Ram is presented on the pictures as very white. Is this related to the fact that Ramayana (and Mahabharata) are linked to Aryans?

Analogy…
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The candidate for the new US ambassador to Germany, Douglas McGregor, criticized the US intervention in Kosovo in 1999.
He assessed that it was directed against Orthodox Christian Serbs and that a Muslim drug mafia was set up after it, which was called a success for democracy, CNN writes in a text.

“These people have never been our friends,” said McGregor, who will replace Richard Grenell as US Ambassador to Germany.

CNN states that he was a military staff member who participated in the preparation of the NATO campaign against Serbia.

“King/Queen of England is also the head of Church of England. ”

How much power does King/Queen of England have? King/Queen of England today is merely a figurehead.

https://theprint.in/opinion/modi-shah-bjp-reduced-hindu-to-ethnic-identity-without-moral-compass/335760/?amp&__twitter_impression=true

“For Modi and Amit Shah, the word ‘Hindu’ is devoid of a moral compass. It’s just us vs them
The BJP has delinked moral principles from what it means to be a Hindu. It’s a successful electoral strategy. But its by-product will engulf India

The BJP is building a new India, an India in which the complexity and diversity of Hindu religion are being flattened into a Hindu ethnic identity. It is becoming evidently clear now that in BJP’s India, the word Hindu carries no higher principles, no utopian ideas, and no moral compass. All that is left of Hindu identity is an ethnic identity. …..Creating this new flattened identity has indeed paid rich electoral dividends for the BJP. This strategy allowed the BJP to avoid contending with the diverse religious traditions that encompass Hinduism, and neither does it have to address the caste discrimination rampant within some Hindu cultural traditions. ”

And finally…

“Religious Hindus sense the disconnect between the politics of BJP’s current dispensation and Hinduism as a religion or a way of life. In a forthcoming paper, Rahul Verma and I analyse survey data from the 2019 Lok Sabha election. We find that more religious Hindus do not necessarily favour the BJP today as they did in the past. The BJP’s strategy of creating a Hindu identity whose sole fulcrum is anti-minority has paid off at the polls. A new Hindu majoritarianism (whose self-definition is just ‘Hindu’) is taking root. This majoritarianism is bereft of an association with any religious practice.”

New here, quite a feisty comment section, so I’ll add in a few points..

A lot of people are conflating multiple issues and focusing mostly on the subjective narratives rather than the specificity of the points that the Supreme Court cited in its judgment. And it is important to separate the narrative from the Judgment because of the confusion that it has caused in the discussion regarding India’s emerging nature. Of course it has shifted to the Right, and looking at the Congress, we are seeing Overton Window in real effect, however, some clarifications are needed to clear the air here.

For all the strongman image of Modi, he’d have bowed before the Supreme Court’s judgment had it been against the Temple(at least for till the foreseeable future). Of course BJP’s proxies would file PIL again to continue the ‘struggle’ but nothing in official government capacity. Reason being that many online Hindutwadis in real life simply have no drive to leave the liberties of a liberal social order (at least on principle and social norms wise). The recent surge in online Hindutva comes mostly from several ‘Dharma Entrepreneurs’ having found ways to make Hindu Advocacy as a viable source of income or socio-political capital (which may then result in income). These are mostly careerists, not the oft used term ‘Bhakts’.

So onto the Supreme Court judgment; it very clearly and unequivocally states that the destruction of the Mosque was an act of illegal vandalism, for which criminal proceedings will still go on, irrespective of this civil suite on the ownership of the land.

Secondly, as compensation for damages (as in any civil suite) the Court has assigned 5 acre land (more than double the land of the old Masjid, now Temple) to the Muslim Waqf Board (the Primary Muslim Litigant, and the single largest landowner in India). This is as compensation and social recompense for the damages and subsequent inconveniences that were subjected to the Muslim side litigants and parties.

Thirdly, on the question of the ownership of the land, the Supreme Court referred to the archaeological evidences that were presented. Now some left leaning historians did, and are still opposing the move, however, when they were summoned by the Court, all of them admitted to not being experts in the field, and not having considered the evidences provided by the ASI (Archaeological Survey of India). This is on court record, hence is available for all the verify. On the other hand the testimonies and the material archaeological evidences (Pillars, Hindu Iconography, Lotus symbols, Garuda Symbols associated with Vishnu etc) seemed overwhelmingly in favor of the Hindu side. Other than this, the local traditions, pre-independence litigation and British administrative records on the prior disputes (which even involved a Sikh party on the Hindu side, that was still an active partisan in the case), Pre-British records and other derivations from the local accounts and cultural milieu, essentially corroborated with the ASI’s findings.

Note here, the Court did not proclaim that a Temple was there under a Mosque, it simply stated that the Evidence and Testimonies of the Hindu side in regard to the presence of the Temple and the Religious sentiments attached to this location, corroborated and made for a more cohesive case than the Testimonies and the case presented by the Muslim side which could not produce or corroborate their claims.

Therefore, the Court on account of the regular procedures regulating the submission of Evidence and Testimonies had to grant it to the Hindus. That being said, it has been made clear that this matter was a civil matter, hence the damages were compensated to the Muslims, while the spot was granted to the Hindus, however in the Criminal matter, most assuredly the Court acknowledged the wrongs that were inflicted on the Muslim community, and that matter is still sub judice in the Court.

So, Modi and the BJP have essentially appropriated the credit of the Judgment to paint themselves as the movers and shakers of the new ‘Hindu Resurgence’. The Left Political parties, viewing the situation from their myopic and antiquated minority appeasement view, fell straight for it. Modi wanted a controversy over it with himself and Sangh Parivar at the centre of it, and he got it. The Leftist again floundered when they are condemned Modi for looking as some ‘Hindu King’ rather than a Secular Prime Minister. This is what Modi wants, and the Leftist Cabal, as always, are obliging him.

But make no mistake here, for all the imagery and the media histrionics (both for and against), India is nowhere close to Pakistan. It is not comparable, not by degrees, not even on principles or any qualitative field. Without mincing my words (with no offence to the people that inhabit it); Pakistan is an abomination, a Frankenstein state made up of a second rate Persianate culture super-imposed on essentially a hodge-podge of largely frontier and agricultural populations that are simply out of their depth in reconciling their historical heritage with their religious and cultural ideal. The Pakistani state is the institutionalization of the Convert’s Zeal phenomena, while India is right now at the crossroads of deciding between the Constitutional State and a Civilization State. The Conservative and Right Wing spectrum of India reflects this dilemma, you will find ‘Constitutionalists’ fighting for the Uniform Civil Code, and Traditionalists who are bent on turning back the time to probably Rig Veda if they’re allowed, all under your Right Wing Agenda. In Pakistan, the Conservative Wing is uniformly united under the Sharia (variations in interpretations notwithstanding), with even much of the Moderates acknowledging the Sharia’s Supremacy (Islamic Law), however with certain concessions to the minorities. As I said, this is not even comparable. It is impossible to find even 20% Hindus who believe in Vedas’ infallibility, let alone to base a legal and state structure on them, I’ll not even get into the various traditional schools and interpretations, but suffice to say, there is more diversity of opinions in the Indian ‘Conservatives’ than Pakistani Conservatives, Moderates and even some Liberals.

Bhoomipoojan has brought to the fore blatant Hinduphobia in sections of the West, especially the press.