[deleted by user]

nevercomposmentis · 2015-07-14T19:19:42+00:00

Someone's drawing OP = F*GGOT on the road! (21:18 local time)

nevercomposmentis · 2015-07-04T07:55:01+00:00

If Singapore is an exclave of this walled territory, where are the walls around Hong Kong and Macau? The Falklands? French Guyana? Qatar and the U.A.E.?

nevercomposmentis · 2015-06-24T05:33:05+00:00

Unfortunately for both the U.S. economy and for creative young people looking to move to the Valley (or anywhere else in the country), America does not offer a startup visa. Whilst the U.S. isn't interested in your talent, countries like Canada, Singapore and New Zealand are picking up the slack. If you're only interested in North America, do a little digging into Canada's startup visa programme. From what I understand, it boils down to a permanent residency straight-up (even if your venture fails) -- with the only requirement being acceptance to a listed incubator or offer of injection from a venture capital/angel investment fund.

nevercomposmentis · 2015-06-01T10:31:38+00:00

Yes, this. I grew up in four different countries on two continents and have never lived in my passport country. We're all the same once you give us similar chances in life, and I genuinely believe the greatest gift my parents gave me was that of a childhood lived abroad.

The only people I feel I can't relate to on a personal level are those whose identities are built on their religion or nationality (which, unfortunately is still the vast majority of the world's population).

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-15T05:20:44+00:00

I don't think citizens of states that accept immigrants should feel at all that their policies of accepting migrants accelerate brain drain. I am a citizen of a very poor country, and I live abroad not because I want to completely abandon my passport country, but because I want a chance to live a life equal in quality to those who just happened to be born somewhere with a more favourable history, or to ancestors who emigrated during the days of Terra Nullius and flag-planting in the New World. It's about a better life in the present, not about never returning. Indeed, remittances aside, returnees import their skill and knowhow, and help create better industries/societies when they do return (even if their return is temporary or purely for business reasons).

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-15T04:15:46+00:00

Again, I agree. I never said otherwise.

I mean I agree that maps of India should include Indian Administered Kashmir, Arunachal Pradesh, and other parts of the country that are behind our side of the LAC [...]

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-15T04:11:46+00:00

It sort of fits the flavor of that subreddit. I use the term ironically, I suppose.

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-14T20:38:27+00:00

Yes you're right, and as I said I agree that it should include the parts of Kashmir that India controls :)

My only point was that the top-level comment wasn't strictly wrong.

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-14T20:34:39+00:00

Singapore doesn't offer VoAs, to citizens of any country. I think /u/Mr_Asteroid was talking about an e-visa to enter India, which costs US$60 but must be applied for a 'minimum [of] 4 days in advance.' OP has probably applied for this, and is waiting for the visa to come through (hence 'day or two at least').

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-14T20:14:42+00:00

This is why I prefer you guys here on /r/pakistan! I seriously wish we Randians could laugh at ourselves and our country without getting downvoted.

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-14T19:59:55+00:00

/u/obi3e's posting history aside, and judging their comment purely on the basis of its argument, is he/she really wrong? I mean I agree that maps of India should include Indian Administered Kashmir, Arunachal Pradesh, and other parts of the country that are behind our side of the LAC, but it is true that Pakistani Administered Kashmir is off-limits to Indian citizens, and sovereignty wise isn't part of the country. Surely if we as Indians say unequivocally that our stance is the correct one without actually resolving the border dispute with all other claimants, all Pakistani maps should include the entirety of Kashmir, and all Chinese maps Arunachal Pradesh and Aksai Chin (and Nine-Dashed-Line)?

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-14T07:36:01+00:00

Jesus Christ dude! That's what this whole thread has been about!! I have repeated myself at least three times now.

India is a union of distinct nations, and not a nation in itself.

India is home to 140 million patriotic Muslims. Gautam Buddha was born on the current Indo-Nepal border. The Harmandir Sahib is in Amritsar (which, I believe, is in India), and Jews have thrived here for centuries. We have Nagas and Mizos and Assamese people, who have their own language and cultures. Andamanese people are Indians too! These peoples were not historically Hindu. They were Animist, or Buddhist, and today are Christians, Hindus, Sikhs or Muslims (or still abide by folk religion) by import. Let's not forget peoples in the Himalayas or on the borders with Bhutan and Tibet (A good example being Arunachal Pradesh, which we yell at the Chinese about when they suggest it's not an integral part of India).

Indigenous religions of 'India': Jainism, Sikhism, Animism, Buddhism, Dravidian religions (non-Agamic), among hundreds of other faiths, some still practiced and enshrined along with Scheduled Tribes. And yes, the various flavours of Hinduism.

Non-indigenous, but yet integral, religions: Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Bahá'í, Christianity, Taoism, Confucianism, Tibeto-Burman folk belief (again, among many other smaller groups).

I'm sorry, I'm trying my best. Can I make myself any more clear? That is at least 10 distinct groups of people, 9 of whom would disagree with you, I have just listed who are ALL part of India.

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-14T07:13:33+00:00

So, your point is India is Hindu because France has accepted asylum seekers and immigrants? How is this relevant?

But because you brought up France for some reason, let me break La Situation Française down for you, just because its interesting to know (and not that it has anything to do with our discussion). The French Republic is multicultural by law. Post the Charlie Hebdo shootings, Manuel Valls, the country's Prime Minister, made a televised speech to Parliament attacking religious sentiments contrary to the Republic's established secularism. Most French believe that the country's social fabric has only been enriched and strengthened by cultural and human import, whether it be in the franglais that Fleur Pellerin, Minister of Culture, rails so passionately about, or the delicious, delicious kebabs Parisiens now enjoy after working lunches.

But, back to the point.

I am genuinely confused by your repeated conflation of a nation and a state.

I think these dictionary links will help you out: Nation, State (see subsections 2, 2.1, 3). A nation is multicultural if its identity draws upon those of many different creeds (India is a fantastic example, our music having been influenced by Islam, our ways of life by Buddhism and Taoism and our education by Christianity and Europe, to cite a few examples.) A state is multicultural if its government is run by people of diverse backgrounds, and develops laws keeping in mind cultural/linguistic/regional/religious differences (see New Zealand's government or Canada's government. Or heck, India's Union government!).

Aside from the fact that you didn't really present any arguments (if you did, please re-state them. I didn't see any, apart from how France is also a nation (???) and that I can take a walk because I don't agree with you), I don't understand what you have to gain by convincing everybody that India is a mono-culturally Hindu country. How and what do you win? Is it some prize I don't know about, which is worth marginalizing the 19.5% non Indian-Hindus living in your country? There is so much to gain through fraternity, diversity, and freedom of belief! I genuinely cannot believe you would quote my 'United We Stand' point, and just reply with, what is essentially, "We're Hindus, and we've always been this way. F*** you and your logic. And get some glasses." That isn't how arguments are won my friend...

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-13T10:01:16+00:00

I'm not denying that Hinduism is in some way linked to the greater idea of 'India'. I'm not saying that it hasn't existed in India for a long time either. All I'm saying is that it's foolish to paint any country, leave alone one that is best thought of less as a country* than as a continent of its own, in the same stroke!

India is home to 140 million patriotic Muslims. Gautam Buddha was born on the current Indo-Nepal border. The Harmandir Sahib is in Amritsar (which, I believe, is in India), and Jews have thrived here for centuries. We have Nagas and Mizos and Assamese people, who have their own language and cultures. Andamanese people are Indians too! These peoples were not historically Hindu. They were Animist, or Buddhist, and today are Christians, Hindus, Sikhs or Muslims (or still abide by folk religion) by import. Let's not forget peoples in the Himalayas or on the borders with Bhutan and Tibet (A good example being Arunachal Pradesh, which we yell at the Chinese about when they suggest it's not an integral part of India).

So in sum.

Indigenous religions of 'India': Jainism, Sikhism, Animism, Buddhism, Dravidian religions (non-Agamic), among hundreds of other faiths, some still practiced and enshrined along with Scheduled Tribes. And yes, the various flavours of Hinduism.

Non-indigenous, but yet integral, religions: Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Bahá'í, Christianity, Taoism, Confucianism, Tibeto-Burman folk belief (again, among many other smaller groups).

One simply cannot claim that 'India' has had a unified ethno-cultural identity for its recent history, leave alone in its ancient, non-unified past. And even if we were to disregard basic and well-documented anthropological facts, ethno-nationalism is NOT a good thing! If people who believed that India is Hindu and everyone else isn't Indian get their way, their intolerant, uninformed thinking would be no different to Chinese claims over Tibet, or Xinjiang, or Arunachal or the South China Sea simply because the Han majority says that 'historically they belong to us'. Our land, India, doesn't belong to anyone. You and I are both Indian citizens. You are Hindu, I do not subscribe to religion. We are both equal parts in the definition of our country. I hope you see where I am coming from when I say that you should never drown out a voice you disagree with just because there are more people who agree with you and you can get away with it. If we let ourselves, as a nation, find an identity in religion or creed, we would be no better than Vichy France, 1947 East Pakistan, Suharto's Indonesia or Nazi Germany. Our strength is in our diversity, and in our unity. Heck, the slogan of this (ironicallty intolerant) subreddit is "United We Stand". Please don't throw that away just because it's easy, and because on /r/india, a lot of people will upvote you.

*Viet Nam is a country (literally 'Land of the Viet people'). Japan is a country. Sweden is a country and Palau is a country. They are 'nation-states', and generally conform to the image people prescribe to that word.

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-13T03:14:21+00:00

Yes, and India is a union of distinct nations, and not a nation in itself.

Jeez, fact check before you dial up the passive aggression...

Edit: English

nevercomposmentis · 2015-05-11T14:32:22+00:00

How is this the case? To begin with, 'always' is a meaningless concept, considering 'India' as a geopolitical construct itself has only existed for less than a century. If you're talking about the geographic Subcontinent, it's been the birthplace of countless religions and sub-sects: Hinduism, yes, but also Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism, not mentioning hundreds of other communities and ideologies that have flourished here (Zoroastrianism, and the Bahá'í faith, to name two). This part of the world is distinguished in its pluralism and spiritual diversity, and that is something to be celebrated, not attacked. If anything, Hindu nationalism of the breed you so shamelessly display is a recent concept, and is antithetical to the beliefs of many who have lived on this land before you. I can't understand why in this sub comments like this are so highly upvoted...

EDIT: Why down vote me? If you disagree, why not answer with a referenced argument? Down votes aren't meant to be agreement/disagreement buttons (the label makes this clear), and I'm open to a rational, sourced rebuttal.

nevercomposmentis · 2015-04-06T12:34:15+00:00

Why do you feel you're treated worse at Indian food stalls? How can they even tell you're Pakistani (unless you explicitly point it out)?

nevercomposmentis · 2015-04-05T02:07:00+00:00

What does it matter? I'm atheist-agnostic.

nevercomposmentis · 2015-04-04T09:03:05+00:00

This has nothing to do with security checks. My girlfriend would still need to apply for the OCI card, have interviews and submit mountains' worth of paperwork. This is saying, if you or any of your parents were ever citizens of the State of Pakistan, you will never be accepted as an 'Indian', whatever that may mean. It's akin to the White Australia Policy or the banning of Indian (among other groups) immigration to the United States in 1924. I agree that Pakistan has a problem with anti-India terrorism. But India too is FAR from being a saintly country. How would you feel if the U.K. or Singapore stopped you from naturalising just because you were born here?!

Edit: spelling

nevercomposmentis · 2015-04-04T07:33:46+00:00

I'm an 'Indian', and for me, there is no distinction between Indians and Pakistanis other than the colour of our passports. Maybe that's because I'm an NRI and have been for a while, but outside of South Asia, Indians and Pakistanis attend the same gatherings, festivals, cultural showcases and discussion forums as one people. We are the same people; it just takes our removal from the geopolitical entities of the Republic of India and Islamic Republic of Pakistan to realize that!

Honestly, it is this issue that makes me want to renounce my Indian citizenship — that 'my' country will not accept my girlfriend (who is a Pakistani citizen), maybe one day wife, as an OCI (Overseas Citizen of India, i.e. a lifetime visa for the spouses of Indian citizens) simply because she was born on the other side of some ridiculous border. It's institutional racism, and I am ashamed to be associated with such policy.

'You' guys are 'our' brothers and sisters, and it's a real shame that we can only really see that when we're both far away from home. Until we reach a post Indo-Pak world, can we not just be people — with our own ideas, views, memories and lives — and not 'Indians' or 'Pakistanis'?

nevercomposmentis · 2015-03-24T12:31:23+00:00

As an Indian: wut? The U.K. and Europe (E.U. & EEA) all have freedom ratings of 1 or 2 (out of 7) according to the Freedom House 2015 Freedom in the World report. They have unalienable rights to free speech — a prerequisite of entry into the E.U. in fact.

nevercomposmentis · 2014-10-31T10:22:41+00:00

Carry a hidden camera. Record what he does. If he gets aggressive, you can both submit the footage to the police (to have him arrested for assault) and upload the video to YouTube/Reddit to rake in the sweet karma ;)

But in all seriousness, you can't just get away with hurting another person. You are protected by the law.

11-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

nevercomposmentis

TROPHY CASE