ta_vf7xjd34cc

> In India, the Judiciary has primacy over legislative.

You should read the Constitution before making random statements like these. The Parliament is supreme because every part of the Supreme Court (size, age of the judges etc) is in the hands of Parliament.

Unfortunately, like most countries including the United States, politicians prefer to use the Supreme Court to tackle knotty political issues. So, from the outside, it looks as if these courts are all powerful. Till someone proves that they are not. Like Indira Gandhi did during the Emergency.

The US has Marbury v. Madison. We have the Basic Structure Doctrine. The SCI invented a "Collegium" in the same way that they did the BSD. I am not going to go into whether these things are good or bad.

If the President asked the judges to go pound sand, there is nothing can can do about it except hold a press conference.

I consider the striking down of the NJAC to be illegitimate. If the government of the day had a backbone, every single judge would have been impeached.

Under the new tax regime, individual income up to ₹750,000 is tax free due to a combination of standard deduction and 87A.

Given that many small businesses often accept UPI payments in multiple names (husband, wife, mother etc), a small family can actually manage ₹1,500,000-3,000,000 in (legitimate) tax free income.

That is about $18-36,000.

Which is a lot in India.

> “Because despite everyone’s best efforts, sometimes the food spills into the delivery boxes. In those cases, the smell of the previous order travels to the next order and may lead to the next order smelling of the previous order,” Goyal reasoned. “For this reason, we had to separate the fleet for veg orders.”

Would dog-lovers take umbrage if their food orders are delivered from the same bag that also contains dog-meat? Would Jews and Muslims do that if their package was drenched with juices from an order for pork? The answer is obvious. When it comes to Hindus and Jains however, the argument is that their sentiments should not be respected because of "caste" or "purity."

However, I think that shelving the separate uniform colors idea is a good thing. In parts of the country, riders in green uniforms would be prime targets for hooligans of the jihadi-left variety.

> Persecuting your own citizens who worship minority religions is not decolonization in any way.

Reclaiming your own temples, after giving the injured party land to rebuild their mosque, is not persecution in my book. I would argue that building a mosque after demolishing a temple at the place Hindus believe their Lord was born was a deliberate provocation, and the other party refusing to let it go for 500 years was persecution of Hindus and their faith.

No other mosque in Ayodhya was touched when this particular mosque was demolished three decades back. If Hindus were truly supremacist, every single one would have been.

> minority

There are more than 600,000 mosques in India and over 200 million Muslims. They are a second majority.

From Catherine Nixey's The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World:

> When modern histories describe this period, this time when all the old religions died away and Christianity finally became pre-eminent, they tend to call it the “triumph of Christianity.” It is worth remembering, however, the original Roman meaning of the word “triumph.” A true Roman triumph wasn’t merely about the victory of the winner. It was about the total and utter subjugation of the loser. In a true Roman triumph the losing side was paraded through the capital while the winning side looked on at an enemy whose soldiers had been slain, whose possessions had been despoiled and whose leaders had been humiliated.

> A triumph was not merely a “victory.” It was an annihilation.

> ...

> For before it preserved, the Church destroyed. In a spasm of destruction never seen before—and one that appalled many non-Christians watching it—during the fourth and fifth centuries, the Christian Church demolished, vandalized and melted down a simply staggering quantity of art. Classical statues were knocked from their plinths, defaced, defiled and torn limb from limb. Temples were razed to their foundations and mutilated. A temple widely considered to be the most magnificent in the entire empire was leveled. Many of the Parthenon sculptures were attacked, faces were mutilated, hands and limbs were hacked off, and gods were decapitated. Some of the finest statues on the whole building were almost certainly smashed off then ground into rubble that was then used to build churches. Books—which were often stored in temples —suffered terribly. The remains of the greatest library in the ancient world, a library that had once held perhaps 700,000 volumes, were destroyed in this way by Christians. It was over a millennium before any other library would even come close to its holdings. Works by censured philosophers were forbidden and bonfires blazed across the empire as outlawed books went up in flames.

Per capita figures do not matter in such comparisons when the population involved is massive. YouTube is huge in India.

There is an anecdote that is often used in India about how the Parsis (Zoroastrians who escaped the Islamic conquest of Persia) came to India and assimilated into the society.

When a group of Parsis landed in Gujarat (Western India), the local chieftain posed a question to the leader of the group in the form of a glass of milk. The leader responded by adding a spoon of sugar to the glass and stirring the contents. The answer was found to be acceptable and the Parsis, the tiniest of the minorities, continue to live and prosper in India to this day.

Would they have managed this if the leader had smashed the glass, danced on the fragments, and then taken a hammer to the face of the principal deity at the local temple?

Immigration wiped out Native American tribes, and many other peoples, because the people who immigrated were different and were in no mood to assimilate. Europe is facing this kind of immigration, not the Parsis.

A father who wonders if his daughter will be stabbed in school today may not vocalize such sentiment, but when the time to cast a vote comes, that vote will go to Geert Wilders.

The Hyprland guy argues like a free speech absolutist while Drew wants him to join the neo-religious cult of perpetual rage and victim-hood.

Genocide is a tactic. Like nuking, flooding, fire bombing cities. Or beheading people. Or setting them afire. Or punishing entire tribes/clans for the crimes of one individual.

Universal morality does not exist. Whether something is "right" or "wrong" depends on the context in which it is used.

> Everyone and their dog knows that lead is dangerous.

If the article were truly written by someone whose heart bleeds for those suffering from lead poisoning in the Indian subcontinent, they would restrict themselves to that single issue. These potshots at the leaders together with the emphasis on "foreign expertise" and ""effective NGOs" shows two things:

- the colonial supremacist mindset is alive and well. It is merely adopted a new form conducive to this era.

- NGO-fronted regime change operations are not doing so well in this part of the world.

> Most of these governments are corrupt to the bone.

As are most governments in the West. Lobbying and campaign contributions is bribery by another name.

Parts of every Western power center are for sale at the right price. That does not mean that it is acceptable for their enemies to initiate regime change operations in these places.

> lots of it is pseudoscience.

I can get behind the feeling of the word, but I absolutely hate this word as it has generally been used in the sense that everything modern (science, technology, people) is smarter/more advanced than anything that is old.

If something was produced as a result of a rational thought process (no ghosts, demons, Gods involved), I would be loathe to call it pseudoscience even if it didn't work most of the time. For e.g. building, clothing, weaponry that works in one climate/area may not work if you transplant it to another place on Earth. That does not mean that the techniques used are pseudoscientific in nature. They were the science of that place and time.

> If you visit a traditional doctor he feels your wrist for a while and is able to create diagnoses with that along with looking at you and talking.

A lot of traditional medicine practitioners today are probably quacks. It is possible that something of import was lost over hundreds of generations of knowledge transfer. As we have access to modern medicine that can quickly relieve symptoms, looking into what was lost might be considered to be a waste of time by some when an easier alternative is available.