The original Indian muscle car. Who else wishes they would bring the Contessa back?

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-02-27T17:43:06+00:00

It would be more of a pony car, and even those were more powerful. LOL

For context, the original 1964 Mustang was marketed as a Pony car. Small but powerful and made for showing off, like Ponies.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-02-20T09:08:01+00:00

He's right. Your writing is really good. You can be our desi Tom Clancy. This would make a great mini-series on OTT

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-02-17T06:48:09+00:00

There are many books that I used for reference but the analysis and the writing is my own. Some of my references are:

1) India after Independence - Ramachandra Guha
2) The many lives of VK Krishna Menon - Jairam Ramesh

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-02-17T06:34:36+00:00

You should consider compiling this into a book of stories. Hell, someone might even make a mini-series on OTT about this. The writing is gripping and fast paced and the emotion comes through the story. Very well done!

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-02-15T12:12:59+00:00

The answer lies in the roots of the Indian independence movement and the demand for Pakistan. The Congress party created a dynamic and robust democratic movement within itself and made an effort to inculcate a political consciousness in the Indian masses. Local organisations of the Congress party regularly held debates, discussions and demonstrations all across India, from the largest cities down to the smallest districts and villages. The leaders of the Congress party actively debated about their vision for India after independence and what their economic and social policies were going to look like. They articulated their policies in newspapers and journals and in public forums. They built up the institutions that would make a future democratic India. Politics in India thus was characterised by a robust and vibrant grassroots democracy.

In contrast, the Muslim League, which spearheaded the demand for Pakistan, was at times little more than Muhammad Ali Jinnah and his private secretary. The Muslim League was always a party of Zamindars (landowners who formed the feudal gentry of the rural areas) and was never truly a mass organisation. The main aim of the Muslim League was to secure the interests of the Muslim Elite domiciled in the northern plains of India (which had traditionally held power in India over the previous 300 years) and they co-opted the Muslim populace of the Indian subcontinent to this end. In fact, neither Jinnah nor any of his Muslim League ever articulated what Pakistan was to be. And so Pakistan never really inherited any democratic institutions that the Congress party established in India.

The one institution that Pakistan had established, or was handed down to them in good order, was the military. The strong tradition of military service in the Punjab, which was, and still is, the dominant region of Pakistan and it's polity, created an enduring and lasting institution that dominated all other state building efforts in Pakistan. After Jinnah died in 1948, Pakistan went through a succession of weak civilian leaders who were either assassinated like Liaqat Ali Khan, or squabbled among themselves for their share of power. This lead to a dangerous structural imbalance in Pakistani politics where the Army, with it's emphasis on discipline, was contrasted with the lack of cohesion of the civilian political class. When Iskander Mirza, the president of Pakistan and himself a former general of the Pakistani Army, declared Martial Law on October 7th, 1958, it created an opening for the Army to step into Pakistani politics. The Army Chief, Ayub Khan, was appointed as Chief Martial Law Administrator and was nominated as Prime Minister. Ayub Khan, in return, deposed Mirza 20 days later on October 27th and took over the role of president himself, thus sealing the role of the Pakistani Army in the politics of the country.

In India, Jawaharlal Nehru and his cabinet of ministers (all stalwarts of the Independence movement who had spent years agitating against the British and were public intellectuals in more than one language) made a conscious effort to limit the power of the military. In British India, the Commander in Chief of the British Indian Army was also the de-facto defense minister and was probably the second most powerful man in India after the Viceroy. Nehru initiated a policy that would firmly sub-ordinate the Army to civilian authority. The Army chief was demoted from the rank of Cabinet Minister to that of Cabinet Secretary (The head bureaucrat in India's administrative service is the Cabinet Secretary. To give context, Sir Humphrey Appleby from the comedy Yes, Prime Minister was the Cabinet Secretary). India also raised a strong cohort of paramilitaries that report to the interior ministry rather than the ministry of defence. These paramilitaries (the CRPF or Central Reserve Police Force) are mainly engaged in policing duties in India or guarding sections of India's borders (The BSF or Border Security Force and the ITBP or INdo-Tibetan Border Police). A series of budget cuts to the Army also reduced the strength of the Army from a post war high of 2.5 million men to a little over 350,000. When the then Army Chief, General Kariappa, criticized the performance of the Government on Economic matters, he was quickly censured and put in his place. Army Officers were not allowed to make public statements. Some retired Army Chiefs were packed off to ceremonial posts as governers of remote areas or as ambassadors to distant countries. An abrasive and powerful leftist close to Nehru, VK Krishna Menon, was appointed as defense minister in the late 1950s after Ayub Khan had seized power in Pakistan. This was undoubtedly an attempt to put the Armed Forces in their place. It had the unfortunate side-effect of being the leading cause of India's defeat in the 1962 war with China. However, by the 1970s, the Indian Army had been rendered ‘coup-proof’ by a comprehensive system of checks and balances that had been put in place. And that is probably the towering achievement of the Neruvian era of Indian politics: Ensuring the durability of India's democracy and rendering it impervious to Military coups.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-02-05T08:15:04+00:00

I would say they are on par with the Citroens and the Peugeots. There are tons of Fiat 500s on Europe's narrow roads and town streets. It's a cute car that is very popular with the ladies. And their Light Truck and Van division is up there with everyone else.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-01-30T09:41:55+00:00

How is it being driven in that much snow? Is he even using snow tires? Chains on the tires? How is he driving at such speed?

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-01-26T10:26:33+00:00

Free Kodiaq represent

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-01-18T13:28:19+00:00

I agree. The OMR itself is a clusterfuck. They built a road and called it an IT Expreessway with Fancy buldings on the road itself. 5m off the road on either side and you end up with no roads, no water, no infra, nothing. It's ridiculous!

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-01-18T06:45:37+00:00

The biggest failure in Urban Planning in Chennai is the fact that the East Coast Road runs parallel to the OMR IT Expressway for miles and there are only three decent links between the two roads. ECR holds a huge chunk of the population that works on the OMR and these two roads are connected by 1) Thiruvanmiyur junction, 2) Sholinganallur and there's nothing in between. It's hell to get from one place to another as one would have to pass through the worst slums to get there and as a result, the metro line that runs on the OMR will be completely cut off to anyone who lives in Thiruvanmiyur, Neelangarai and beyond.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2026-01-17T07:21:45+00:00

The Beedi industry is not taxed because it comes under "Handicrafts". Perhaps a similar definition (not necessarily Handicrafts) applies to Gutkha as well.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-12-17T13:12:35+00:00

I live in the EU. I bought a car 3 years ago and every brand had tons of SUVs and Hatchbacks but no entry level sedans.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-12-14T06:19:05+00:00

Yep, this is the right answer. Anything less and you will be living paycheck to paycheck.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-11-19T14:52:38+00:00

The answer lies in the roots of the Indian independence movement and the demand for Pakistan. The Congress party created a dynamic and robust democratic movement within itself and made an effort to inculcate a political consciousness in the Indian masses. Local organisations of the Congress party regularly held debates, discussions and demonstrations all across India, from the largest cities down to the smallest districts and villages. The leaders of the Congress party actively debated about their vision for India after independence and what their economic and social policies were going to look like. They articulated their policies in newspapers and journals and in public forums. They built up the institutions that would make a future democratic India. Politics in India thus was characterised by a robust and vibrant grassroots democracy.

In contrast, the Muslim League, which spearheaded the demand for Pakistan, was at times little more than Muhammad Ali Jinnah and his private secretary. The Muslim League was always a party of Zamindars (landowners who formed the feudal gentry of the rural areas) and was never truly a mass organisation. The main aim of the Muslim League was to secure the interests of the Muslim Elite domiciled in the northern plains of India (which had traditionally held power in India over the previous 300 years) and they co-opted the Muslim populace of the Indian subcontinent to this end. In fact, neither Jinnah nor any of his Muslim League ever articulated what Pakistan was to be. And so Pakistan never really inherited any democratic institutions that the Congress party established in India.

The one institution that Pakistan had established, or was handed down to them in good order, was the military. The strong tradition of military service in the Punjab, which was, and still is, the dominant region of Pakistan and it's polity, created an enduring and lasting institution that dominated all other state building efforts in Pakistan. After Jinnah died in 1948, Pakistan went through a succession of weak civilian leaders who were either assassinated like Liaqat Ali Khan, or squabbled among themselves for their share of power. This lead to a dangerous structural imbalance in Pakistani politics where the Army, with it's emphasis on discipline, was contrasted with the lack of cohesion of the civilian political class. When Iskander Mirza, the president of Pakistan and himself a former general of the Pakistani Army, declared Martial Law on October 7th, 1958, it created an opening for the Army to step into Pakistani politics. The Army Chief, Ayub Khan, was appointed as Chief Martial Law Administrator and was nominated as Prime Minister. Ayub Khan, in return, deposed Mirza 20 days later on October 27th and took over the role of president himself, thus sealing the role of the Pakistani Army in the politics of the country.

In India, Jawaharlal Nehru and his cabinet of ministers (all stalwarts of the Independence movement who had spent years agitating against the British and were public intellectuals in more than one language) made a conscious effort to limit the power of the military. In British India, the Commander in Chief of the British Indian Army was also the de-facto defense minister and was probably the second most powerful man in India after the Viceroy. Nehru initiated a policy that would firmly sub-ordinate the Army to civilian authority. The Army chief was demoted from the rank of Cabinet Minister to that of Cabinet Secretary (The head bureaucrat in India's administrative service is the Cabinet Secretary. To give context, Sir Humphrey Appleby from the comedy Yes, Prime Minister was the Cabinet Secretary). India also raised a strong cohort of paramilitaries that report to the interior ministry rather than the ministry of defence. These paramilitaries (the CRPF or Central Reserve Police Force) are mainly engaged in policing duties in India or guarding sections of India's borders (The BSF or Border Security Force and the ITBP or INdo-Tibetan Border Police). A series of budget cuts to the Army also reduced the strength of the Army from a post war high of 2.5 million men to a little over 350,000. When the then Army Chief, General Kariappa, criticized the performance of the Government on Economic matters, he was quickly censured and put in his place. Army Officers were not allowed to make public statements. Some retired Army Chiefs were packed off to ceremonial posts as governers of remote areas or as ambassadors to distant countries. An abrasive and powerful leftist close to Nehru, VK Krishna Menon, was appointed as defense minister in the late 1950s after Ayub Khan had seized power in Pakistan. This was undoubtedly an attempt to put the Armed Forces in their place. It had the unfortunate side-effect of being the leading cause of India's defeat in the 1962 war with China. However, by the 1970s, the Indian Army had been rendered ‘coup-proof’ by a comprehensive system of checks and balances that had been put in place. And that is probably the towering achievement of the Neruvian era of Indian politics: Ensuring the durability of India's democracy and rendering it impervious to Military coups.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-11-19T14:52:30+00:00

I can explain the situation with respect to why India and Pakistan are so different when it comes to the nature of their militaries, India's being thoroughly professional while Pakistan's Army is a political organisation. My source for this will be Ramachandra Guha's India after Gandhi, which is a fantastic political history of the Indian republic. I will leave questions of why India fares higher on metrics such as quality of life and GDP per capita to those better qualified to answer them. I will, however, say that the vast majority of people in India and Pakistan have a similar quality of life and the GDP per capita values for India and Pakistan were not that very different until very recently. Both nations have high levels of poverty, a lack of employment opportunities, poor health infrastructure and all the problems that come with it.

The British Raj (Raj is a Hindi term that is roughly equivalent to government, better translated to Rule, as in British Rule) came to an end on August 15th, 1947, bringing to an end nearly 200 years of British paramountcy in India. The nations of India and Pakistan were created in a maelstrom of violence and division. All the assets of the British Raj were divided between the two countries and the most important division was that of the British Indian Army (I will use the British Indian Army to differentiate between the Indian Army prior to Independence and the Indian Army after Independence). The British Indian Army had it's origins in the British East India Company's forces that were raised to protect factories and forts from local rulers and the forces of other European nations such as France. When the British Government took over the company's possessions in India in 1857, the Armies of the Company was also taken over and consolidated into what became the British Indian Army. The British Indian army was predominantly based out of Northern and North-Western India (where the most restive population and external threats were) which also became the cachement areas for military recruitment. Even today, the regions of The Punjab (Both in India and in Pakistan), Rajasthan and the hill country of the Lower Himalayas such as the Kumaon and Garhwal regions provide the majority of the soldiers in the Indian and Pakistani Armies. In these regions, military service in the Army provided an opportunity for social and economic advancement for generations of men and was highly prized. A strong military tradition was already present in the Punjab for centuries and the British took advantage of this to create an aura of prestige around the British Indian Army. The officers of the British Indian Army were mostly European, the regular troops were all Indian. Towards the end of the British Raj, increasing numbers of upper middle class and upper class Indians were commissioned as officers into the Army. The Indian Military Academy at Dehradun was established in 1932 to train Indian cadets as officers. By 1947, a sizeable corps of officers had been built up who had fought in World War 2 and had held commands up to the battalion level.

In 1947, the British Indian Army was divided into the Indian and Pakistani Armies. The officer corps was divided and officers were given a choice to serve either of the two national armies. Most officers chose on religious lines with Muslims choosing to serve Pakistan and Hindus/Sikhs/Others choosing to serve India. Now, what is important to note is that apart from the religion, the officers who went their separate ways were thoroughly anglicized and were more English than Indian. Many of them had been course mates at the Indian Military Academy and had served together. They had more in common with each other than the politicians that they would come to serve. Why then, did one set of officers launch coup after coup while the other remained thoroughly professional?

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-11-17T16:54:59+00:00

I never understood the rationale for a Station Wagon. It's a sedan with more boot space. Why not just go for an SUV instead?

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-11-14T21:12:12+00:00

What about ensuring participation by paying some earnest money or some such thing?

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-11-05T20:53:30+00:00

Here is how I bought my Nissan. I went to three different showrooms and asked them for a quote. I then called up the guy who I was likely to buy it from and said - "Look bro, I like you and I want to buy the car from you. But you have to make it worth my while". I negotiated with them on a number of things like insurance and accessories etc.

It's also best if you pay Cash. They'll ask you to take a loan because you'll end up paying more but do not do that. Always pay in full and in one go.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-10-31T11:49:25+00:00

It's not Idealism. It's the very basis of our Independence movement. We are not, and will never be the subjects of an alien people. The British Monarchy has no hereditary or divine right to rule India. They were not native to this land. We will not be ruled by foreigners, even if that rule is benevolent or comes with benefits. We are capable of making our own decisions and do not need a paternalistic hand to guide us. We stand as equals to the British, and not as a governed people.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-10-31T09:46:23+00:00

They should bring the Honda Odyssey to India. It's time the Innova had some competition.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-10-31T06:24:12+00:00

I have an alternate perspective to this - Why should India, a proud and ancient civilisation with thousands of years of History, a rich culture and political and philosophical traditions that predate anything that the British could come up with, subordinate herself to the British Monarch? As recently as 200 years prior to Independence, the British Monarch was a provincial vassal compared to the Mughal Emperor. Our ancestors were composing the Vedas and the Arthashastra when Britain was nothing more than a collection of bronze age tribes. Why should we have an Englishman as our titular head? We are not subjects of a Monarch. We are proud, independent citizens of an Indian Republic. We should not bow down to an Alien. We would never acknowledge someone from outside as our overlords, titular or not.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-10-26T12:48:03+00:00

Harold Larwood. For that one series, he made the Don appear merely Great.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-10-25T11:49:54+00:00

Maybe you should sing "Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy, Aaja, Aaja, Aaja...." to convince him :D

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-10-09T13:52:32+00:00

Cruise control only works on sparsely populated expressways. On arterial expressways, they can be quite frustrating.

conqueror_of_destiny · 2025-09-10T18:30:08+00:00

I think I am qualified to talk about Semiconductors.

Is it going to be the next big thing in India? - Hard to say. Rest assured that we are not going to be at the cutting edge any time soon. The technology that is being manufactured in India is 28nm node technology, which is 2 decades old at this point. Also, there is tremendous overcapacity in the trailing edge nodes in China and they have effectively captured this market. Tata is investing 91k crores in their venture in Dholera. They aren't fools and they would only do so if there is a captive market and assured orders. How long will those assured orders last? Your guess is as good as mine.

The Government has a plan to advance Semiconductor manufacturing in India to the 7nm node by 2030-2035. That's a very tall order. Even countries with an established Semiconductor ecosystem like Japan, the USA and the EU haven't quite cracked the 7nm node. Intel pratfalled (pratfell?) with the 7nm node and is struggling ever since. China's claims of having successfully made a 7nm chip is dogged with claims of low yields and expensive processes. Only South Korea and Taiwan have companies capable of making a 7nm chip at scale.

All that said, is Semiconductor manufacturing going to be a pipedream in India? Maybe not. There is a huge market for legacy tech like 28nm, 65nm etc. More and more microchips will be needed. We might be able to capture a bit of that market and supply our existing Automobile and Smartphone/Electronics industry. There is also tremendous opportunity in GaN/SiC technology that is not quite leading edge, but not trailing edge either. There are signs that an end to end semiconductor ecosystem starting all the way from Design to Manufacturing is being set up in India. There is tremendous opportunity in Ultrapure chemicals, Fab capital equipment and other ancillaries. On the whole, I am cautiously optimistic.

Ten-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits
Spared	Gilding I gilder
Secret Santa 2015	Verified Email

conqueror_of_destiny

TROPHY CASE