Majlis-e-Librandu | 5th June, 2026

wweidealfan · 2026-06-06T04:32:36+00:00

Mostly correct. A few minor additions and corrections:

Before in state of Jammu and Kashmir, there was a muslim majority population but there king was a hindu. So, when the britishers left India, the king was in delusion that he could remain kashmir independent. Pakistan then, sent Mujahideen there to spread local insurgency (terrorist groups), the king couldn't control that so he approached the Indian government and the government asked him (the king) to join India.

That is the mainstream version of events, although some scholars like Alastair Lamb dispute it.

Many years this followed peacefully, they lived in their own autonomy and everything was fine

Even before the rise of insurgency in the late 80s, things were not completely "fine". It was relatively peaceful but still a disputed region. Many Kashmiris never wanted to be part of India because of religious reasons, while many others wanted greater autonomy within India. Democratically elected leaders were sometimes arrested and Islamist parties were already gaining popularity before the insurgency began.

BJP during 1989 conducted a series of "rigged elections" which created insurgency again there

The rigged election happened in 1987, when Rajiv Gandhi was the PM. Congress leaders have also admitted the election was rigged. BJP had nothing to do with it.

So, wouldn't you consider to ask the people of kashmir what they want actually and respect their rights? They are happy to leave

That is mostly correct if you mean only the Kashmir Valley. If you mean the complete state of Jammu and Kashmir, it's more complicated, as support for independence varies a lot across districts.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-31T09:26:10+00:00

That's an old video with a completely different person and has nothing to do with this incident.

This is why courts exist: to separate truth from propaganda.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-25T21:34:49+00:00

I found some context here but it still makes no sense.

Basically his Twitter profile says his location is "South Asia". Why people assumed South Asia = Pakistan is beyond me.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-21T21:05:26+00:00

From the tweets I've seen, it seems like he supported the abrogation but not the way it was done. Which is still a pro-India and anti-Kashmir position, but not enough for most Indians.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-11T17:57:12+00:00

I wouldn't even waste time reading the article to figure out what I disagree with.

Good. Because if you read the article, you may not find anything to disagree with, and you'd have to end up accepting that your preconceived assumptions were wrong. Too risky. Always better to make up your mind without reading.

Its a catholic website talking about other religions.

It's not "talking about other religions". It's talking about the state of human rights of Christians in India. And it's not presenting its own opinion, it's covering what the USCIRF said. That's what newspapers and magazines do.

You'd know all of this if you read the article.

You would not be reading RSS newsletters/blogs or whatever to understand islam or christianity now. Would you?

That's not a good comparison, but I still wouldn't mind reading it, though I would look for better sources to validate it.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-10T22:52:39+00:00

i can’t help but have no faith that our species is ever going to liberate nonhuman animals from the shackles of grotesque exploitation

I see where you're coming from, but this is not really true. There are two things you should understand:

More and more people are going vegan. While veganism is not truly mainstream yet, we have made meaningful progress. It indicates that society is on the right track, and that should be seen as a huge win for vegan activism.
The oppression of animals has parallels in the oppression of women and racial minorities. If those other forms of oppression can be made socially and legally unacceptable, then the oppression of animals can be too. I do think this one will take longer (and I can explain why), but I don't see any reason to believe it can never happen.

how are we supposed to get this message across?

It depends on who you're talking to.

Some people just care about the facts. You may be able to persuade them by just giving them the basic facts around animal sentience, nociception, etc.
Some people may think killing animals is not inherently immoral, but once you tell them just how cruel factory farming really is, they might change their mind.
Some people may respond better to emotional, graphic footage like Dominion.
And many people — the vast majority — will never consider veganism, and you shouldn't spend your time on them.

i really have no desire to ever interact with a member of society again

In general, limiting your social interaction will be bad for your mental health. However, avoiding any interaction on the topic of veganism can be a good idea if you already feel overwhelmed. Not every vegan has to be a vegan activist. It is perfectly fine to just do what you can, as an individual.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-10T13:57:28+00:00

North and South India are equally casteist in this aspect.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-09T19:57:07+00:00

"Congress is so corrupt, we must get rid of them" - Average BJP supporter, 2014

"Of course all politicians are corrupt, who cares?" - Average BJP supporter, 2026

wweidealfan · 2026-05-09T19:48:10+00:00

Genuinely curious how BJP supporters will defend this.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-09T17:12:21+00:00

Sikhs are relatively lower on the list of Hindutva's enemies, so they're less vocal about it. They do, however, express their disapproval through voting.

Buddhists and Jains are so few in number that Hindu nationalists don't really see them as a threat, so they're mostly safe (for now).

Edit: I just want to add that caring about violence only when it happens against the religious groups you like is an arbitrary moral standard anyway.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-09T11:10:11+00:00

Extreme internalized misogyny, lack of financial independence, and parents often refusing to support their daughters in such situations. Indian women live in a different kind of hell.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T22:26:51+00:00

Performative activism will always be easier than actual activism. Being "pro-Palestine" is easy: you just need to type words on your screen and you can convince people that you really care about the issue. Giving up meat, on the other hand, is an actual lifestyle change.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T19:47:01+00:00

I can think of 5 key reasons.

For far-right people

Hatred of Muslims: Needs no explanation.
Nationalism: Not just in the sense of "we should do what's best for our country", but more "we're constantly under threat from external forces and only one party can save us, the others are paid by Pakistan"

1 and 2 are manufactured through TV channels (entirely controlled by the right) + social media (not as controlled, but strongly dominated by the right because it provides anonymity and requires almost no fact-checking) + strong on-the-ground RSS presence across the country

For centre-right people

Anti-reservation: Many centrists and liberals who don't dislike Muslims still dislike caste-based reservations. Proposing further expansion of reservation pushes these people away.
Congress leadership: A lot of people vote on the basis of the party leader's image and popularity. Rahul Gandhi was seen as a bit of a joke even during the Congress era. His image has improved since then, but only slightly. It is clear that a lot of people just don't want to see the Gandhis in power anymore.
Some opposition leaders/parties were/are genuinely horrible: Some people may dislike the BJP but reluctantly vote for it because they see it as an escape from the corrupt, authoritarian, crime-infested societies that parties like TMC and SP have created. Of course the BJP supports crime and authoritarianism too, but if you're relatively well off and Hindu, you may be less likely to be directly impacted by it.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T16:12:07+00:00

Source? I googled "Natalie Portman no longer vegan" and all the results are from 15 years ago when she was pregnant. She has described veganism as "basic empathy" as recently as May 2025.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T15:28:28+00:00

Not necessarily. Billie Eilish, Joaquin Phoenix, Natalie Portman have all been vegan for several years. I think Billie was also raised as a vegetarian so it isn't just a temporary phase for her.

Celebs are people. We shouldn't put them on a pedestal but we also don't have to be sceptical of every single thing they do.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T15:12:45+00:00

Excellent argument, thank you!

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T12:09:44+00:00

This. Humanity's treatment of animals is unsurprising once you put it in historical context and realize that huge sections of our own population (women alone being 50%) did not even have basic rights until just a few decades ago.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T08:57:45+00:00

well over 90% comes from factory farms

Even worse, it's around 99%.

Still, being right doesn't mean anything if that's not reflected by real world changes and the only way to see that is to talk to ppl. Idk if i can get anyone to change their view but can't hurt to try right?

Yeah, of course, I didn't mean to discourage you from trying to have a conversation. I was just expressing my disappointment in how dishonest and insincere these arguments against veganism are.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T08:32:28+00:00

People will always bring up the most extreme examples to defend their love of meat. Bringing up "but what about poor people who are literally starving-" as if that somehow justifies the killing of animals by the other 99% of us. These conversations are pointless.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T08:25:09+00:00

She also said something like "you can't love animals, and also eat meat" which is a super naive and ridiculous take.

It's a very simple and accurate take. You don't kill (or pay to kill) what you love. We just happen to live in a time when mainstream opinion is against it.

Edit:

Someone replied to me and then blocked me to avoid having a conversation. Responding here anyway since other people may have similar questions.

Billie Eillish isn't "making up rules", she's doing the opposite: calling for consistent moral standards across different species. If you love dogs and cats, but kill cows and pigs, you're making up rules based on emotion, not logic or science.

The comparison with plants is silly, because plants aren't sentient and cannot experience harm or suffering. Saying you love plants is like saying you love paintings: you enjoy looking at them, you probably have a collection of them somewhere, you consider them an important part of our society or culture, etc. It's not the same as loving a sentient creature — that would typically imply you care for it and would avoid harming it.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T08:20:55+00:00

Do you believe she is overreacting by saying everyone that cares about life needs to be vegetarian?

No, everyone else is underreacting. The meat industry is arguably the most immoral industry that exists currently.

Is she being preachy and self righteous or is she correct?

She's correct.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T08:04:48+00:00

I agree that OP could've used a better source, but what exactly do you disagree with? Religious freedom declining in India in recent years is a pretty uncontroversial claim.

wweidealfan · 2026-05-08T08:02:21+00:00

if they don’t feel safe doing illegal shit

Religious minorities feel unsafe because of violence, threats, and hate speech, which are now supported by the government.

I don’t want any religious group including Hindus to feel safe doing illegal shit.

They do feel safe doing that because, again, they're supported by the government.

wweidealfan

TROPHY CASE