Since this will soon become heated and full of misinformation, here are some details-
1. PM Trudeau called emergency session over "credible" allegations but no actual evidence. The leader of opposition has also called out lack of evidence.
As for background, India considers two countries as those which harbors terrorists active against India - Pakistan and Canada. Canada has harbored "Khalistani" terrorists (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182) for long. Recently these "khalistani" (mind you, not Sikhs) have started threatening Indian diplomats (https://x.com/AdityaRajKaul/status/1676496624519122950?s=20) and attacked Indian properties and temples in Canada/UK. India recently started taking harder stance on push back on both Canada and UK for safety of it's nationals.
He's since changed his position and is saying Trudeau should release more information publicly. For context Poilievre has refused to get security clearance, so it's unlikely he's seen the whatever evidence CSIS has.+
+ there's a lot that's been written about his refusal. The short of it is that his position is that part of the process is he needs to promise not to reveal anything he sees and he has said that could interfere with his work as leader of the opposition.
You say Canada as "harbored" terrorists, but then link to an attack by Babbar Khalsa, which is designated as a terrorist by Canada. Do you have any basis for this assertion?
Also, I see calling credible allegations "baseless and irresponsible" doesn't inspire confidence. It's pretty clear how bad the assassination looks for India and pretending otherwise instead of promising to assist with investigations just make India look more guilty.
thank you .. also I have seen ill-informed US people accosting young Sikhs with accusations and harassment on the street in daylight .. Sikhs identified by their formal dress
While I understand that "Khalistani" have significant doctrinal differences from "traditional Sikhs", it seems like claim the Khalistani are not Sikhs is like claiming that Mormons aren't Christians. It is a prejudice based exclusion of a group in contradiction of the groups own identity.
I think explaining the differences between groups is totally worth wile, but denying the label seem like prejudice to me.
I rather doubt that Sikhs have been accosted in the US based on being confused with Khalistanis, as few americans have ever heard of Khalistanis. The attacks I heard about all had to do with ignorant Americans not knowing the difference between Sikhs and Muslims.
Do you agree the fundamental difference with Abrahamic religions is their choice of holy books and introduction of a holy prophet? The Jews have the Torah. The Christians had Jesus and appended the New Testament to the Torah, hence new religion, Christianity. The Muslims had Muhammad and appended the Quran to the Torah, hence new religion, Islam. The Mormons had Joseph Smith and appended the Book of Mormon to the Bible. I struggle to see how that doesn't make them a different religion just like the rest, worthy of a different name.
This is the evergreen debate about what makes one a "Christian." Is it simply one who worships Jesus Christ? Is it self-labeling as Christian? Is it adherence to some arbitrary specification that mandates a "Christian" must accept specific extra-biblical doctrines?
Depending on how you define Christian, it either includes or excludes Mormons. No discussion about "Are Mormons Christian?" is productive without first agreeing on a definition.
> The Muslims had Muhammad and appended the Quran to the Torah, hence new religion, Islam.
Islam views both Old and New Testament as the word of god, but the Quran is not viewed as an appendment to them but rather as a replacement.
> I struggle to see how that doesn't make them a different religion just like the rest, worthy of a different name.
Other religions add new holy books and new holy people without transforming. The Sikhs had 10 gurus over the course of more than 200 years.
Fundamentally, it is a question of cultural identity. Here, the key point is that the Mormons claim a Christian identity. What non-prejudiced purpose does it serve to deny them that identity?
So first you present how this accusation is baseless. But why did you added how this guy was bad and dangerous? Even when he was - it is unnecessary to your original argument and looks bit suspicious.
I'm surely a giant racist. Nobody falls for that stuff anymore. If you want to understand why our politicians are acting a given way, you look at their key coalitions. In this case, there is a direct cause between the PM defecting from a close relationship with India's PM Modi, and who he needs to show alignment to in response to a political crisis affecting that community.
I'm from India, I beg to differ. Despite all the cacophony of news channels, it is much less lawlessness now, partly because people are more aware and focused on their lives.
However, to your point "destroy a portion of the population in the race to put India on the global map." I encourage you do dig deeper than what english media reports and find the truth yourself. For example, the reason for this violence is two tribal communities, X & Y in hilly area. X was enjoying benefits of reservation, while Y had shared same past and situations. Y went to court asking to be included for reservation as schedule tribe, which court agreed to. Immediately, rioting starts. Can you come up a logical reason why Y would create ruckus instead of celebrating these benefits? Now read the news again and fill in who is X and who is Y.
This is an Union minister speaking at an RSS event.
This is neither the first nor the most vicious attack on India's biggest minority that I have heard of. This kind of rhetoric just seems commonplace today.
Full disclosure: I am an Indian too, living abroad now, but voted for the Modi government in 2014.
We cant be more diametrically opposite. I was in US now in India and didn't vote for Modi :D
But what does that link add to point I raised? Looking at Baghel's wikipedia page, he is typical politician jumping parties to be in power. He'll say whatever suits his position. And if you want to pin it on RSS, at least cite their chief's position instead of a politician who has nothing to do with RSSS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvR8Gy8TDsQ (same thing is what media typically does, use sound bites from unofficial sources).
My only request was to look beyond headlines which (I claim) are biased and do logical analysis. Not here to debate or convert your ideologies.
This is the example of harshest punishment by BJP for a hate speech: /s
"Prime Minister Narendra Modi said he will never forgive BJP's Sadhvi Pragya for insulting Mahatma Gandhi by calling his assassin Nathuram Godse a true patriot." [1]
Has Modi taken any other action against BJP's Sadhvi Pragya for her hate speech?
Below articles list countless events of hate speeches by various BJP ministers and leaders. Can you please point out a single instance where BJP/police has taken any action?
Blanket blaming the media for everything does not help either. I almost never trust western media to understand the nuances of Indian politics. Everytime I visit home, I realize the Indian television media is always effusive in praise of the Modi government. The one exception might have been NDTV, but they had a management shakeup last year, so I am not aware of where their ideologies line up. Print media seems to be left leaning in general - Hindu, Indian Express etc. So trusting media at this point is a foolish exercise.
For every one BJP comment regarding safe-guarding minority rights, there are 5 which call for open discrimination. Even the video you shared, seems sympathetic at first glance, but Mohan Bhagwat has always prefaced comments with a subtle hint of "know your place in the hierarchy, and you will be fine". [1] I have never known Muslims to claim they were in any form superior. They are poorest minority in India. So that comment makes no sense.
So I only have to fall back on what I know from the people I am close to. All my Muslim friends feel less safe than they were 10 years ago. No one's come into their home and thrown them out, but they have to tip-toe around small things like eating beef, wearing the burqa, and offering prayers.
I suppose we have to ask ourselves, is it worth making people unsafe for practicing their faith in the name of politics?
We might fundamentally disagree on that point, and that is fine. In which case that is hand dealt for this country, and things will fall where they have to.
I appreciate your civility and I agree neither one of us is going to walk away from this thread having changed our minds.
Even this news report could not call it attack on minority (though they surreptitiously use images to build that notion), because reality is just the opposite - it is Christian tribes attacking local Hindus.
India has similar to affirmative action law (called reservation) which provides certain castes and tribes up to 60% of allocation in various governmental programs (like admission in university, promo in govt jobs, etc.)[0]. Kuki tribe (now all Christians) had this reservation for long but Metei (local Hindus who also qualify for Scheduled Tribe in that region) were demanding them to be included too. Recently, judicial court gave Meitei right to be included in this reservation system [1] and Kukis started rioting against it. The attack has been primarily from Kukis to displace Meitei from this region, and hence not share reservation quota. (um! does genocide ring a bell? probably not because genocide of Hindus in India is common thing. See Kashmir[2], Kerala[3], and currently going on in West Bengal).
I'll also add that in India, English media is very heavily biased against Hindus so one has to read regional language news or social media to find unbiased (unfortunately, unfiltered too) reports. To answer what you are thinking next - you can prove it yourself! Just compare what English dailies/channel report vs twitter layperson and regional newspapers do with evidence. Not just for this, for any (seemingly never-ending) forthcoming incidences.
Why would Indian media be anti Hindu when the almost all of the 1. Electorate, 2. Government, 3. Corporations, 4. Media houses, 5. Rich are Hindu? I'd love to hear your explanation for that one. I don't disagree with your first point.
Thanks for your question. Curiosity is first step towards knowledge. I wish I was eloquent enough to put decades of history in few words. Best I can do is point you towards this book https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/57313237-sanghi-who-neve.... Note, anything even remotely exposing the issue will be immediately tagged as nationalist, BJP, RSS, Modi etc. The book only is about personal experience of one media person, and doesnt dig deeper into what brought media into this state. It can be starting point and you can follow the references further.
So is Book that you linked written by the same Rahul Roushan who is the CEO of OpIndia, a right-wing news portal that has been found publishing fake & Islamophobic news on multiple occasions?[1]
The other editor of OpIndia is Nupur J Sharma, who was also the BJP national spokesperson in 2020 and her derogatory remarks against Prophet on TV sparked outrage in India as well as the Arab world. [2] [3]
Just one example from recent past. The Wire is considered "reputable" english online news source but multiple times they have been caught fabricating grave evidence (even criminal) to plant stories against BJP (supposedly Hindu political party). Here was their latest gaffe https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/23/23419366/the-wire-meta-i.... Had it been any other country, such outlet would have been criticized to oblivions if not under legal action. But no! they are still the doyens of truth :) If BJP (current ruling party) even sneezes in their general direction, your ears will fall off hearing about fascism in India, even on HN :D
Are you trying to imply that there was no legal action taken against The Wire? Didn't BJP got The Wire office raided by police after that news report? [1]
BTW, mention of "The Wire" does not answer parent's question. "Why would Indian media be anti Hindu when the almost all of the 1. Electorate, 2. Government, 3. Corporations, 4. Media houses, 5. Rich are Hindu?"
Seriously, someone please stop this madman Modi! In 1989, Benares was vibrating with romantics (aka poor/cramped/unsanitary) where I could take pictures of poor but smiling people and write captions like "happiness is not about money". Modern India has ruined everything - no abject poverty, everyone has cellphones, no collapsing ruins of ancient uncared temples, etc. Modi, please stop!
Yes, as much as i tremendously enjoyed Varanasi in 2008 (in fact the only place I ever visited in whole world that had some sort of indescribable 'magic' in the air, and this comes from very rational non-religious person) and have some of the strongest memories in my life (being 1 meter from burning deceased on Manikarnika ghat, not entirely my choice I still feel the heat), I am tremendously happy for all the people lifted out of poverty.
I don't think westerner without prior similar experience can comprehend how poor people like dalits can actually be, not only monetarily but also when treated by rest of the society. If it means I will never ever see streets lined with beggars with leprosy who are in pretty rough shape while having absolutely nothing, and not have conversations I had because they will be on their phones, so be it. Mankind needs this.
It is not, it is just more and more attack on Modi whenever some critical elections are impending. I'd claim that India has never been more democratic. Every side is free to not just talk but shout on top of their lungs, Indian judicial system still works, journalist and media (despite being absolute junk and corrupt) still function on their own. Now, there are incidences here and there, but these are exceptions not the rule and my claim is that by and large India is most democratic country. Given true democratic nature of India, whoever didn't like these exceptions (from either side of political fence), cry foul loudest. Whoever controls media better, appears to be having majority voice.
Indian politics is different than other countries, even within South Asia, I'd say. It was dominated by one single political party (Indian National Congress or INC) headed by a single family. In fact, it is funny that English media blames Modi to be authoritarian, who is duly elected both by people and within his party, compares to INC which is actually autocratic (It's always one Nehru family which is head of party and has first right to be PM if in power). However, since 2014, INC been uprooted with Modi's rise. While INC believed in status-quo approach (hence, no progress of India since 1947 until 2000s and was considered to be extremely corrupt), Modi completely turned political game over. Almost 45% of India voted for Modi's party, BJP in last election (total 800million voters). He has exceptional work ethics, both opponents and supporters admire his integrity and dedication towards serving India (Modi calls himself prime servant instead of prime minister). People on ground can see changes his party has ushered, like transportation infrastructure, digitization, focus on cleanliness and environment and much more. Sure, Modi is also head-strong may be even adamant. But given what India's state was with respect to corruption and rotten state affairs, probably this attitude was needed to bring the change. I'm glad that given mass support he enjoys and adamancy he has, Modi is not the authoritarian, some Indian elites claim to be and uses his power for development of India.
Lot of good comments already, but then different personalities respond to different things so suggesting another approach. Stop thinking about success or career or even your happiness, instead invest in "fulfilment" of your life. That could mean different thing to different people, but I recommend doing something for someone else - no expectations, no desire for recognition, no desire for any returns! just do it! Take it as a challenge! Just one simple thing, with nothing in it for you! That might mean help a student with class/project/direction, or help an elderly in tech support, or help no-name mom-pop store with their tech support. Essentially, find something or someone local and help them with whatever you know. Don't overdo it, don't go completely out of your way, don't analyze what and how of it. Just do whatever you can in a manageable way.
If you go that far and feel satisfied, then start looking for more engagement and what else you can do, but this time with more involvement. If it sounds cliched or bookish, don't bother about it and try other suggestions. Key is to find what clicks with your personality and not necessarily what world's view is about life.
I think they are saying that humans cannot associate palm prints to an individual, unlike face (or even eyes in certain cases). It's just security by obscurity kind of thing but yes, not very convincing argument for privacy.
This is a sleight of hand on Amazon's part. Humans looking at a palm print and identifying the person is not a concern, it's computers looking at a palm, associating it with a credit card, which can then open up a trove of behavioral data to push (i.e., ads) to people. It's disingenuous, like putting someone in a tiger cage and saying "Don't worry, there's no way you can drown in here -- we made sure there's no water."
Despite the hype, Akbar was not tolerant at all. Like most Muslim kings in India, he was heavy-handed towards Hindus but was also towards Shia Muslim [1]. He ordered numerous massacre of Hindus (e.g. massacre in Garha in 1560 AD[2], order to weight Janeu - a cotton thread worn by hindus - of killed Hindus which weighed 200kg [3], rewarded Abd al-Qadir Badauni with gold coins who soak his Islamic beard in Hindu infidel blood [4]), had many Hindu temples razed/looted and destroyed, among many other things. Despite many facts, AFAICT, India is only country which portrays its invaders and looters as heroes.
[1] ’Akbar and His India’ by Irfan Habib
[2] The SAGE Encyclopedia of War: Social Science Perspectives edited by Paul Joseph
[3] Emperors of the Peacock Throne: The Saga of the Great Mughals By Abraham Eraly
[4] Source: The Legacy of Jihad:Islamic Holy War & the Fate of Non-Muslims edited by Andrew G. Bostom
Nations are usually built on lies. Most countries would likely fall apart if they were completely truthful about their histories.
In India's case, the whitewashing of Mughal rule was a necessity because there are still a substantial number of Muslims living in India, and painting their ancestors - the Mughals - as barbaric invaders would likely lead to violence (especially when seen in the context of the Partition violence).
At this point, India has to confront a hard question: does it continue believing the old lies, or does it accept the harsher reality? If we go with the latter, can you be confident that the country will survive in its present form?
I'm not sure of the answer. The mature position would be to understand that the violence and religious persecution happened, but since that's in the past, we can't really change anything about it. Punishing the present does not undo the sins of the ancestors.
But I'm not convinced that most people will take the mature position.
Empire making and keeping is inherently violent, but the current trend seems to be trying to make the case that Hindu emperors achieved what they achieved with peace, rainbows and divine fairness (and some old Hindu science of flying machines, plastic surgery between humans and elephant heads. All lost because of outside invasion). Pushing this point of view has been the national agenda in the current political situation.
If nothing else, it's a gross oversimplification of history - a basic "us vs them" narration. When in reality, alliances were driven more by political necessity than by religion. There were Hindu generals in Mughal armies, just as there were Muslim commanders in the Maratha armies.
If you trace the Mughal family tree, you'll also find that someone like Shah Jahan was 75% Indian by blood (Hindu Rajput grandmom, Hindu Rajput mom). Make of that what you will.
Agreed. Even the notion that the British took India from the Mughals is quite a laughable notion. Mughals were a shadow of themselves at that time. India was taken from the Marathas, not the Mughals.
An aside, are you aware of significant artifacts (more than hill top forts) institutions that the Marathas left behind. I would be quite interested in knowing about them. With the subject matter so politically charged it is hard to have levelheaded conversations on it.
There is various degrees of violence. In Indian context Kings fought each other to grab kingdoms but that did not translate into general massacre of public for their religious beliefs until Islam arrived.Of course this comes from my little knowledge of Indian History so I will be happy to learn more.
> some old Hindu science of flying machines, plastic surgery between humans and elephant heads. All lost because of outside invasion).
I do not subscribe to this nationalistic view. But then a lot of knowledge from India did get appropriated and lost. Take the example of Fibonacci series. Europe didn't adopt decimal numerals until 16th century and yet Fibonacci was able to invent his series?? No, he himself wrote I learned this from Indian and I am merely translating it. Yet it's called Fibonacci series with no attribution to its origin.[1]
Nalanda reportedly had 10k students, 2000 teachers, and 9 million books. When Khilji destroyed it, library burned for 3 months as reported by the historian of the destroyer himself so saying nothing was lost is just not real.[2]
> Yet it's called Fibonacci series with no attribution to its origin.[1]
I gather that you are not trained as a mathematician.
Much is made by the Hindu right wing about Fibonacci series. Before I explain, a minor correction, your comment makes it seem Fibonacci invented or claimed to have invent it. He did neither, he cited Indian publications describing the series.
Now back to the main point, hardly any mathematical result is named after the mathematician who invented the said concept, let alone first studied it. Consider Dirac delta functions. It was not invented by Dirac and neither is it even a function. Consider Taylor series, Taylor was not the first to come up with that series. Look up Stiglers law that describes the phenomenon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler%27s_law_of_eponymy True to its character, Stigler was not the first to observe this.
Its quite rare to have names correctly attributed in math's. Usually the name goes to the one who popularized the notion, the one who got the notion the maximum number of eyeballs and ears.
But no, that's not what you will be get from the Hindu right. What you will get are stories about "our rightful place was taken away from us by conspiracy".
Everywhere it is known that democracy started in Greece. Vaishali was a democracy much before that. That does not mean there is a conspiracy to do Hindu's under. A lot of it is just lack of knowledge and us not being in the forefront of human and modern civilizational accomplishments.
Tell me about one modern civilization scale accomplishment that came out of India recently that has changed the world. Artificial Satellite in space, not us. Humans in space, Moon -- not us. Computers -- not us. One computer language -- not us. Superconductors -- not us. Internet -- not us. When you lose that spot you lose the attention. No one is going to pay any heed to the fact that yeah democracy came to Vaishali before it came to Athens. They will listen even less because its the same folks who claim that Hindus had nuclear weapons during Mahabharat times, who talk about some truly genuine and notable historical facts.
> > some old Hindu science of flying machines, plastic surgery between humans and elephant heads. All lost because of outside invasion).
Of course I am not a mathematician or a historian and we digressed a lot into Indian history.
I was merely refuting the premise of this Pakistani propaganda article that Akbar was tolerant.
By contrasting between Akbar's ordering of beheading of 30k non combatants with Maha Rana Pratap returning his enemy Rahim's family back to him safely I hoped to demonstrate that Akbar wasn't tolerant even for his time. I believe you are from India so you would know both stories especially of Rahim.
On the subject of attributions you do know chain of custody for Dirac's function? Secondly if democracy can be attributed to Athens then why not Vaishali? They both are dead and harmless. Indians are not going to claims royalties from rest of the world for running democracies.
Why deny attribution where it is due and makes sense? Anyways we can keep that aside.
What if I tell you this cultural appropriation is going on as we speak. I hope you know that Yoga and Bhratnatyam are actively rebranded as Christian Yoga[1] and Christian Bhratnatyam[2]. This appropriation should be accepted just because India is not as advanced as compared to the first world countries?
I hear what you are saying but don't agree that "let's brush it under carpet" approach would be a mature one. My assessment is that current religious problems in India exist because there was no closure on hindu-muslim issues which started with Mughals and ended with partition. No political or religious leader addressed this issue with genuine concern and acknowledgement of history. Instead, all (including Gandhi to current politicians) took ostrich approach to deny the rift with slogans of unity, while pressurizing Hindus to forget-and-forgive since it appeals more to Hindus. This eventually gave rise to "pseudo-secularism" in India which is essentially anti-Hindu but pro-Islam stance. It is my opinion that due to this, distrust between Hindus and Muslims still lingers on and always will. Better approach would have been a proper closure of all the violence, conversions, atrocities, etc of past and then focus on moving on. And finally, mature approach would have been to figure out what is proper closure?
> In India's case, the whitewashing of Mughal rule was a necessity because there are still a substantial number of Muslims living in India ....
There are substantial level of German living in Germany, let's not teach them about Nazis? Interpreted other way you are advocating appeasement of people who already have superiority complex due to their religious beliefs.
History should be taught as it is? No lies. If Marathas were the aggressive towards Punjab and Bengal, teach it.
> I'm not sure of the answer .... ancestors.
How will you achieve that if you whitewash. Mature position requires understanding the past and then moving on.
You have to see things in context. The "whitewashing" happened at the dawn of independence. We'd just come off a massive human rights disaster in the form of the partition. Religious tensions were simmering. The country was broke. "Truthful" (though that's a loaded term in itself) would have ruptured the foundations of the country.
We do indeed need to have this conversation as a nation. But I don't think we're ready yet. We're still too poor and desperate. Poor and desperate people rarely make mature, rational decisions, especially about topics as emotionally charged as religion.
Not going to happen. History is always written by the victorious and in a way that is more flattering towards the victorious. The way we think of Hitler nowadays, we would be thinking the same of Churchill if WWII went the other way.
What are good resources to learn async concepts? Is there some resource which covers past and present across various languages? A resource which would conceptually cover - sync, async, blocking, non-blocking, threading, event loop/reactor, coroutines, futures/promises, async/await, fibres/green-threads, etc.
> "Since your interviewer is a friend, a buddy, a team member who’s on your side and means well for you (Refer to 4), talk to them while you're figuring it out."
I strongly disagree with this. It is true in theory but doesn't work in practice. Most FAANG interviewers are looking for a fast optimal solution. Unless you are interviewing for very junior role, if you take hints from interviewer, it'll likely go against you.
It depends. It's better to get a candidate unstuck with a few hints and then not give them a perfect score, than just staring at them while they struggle then crash and burn and panic. Sometime a little hint is all it takes, and then you get to see a great solution you didn't expect, or awesome code, and the candidate still passes the bar - while not in flying colors.
The way I read this is that he simply encourages you to talk and share your thought process while solving the problem. If you are stuck, you will have to take hints anyway, but until then taking aloud helps the interviewer and might as well help you by forcing you to articulate your thoughts in a structured manner.
When interviewing people (non-technical roles, but roles heavy on problem solving) I always encourage them to share their thought process. Plenty people who I hired not because of the right solution, but because they convinced me that they can think creatively and in a structured manner (i.e., clarifying the problem statement, identifying things that are the most critical, ...)
1. PM Trudeau called emergency session over "credible" allegations but no actual evidence. The leader of opposition has also called out lack of evidence.
2. Canada expelled a key Indian diplomat but not nothing more - basically diplomatese - https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/18/americas/canada-hardeep-s...
3. India issued statement calling allegations as baseless and irresponsible - https://bit.ly/3EHtuwe
4. India too immediately booted out key Canadian diplomat. Diplomat was so angry he almost slammed car door on a journalist (https://x.com/ANI/status/1703997495318352108?s=20)
5. PM Trudeau seems to realize he has worsened relations with no credible evidence - https://www.reuters.com/world/canada-pm-not-trying-provoke-i...
As for background, India considers two countries as those which harbors terrorists active against India - Pakistan and Canada. Canada has harbored "Khalistani" terrorists (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182) for long. Recently these "khalistani" (mind you, not Sikhs) have started threatening Indian diplomats (https://x.com/AdityaRajKaul/status/1676496624519122950?s=20) and attacked Indian properties and temples in Canada/UK. India recently started taking harder stance on push back on both Canada and UK for safety of it's nationals.