Hello friends. Conservatives at law schools have been feeling marginalised and under pressure in recent years. We have seen Conservative Societies and Indic Studies Societies in the IITs and a strong RW ecosystem in the IITs, but this culture is lacking in law schools. However, I discovered on my Twitter timeline that there is a Conservative Society and Indic Studies Society at JGLS, which are challenging the left ecosystem and inviting intellectuals who are conservative. Below are some examples of events. I would be interested to know if these societies have got a good response and encouraged students to come out as conservative/centre-right, who would normally be quiet because of fear. Also, do people think this experiment can be repeated in NLUs?

This is one case where you should immediately go back into the closet and stop trying to set educational institutions back by decades with your misguided attempt at standing out in a crowd. Conservatism is cancer that stops progress and development and it's enough that we've had to endure it twice at the national stage, there's no need to bring that vile nonsense into institutions of education - which are by definition meant to harbour progressive ideas for the advancement of manking. Your ilk and your drivel need to be curbed and curtailed so you don't spew your medieval venom on a national platform.

honestly I hate this hypocritical censorship of thought that liberals and people on the left try to force upon conservatives. What the OP is trying to say is very true and a relevant observation on their surroundings - coming out even as a mild conservative poses a great risk to your career esp. in law firms.

Just to clarify, not every conservative wants to get out of their house in the night to lynch the minorities.

Was the opposition to the theory really based on facts, though? It was decried solely on the basis of it being a mostly Trumpian creation. The "facts" relied upon were the result of careful ommission and supression by vested actors. Read a book.

Or a news report. https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-how-amateur-sleuths-broke-wuhan-lab-story-embarrassed-media-1596958

Wah. Quote:

not every conservative wants to get out of their house in the night to lynch the minorities.

But you don't condemn it either. Such violence doesn't take place instantaneously. You build up hate through your actions and words, pushing your lackeys to indulge in such violence.

Well guess what lynching happens of other communities too, but only ‘LW’ views it through a communal sense depicting the plight of a particular community, both RW and LW are hypocrites at the same time. For now all we need are centrists who can point out the criminals irrespective of his/her religion.

Stop this BS. Stop hiding behind the tag of a conservative. You're a right winger. Oh wait. It is not even right wing. There's just hate that you try to justify with some made up ideology. And what exactly is right wing ideology? I would really like to hear it, without any reference to another religion.

As long as "conservative" is not actively sulfurous, I don't see a problem. I get where you are coming from in that some law school students' politics is wholly reactionary. You might notice that the curriculum is extremely rationalist and West-inspired; we don't discuss Indian philosophers like Chanakya or Ambedkar in as much detail as we dote on Sartre and Chomsky. If the "conservative" brings out these aspects, it would in fact be a welcome move.

A well-educated person supports no ideology, and reads everything with a pinch of salt. That is an attitude I have seen in very few people. Most want to jump on a bandwagon as soon as they can, not reading enough to see if the wagon is aimless (or not). Fin.

Look at your posters dude. Are these the kind of people you want to associate yourself with? Every single one is from a privileged, upper caste background. The only Dalit representation in your poster collection is Guru Prakash - who btw has conveniently left out the "Paswan" in favour of "Sri". Given his lineage, the man hasn't seen a day of oppression while dalit brethren die brutal deaths every day across the country.

The audacity to call yourself marginalised while kowtowing to the loudest and dumbest voices in the country is remarkable in its folly. But then again, all that the right knows is self-victimisation.

Lazy and dumb stereotyping.

Guru Prakash is a Dalit and very much uses his surname of Twitter. Don't reduce him to a label.

Iyer-Mitra is a half-Tamil/half-Bengali openly gay man (petitioner in the current gay marriage case) and also the son of an acid attack survivor.

Sai Deepak is a self-made lawyer who has risen on his own strength.

This is my India.

Hey my pal. Here, some fun reading about Abhijit Iyer Mitra.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/after-43-days-in-odisha-prison-abhijit-iyer-mitra-walks-free/story-e7xdZfYYEQfBMNB0KxsV4H.html

Funny that the right wing thinks of him as a sympathiser. What's with making derogatory remarks about an Odia temple? Or is it the VD Savarkar effect - apologize and then join hands with the oppressor?

More importantly, are all right wingers so meek so as to offer an apology at every other instance and not have the courage to stand by their beliefs? Savarkar the. Iyer Mitra now. Not even counting who apologize but don't really mean it - example being Sadhvi Pragya apologizing for her comments on Godse.

On the contrary Guest 4.1.2 it shows your ignorance of the term conservative. You should hears Abhijit's talks. He is an atheist and identifies as Hindu because the ancient Carvaka tradition in Hinduism recognises atheism. He is gay and sees no contradiction as Hinduism has been accepting of LGBT people (e.g. the warrior Shikhandi in Mahabharata, Khajuraho), unlike Abrahamic texts and communists. He is also pro free-market. He also is suspicious of China and with good reason (unlike China-loving libs, who Xi Jinping no doubt sees as "useful idiots").

Please tell me the name of ONE left-wing "intellectual" in India who is condemning the genocide in Tibet and Xinjiang Just ONE.

And FYI Savarkar was also atheist and against worshipping the cow and was against caste. See what the Congress party's own mouthpiece National Herald says about that:

https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/india/savarkar-equated-cows-with-donkeys-and-pigs

Hey buddy. I don't think I mentioned Hindu/ Hinduism anywhere in my comment. I mentioned 'right wing'. You for some reason thought it relevant to mention that Iyer Mitra is an atheist but identifies as a Hindu. And also brought in his sexual orientation (for what purpose?). That just demonstrates what 'right wing' ideology essentially is (in your assessment) - linked to one religious belief system (Hindutava, not Hinduism). My point is that right wingers (who by your admission are largely Hindutavadis) adore Iyer Mitra as a right winger, while he's clearly not a believer and mocks Hindu gods (what does that say of Hindutva: don't care about Hinduism, we are more concerned about hating others and will love everybody who hates along with us).

Going to ignore your whataboutism regarding China, communist, left wing, etc.

How exactly is Savarkar being an atheist relevant? Again, I mentioned that he was a right winger. Do you deny that he's the father of Hindutava (which passes off as right wing ideology in India)? Savarkar being an atheist or not hardly makes a difference to the damage that his right wing ideology has caused to India. It's like saying Advani wasn't really a religious man (some may even say that he was a secular person). But look where Advani has got us as a country, merely for his personal political gains.

Talking about cruelty on Dalits well dear your LW hasn’t done much for them either. Go see recent incidents of Dalits being forced to leave their houses in a M majority village, and guess what it wasn’t widely broadcasted because it didn’t suit the agenda.
Both RW and LW are hypocrites of highest order currently all we need are centrist, who can atleast call out the crimes/criminals irrespective of their religion and agenda

This is a very fair question, it is unclear why it is downvoted. The issue with most of these debates of 'left' vs 'right', is that both are very very wide ranges. Being socially conservative vs economically conservative are potentially two very different things, though many political parties may stake a claim at being both and this therefore making it seem like a binary choice.

The same goes for the so-called 'left', many of whom might consider themselves to be liberal on social policies but are effectively in support of free market capitalism in their day-to-day ideology.

Fair, while it is hard to be conservative in some colleges, its not like you are being punished by your peers. As long as you don't say something outrageous (like Modi is good for Muslims), people will be on normal terms with you. Sure, being part of the 'woke' club might earn you brownie points in some institutions, but as long as you are nice, kind, etc.... people won't cancel you or anything.

Plus if you are really sure about where you stand politically, don't let a bunch of college kids ruin your commitment to your ideals.

Don't do it. It's not worth the trouble. I always thought that law school would be afford people to make their point on any issue, however I was horribly mistaken. Saying anything that the left-liberal majority disagrees will call for social castigation. You will be known as that "problematic" and all the other fun tags that follow. I am also sure I will get attacked here for saying this.

Instead put your head down, familiarise yourself with the woke buzzwords, casually slip them into conversation and you should be gold. Trust me, thinking that you can rationally (I'm sure people will say there is no way you can rationally be a conservative) argue with them is a mistake. Just fake it, its not that hard, just call everything someone they liberals disagree with "problematic" and you are social sorted.

FREE SPEECH IS ALLOWED UNTIL YOU DISAGREE WITH THE LEFT-LIBERAL MAJORITY.

No doubt students in law and politics especially can be very passionate about the ideas they study and learn, and it is conceivable that certain ideas are unfashionable and will result in social opprobrium or castigation, and in some cases the issues are so emotive and the debates are so charged that it might feel like the freedom to express different thinking is stifled.

But without actually specifying what exactly it was that others labelled as 'problematic' or disagreed with, this post does prima facie seem to be a troll post merely intended to incite a flame war.

If you are genuinely interested in debate on political issues, we will endeavour to continue strictly moderating responses to allow you and others to "make their point on any issue", and to attempt to engage the substance of the argument and ideas rather than insulting the speaker making it.

That is if you are genuinely interested in debate on substance.

Sad to see your comment Kian. You know very well what is been referred to .The way pro-CAA students were abused with gaalis at BC/MC level, the way Sadhguru was heckled and booed, the way a state Governor was deplatformed and the way conservatives are generally bullied with insults like "bhakt", "gaumutra" etc. At my NLU students use insults like "bhakt" openly in class to bully students and one teacher smiled instead of scolding them. Is that how a teacher should behave? Also, a RW was student was speaking to a girl outside the boy's hostel. The woke boys came to the corridor and started jeering and whistling. The girl got embarrassed and left. There is also a lot of ragging. You will be asked if you support Modi and if you say yes they will ask you sexual questions.

That's why law school is not a safe space for conservatives. But I am happy to see Jindal standing up.

First, bullying is never ok and the polarisation that has happened between so-called 'left' and 'right' should not have a place in a university, which should provide a "safe space" for ideas, as you say.

But claiming a 'deplatforming' of people like Sadhguru, government supporters or a state governor seems a bit disingenuous. A university surely does not have a duty to give a platform for those who have millions and millions of followers or supporters, nor does a university have a duty to give a platform or space to a party in government or defenders of government policy, who surely have wider reach, support and a greater platform than nearly anyone else?

If anything, academically a university arguably has a duty to represent and make heard voices that are not front-and-center on TV, newspapers, Twitter, WhatsApp and everywhere else.

Also, supporting ruling governments has rarely been 'cool' or fashionable on university campuses throughout history, so it's not surprising that a majority of students might disapprove of those supporting or defending some policies of the current government (the worst of which are arguably not merely 'conservative' but actually far-right and anti-democratic).

(That is even if a large part of that polarisation is cynically and intentionally created by politicians, and even if 'conservatives' are not at serious risk of getting arrested outside of campus for making their views known, unlike the 'left' currently).

But again, it is also a disservice and confusing when you use "RW student" or "Modi supporter" or "conservative" interchangeably, without defining further (and of course, the 'left' is as guilty of this conflation of the right much in the same way.

Are you claiming for instance that if you said, "Adam Smith is awesome", people would bully you? And would you think social opprobrium as unfair if someone made a statement on campus such as "homosexual relationships are against the order of nature" or "India should be first and foremost a nation for and of Hindus"?

For example: arguing against reservation immediately brands you a casteist. Arguing the merits (lack thereof) of third-wave feminism brands you a sexist/misogynist, arguing in favour of reduction of tax rates, lesser regulation brands you as insensitive/capitalist pig etc who hates the poor and needs to check their privilege, regardless of the fact that said person is from a lower middle class family in the first place and is perhaps not speaking such things from a selfish perspective, arguing against the mainstream view of transgender identities will brand you transphobic, anything said against Islam brands you a bigot/Muslim hater.

Of course blanket illogical/irrational beliefs should not be given the highest platform. But if someone uses logic and rationality to argue the abovesaid points they shouldn't be cancelled. There is an unnecessary amount of "gotcha" everytime something that doesn't conform to the left-liberal viewpoint is said. It is unfortunate that those who wield the most social capital are rigidly left-liberal and then do ALL THEY CAN to exclude such view points because they are "problematic" etc etc.

Excellent points by ex-NLUite. Let me add further.

Quote:

arguing against reservation immediately brands you a casteist.

Correct. Even though many of the castes getting quota are quite privileged (e.g. Jats), even though many minorities do not get quotas because they are not large enough national vote banks (Sikhs outside Punjab, Parsis), even though many Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas are poorer than some SCs/OBCs, even though Muslim and Christian colleges like Jamia, AMU and Stephen's are exempt from quotas because of an artificial "minority institution" tag.

Quote:

Arguing the merits (lack thereof) of third-wave feminism brands you a sexist/misogynist,

Correct. Even though the so-called feminists are often hypocrite, e.g. Nivedita Menon wrote a long piece essentially defending Lawrence Liang and attacking those who exposed him.

Quote:

arguing in favour of reduction of tax rates, lesser regulation brands you as insensitive/capitalist pig

Correct. Even though countries doing this (going back to Thatcher and Reagan) have become prosperous and provided jobs to the poor.

Quote:

needs to check their privilege, regardless of the fact that said person is from a lower middle class family in the first place

Correct. It's because the left hates the middle class with a vengeance, even more than they hate capitalists. That's because the middle class can rise from nothing and prove that merit and hard work are what matters.

Quote:

arguing against the mainstream view of transgender identities will brand you transphobic

Correct. Even though many feminists are also against the type of fanatical transgender rights movement we have today, where muscular men are competing in women's sporting events after a sex change and winning medals.

Quote:

anything said against Islam brands you a bigot/Muslim hater.

Correct.Even though Taliban/Al Qaeda/ISIS acted in the name of Islam and the Taliban is openly supported by Pakistan. Even though Islamic countries like Pakistan treat minorities horribly.

This poor UC talking point is disingenuous. The fact is NSSO surveys have shown that a disproportionate number of poor people in this country are SCs and STs. While I do agree that the current reservation system could be in some need for reform, one cannot deny the link between caste and socio-economic outcomes in this country. UCs have had opportunities to build a network over generations which other communities mostly lack to the same degree. To pretend that it's an equal race is to be in denial.

Many might agree that political correctness or cancel culture may have swung too far one way, the examples or 'arguments' cited here are a good illustration for why much RW discourse is not taken seriously in academia.

Quote:

even though many Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas are poorer than some SCs/OBCs, even though Muslim and Christian colleges like Jamia, AMU and Stephen's are exempt from quotas because of an artificial "minority institution" tag.

This is a primitive understanding of caste economics at best in the first part or an intentional distortion: is the average SC/OBC student better off than the average Bhramin, Khsatriya or Vaishya? Have the latter endured centuries of institutionalised oppression from the other?

Jamia, AMU and Stephen's point, even if prima facie accepted without going into the substance or rationale, basically boils down to whataboutery: look here, the system seems inconsistently applied and is not perfect, therefore reservation = bad.

Quote:

Even though the so-called feminists are often hypocrite, e.g. Nivedita Menon wrote a long piece essentially defending Lawrence Liang and attacking those who exposed him.

Picks one dubious example, proceeds to say all feminists are 'often hypocrite': reductio ad absurdum. This is no way to buttress your point, except establish your credentials as fundamentally not understanding what feminism means or what feminists stand for (nor is it a useful way of making an argument, hypocrisy exists on both the left and the right -- especially the right).

Quote:

Even though countries doing this (going back to Thatcher and Reagan) have become prosperous and provided jobs to the poor.

Does this count for empirical evidence in RW Lutyens drawing rooms? That's like saying China has become prosperous and provided jobs for the poor, therefore hard-right capitalism exploiting labour and human rights in the garb of communist totalitarianism is the most effective form of government.

Quote:

It's because the left hates the middle class with a vengeance, even more than they hate capitalists. That's because the middle class can rise from nothing and prove that merit and hard work are what matters.

ROFL, "left hates the middle class" - please provide actual empirical support rather than polemic. I.e., explain why the gap between lower and upper classes have been increasing in the majority of capitalist countries, while the middle class has been shrinking? And how does hard work and merit matter in capitalist societies where there is no minimum wage and where workers get exploited? Can a lower class person in India realistically pull themselves up by "merit and hard work" into the middle or upper class, without the educational infrastructure and privileges that the rich enjoy?

Quote:

Even though many feminists are also against the type of fanatical transgender rights movement we have today, where muscular men are competing in women's sporting events after a sex change and winning medals.

If anything, the fact that feminists and the left is having internal disagreement about transgender rights is a sign that healthy debate is taking place. But "muscular men competing in women's sporting events" is not really the crux of that debate but just looks like you're not even trying in your trolling now.

Quote:

Even though Taliban/Al Qaeda/ISIS acted in the name of Islam and the Taliban is openly supported by Pakistan. Even though Islamic countries like Pakistan treat minorities horribly.

Criticism of Islam and fundamentalist Islam politics is accepted in all of academia, if you don't use that as a fig leaf to make thinly veiled islamophobic 'point' that Muslims are terrorists and Taliban or Pakistani. Read up on the atrocities committed against ethnic or racial minorities or lower classes / castes in the name of religion, including in Buddhist Myanmar, atheist China, Christian America and last and not least modern-day Hindu India.

Quote:

But claiming a 'deplatforming' of people like Sadhguru, government supporters or a state governor seems a bit disingenuous. A university surely does not have a duty to give a platform for those who have millions and millions of followers or supporters,

What ridiculous arguments, Kian! The Governor of West Bengal is a constitutional authority and a Senior Advocate who was originally invited by NUJS students and then uninvited by a minority. Also, why ban him but allow Derek O'Brien?

Quote:

Also, supporting ruling governments has rarely been 'cool' or fashionable on university campuses

Yeah, right. So that's why NUJS invites people from the ruling party TMC? That's why the ruling party in China gets a free pass from communist unions in JNU? Never seen a pro-Tibet/pro-Xinjiang protest at any NLU either.

This is the sad truth today:

You don't have freedom of speech if you disagree with liberals where they are in a majority. This is not a trolish comment, its 100% truth.

I am not even conservative, I considered myself liberal until the last two years where I see that the left is quite opposite of anything liberal these days.

It is a religion. Where certain 'truths' are worshipped and heretics are persecuted. it started in US academia and have now spread in India. Kian, you seem to be oblivious to contemporary politics.

During the CAA controversy students from NALSAR and NUJS who signed a counter-petition were bullied badly. I can share links from MSM outlets if the moderator wants, but am not doing so because their names are mentioned. In the case of NUJS the student tweeted that he was called BC and MC openly by JUNIORS!! What kind of behaviour is this? It's pure Stalinism masquerading as liberalism.

People don’t understand that conservatism is extremely broad. I am economically conservative and all these people purporting to be left also become economically conservative as soon as they get a tier 1 job and if they don’t manage to secure one, they become marxists.

Moreover it is not an objective three front choice but an entire spectrum to choose from. Socially, I am a liberal leaning towards right. And I have shifted towards right from left when I realise how left contradicts free speech itself. People need to know that two contradicting ideologies are extremely essential for a society. As per John Rawls’ harm theory, free speech must be curbed only when it incurs direct (or maybe indirect too) harm to an individual. But let people speak? The thing is that when you say institutions must not have any rw society, you are polarising views towards a single ideology. When a single ideology, be it left or right, exists in any closed space, we have witnessed what happens in regards to Hitler, lenin and stalin. Contradicting ideology, no matter how harsh it is, must exist in order to create a balance. If an institution is full of left wingers and the authority becomes autocratic, who is gonna criticise it? Criticism brings about changes.

As if BJP is the custodian of free markets and liberal economics. BJP has screwed up the economy like Mt. Vesuvius screwed up Pompeii. A motley of semi literate medieval urine drinkers being projected as the harbingers of growth, is similar to Jeffrey Epstein being projected as a humanitarian.

'Leftists' you find in elite law institutions are 'left liberals'. In other words, they are merely left of centre.

'Communists' you refer to are 'far left' defined by a single party left system. Only thing beyond them on this spectrum, is 'revolutionary left' and/or 'militant left' (think Naxals). Again, with the latter you would do well keep in mind the adage - one man's militant is another's....

Finally, a lot of the right is also scattered across the spectrum. There is the 'economic right' (think Adam Smith), or the 'religious right' (think VHP). Then, there has always been an amalgam of this which comes in as the 'nationalistic right' - gathers support by aligning money and fervour (generally against any one 'other').

Incidentally, both the 'nationalistic right' and 'single party left' ate similar - centralising, ham-fisted, rhetorical.

Therefore, people like me (left of centre waala left liberal crowd) are against both - China ka communism, and Hitler ka fascism. I do not want either. However, I am willing to live with my law firm friend's ka 'economic right' while arguing for a better deal for those less fortunate than us. Humein Adani, Ambani, Jindal ki oxygen se issue nahin hai, but unki monopolising tendencies se hai which stand on crony capitalism.

Left right bahut deep hai. Yeh aapko Arnab nahin samjha payega, aur na main. Aap apna chilaana jaari rahein.

Why on earth is comment 17 is trollish? Biased moderation to the power of infinity. Isn't it true that Covid originated in China? Isn't it true that Pfizer and Moderna discovered vaccines? Isn't it true that Ambani and Jindal donated industrial oxygen during the second wave? Is the Congress IT cell moderating LI?

You lot aren't conservative. What similarity is there between Count de Maistre and you lot? What historical fact about India (which didn't even exist) are you trying to conserve? The Privy Purses? The return to Empire? You're as left wing as the nationalists during the French Revolution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_nationalism#:~:text=Nationalism%20originated%20as%20a%20left,subjective%20will%20to%20live%20together.

There's little difference between you lot and baizuous you're both founded on the same ideology i.e. perpetual victimhood. Both of you love crying about (alleged) historical crimes and or atrocities. Nehruvian nat propaganda raised generations of victims. The former lied and claimed that there was once a gOlDeN biRdie ruined by the OTHER i.e. goras. You lot just added Muslims to the list. Even your language and actions are similar.

Trans generational trauma, crying racism at the drop of a hat, the permanent mindset that's best summarised as "The West is bad, racist and was always poor and weaker than my group UNTIL these backward Westerners somehow got the whip hand over my FAR SUPERIOR group":

Renaming historical streets, destruction of historical monuments. Distortion of facts (liberals like George Gheverghese Joseph) or this: https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/teach-puranas-mythology-to-engineering-students-minister-satyapal-singh/story-qa4dokHfQjHvpqnGut6YaL.html

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/02/hindu-nationalists-claim-ancient-indians-had-airplanes-stem-cell-technology-and

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02243-x

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Aryanism

Thank God for Meera Nanda, she makes both of you froth at the mouth.

Liberal Starter Pack

1) Victims of Romila Thapar, Bipin Chandra and Guhas revisionist history who we're ordained to tone down the communal character of History.- tinkering with the facts of history itself delegitimizes its objectivity. Never heard of Sita ram goel, Ram Swarup or read Arun Shouries work ☑️ (The Streisand effect post Vajpai and 2014 about a "forgotten history" propelled the omissions made to firmly establish the BJP as the go to party for the average Hindu.)

{Speaking of the Streisand Effect and its effect on Indian polity, what's often missed is that the Liberal and SJW reporting catapulted Modi from CM to PM worthy stature. He ironically did everything by the book, a few months into office as MLA which is why the SIT gave him the clean chit. The insistence of the Congress and Media to paint him as a communal figure sparked what may be a genius move that has brought us where we are today. By consciously refusing to apologize and downplaying the severity of the Riots, he subliminally lent credence to that narrative which was the watershed dog whistle of mainstream Hindutva politics.}

2) Free speech advocacy for sharjeel imams, kunal kamras and the woke stand up brigade which tiptoes around religion sanctioned imprimaturs by the most peaceful religion in the world through long essays to create an false and execrable equivalence between a monotheistic religious faith prescribing decapitation of idolaters, homosexuals, apostates and non believers and a plural one not seeking any of these (Despite a lot of its detestable orthodoxy which can and has been amended by law) ☑️ See Jai Shri Ram is a War Cry- Declarative Statement ( Prove Otherwise, The Delusion Lol) Tweet Deleted after the desired reach; also https://twitter.com/SharjeelUsmani/status/1351682274866020352?s=20

3) Championing of Tolerant, Secular, Progressive democracy but only to the point where the opinions shared conforms to their own (a lot of times uninformed) opinions. ☑️

4) See the world in a binary of BJP(bad, Hindu, uncouth, Youtubers jinka Ghar chalta hai views aur controversy se- Rathee aur Banerjee ne contextless newsclip dikhai toh Sahi hi hoga) Vs most intellectual most smart woke brigade--basically koi bhi iss Tanashahi se Bachao hame (Owaisi, Amanatullah Khan, Mamta Banerjee, Audrey Trushke, Anish Kapoor ) ☑️

See: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/jun/04/modi-parliament-taliban-anish-kapoor

(Hindu Taliban, get a load of this fiction)

5) Can't wait for the discussion to take place and THEN critique the views on merits because Mah presumption Mah bias is not bias kyunki main Wire aur Caravan Padhta/Padhti Hun. (Commonly called cancel culture, tyranny of the woke) ☑️ *The extents to which Delhi Press (Champak, Caravan, Grihshobha, Saras Salil, and Sarita) maintains its vitriol and ideological purity boggles the mind

Fun fact: Mk Venu and Varadrajan founders of the Wire started it after getting fired from RSTV where they were handsomely remunerated. Aap chronology samjhiye.

6) Presuming at first glance ki ye Vimal ka ladka is thread ko Subliminally Saffronize kar Raha hai he must be dirty, Sanghi, Cow Pissdrinking, Modi Bhakt. ☑️

🙏🏻 You're wrong. I'm actually a big critic of the BJP in terms of a lot its politics and bad decisions and my only agreement with it is on terms of certain policies which are good for this country, regardless of the political establishment.

If you can't keep a thick skin and engage in productive debate with a people who might be most aggressive or unfiltered to extract meaning to improve your own opinions from their suggestions, you belong on the subscriber list of imposters like Rathee, Banerjee, Quint, Wire, OpIndia, Scroll, Altnews, Caravan ,, Swarajya and their Ilk.

Its cool to scoff and turn up the self loathing to 5th gear because you know the tolerance that underpins it. (Don't bring up nutjobs of Karni Sena and VHP and lone wolf incidents to make the lame strawman of extrapolating it to all, just like the, lets say Abrahamic war cries and cruelty (also known as Distress sounds-as per "neutral" Media doyen Wikipedia) can't sully the entire faith and is vociferously defended to that end. (Despite being religiously sanctioned in some cases)

Heres a fun adumbration of the place where we're at in Society.

https://twitter.com/erbmjha/status/1400034070579408898?s=20 - Don't assail the source, refute on Merits.

https://twitter.com/rw_parth/status/1400485654023196685?s=20

If this asinine cornering and shaming of people goes on- because as Raghu Karnads, Swara Bhaskars et al can police selectively due to the "Respectability Politics", we'll end up with BJP crossing 380 next time.

Curb your hypocrisy, be consistent with your outrage, admire the good things, excoriate the bad ones, keep your leaders in check.

Yours truly, A liberal conservative.

Yes you pigheads its possible to espouse of the the liberal values of the 21st century and venerate your traditional values at the same time.

As far as the conservative guy goes, bhai make your opinions as long as they're rooted in rationality, and avoid stirring up anything that goes against the woke ethos. I guarantee you if we end up with a non-BJP government in 2024 you'll be like meh, just another day and go to work. If BJP does come to power, try and dissociate yourslef from groupthink and your reaction should be the same. A possessed liberal will likely disown their parents(if they support modi) and then struggle to go back to their work to do a caste analysis of employees at Reliance, Adani and Google.

Cheers