|
Spaced God posted:im a dumb babby american who has been mostly following this through intelcrab while filling the gaps in on wikipedia. I can't tell if this is.... good...??? or if it will start a war with pakistan???? Not good. There’s a large Muslim population in Kashmir. I’m reading in these articles that they’re attempting to remove restrictions which prevented Indians from other states from buying property in Kashmir. Ostensibly that would allow large amounts of money from what will certainly be wealthy Hindu residents interested in buying property in one of the most beautiful regions of the country. It will over time shift the dynamics of the area and potentially ratchet up tensions. Imagine gentrification but in an area with long simmering resentments over partition where you could start to see Indians, with state sanction and assistance, trying to push Muslims out. In a political climate where there are lynchings and communal violence towards Muslims and a highly bellicose Hindu youth movement. Given Modi’s history in Gujarat I just don’t have much faith in his stewardship of any community of Muslims and their fair treatment.
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 07:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 20:11 |
|
|
As I understand it, there's a fear that this is a step towards ethnic cleansing, starting with the creation of Hindu-only ethnic enclaves in majority Muslim Kashmir. Edit: Beaten, and by a better explanation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 07:09
|
|
|
Indians will just point out that it'll allow the Pandit to return. That's a prominent part of the BJP's rhetoric and it has a strong media presence: https://zeenews.india.com/jammu-and-kashmir/after-almost-30-years-a-kashmiri-pandit-returns-home-in-jammu-and-kashmirs-srinagar-2200544.html https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ow/67817682.cms https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/bjp-to-relaunch-kashmiri-pandit-rehabilitation-plan-after-j-k-polls-1568265-2019-07-13 The abolition of articles 370 and 35A has been something brewing up for a while. It's a constitutional mess because article 35A was passed through article 370, and article 370 was supposed to be temporary, however the legislative body that could repeal it (J&K's constituent assembly) was abolished before it did so. There are real problems with the provisions of article 35A as they allow discrimination of a kind impossible anywhere else in India. This doesn't mean that the BJP's motives are pure and noble on this point, of course. https://www.indiatoday.in/india-today-insight/story/why-kashmiris-may-not-be-special-any-longer-1542880-2019-06-05 https://www.businesstoday.in/current/economy-politics/article-35-a-jk-unrest-jammu-and-kashmir-constitution-law/story/370244.html https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/jammu-and-kashmirs-special-status-what-is-article-370/articleshow/70512062.cms The recent spate with Pakistan pushed it to the front of the agenda for India. Ending J&K's special status is a way of asserting more strongly the Indian claim. https://www.livemint.com/politics/n...4731820588.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 08:16
|
|
|
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/jammu-kashmir-news-live-amit-shah-to-address-parliament-on-jammy-and-kashmir/liveblog/70529047.cms That's a live blog if anyone is interested. Any debate about the revocation of the articles 35a and 370 will be perfunctory in nature, the BJP has already received support from a number of smaller parties and with their majority in the upper house they can push it through. We kept Modi and Shah in power, we're going to suffer the consequences.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 08:58
|
|
|
I'm beginning to think that Shiv Sena might be more dangerous to the world (via nuclear rhetoric) long-term than ISIS ever was. I still remember reading headlines of most Indians cheering for nuclear war during the height of tensions of feburary, and feeling my blood simmer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 09:13
|
|
|
Modi finally ready to revenge the down planes?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 13:14
|
|
|
What is the end-goal here. He won the election, why go for genocide and potentially war now. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 13:24
|
|
|
Because the US, China, Russia, EU, and other major trading partners are too busy to care? Not the only explanation, or even the most important one, but it'd help explain the timing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 13:27
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:What is the end-goal here. He won the election, why go for genocide and potentially war now. Because nationalism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 13:31
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Crossposting from another forum:Goon#1 posted:The amazing thing is that the Indians managed to keep their intentions hidden till the last moment. No one, not the press, nor the opposition, not even the other members of the government were kept in loop. Almost all sensitive locales have already been taken over by the military and only now people are realizing that this is what is happening. Goon#1 posted:...A union territory is a type of administrative division in the Republic of India. Unlike the states of India, which have their own governments, union territories are federal territories governed directly by the union government (central government) hence the Union Territory. Basically, this means they will cut off all the local political parties in Kashmir by the balls, as they will no longer have a say in how the state is governed, as everything will be done by central fiat. Goon#1 posted:...Kashmir is unique. I don't think any other state gives as much problems to India as this one state does. So, the govt may be doing this to get a tighter hold on the state, but for sure, there are going to be riots in the state. Almost unmanageable I would say, despite all precautions taken. Things are going to get a lot worse before they start getting better. And this is without taking into consideration, what Pakistan might do in retaliation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 13:34
|
|
|
Everyone is beating up on Muslim lately, better get on the bandwagon before it costs political capital and international opinion to do so!
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 13:38
|
|
|
imho this is the epicenter of climate change poo poo hitting the fan its hard to find one good map, so try to overlay these two maps in your head:   its a pretty well researched thing at this point that a 2C world is very risky for this region, and 3C world means an out and out water war. https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/6/eaav7266 http://lib.icimod.org/record/34383 India is positioning itself to choke pakistan off so that when the meltwater runoff is 50% lower some year the famine is in pakistan not india.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 13:59
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:India is positioning itself to choke pakistan off so that when the meltwater runoff is 50% lower some year the famine is in pakistan not india. It feels so short sighted to me because a lot of the head waters of rivers in that region are in China. And so India still isn’t cementing any sort of real control of these water resources (which China has been aggressively damming upnwith hydroelectric projects). And arguably Pakistan has been making more inroads diplomatically with China as China expands its influence in Central Asia. Which isn’t really to disagree with you, it’s just to say that this sort of prerogative feels like motivated rationalization to cover for much deeper seated antipathy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 14:09
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:It feels so short sighted to me because a lot of the head waters of rivers in that region are in China. And so India still isn’t cementing any sort of real control of these water resources. And arguably Pakistan has been making more inroads diplomatically with China as China expands its influence in Central Asia. Which isn’t really to disagree with you, it’s just to say that this sort of prerogative feels like motivated rationalization to cover for much deeper seated antipathy. China can't choke off India without also choking off Pakistan, so
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 14:10
|
|
|
yea and "choke" was too strong a word, its not like there won't still be a massive amount of water, enough for china and india and *some* pakistanis its just, y'know, better to be upstream than down. edit: also most of the chinese territory the rivers source in is un-farmable mountains edit2: its like the old "you don't have to outrun the bear, you just have to outrun the other guy" thing
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 14:13
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:China can't choke off India without also choking off Pakistan, so Right but I’ll bet dollars to donuts Pakistan will be ok with China choking off water (which they’re already doing) in exchange for economic support brought along through the Chinese beltway project. It’s kind of an unrelated tangent but I feel like there is a tract in the arthasastra discussing the mutual interests of allies on either side of a common antagonist. The water coming down the Indus has been declining for decades. There is journalism from early 00’s discussing widespread drought and the insufficiency of the Indus since India has monopolized the resource so what would Pakistan care if China, who has been making steady entreaties to Pakistan particularly as Us influence has wained, chokes off the country which has already drank their milkshake, so to speak.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 14:18
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:Yeah just ask. There are a small handful of Indian posters that occasionally pass through (not me). Others of us have studied enough we can at minimum point you in the right direction. Okay. My main question is that I often hear that India was very "socialist" during its first couple of decades of independence, then has gradually become more capitalist. Is this true or just right wing talking points?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 16:13
|
|
|
Almost every single nation in the world was more "socialist" 70 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 16:16
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Okay. I suspect the talking point is literally a single issue test on whether they were on speaking terms with the Soviets, not focused on actual policy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Okay. SMWD has the bulk of it. After independence Nehru did not want to be a pawn of either the soviets (the “second world”) or USA (the “first world”) and so avoided taking sides as much as they could. Which is where the term third world came from, which originally did not have the implicit definition as being a backward undeveloped country which is something that it sort of became a term for later. It’s been awhile but the understanding from what I’ve read is that this was motivated entirely by a desire for independence. They didn’t want to become a client state after achieving freedom from colonialism. When you don’t choose sides you sort of antagonize both sides, which is really the issue rather than whether India was socialist or not. The USA particularly with the ascendency of Nixon became more suspicious of India and Nixon on particular had a strong antipathy towards Indira Gandhi. During that period you saw Nixon making lots of entreaties with the Pakistani government, selling them military hardware in hopes they’d act as a bulwark to Russia who at this time is loving around in Afghanistan. This state of affairs in many ways does not really turn around in earnest until Manmohan Singh becomes prime minister. This is eliding some details (Indira Gandhi and her sons blurred the lines of state ownership a bit and the corruption was a controversy but my recall is hazier on some of the particulars. But that’s the broad sketch.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 16:32
|
|
|
I wish there were more books in english of the debates, legislation and local/state events that occured in Cold War India. Not enough biographies of modern Indians besides Mahatama.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 16:37
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:I wish there were more books in english of the debates, legislation and local/state events that occured in Cold War India. Not enough biographies of modern Indians besides Mahatama. India after Gandhi by Ramachandra Guha is a decent recap of what’s happened since independence and covers a lot of the controversies and tensions that were roiling the state governments during that time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
Geopolitics isn't very relevant to that answer at all. India was almost entirely socialist economically till 1991. The government controlled almost all industries, "license raj" made it impossible to run any private enterprise unless you bribed the entire chain of command, labor laws were extremely pro-union and there were massive handouts / social welfare. Just like China, India started liberalization to attract investment, open up sectors to privatization and loosen government control and that sped up growth. Even today, India has massive social programs for the poor including free Healthcare, education, subsidized food and cooking fuel. All leading utilities are state owned as are the major oil producers, refiners, metal and coal miners, banks, insurance. There's still a badly run telecom operator and airline operated by the State. Most doctor's first job is in a government run hospital. So yes India was extremely socialist from 1947 to 1991.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 16:46
|
|
|
Fantastic replies, thanks. A few more questions: - According to the news, India has been developing quickly over the past two decades or so. Is this accurate, and if so why? - Is the Kerala economic model as good as people say it is? Someone told me the reason why the state has such relatively high human development is primarily due to family abroad sending money back home. - IIRC, West Bengal had a lot of Communists elected and made it a pseudo socialist state. How well did that work out? - I heard something about a female president give mandatory vasectomies as a form of population control?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 16:46
|
|
|
Can we rename this to the South Asian Thread: Moving poo poo Through KashmirYiggy posted:India after Gandhi by Ramachandra Guha is a decent recap of what’s happened since independence and covers a lot of the controversies and tensions that were roiling the state governments during that time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 17:05
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Fantastic replies, thanks. I'm on mobile but I can answer this one now. In the late 1970s, India was in a state of emergency imposed by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, which allowed her to rule by decree, suspend elections, institute press censorship, and jail political opponents. The forced sterilization policy dating from this time affected over 6 million men, justified as a means of instituting population control amid fears of famine and social unrest. Thr government took a different approach even after the state of emergency. Tubal ligation was a major component of population control policy for years afterward, however, and off the top of my head about a third of all women in India have been sterilized.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 17:35
|
|
|
Anarkii posted:Geopolitics isn't very relevant to that answer at all. India was almost entirely socialist economically till 1991. The government controlled almost all industries, "license raj" made it impossible to run any private enterprise unless you bribed the entire chain of command, labor laws were extremely pro-union and there were massive handouts / social welfare. I think the socialism policies could be explained by geopolitics very well. They were influenced by Soviet Union. As for the market reform in Asia, the order of free market reform went like this: Japan in 60s, 4 tigers in 70s, China in 80s (1978) and India in 90s.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 18:04
|
|
|
Kangxi posted:Thr government took a different approach even after the state of emergency. Tubal ligation was a major component of population control policy for years afterward, however, and off the top of my head about a third of all women in India have been sterilized.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:what? I'm so sorry, I had remembered the statistic incorrectly. 39% of women who were, quote, "married or in unions" used sterilization as birth control compared to other methods of contraception such as IUDs or the birth control pill. The figure comes from a 2015 UN survey. https://pulitzercenter.org/reporting/worlds-most-common-contraception-has-dark-past Deeply sorry for the confusion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 19:29
|
|
|
This is all taking place on the Indian side, correct? If so, unless they cross over into Pakistan's territory won't this amount to nothing in terms of armed conflict between Pakistan and India?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
Hamelekim posted:This is all taking place on the Indian side, correct? If so, unless they cross over into Pakistan's territory won't this amount to nothing in terms of armed conflict between Pakistan and India? what does pakistan do in the event of pogroms and ethnic cleansing within sight of the border? what about a million refugees?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 20:45
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:what does pakistan do in the event of pogroms and ethnic cleansing within sight of the border? what about a million refugees? What does the world do? They won't sit idly by when both countries have nuclear weapons. At least I hope they won't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 20:48
|
|
|
Hamelekim posted:What does the world do? They won't sit idly by when both countries have nuclear weapons. At least I hope they won't. we've done so in the past 
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 21:34
|
|
|
Hamelekim posted:What does the world do? They won't sit idly by when both countries have nuclear weapons. At least I hope they won't. I'd bet on the very exact opposite. It's just because they both have a fully developed and usable nuclear weapons capability that everyone is going to keep the gently caress away, no matter what. What used to happen is a thunderstorm of diplomacy from state departments around the world, coupled with concerend letters or statements at most in the UN. But now...the US state department being in the state it is, coupled with everyone else being preoccupied or divided, and modern Russia wanting the rest of the world to burn and happily selling the matches, diplomatic activity might be depressed this time. Note that nobody would actually have done anything outside talking before either. Thats how powerful nuclear weapons are.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
ThisIsJohnWayne posted:I'd bet on the very exact opposite. It's just because they both have a fully developed and usable nuclear weapons capability that everyone is going to keep the gently caress away, no matter what. Economic sanctions can work on nuclear countries.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 21:39
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:what does pakistan do in the event of pogroms and ethnic cleansing within sight of the border? what about a million refugees? The answer according to Pakistani Twitter is #PakArmyLiberateKashmir
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 21:43
|
|
|
Isn’t this going to cause problems for other Muslim majority areas in India as well? Sound like a bad idea all around by people betting they can get away with it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 21:48
|
|
|
Hamelekim posted:Isn’t this going to cause problems for other Muslim majority areas in India as well? Sound like a bad idea all around by people betting they can get away with it. modi first rose to prominence because he let pogroms happen
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 20:11 |
|
|
Hamelekim posted:Economic sanctions can work on nuclear countries. What country on earth would create economic sanctions against India. I can't imagine that against Pakistan either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 21:51
|
|