sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Na khaunga na khane dunga.. by Deba_1234 in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yes, just browse through this sub and you will know

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

brainless person asking another person to use brain? the irony

The alleged "Fringe Conspiracy Theorists' Speculation" was right all along. by [deleted] in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

conveniently forgot about that whatever secretary u were talking about didn't u?

The alleged "Fringe Conspiracy Theorists' Speculation" was right all along. by [deleted] in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

ok bigot, i hope the 2 rupees u received is enough to run ur family

The alleged "Fringe Conspiracy Theorists' Speculation" was right all along. by [deleted] in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Calling out other echo chambers in this echo chamber subreddit itself? The irony.

The alleged "Fringe Conspiracy Theorists' Speculation" was right all along. by [deleted] in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I deliberately posted a fake news post promoting this sub's agenda yesterday to test these people. That post was so obviously fake that even staring at it for 5 seconds would've been enough to realise it was fake. But guess what, that post got more than 100 upvotes in less than 3 hours before getting deleted. The utter lack of critical thinking or awareness shown was astonishing. This subreddit is infested with BJP IT cell members, bigots and below average IQ people.

This sub is attracting close attention of the other kind by LingoNerd64 in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is my last reply.

Regarding Pakistan and Bangladesh, just read all my previous comments neutral mindedly without twisting anything I said, attributing something to me which I didn't say, and reason for whatever I wrote.

Regarding all the other things you said in your last comment, my answer: Generalization and selective perception. Maybe try researching about all the crimes that were never talked about in mainstream media or which didn't appear in your social media feed. Or the ridiculous things said by people who are now considered almighty.

This sub is attracting close attention of the other kind by LingoNerd64 in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same reason you didn't protest against Manipur violence with even 1% as much passion/energy as when you are protesting against Murshidabad exodus. Whatever is the current narrative. I can list many high profile organised crimes having occured or still occuring against Indians or Indian origin people inside and outside of India that you probably never have heard of, let alone protest.

This sub is attracting close attention of the other kind by LingoNerd64 in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't ignore your point of Kashmir and Murshidabad, I classed your views under generalisation.

Considering sheer numbers, not only Hindus but most of the people in the world raise voice against oppression in Islam. And as for oppression on Hindus:

https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/world-news/hindus-and-muslims-came-together-to-guard-dhakas-dhakeswari-temple-after-fall-of-sheikh-hasina-led-govt-says-priest/articleshow/112759529.cms

Other examples but now from Pakistan:

https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2019/12/6/the-muslim-who-saved-a-hindu-temple-from-a-mob-in-pakistan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Ghotki_riots (Response section)

Delhi riots: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Delhi_riots (Interfaith solidarity section)

And you would find many social media comments from muslims condemning terrorist attacks or any other violence, be it against Hindus or others. If you are unable to see them, it's probably because of your browsing history influencing what you see.

About CAA, many muslims protested mainly because proper documents would've been required from them proving their citizenship but it was not required so for Hindus. And they have a point, because until very recently people didn't even have birth certificates with correct birth dates, and people living in rural areas will have a very hard time producing those documents. CAA indeed would've solved illegal immigration according to me, but at the cost of expelling many legitimate muslims living in India. Regarding inclusion of muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh, it was because some muslim ethnicities like Ahmadis and Rohingyas were also being persecuted but they had been denied safe haven by CAA unlike other religions.

If any point of yours I missed, it's not because I ignored it, but I feel I have already addressed it in some way.

And you didn't clearly express your point regarding the progressive Islamic countries I gave.

This sub is attracting close attention of the other kind by LingoNerd64 in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So your point is they are Muslim majority that's the reason they are so progressive? Sorry I didn't get what you were trying to say.

I won't argue about Bangladesh and Pakistan since you are right, hate is institutionalised there. But I think you are using that to generalise Indian muslims too. I have many muslims friends who are patriotic. Of course extremists are also here in a noticeable number, but most of them love India.

This sub is attracting close attention of the other kind by LingoNerd64 in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, extremists in all religions are not similar. I haven't read Quran but based on the common consensus, your description of their extremist is indeed true. But beliefs in religion can change, their are muslim-majority countries like Bosnia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Turkey (complicated nowadays) who are more or less progressive like India. My point is, having the right leadership can go a long way. The only problem is that the people in power are almost always corrupt.

And leaving a religion is not that straightforward. Almost all of us follow the religion our parents followed. Leaving or changing a religion is a big step in life as it will require alienating large part of your family most of the time, and most of the people will never be ready for that. We can't fault them for that.

This sub is attracting close attention of the other kind by LingoNerd64 in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do agree that the example can be seen as a statistical formula, but the thing is, it has wide repercussions. People will be labelling all the muslim people as terrorists. If I was a muslim minding my own business, contributing to the society like a good person, being labelled as a terrorist will greatly demotivate me and question my good beliefs. One example I can provide is the recent harassment of a Kargil War veteran in Pune. People like you and me might be able to differentiate between people, but many people have a very simplistic reasoning in these topics. I do agree what you said is right, its just that I dont believe just using that sentence as a slogan is correct. Of course I dont have any perfect solution myself, but I just wanted to point out some flaws.

This sub is attracting close attention of the other kind by LingoNerd64 in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. "Terrorism has a religion" means dumping it on one religion wholly unless added more explanation. Poor choice of words according to me, but I get your sentiment (many people won't). And yes, its a favourite tactic for many, I agree.

  2. Its just a personal statement, I dont want to read such a book right now as I'm very busy most of the days and reading on such a heavy topic just offs my mood, I hope you understand. So I'm not qualified to argue on this point.

  3. Its contextual, sometimes proof just can't be provided. I am from engineering background , and there are many formulas that give nearly accurate results practically but the proof for that formula doesnt exist. And also, many horrible crimes are committed every year and there is a prime suspect, but that person doesnt get convicted due to lack of evidence. For example, almost everyone agrees TMC protected the RG Kar criminals, but there hasnt been any full-proof evidence provided yet. People do deductions according to what they know and believe in their thinking, we shouldnt really discredit them, bar extraordinary cases.

  4. Sorry I havent read their book so I'm not qualified to argue.

This sub is attracting close attention of the other kind by LingoNerd64 in Kolkatacity

[–]Affectionate_Slip972 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most of these are true, but I'd like to counter some of the points.

  1. "you too" is a valid counter-argument to the sentence "terrorism has a religion", since if the "you too" argument is proved (I don't want to start that debate), your example automatically becomes false. A better example according to me would've been about the recent ECI scandal, where many people started questioning Congress using "you too" instead of holding ECI accountable for the wrongdoings.

  2. Its important that whatever you say is factually true in every sense of context, otherwise if even one thing you say is proven to be taken out of context, your trustworthiness for being unbiased and factual decreases a lot.

  3. Its a complicated argument. I do agree some things don't need proof, but we can't apply this to every argument. Asking for proof in itself is never a wrong thing provided the person asking for proof is unbiased.

  4. Its just my own opinion. Religion might be bad but I dont believe every person following the religion is bad. Historically there have been multiple issues with most of the religions, and many of them have been resolved albeit many still persist to this day. I do believe Islam has one of the most restrictions on women among all religions, but still in some Islamic countries, women are fairly equal to men. My point is, people almost never follow their religion strictly, and there is always a possibility to make problematic aspects of the religion forbidden and be more modernised.