[screye]

> countries didn't have borders until after independence

This only applies to anyone who entered after 1971, by when the borders were well established.

> attempt by the government to remove poor Muslim populations from India and blatant religious persecution

That is the allegation from the opposition. The current government denies that and only anyone who entered illegally after 1971 (in accordance with the assam accords) would not be granted full citizenship. It is hilarious that you consider this religious persecution, when the accusers themselves (The INC) were the ones that came up with this bell in the first place for Assam.

The act also does not allocate any special funding to deportation. This means that while some groups would have gotten citizenship, others would have remained just as illegal as they were before this.

There was a lot of misinformation around the act, but the idea that the entire muslim population without documentation would be deported was not just overblown, it was straight up lying.

Western establishment media loves to jump to conclusions on something that there was no indication would happen, and have continued attacking a strawman that has never existed.

> The current government in India is going from a democracy to a Hindu nationalist state.

There is zero indication that this is the case. The Modi Govt. is trying to actively privatize India and that goes actively against the RSS's isolationist ideals. This Govt. is giving opportunities to lower castes that the Congress would never even let stand among them. The party is not nepotistic and rewards grassroots merit instead of the monarchy that India has seen with the Gandhi family for 60 years. If anything, India is far more democratic today than ever.

As for the political power of Muslims, there is a huge caste issue within there that is not addressed at all. The majority of muslims in power are those that trace their roots to upper castes or timurid/persian/afghan invaders. They refer to themselves as Ashraf, and adopt a noticeably non-indic identity. They constitute 15% of all muslims in India, but control the vast vast majority of institutional power for muslims. On the other hand, the common folk who converted, also referred to as Pasmanda get zero representation despite constituting 85% of the population. [1] [2] [3]

Historically, the Congress has loved to give a lot of power to Ashraf Muslims. Modi has stopped giving them the time of day. That is true. IMO, it reflects the last cry of an old elite who have realized that there will be no more free lunch.

At the grass roots, Modi has actually increased funding towards poor muslims [4] and has maintained every special accomodation given to them throughout his term.

The CAA would have given much needed protections to hindu minorities across the border that are being mercilessly slaughtered by muslim fundamentalists that are far more radical than any form of Hindu fundamentalism that exists today. [5] [6]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8_6ryRZcU0

[2] https://theprint.in/opinion/indias-muslim-community-under-a-...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_among_South_Asian...

[4] https://theprint.in/india/more-muslims-govt-scholarships-mod...

[5] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/south-asia/mob-bur...

[6] https://indianexpress.com/article/india/durga-puja-processio...

[bwb]

It is pretty clear this is religious persecution by a majority government with Hindu nationalistic tendencies. Are they fully there yet? No, but the moves they are making are worrisome... democracy doesn't just end, it slowly exits the stage...

The articles you gave are:

1. A YouTube channel by a dude who makes his own podcast. Not backed by any real media organization.

2. The articles you quoted are all from sources in India, in many cases from quasi media organizations, and the stories you referenced have nothing to do with this. Obviously the Times Of India is a great media source compared to the others, but you linked to a story that has nothing to do with this.

Here are some to take a read that outline the issues and the reasons behind this law. From reputable media sources:

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/india-muslims-marginalized-...

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/17/world/asia/india-assam-mu...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28940197#:~:text=https%...

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/21/india-muslims-deported-...

You other mentions have no factual merit or sources and are sensationalized. One incident doesn't make a pattern or a trend or redemption.

Here are good sources from trusted media organizations on what is going on big picture as Modi and the party move India in a scary direction:

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/13/modi-india-hindutva-hin...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-05/modi-s-go...

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/india-mo... \

I hope to see India as a democracy for a long time. Same goes for the USA as things are not looking good here either.

[screye]

I do not quote western news sources, because they are entirely incompetent in their reporting of India. Go to an international news page and read news about the US. You will quickly realize how little nuance and context these external organizations have about the ground reality in the US. You probably know that already, but Gell-Mann Amnesia affects all.

Additionally, foreign news organizations hire from the elite upper crust of India who are often educated from elite Indian liberal arts schools. It is no secret that the elites of India have flourished under the patronage of 60 yrs of Gandhi rule and that universities created in this era were prescriptively moulded in the ideology of the Congress at the time. IE. Socialist & Pseudo-secular. Almost all the heads of major media houses in the country rose to power after the 'blessings' of a Gandhi. Do you think any of them would be capable of doing

At the risk of hurling an ad hominem, I genuinely find the intellectual quality of the traditional liberal arts elites of India to be rather low. It is not surprising, given that no self respecting parent in India would doom their intelligent child to a career (or absence there-of) in media, the most nepotistic of all industries in the country.

> sources in India, in many cases from quasi media organizations

Did you actually just call ThePrint a quasi-news-org ? That's hilarious given the extent to which they go to appear bi-partisan, follow high standards of reporting and do primary journalism. It is headed by the most acclaimed journalist in India, who has previously been the editor of some of the biggest media institutions in the country. He has recieved acclaim from Indians (Padma Bhushan) and International actors [1] alike.

On top of that, they are explicitly liberal and employ experts from every side of the spectrum (Yogendra Yadav to Abhijit Iyer Mithra). To maintain journalistic integrity they have adopted a subscription based model, so they don't sell their soul to ads and one of the few media houses that send real boots on the ground to war zones for 1st party reports.

> Times Of India is a great media source compared to the others

That's even more hilarious, because the times of India is easily the worst of the lot, when it comes to major english newspapers. This isn't just me saying it, almost every Indian knows it. We used to jokingly call it the prostitute, because it sells out whichever party is in power at that time. In my entire life in India, I have never heard anyone call TOI reliable. Not a single time.

> YouTube channel by a dude who makes his own podcast

It was a long form discussion by a community that the national media ignores. How would I find an institutional interview of someone the institutions have abandoned ? There was a reason I linked 2 other sources for you to go off of if the podcast was not of sufficient veracity for you.

> have no factual merit or sources and are sensationalized. One incident doesn't make a pattern or a trend or redemption.

Can you please link to an exact link that has factually false information or where the damages were sensationalized ? I purposely linked to 2 events that have occured within the last week to highlight the frequency of such events. These there were dozens of people killed and their houses burned. Anywhere else, it would have been called a pogrom or a genocide. This same week we have seen hindus lynched on the Punjab border and an outspoken hindu advocating for Kashmiri unity being lynched by Jihadis in Kashmir.

The American left has time and again turned a deaf ear to muslim fundamentalism over the last few decades. I am not sure if that is due to guilt from middle eastern wars or a perception of muslims lying at the bottom of the privilege hierarchy as viewed from the woke lens. However, these mappings fall flat the second you look away from the west. Ashraf muslims were the invaders and historic oppressors, rulers of princely states and are incredibly well represented in positions of power in institutions. On top of that, India institutes special provisions for all minorities, in a manner that no other country does. IMO, India is the most pro-minority country on planet earth and to some degree it is time for Hindus to finally get the same rights in the country as minorities have been enjoying for 60 years. (Mostly due to Nehru's naivete and electoral minority based politics)

For ex, minorities get to fully control their own religious institutions, educational institutions, civil courts, special affirmative action and reservations, and their respective funding sources without needing any transparency. On the other hand, Hindus get none of these accommodations and all their institutions are controlled by the Govt. and sorely underfunded (because the Govt. is poor). Any criticism of a minority religion is considered 'bigotry' but criticism of hinduism is considered progressivism. The hypocrisy is practically dripping from the pens as western sources write about India.

India has always been a country of indic cultures and traditions. Those traditions are carried forward by hindus in an explicit sense, but is also reflected in the unique nature of islam and christianity in the subcontinent. Indians have provided refuge to Parsis, fleeing political refugees, Tibetans and many other communities over the last few centuries. THe people who took them in and allowed them to freely practise their beliefs and traditions were hindus. I am not worried about India's secularism, because secularism is core value of Hinduism. [2][3]

That being said, the wierdly India-specific interpretation of secularism practised by the Gandhi family is one I completely oppose and abhor.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekhar_Gupta: Under his leadership, The Indian Express won the Vienna-based International Press Institute's Award for Outstanding Journalism in the Public Interest thrice

[2] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/06/29/key-finding...

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCNV1vtV2HU

[bwb]

I think your POV and personal bias has blinded you to a more complete picture of what is going on. I wish you the best of luck and I hope you have a democracy in 10 years. Much like I hope the USA is still one as well :)

[screye]

Likewise. It is sad that we cannot see eye to eye, but unfortunately we do live in different realities.

If I had one closing suggestion, it would be to be more open minded towards claims from non-institutional actors. If they have established their credibility, follow the correct scientific processes and document their proofs, then it is worth stepping outside the bubble to lend an ear to their claims from time to time. I do not ask you to believe them, just to give them the time of your day and evaluate them critically, untarnished by the allegations levied against them by institutional actors.

Irrespective of those differences, I too hope for a future with robust democracies in both India and USA. :)

[bwb]

I am open minded to great reporting by individuals and small actors, but I think the actors you quoted are a hard sell when orgs like the Human Rights Watch, NY Times, FP, and so on are doing deep reporting into what is going on that counters your viewpoint.

The next 10 years will be interesting regardless, I worry more for the USA versus India when it comes to maintaining a democracy past 2024 :)

[hiyer]

NYT may be reliable in general but it's far from being so when it comes to reporting on India. Especially when the government in power doesn't agree with NYT's "liberal" philosophy.

[PinkSapphire]

Your comments are well thought out. Beautiful. Respect.