[JumpCrisscross]

> fearmongering at a scale unseen before

Such hyperbole weakens your argument. It's borderline zealous. I don't think you are a zealot and I think you have a valid argument, although I disagree with you. But expressing good thoughts in hyperbole is not effective here.

(Another example is the "no right to criticise" argument. Nobody cares who has a legal right to do disagree. This isn't a court of law. All we care about are good arguments. If someone is hypocritical, point that out. But people can be hypocritical while still having a good point.)

[aub3bhat]

"fearmongering at a scale unseen before" is reasonable response when the argument uses words like "dystopian".

[JumpCrisscross]

You have never seen anyone call anything dystopian before?

[intended]

Aadhar is definitionally dystopian.

In case people are unaware

> No fundamental right to privacy to citizens: Centre tells SC

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/No-fundamental-righ...

thats from 2015.

Aadhar has regularly been pushed in violation of SC verdicts for ever.

Until 2016, and the enshrinment of the 2016 act, it wasn't even with parliamentary backing - AND it was still pushed.

At every level, aadhar has been abused and misused, publicly and on record.

It is dystopian