperial Britain has much to take blame for in South Asia, the partition is not really one of them. Great Britain (or rather Mountbatten on its behalf) really just acted as a third party arbiter in the partition. It was Jinnah's insistence on a separate carveout for Muslims in South Asia, together with Nehru's refusal to meet any demands for federalism, that resulted in partition. Imperial Britain had nothing to do with Direct Action Day.
  - photochemsyn 3y ago
    I think the argument is that for the previous 100 years, Imperial Britain had deliberately encouraged violent divisions between the Hindu and Muslim populations as a means of exerting external control, again this is called a 'divide and conquer' policy. Your argument is sort of like saying, just because the British gave them the dynamite, they're not responsible for lighting the fuse.
    - nine_k 3y ago
      Indeed, safe handling of dynamite involves not lighting the fuze deliberately. What happened after the abolition of British Raj was in part a consequence of it, but I would not deny agency of the participants of the warfare that ensued.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > While imperial Britain has much to take blame for in South Asia, the partition is not really one of them. I’m going to disagree; however little direct control they exert at that point, the imperial power always bears significant responsbility for the costs of problems that accompany imperial collapse.
    - robocat 3y ago
hackernewds 3y ago
> drifted apart is a kind way of framing "were partitioned intentionally to foment division, by the departing colonizers"
- screye 3y ago
  Not exactly. The brits were to blame for process of partition (or lack there-of). The haste, wanton disregard for life, the casual approach towards the largest refugee crisis in human history was certainly avoidable. They were also to blame for further exacerbating divisions via divide-and-conquer. But the divisions already existed. The idea of a Muslim state had had been stewing for decades in certain circles. It was inevitable.
  - kumarvvr 3y ago
    > The brits were to blame for process of partition Yeah, no. They took advantage of the divisions created in the population based on religion. Divisions created by Islamic fundamentalist parties.
    - screye 3y ago
      That's why I pointed to the 'process of partition'. The border-lines were drawn by a man who had never visited India over a few months. They withdrew all state machinery overnight, and somehow expected 2 nations born into war to fare alright. Did they expect millions to cross borders and leave their homes behind without any resulting repercussions ? How is a country (Pakistan) divided in 2 by its biggest enemy (India) even supposed to work ? How are Sikhs supposed to live if the borders go right through their fields, dividing their 2 holiest sites ? Animals when kept in captivity, cannot return back into the wild without supervision. Systems of govt are no different.
      - revelio 3y ago
        So it's the Brits fault that Pakistan/India immediately went at each others throat the moment they were gone and the solution was to keep both under "supervision" i.e. empire control? When exactly could they have left without that outcome? Or is the idea here that the British empire still exists in the 21st century? At what point do the people living there take responsibility for ending their own violence, in this scenario?
windex 3y ago
Unfortunately, India today is not exactly a beacon of righteousness. The current government in India is taking the country on exactly the same path as Pakistan except that India has an oligarchy which is being setup by people in government which would make it more like Russia. I'll give the country 10 years to implode if it doesn't course correct to become more inclusive, social justice oriented, and less violent.
- GalenErso 3y ago
  > I'll give the country 10 years to implode I'll take predictions that won't happen for 100, Alex.
- barry-cotter 3y ago
  People have been predicting Pakistan will collapse since 1947. It can’t be as fragile as it looks or it’d be gone already. Regarding India, hoping people who have different values to you suffer isn’t a prediction .
  - kumarvvr 3y ago
    > People have been predicting Pakistan will collapse since 1947 It would have. But decades of war in Afghanistan and the pouring of USD by America, disregarding the very fact that they are funding a well known and open military dictatorship, has kept the country floating. It is in a deep cycle of debt and has no meaningful economy to speak of.
- xNeil 3y ago
  10 years to implode on what basis? That there's an oligarchy of sorts? What an absurd statement.
- screye 3y ago
  I'll give the country 10 years to implode I am willing to take a bet for any $$ value with 10x odds in your favor to contest that claim. more inclusive, social justice oriented, and less violent Hot take. If you genuinely cared about these things, you'd end up a supporter of the Modi Govt. I do not mind views that are diametrically opposite to me. But, every article in western media seems to be written by someone who is 1 degree of separation from the Indian opposition. The claims are never backed by statistics, and the infographics are often so absurd that I have to wonder if I live in an upside-down world. Apparently, India has the 150th [1] least free press in the world and India has been a country with on average 2nd highest chance of genocide [2] for the entire last decade. Dig into their data a little bit, and you realize that they either only interviewed opponents of the current govt. or used zero data what-so-ever. Note: Modi is the world's most popular leader[3]. About 20% of Muslims and 30% of Christians voted for his 2nd term[4]. For reference, Republicans have never been able to come anywhere close to 20% of the black vote-share, and no is claiming that America will collapse when a Republican wins every alternate election. The opinion of the average HNer on India, is as bad as a Q-anon supporter on American issues. I apologize for the somewhat angry tone I take on these threads. I do not intend to start a culture war. But when ignorance and arrogance are paired this frivolously, I can't help but respond in kind. [1] https://rsf.org/en/index https://rsf.org/en/index [2] https://earlywarningproject.ushmm.org/countries/india https://earlywarningproject.ushmm.org/countries/india [3] https://morningconsult.com/global-leader-approval/ https://morningconsult.com/global-leader-approval/ [4] https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/06/29/nationalism-and-politics/pf_06-29-21_india-06-4/ https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/06/29/nationalism-... [5] my previous rants on the matter - https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=author%3Ascreye%20modi&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
kumarvvr 3y ago
>We fought together to gain freedom and just drifted apart. A movement propped up on the idea of a "separate nation for muslims", fought hard for and achieved with much violence and bloodshed is "just drifted apart" Wow !
- anaganisk 3y ago
  I don't know what you are trying to say here, but it didn't have to be violent and persist after too, that's exactly what I was saying by "drifting apart". If they felt safer as a separate nation to have their interests protected that shouldn't be the cause of bitterness. Jinnah and Nehru had both been adamant on their stances, former was proponent of federal governance while later a central. India had several bifurcation of states, it helped in better representation. Recent AP, Telangana state bifurcation was done after much violence, did they drift apart? Does an avg person of the 2 states have anything against each other now? That was exactly my point, for avg people they're just other people, we are constantly washed by propaganda to believe they're enemies.
  - devsda 3y ago
    > Recent AP, Telangana state bifurcation was done after much violence, did they drift apart? Don't think it is right to equate the violence during the partition of India to the Telangana movement. The 1947 partition had violence where communities fought and attacked each other. The Telangana movement except for few minor instances in the very early stages post independence, was not directly against people from Andhra region. A major part of the casualties were during protests as a direct result of government action and self harm. There may have been general dislike for people from other region but I don't think it ever turned into enemity and hatred towards each other.
  - kumarvvr 3y ago
    You are equating bifurcation of states for political & administrative reasons, within the same country, to splitting a country into two ! When a country is split, crimes committed against those who are migrating to another country will not be prosecuted by the home country, and will not be possible to be prosecuted by the split country. Land, Houses and other immovable assets will be stolen from those who are forced to leave respective countries. Rapes, looting and arson are rampant, on both sides. In the case of India and Pakistan, the division was on explicit religious lines. Islam has an outdated theology of being the only true religion and all other religions are false (as is Christianity). This theology forms the basis (whether that basis evolved later or is advocated by islam is a secondary issue) of the idea than non-believers can be treated inhumanely and are essentially no different from animals. In essence, Partition of India was not "drifting apart". It was a violent tearing apart of countries and communities. The origin was from the muslim community, whose political leaders realized that for them to seize power, a democratic setup with majority Hindu population will be impossible. So, to preserve their power and egos, they split the country, aided by pacifists like Gandhi and Nehru. To note, Pakistan has one of the most fertile lands on earth. Abundance of natural resources and a strategically important location. Also to note, the plan was to destroy Hindu civilization as a whole (a historical dream of Islam. Search google for Gazwa-e-Hind). Jinnah proposed a 10 mile wide corridor, cutting across the heart of India to allow road access to east pakistan (now Bangladesh) Partition of India is the manifestation of the idea of Gazwa-e-Hind. A strike at the Hindu India.
pktttttuio 3y ago
[flagged]
jim_inont 3y ago
[dead]
propogandist 3y ago
Modi is corrupt. The guy does not have the interest of the country at heart, he just cares about the Ambanis and increasing the wealth of his political allies.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Modi is corrupt Source? Part of his allure and political inertia comes from being squeaky clean as far as bribes go.
  - yipbub 3y ago
    He was complicit in the Gujurat riots ethnic cleansing[0] Demonetization was a scheme to enrich his billionaire friends and party[0]. There's a lot more, and being the PM he hasn't allowed the media to question him. He only appears in staged interviews singing his praises or speeches. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_riots [1] https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/national/bjp-members-knew-about-demonetisation-beforehand https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/national/bjp-members-kne...
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > Gujurat riots ethnic cleansing…Demonetization…only appears in staged interviews singing his praises or speeches None of this is corruption. Authoritarianism. Populism, perhaps. But not fraudulent, not bribery, and not corruption.
      - yipbub 3y ago
        > None of this is corruption Even if that were true(which it's not), that's not a good defense of Modi. "Corruption is a form of dishonesty or a criminal offense which is undertaken by a person or an organization which is entrusted in a position of authority, in order to acquire illicit benefits or abuse power for one's personal gain."
        3y ago
throwawaytt 3y ago
[flagged]
- anaganisk 3y ago
  So you made a throwaway to say this? Did you even read my comment properly? I said average citizens and people like you again go back to propaganda. Tell me what BJP uses to win elections all the time? Hatred against Muslims? Top BJP Subramaniyam swami was quoted saying "Muslims are not equals, so they don't need equal rights". >They preach hatered towards Hindus/Jews in their schools (books are filled with hatred). Ofcourse, because your propaganda says so? I've met Pakistanis in real life in the US, and none of them want to hate me or kill me even the older generation ones. Also doesn't RSS, VHP, Bajarang dal do the same in India? Both governments failed us. We're fighting because they say so, tell me on a personal level what you hate about them?
  - throwawaytt 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - porkbeer 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - throwawaytt 3y ago
        [flagged]
  - throwawaytt 3y ago
    Average citizen in Pakistan supports army which instigated 4 wars against India so far
spaceman_2020 3y ago
I’ve always felt that its very hard to harbor deep hatred for any people when you can speak their language and share their culture.
- saiya-jin 3y ago
  unless you are Russian, they have no problem at all as we can see every day (I realize common folks are a bit different from the news image, but any news I hear from within Russia these days just confirms what I stated, and then you have those hundreds of thousands who voluntarily went to Ukraine to kill and steal)

mc32 3y ago

The whole world seems to be aligning with this type of politicking, unfortunately.

xwolfi 3y ago
Not at all: it s not because we have to alternate we should tolerate corruption, and what you see a lot is investigations catching up to criminals. At least as a French even if we sue a few former presidents here and there, I still accept my candidate loses and we try something else for a whole (I vote Macron, as centre right). I dont think the US should count much: they dont really transfer power, there are the same immutable parties that havent welcomed a serious challenger for decades playing theatre while having policy continuity by most standards, bar a few candies for the populace at the edge.
- mc32 3y ago
  The so-called deep-state exists in all countries that have not experienced recent revolution. The deep state is simply entrenched unelected (appointed) bureaucrats who continue a steady policy who only marginally change course during elected government changes. Only revolutions tend to almost completely sweep out the old and usher in the new guard. In France you have the sciences po graduates. In America we have the Washington Establishment which consists of revolving door politicians|lobbyists. In any case, the world is gravitating to Us vs Them in politics to win by divide & conquer.

n_t 3y ago

[flagged]

mey 3y ago
That doesn't preclude empathy for fellow humans, or wishing for a better future.
- n_t 3y ago
  Please don't obfuscate things here. Both OP and I are talking about Pakistani state. We all are aware that individual (particularly sane ones) have minimal control on government policies.
  - anaganisk 3y ago
    No I wasn't talking about the Pakistan state, I literally said an avg citizen. Calm down, dial down the propaganda and read my comment again.
    - dang 3y ago
      Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
wanderlust123 3y ago
Lol this is literally propaganda. One could say the same about Modi and his RSS mob. The original post was making a point about humanity, and you hijacked it with your own agenda. Way to go bud.
- dang 3y ago
  Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: you've unfortunately broken the site guidelines in other cases too, such as https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33906633 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33906633. Please don't do that - we have to ban accounts that do that sort of thing.

photochemsyn 3y ago

[flagged]

ummonk 3y ago
While imperial Britain has much to take blame for in South Asia, the partition is not really one of them. Great Britain (or rather Mountbatten on its behalf) really just acted as a third party arbiter in the partition. It was Jinnah's insistence on a separate carveout for Muslims in South Asia, together with Nehru's refusal to meet any demands for federalism, that resulted in partition. Imperial Britain had nothing to do with Direct Action Day.
- photochemsyn 3y ago
  I think the argument is that for the previous 100 years, Imperial Britain had deliberately encouraged violent divisions between the Hindu and Muslim populations as a means of exerting external control, again this is called a 'divide and conquer' policy. Your argument is sort of like saying, just because the British gave them the dynamite, they're not responsible for lighting the fuse.
  - nine_k 3y ago
    Indeed, safe handling of dynamite involves not lighting the fuze deliberately. What happened after the abolition of British Raj was in part a consequence of it, but I would not deny agency of the participants of the warfare that ensued.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > While imperial Britain has much to take blame for in South Asia, the partition is not really one of them. I’m going to disagree; however little direct control they exert at that point, the imperial power always bears significant responsbility for the costs of problems that accompany imperial collapse.
  - robocat 3y ago

hackernewds 3y ago

> drifted apart is a kind way of framing "were partitioned intentionally to foment division, by the departing colonizers"

screye 3y ago
Not exactly. The brits were to blame for process of partition (or lack there-of). The haste, wanton disregard for life, the casual approach towards the largest refugee crisis in human history was certainly avoidable. They were also to blame for further exacerbating divisions via divide-and-conquer. But the divisions already existed. The idea of a Muslim state had had been stewing for decades in certain circles. It was inevitable.
- kumarvvr 3y ago
  > The brits were to blame for process of partition Yeah, no. They took advantage of the divisions created in the population based on religion. Divisions created by Islamic fundamentalist parties.
  - screye 3y ago
    That's why I pointed to the 'process of partition'. The border-lines were drawn by a man who had never visited India over a few months. They withdrew all state machinery overnight, and somehow expected 2 nations born into war to fare alright. Did they expect millions to cross borders and leave their homes behind without any resulting repercussions ? How is a country (Pakistan) divided in 2 by its biggest enemy (India) even supposed to work ? How are Sikhs supposed to live if the borders go right through their fields, dividing their 2 holiest sites ? Animals when kept in captivity, cannot return back into the wild without supervision. Systems of govt are no different.
    - revelio 3y ago
      So it's the Brits fault that Pakistan/India immediately went at each others throat the moment they were gone and the solution was to keep both under "supervision" i.e. empire control? When exactly could they have left without that outcome? Or is the idea here that the British empire still exists in the 21st century? At what point do the people living there take responsibility for ending their own violence, in this scenario?

windex 3y ago

Unfortunately, India today is not exactly a beacon of righteousness. The current government in India is taking the country on exactly the same path as Pakistan except that India has an oligarchy which is being setup by people in government which would make it more like Russia. I'll give the country 10 years to implode if it doesn't course correct to become more inclusive, social justice oriented, and less violent.

GalenErso 3y ago
> I'll give the country 10 years to implode I'll take predictions that won't happen for 100, Alex.
barry-cotter 3y ago
People have been predicting Pakistan will collapse since 1947. It can’t be as fragile as it looks or it’d be gone already. Regarding India, hoping people who have different values to you suffer isn’t a prediction .
- kumarvvr 3y ago
  > People have been predicting Pakistan will collapse since 1947 It would have. But decades of war in Afghanistan and the pouring of USD by America, disregarding the very fact that they are funding a well known and open military dictatorship, has kept the country floating. It is in a deep cycle of debt and has no meaningful economy to speak of.
xNeil 3y ago
10 years to implode on what basis? That there's an oligarchy of sorts? What an absurd statement.
screye 3y ago
I'll give the country 10 years to implode I am willing to take a bet for any $$ value with 10x odds in your favor to contest that claim. more inclusive, social justice oriented, and less violent Hot take. If you genuinely cared about these things, you'd end up a supporter of the Modi Govt. I do not mind views that are diametrically opposite to me. But, every article in western media seems to be written by someone who is 1 degree of separation from the Indian opposition. The claims are never backed by statistics, and the infographics are often so absurd that I have to wonder if I live in an upside-down world. Apparently, India has the 150th [1] least free press in the world and India has been a country with on average 2nd highest chance of genocide [2] for the entire last decade. Dig into their data a little bit, and you realize that they either only interviewed opponents of the current govt. or used zero data what-so-ever. Note: Modi is the world's most popular leader[3]. About 20% of Muslims and 30% of Christians voted for his 2nd term[4]. For reference, Republicans have never been able to come anywhere close to 20% of the black vote-share, and no is claiming that America will collapse when a Republican wins every alternate election. The opinion of the average HNer on India, is as bad as a Q-anon supporter on American issues. I apologize for the somewhat angry tone I take on these threads. I do not intend to start a culture war. But when ignorance and arrogance are paired this frivolously, I can't help but respond in kind. [1] https://rsf.org/en/index https://rsf.org/en/index [2] https://earlywarningproject.ushmm.org/countries/india https://earlywarningproject.ushmm.org/countries/india [3] https://morningconsult.com/global-leader-approval/ https://morningconsult.com/global-leader-approval/ [4] https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/06/29/nationalism-and-politics/pf_06-29-21_india-06-4/ https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/06/29/nationalism-... [5] my previous rants on the matter - https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=author%3Ascreye%20modi&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

kumarvvr 3y ago

>We fought together to gain freedom and just drifted apart. A movement propped up on the idea of a "separate nation for muslims", fought hard for and achieved with much violence and bloodshed is "just drifted apart" Wow !

anaganisk 3y ago
I don't know what you are trying to say here, but it didn't have to be violent and persist after too, that's exactly what I was saying by "drifting apart". If they felt safer as a separate nation to have their interests protected that shouldn't be the cause of bitterness. Jinnah and Nehru had both been adamant on their stances, former was proponent of federal governance while later a central. India had several bifurcation of states, it helped in better representation. Recent AP, Telangana state bifurcation was done after much violence, did they drift apart? Does an avg person of the 2 states have anything against each other now? That was exactly my point, for avg people they're just other people, we are constantly washed by propaganda to believe they're enemies.
- devsda 3y ago
  > Recent AP, Telangana state bifurcation was done after much violence, did they drift apart? Don't think it is right to equate the violence during the partition of India to the Telangana movement. The 1947 partition had violence where communities fought and attacked each other. The Telangana movement except for few minor instances in the very early stages post independence, was not directly against people from Andhra region. A major part of the casualties were during protests as a direct result of government action and self harm. There may have been general dislike for people from other region but I don't think it ever turned into enemity and hatred towards each other.
- kumarvvr 3y ago
  You are equating bifurcation of states for political & administrative reasons, within the same country, to splitting a country into two ! When a country is split, crimes committed against those who are migrating to another country will not be prosecuted by the home country, and will not be possible to be prosecuted by the split country. Land, Houses and other immovable assets will be stolen from those who are forced to leave respective countries. Rapes, looting and arson are rampant, on both sides. In the case of India and Pakistan, the division was on explicit religious lines. Islam has an outdated theology of being the only true religion and all other religions are false (as is Christianity). This theology forms the basis (whether that basis evolved later or is advocated by islam is a secondary issue) of the idea than non-believers can be treated inhumanely and are essentially no different from animals. In essence, Partition of India was not "drifting apart". It was a violent tearing apart of countries and communities. The origin was from the muslim community, whose political leaders realized that for them to seize power, a democratic setup with majority Hindu population will be impossible. So, to preserve their power and egos, they split the country, aided by pacifists like Gandhi and Nehru. To note, Pakistan has one of the most fertile lands on earth. Abundance of natural resources and a strategically important location. Also to note, the plan was to destroy Hindu civilization as a whole (a historical dream of Islam. Search google for Gazwa-e-Hind). Jinnah proposed a 10 mile wide corridor, cutting across the heart of India to allow road access to east pakistan (now Bangladesh) Partition of India is the manifestation of the idea of Gazwa-e-Hind. A strike at the Hindu India.

pktttttuio 3y ago

[flagged]

jim_inont 3y ago

[dead]

propogandist 3y ago

Modi is corrupt. The guy does not have the interest of the country at heart, he just cares about the Ambanis and increasing the wealth of his political allies.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Modi is corrupt Source? Part of his allure and political inertia comes from being squeaky clean as far as bribes go.
- yipbub 3y ago
  He was complicit in the Gujurat riots ethnic cleansing[0] Demonetization was a scheme to enrich his billionaire friends and party[0]. There's a lot more, and being the PM he hasn't allowed the media to question him. He only appears in staged interviews singing his praises or speeches. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_riots [1] https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/national/bjp-members-knew-about-demonetisation-beforehand https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/national/bjp-members-kne...
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Gujurat riots ethnic cleansing…Demonetization…only appears in staged interviews singing his praises or speeches None of this is corruption. Authoritarianism. Populism, perhaps. But not fraudulent, not bribery, and not corruption.
    - yipbub 3y ago
      > None of this is corruption Even if that were true(which it's not), that's not a good defense of Modi. "Corruption is a form of dishonesty or a criminal offense which is undertaken by a person or an organization which is entrusted in a position of authority, in order to acquire illicit benefits or abuse power for one's personal gain."
      - 3y ago

throwawaytt 3y ago

[flagged]

anaganisk 3y ago
So you made a throwaway to say this? Did you even read my comment properly? I said average citizens and people like you again go back to propaganda. Tell me what BJP uses to win elections all the time? Hatred against Muslims? Top BJP Subramaniyam swami was quoted saying "Muslims are not equals, so they don't need equal rights". >They preach hatered towards Hindus/Jews in their schools (books are filled with hatred). Ofcourse, because your propaganda says so? I've met Pakistanis in real life in the US, and none of them want to hate me or kill me even the older generation ones. Also doesn't RSS, VHP, Bajarang dal do the same in India? Both governments failed us. We're fighting because they say so, tell me on a personal level what you hate about them?
- throwawaytt 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - porkbeer 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - throwawaytt 3y ago
      [flagged]
- throwawaytt 3y ago
  Average citizen in Pakistan supports army which instigated 4 wars against India so far

spaceman_2020 3y ago

I’ve always felt that its very hard to harbor deep hatred for any people when you can speak their language and share their culture.

saiya-jin 3y ago
unless you are Russian, they have no problem at all as we can see every day (I realize common folks are a bit different from the news image, but any news I hear from within Russia these days just confirms what I stated, and then you have those hundreds of thousands who voluntarily went to Ukraine to kill and steal)