The Constitution of Brown Pundits
see: Bharat Needs No Validation
Ever since Brown Pundits was resurrected over the last two years, one thing has been missing: a written constitution. We never had one (fifteen years as the British of the blogosphere, running on an unwritten constitution).
The landscape has changed since the founding. The diaspora is not so interesting anymore. Pakistan and the other regions are not so interesting anymore. Modi came to power, and the economic divergence between India and her neighbours is now just immense; she is one of the largest economies in the world. A blog that does not register that is not describing the “Hindu Continent”, it is describing 2011.
Alias
I am not officially changing the name from Brown Pundits. But BP also stands, very much, for Bharat Pundits. We are not trying to make claims of equality. The focus of this house is India, that is Bharat, and how she claims her destiny in the world, with a nod to our origins, which were diasporic and Indo-Islamicate. Bharat Pundits began as a reframe in a wry comment reply to Kabir earlier afternoon. It has evolved into a Precedent.
“Writing”
0M-3 made a deliberately Islamophobic comment (now deleted) claiming the pages of the Holy Quran were copied (or something to that effect). That is just a trashy comment, and it is palpably untrue. The quality of Arabic verse set a standard that helped carry Arabic into the top five languages on earth. The Holy Quran needs deep study, and I dislike uninformed comments on any subject, particularly those that are sensitive or complex.
The point is that theology is complex. Under no circumstances are we going to have simplified, random flame threads on complex subjects. This is not a throttling of free speech. Free speech is also intelligent.
For instance girmit’s comment on the Wodeyars set the high watermark in the 200+ comments (more than half deleted) that happened over the last 24-36 hours.
Equity, not equality
Brown Pundits doesn’t need to be fair. It doesn’t need to be equal. It needs to have equity. That is the difference. Bharat is an equitable notion, since Dharma, as Agni points out, has space and capacity for all.
Here is what equity means in practice. Even if we tilt Saffron; it doesn’t mean we don’t respect interrogation. Q’s comment to 0M’s post was excellent and I agree with most of it; Pakistan, to her credit, is an extremely deft diplomatic and strategic player. The visit to Israel precisely prior to the failed Iran war isn’t a masterstroke per se.
Pakistan
Alas however Pakistan is a third-rate peripheral power. Maybe in some years it plays itself up to second-rate, because as a purely strategic, diplomatic and military actor Pakistan has always been formidable.
I do have much sympathy with 0M’s view that the British envisaged Pakistan for exactly what it became: not the shaheen Allama promised, but a cheel on India’s shoulder, circling, harrying, snatching what it can, never stooping like a falcon.
I hate to say this, because there is so much capacity in that valley. It is one of the richest in the world. Punjab is exceptionally rich. The northern areas are very beautiful. Karachi could have been the Singapore of the Arabian Sea. Balochistan has the minerals, the Frontier has the ruggedness of its terrain, and Peshawar to Kabul was once an axis of its own. The tragedy of the cheel is that it has falcon country and flies it like a scavenger.
En Fin
However the blog has shifted over fifteen years. Pakistan has dipped in significance while India has soared in the sun. Even with mistakes made by India; its fundamental rise and promise seems assured, notwithstanding any unforeseen disasters (even the CJP is careful not to stoke chaos).
I can understand that for Kabir, who has been with us for at least a decade, that shift is real, and it is hard. Blogs can do that since we are not bound to a written constitution like India is to her secularism.
Map is wrong
Use the correct map:
I restored this map since it’s interesting to see how fantastical it is.
Why would Rajasthan and Maharashtra (the two redoubts against Indo-Islamic rule over various epochs) want to secede from India.
It’s interesting how Khalistan is Saffron.
Sam Dalyrymple was saying how QeA thought Kolkatta would be the capital of Pakistan.
no more Partitions but Unifications please..
It’s fine for blogs to change.
But what place is there for myself and Q on a blog that is “Bharat Pandits”? You are making a choice to limit your audience. Which is fine but it’s a choice.
I’ve said many times that I don’t care if you never discuss Pakistan. But if this is a blog which tilts “Saffron” and has an inordinate focus on attacking Pakistan, then there is a problem.
Just food for thought.
Thank you for deleting the blatant Islamophobia.
Q seems to be thriving? He makes excellent comments; he has his opinions. He is a Paknationalist and rather unabashed about it.
What’s the big deal exactly? With respect you have pushed this blog in this direction since every little point was unnecessarily litigated. Also it’s not like if Q, Calvin or yourself write a post that completely disagree with the blog’s ideals (but is respectful); it would be censored in any meaningful way.
We called out Islamophobia when we saw it; Dharma is a multiplicity not conformity. Do remember it was our “Gender Precedent” that triggered this new iteration.
If you want a blog which focuses on India’s internal affairs, I have no issues.
If Pakistan is attacked, come out with all your nuclear armament and fire away, from both hips and a potamus.
Just think how much you objected before OM’s article was written. It did not turn out so bad, did it.
I really have no issues with people disagreeing with me. My issues are with personal abuse and disrespect. There is no reason for people to go after me in the way that they do.
I have edited your comments to give an idea of what I like. High Signal low noise. No Emotionalism; I won’t accept your constant accusations of an *active* bias in the blog.
For the record the Cresceniate Faction dissolved after the Gender Precedent. It was not a good look. Calvin has my full support in posting whatever content he likes. You have my full support in posting whatever content you like.
There is *very* little censorship; I also did not appreciate 0M’s comments on the Holy Quran (I also believe in it’s inviolable sacredness down to the dot) and I supported you in that as well as clearing the conversation on the Abrahamic God (where you were actually right).
I do take on point though that sometimes I am compromised as I avoid alienating the majority (when you, 0M and RNJ get into a Flame Thread, I tend to be more harder on you then them). I will mull on that as there are no good solutions. I thought to balance it out by giving you admin rights but then you deleted half the blog when you were admin. So I have no real way to address my own blindspots, which is problematic (and Agni and I tend to agree much more than we disagree).
So you are raising a very good point, which I don’t have an easily solution to alas.
I do think we may have to reinstitute the Ceasefire Protocol for you since it seems that the Commentariat do like to trigger you unnecessarily and that’s really not fair. The Quranic thread was not a good look; also I don’t see the incessant need for them to discuss your personal life.
I did not find anything remotely sacrilegious about OM’s comment for you to get so worked up. Until you wrote about it, I wasn’t even sure what the offensive comment was. If this is your yardstick, then Kabir is hands down the absolute worst offender. His past comments on Hindus and their scriptures were 100X worse.
Even then, none of the other RW commentariat asked for bans or deletions. Our tolerance levels for free speech is very high.
Your yardstick for what is free speech and what is blasphemy is very different from the rest of us and maybe you can set out some guidelines for what you is ok or not by you.
Please don’t take RW commentariat for granted. They are the only ones who have actually contributed articles on this blog, apart from you.
Case in point is OM who is a very high signal contributor. Can’t have him singled out like this and at the same time see the red carpet rolled out for a Calvin, who is an absolute caricature of the left.
If you keep singling out RW commentators like this, they will leave (BB case in point).
This is a fair comment.
There cannot be disagreement for the sake of it. It’s better for individuals to choose to not respond to provocation as far as possible.
“Kabir is hands down the absolute worst offender”–
Were you here when I referred to the Ramayana as “mythology”? All hell broke loose.
OM’s comments about the Quran were Islamophobic.
Generally, I think any criticism of anyone’s religion should not be allowed–especially when it is done only to trigger someone and has no substantive purpose.
“They are the only ones who have actually contributed articles”– I contributed many posts. It’s a different matter that those have subsequently been deleted from here. Some of them are on Substack.
“If you keep singling out RW commentators like this, they will leave”– BB is the one who made an actual threat of violence which some of the other RW commenters have apparently decided was a joke and I took it too seriously.
BB also had a habit of sexualizing Muslim women. He was not an innocent.
“Were you here when I referred to the Ramayana as “mythology”? All hell broke loose.”
Yes I was and I have no hesitation in saying you are an absolute Hindu hater. Yet no one ran to admin cribbing Hinduphobia, delete comments etc, ceasefire etc.
OM’s comments are nothing remotely offensive. They may be correct or incorrect, tasteless etc. But It was just an opinion just as you had an opinion on the Ramayana.
Your contributions are all plugs for your Substack. Absolutely zero original content ever.
OK. I’m not going to litigate OM’s comments with you. They’ve been deemed Islamophobic by XTM. That should be good enough.
“Your contributions are all plugs for your Substack”– This is factually incorrect. I wrote several pieces that were rebuttals to things BB had written. Those were specifically about the BP Discourse.
Here is one example:
https://kabiraltaf.substack.com/p/british-india-was-not-a-nation-state
“You are an absolute Hindu hater”– This is an unfair characterization. I hate Hindutva not Hindus as a whole.
By your own criteria, I would be justified in calling some RW commenters here “absolute Muslim haters”.
I have absolutely no issues engaging with you despite my firm view that you hate Hinduism. I have absolutely no problem with Om’s comments – if they are wrong they can be rebutted. You are free to characterize people anyway you want. They can oppose it if they wish.
“I have absolutely no problem with OM’s comments”– Well, the admin of the blog made a call that they crossed a line. So there’s no need for us to litigate this further.
Kabir you have made many Hinduphobic comments in the past. It’s better you do own that.
Pakistan is built on normalised Hinduphobia
“Hinduphobia” is subjective–as is Islamophobia.
Anyway, I’m happy to stay within whatever constraints you have set up.
If we really want to talk about the past, let’s note that it all started with “taqqiya” which is an absolutely unacceptable word for a non-Muslim to use towards a Muslim.
“Pakistan is built on normalized Hinduphobia”– This is a broad generalization.
The rationale for Pakistan was that a certain section of British India’s Muslims didn’t want to live in a Hindu-dominated nation state. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that. Did we (Muslims) not have the right to self-determination in the parts of the colony in which we were the demographic majority?
Don’t unnecessarily litigate Kabir; it becomes vexatious and troll-like.
I’ll be removing TNT references going forward; the blog is much more than that.
Are you Muslim?
Again I’m not going to be held hostage to what is right and what is wrong but that was a bad comment.
It is deeply Islamophobic.
You are free to make your judgment and I have absolutely no interest in holding you hostage to it. I have my opinion on it and that wont change. I have also made it clear that what you call Hinduphobia is also an opinion (offensive maybe but that’s it) .
I am absolutely not a Muslim.
The point about the Blog is that we can agree to disagree.
Also I have to be able to step away from my own personal opinions to see what is fair.
Now that we have enshrined Brown, that is Bharat, Pundits; the next questions becomes protections for the “Minority.” Who are all non-Hindus
The Majority are all Hindus, either by birth or marriage, so that is the real meditation.
In a way we mirror the broader Indian polities meditations on this topic. Do Minorities get more consideration than the Majority; if so how?
Why are we conceding to the Minorities, so that they stay or because it is right and just.
I have moved away from “Masala”; I would like everyone to stay BUT only if it is a positive experience for them and they get also something out of Brown Pundits.
0M is an intelligent commentator and I have no animus but as a member of the “dominant faction”, which also has significant Admin backing, he does have more responsibility in what he says.
You obviously have every right to guide the discourse and I am not questioning that in anyway. Thank you for clarifying your position on this.
I also wanted to say on a different point: There is obviously nuance to every point that is made even if its not obvious. For example, I am pro affirmative action but totally opposed to the way its been done in India. In that sense, I actually agree on the underlying issue but differ on the solution.
However, the effort put into the conversation has to be worthwhile. Cant engage in a futile exercise of talking past each other.
Yes, touché
//Case in point is OM who is a very high signal contributor. Can’t have him singled out like this and at the same time see the red carpet rolled out for a Calvin, who is an absolute caricature of the left.//
I am responding here since the person who wrote this does not want to reply to me.
My views and thoughts are standard logic outside of right wing echo chambers.
As I have repeatedly said, many here only see their opponents with either hostility or as a caricature of themselves.
None of what I have advocated for is actually that out there:
The CJP fiasco: the main thing my point centered on is that the protestors have a right, and their honesty and sincerity shouldn’t be questioned by default. The govt many were advocating on behalf vindicated many of the things I was saying.
Anti-reservation: Most of the anti reservation narratives are based on casteism against the SC/ST and ironically me using one of the arguments on GC people.makes this apparent.
Luyten: People’s loyalty should not be questioned, one should not be suspicious of people because they dont want to sanskritize. It brought out one very interesting thing that people who dont care when muslims loyalty are questioned or SC/ST capability is become very angry at even non criticism of GC.
Anywhere else with even a modicum of indian left wing or ambedkarite presence, many of the repeated questions of SC/ST capability would have resulted in questions of bias long before I was accused of being anti GC and the repeated hostility towards people questioning a party would also countered quite early.
This site has never had much of a non RW presence and it shows with who can not even be criticized and who can be caricatured and pillared.
Re-instituting the Ceasefire Protocol does seem like the best way forward. I don’t want to engage with OM and RNJ in any way.
You yourself stated that the blog leans “Saffron”. So that’s not an accusation on my part.
Calvin has also noted that the default worldview is a RW one.
You have a choice not to engage. Exercise that.
He doesn’t have the self-control to be able to do that.
This is really unnecessary.
You aren’t even slightly apologetic about your comments about the Quran–which have been deemed Islamophobic by XTM.
Why would I be apologetic to a self-described “Citizen of a Hostile State”?
You don’t need to be apologetic to me but to XTM. When the blog’s founder/admin deems your comments Islamophobic, perhaps self-reflect.
This guy is a straight up Hinduism hater. That’s ok – I like interacting with him at times. You hold the line. Let these Pakistanis realize that their sacred cows are not sacred for us and we reserve the right to have an opinion.
“This guy is a straight up Hinduism hater”– That’s a mischaracterization. What “straight up Hinduism hater” would sing Kabir and Meera bhajans? The evidence is there on Spotify.
I’m against Hindutva–which is a political ideology. I have no issues with people’s private exercise of their religion.
In general, it is better not to caricature people’s views.
Anti-semites say the same thing about the non-existent division between Judaism and Zionism.
Its like saying “How can I be racist I listen to rap music.”
This is not a good argument. Zionism is a political ideology. Judaism is a religion.
There are many Jews who are themselves anti-Zionist. An example is “Jewish Voice for Peace”. Are they “anti-semitic”?
More to the point, there are many Hindus who are against Hindutva.
You’re not really helping your case.
The argument holds for anyone who isn’t blinded to their own hatred. Hindutva is Hinduism.
“Hindutva is Hinduism”–
I’m sure all those Hindus who vote for the Congress Party would disagree with you.
I have a personal friend born and brought up in Delhi. He is a PhD in History. His dissertation was on Partition.
Anyway, he’s a Hindu and he would beg to differ with you that “Hindutva is Hinduism”.
Your opinion is not fact.
I deleted your other two comments as they are repetitive and trolling.
I do not care about the composition of this blog.
It is what it is.
I think there needs to be a better definition of “trolling” then opinions that one doesn’t like.
But of course you can delete what you like.
While we’re on the subject of “trolling”:
Why are people allowed to disrespect me like this?
who wrote this?
https://www.brownpundits.com/2026/08/12/brown-that-is-bharat-pundits/#comment-142987
Kishore Kumar
Bollywood misbehaving ..
Ill edit it out
Also its not a big deal whether you believe abortion is right or wrong; it’s your prerogative.
I didn’t see the big deal in the Speaker of TN joining the protests ..
It is a big deal. Vijay being a Christian may try to push regressive policies influenced by Christian theology on a majority Hindu population. Speaker doing this was a trial balloon which luckily backfired.
This is exactly why the reluctance to fully assimilate can lead to disastrous outcomes for others who don’t share the belief if passed as legislation. The US despite its “secularism” uses Christian principles to guide in legislative matters.
Isn’t Vijay half Hindu
So is Zohran Mamdani?
In the clash of civilizations, the more tolerant i.e. Dharmic ones always end up on the losing side.
‘tyranny of the intolerant minority’.
Some people are being alarmist as usual.
They should pay attention to events like thr below that have
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thehindu.com/latest-news/pledge-of-economic-boycott-of-muslims-christians-administered-during-mondays-chhattisgarh-bandh/article66729778.ece/amp/
Many nasty laws that empower vigilantes to attack muslims and chrisrians have come out of this
For those who are worried about complete assimilation should be brave enough to say what they mean, Indian muslims and christians use hindup philosophy, practice hindu/indian culture and are much more open to intermarriage, having other religious neighbours, less likely to think their religion ia only right one than many ptjer communities.
No proposal has been pushed in the legislative assembly, no proposal would have as the motive of many christian religious gathering is not thinking about other religions.
If people who want complete assimilation, want christians to reprint their beliefs according to their whims then that is not possible in a secular country
This is scary – interestingly
Enough in South India, Muslims are known to have restaurants (any business that requires family
Members).
It feels like this will spread.
Two more additions to those who want christians to completely assimilate.
Firstly support for banning abortion is quite common in India.
Some of this is based on religious texts, if the idea of complete assimilation involves both aligning with the majority and deciding your religious ideas on the basis of what is written in hindu texts then many Indian christians are already half way there.
Be careful what you wish for. A secular country does not need to see what is in a religious text to decide policy, not so much in a country where religious texts dominate policy.
https://indiacurrents.com/a-hindu-view-on-abortion/
Many nasty laws that empower vigilantes to attack muslims and chrisrians have come out of this
I am not going to engage in a comment-by-comment by rebuttal before the weekend because I just don’t have the time but please do share references to bills tabled or texts of statutes passed in state legislative assemblies, Parliament that “empower vigilantes to attack Muslims and Christians”.
The disturbed areas act that enable land jihad accusation when many muslims just want to buy houses in better neighborhoods.
The numerous anti conversio laws that are ever expanding in scope of who the complainant can be but most of which result in an acquittal when the complainants cant prove force, fraud or allurement.
The cow protection laws that enable vigilantes to harras and even kill those they suspect of transporting cows for slaughter
The laws against hurt sentiments that enable any mob to do what it wants.
These are just off the top of my head.
I’ll reply to your email and enable author rights shortly.
Counterpoint – I think if ‘ceasefire’ is a construct abused by an overt hinduphobe to seize argumentative ‘high ground’ by asserting to be liberal, while constantly attacking the ‘other’, then that’s…..food for thought.
A constant stream of tarring and feathering, holding India/Hindus/Commenters to some utopian standard, while explicitly providing covering fire for a totalitarian religous segregationist dictatorship – and then demanding that other commenters are denied the right to post counter points?
That is not only hypocritical, but patently unfair.
Read the latest post. There is now a “Courtesy Guidance” in place.
You can choose not to call it a “ceasefire” but any commenter has the right to ask that certain other people not engage with them.
Do not engage with me going forward and everything will be fine.
If the “Courtesy Guidance” is not followed then the ceasefires become mandatory.
XTM has also asked that we not constantly litigate TNT so all this “religious segregationist dictatorship” stuff needs to stop.
I have no great ….louvvv for ‘engaging’ with you. But if I see something that I feel I need to rebut, I will. You cannot use a ‘ceasefire’ to try and shut others up while giving yourself free reign to wax disingenuous.
Follow the “Courtesy Guidance” going forward and things will be fine.
Kabir you can also choose to not get provoked as well. It takes two to tango.
Well Q just made a ridiculous racist comment so you do have some merit.
This isn’t personal but in some ways, Q’s …bias is less grating and provocative than the other plier of prejudice.
I have legitimately made repeated efforts to adopt.. high signal no noise in my comments. But provocations are what they are.
And “free speech for me, while ceasefire for thee” is not a viable solution.
I honestly want to move past the Kabir conundrum. But its…totally overt, how he consistently works towards derailing other discussions toewards his pet platform –
India is “not secular enough”.
“Hinduism is caste first and not just foremost, but most”
Anybody who questions either of this, is attacked personally with accusations of bias.
I saw his comment. And honestly, instead of censoring it, you should have let it be seen – with an admin note calling it out.
Let such silly prejudice and ignorance be exposed and hold folks accountable for their views.
Why babysit and filter the naked bigotry?
such skin color bigotry against Indians by Pakistanis is actually hilarious because of its inaccuracy. And Kabir himself lost his editor privileges on this site because he fished out and brought back deleted comments peddling such nonsense on other author’s threads.
What was it?
I support not removing anything other than maybe personal threats and personal abuse. It lets us understand what the other person and their milieau actually thinks. People here are taking the time and making the effort to communicate their inner understanding. If someone feels insulted, they can insult right back. If they insist on their point one can call them retards, disengage, and move on. This is online, anonymous, written word.
If this was real life, police or street enforcement.
The kind who publicly states his visceral revulsion to Murti puja?
At least Q is consistent and intelligible. You on the other hand trip on your own feet…
That’s precisely the point of the Ceasefires.
XTM had said that if anyone (for whatever reason) didn’t want to engage with someone else, a Ceasefire would be instituted.
You can have one with Calvin for example.
I don’t want one with Calvin. I will ignore his comments if i wish and i will respond if I want. Admin cant/shouldnt babysit people.
It’s not about “babysitting”, it’s a way of managing the blog to minimize flame threads.
For the record, the “ceasefires” came about after BB made a threat of violence.
So let’s keep the chronology clear.
If you want this blog to be representative of India as a whole. You cant just only right wing voices to be present.
I cant and dont want to force people to change their views on thing but if you want to attract more diverse crowd of Indians this space needs to cater to them as much as it does to people from the right wing.
With that said, I will like to take you up on your offer to be a contributor since this place clearly needs arguments from the left of center and from the ambedkarite sphere as well if it is to not be an echo chamber.
I would also like to introduce a suggestion to improve the standard of comments, in order to avoid criticisms that largely devolve into attacks on ones character, that cast unnecessary suspicion on people because of their religion and the politics they might practice and other characteristics that decrease the quality of this discourse
I admit that I should refrain from personal accusations but it is difficult to do so when many of the right wingers on this site can say whatever they want without any censure.
I dont want to dwell on it too much but in the future it will be best if someone say accuses someone of something they actually take the time to reference what they have said that leads to this accusation.
For example many people have called me anti general caste, I dont know what are referring to and why they may think so, so need to circle back to what I have said and give clarification. It will be much more fruitful to actually know what brings this on. Will try to do so myself as well so someone knows why they are accused of something.
Its a food for thought, if many think I am being unreasonable then give some examples so we know what we are talking about.
How interesting is this – I was literally going to invite you to write and then sat down for dinner.
Of course are you a Captain of the (Loyal) Opposition; you have a very privileged position on this blog.
We are willing to assist you in any way we can and we will enable author rights asap.
also Calvin if you find instances of unfair bias you can immediately email me; we are very fair to all viewpoints (that are respectful).
There are a few comments that I find are unfair but let it be. Many of the individuals on this site have more complaints of me and my behavior than I do of them.
I have been unfair to some people, but it is too late to change course better to just avoid directly speaking.
Where are the center-left Hindus? As far as I can tell there is no one from the majority community who votes for INC.
Where are the Indian Muslims?
The amount of nastiness that you have personally faced on the “Lutyens” post is quite out there. While I disagree with you on many issues (especially when it pertains to Pakistan), you provide an important counter to the right-wing beliefs of most on this site.
INC does get some hindu vote but let’s be very clear most of India outside of the RW would really not like this blog.
No muslim would come to a place where minor or even non criticism of GC label people anti GC but one can be suspicious of Indian muslims and christian for not wanting to sanskritize, relitigate muslim loyalty repeatedly.
Most of the things said to me are kind of typical for the Indian RW, that SC/ST competence, sincerity, integrity and presence can be berated and looked down upon with nary an accusation of being anti SC/ST or that all kinds of things can be said about opponents of the air favorite party as seen in CJP fiasco where the party itself invalidated most of the criticism with no self reflection or even anger at being misled, are typical behavior seen in the last 12 years, it is like water off a ducks back at this point in time for me and many others.
I absolutely agree with you. Why would any Indian Muslim engage here if their loyalty is going to be constantly questioned?
With respect, I also thought the loyalty tests XTM proposed on the Lutyens thread were quite problematic.
Also agree that INC voters would not really like this blog. We can see that by the lack of engagement from that demographic.
To be totally honest, I would never have engaged with a site called “Bharat Pundits”. BP was originally very different. Omar Ali (one of the co-founders) is Pakistani American. Razib is Bangladeshi-American. The site originally had a much broader focus and a broader commentariat (many of whom I disagreed with profoundly).
Obviously things change. The default worldview is now much more RW.
Kabir – the blog will reflect its natural constituents. I am not here to attract anyone to the community; no one has actually been hounded out.
Your Pakistani friends were more interested in popular writing (with views) rather than BP’s more niche style.
Calvin if you feel disrespected you can always email in and highlight the infraction; it would be dealt with.
It is the same with Kabir, we have protocols in place to prevent disrespect. It’s not about going into Flame Threads or complaining that it is a hostile atmosphere since we can’t police everything.
Your threads don’t explode as much as Kabir’s do hence we don’t interfere as much.
thank you very much for posting the correct map of india!! and showing tibet.
andamans needs correction.
Mauritius and Malfives are excluded, which are part of the Hindu Continental Sphere.
That other thread has gotten too messy, and my comments keep getting caught up in the censor mill
I have come here to despoil this thread now.
Responding to…
https://www.brownpundits.com/2026/08/09/the-lutyens-brahmin-the-indian-muslim/#comment-142920
That pinch of salt can be taken with these articles and their cherry picked data. Liberal media will often not publish counter narratives.
It is true that IIT’s and IISC resist quality dilution hard. Would you rather they did not?
The cost of this is often absent from these charts.
The colleges remain heavily understaffed with student numbers increasingly dramatically and reserved positions remaining vacant due to lack of suitable candidates.
Likewise cut off criteria tends to ensure that there are almost no reserved students in undesirable fields of study.
This article covers it, notice how they do not mention the real reason but treat it like some sort of unfathomable mystery.
https://unstop.com/blog/vacant-seats-at-iit-nit-and-iiit
which censor mill?
? the one which ground away my existential pontifications here leaving me to wonder if I hallucinated them.
https://www.brownpundits.com/2026/08/12/brown-that-is-bharat-pundits/#comment-142934
Edit away as you like, Newtons 3rd law applies.
sorry sometimes I/we lightly edit the comments to avoid any emotionalism..
mea culpa but keeping high signal low noise.
Since you are quoting my comment.
Firstly Nature is not aome liberal magazine, it is a premier science magazine.
And what exactly is cherry picked about the data present. It is based on data given by the institutions themselves. The article wanted to find how many students are there from SC/ST/OBC communities and get insight on why it could be low.
The main trigger of this is that someone who has clearly expressed anger at SC/ST, invalidated the problems SC/ST people face with anecdotal evidence of reverse castesim and clearly seems to still believe in outdated reservation narratives that have been exposed to be casteist long back is commenting on their colleague aptitude.
We dont know who he is talking about, many people are not privy to actual discussion about why someone from SC/ST background is hired and especially since none of the above registers anti SC to the people when even non critism from my end registers qs anti GC to many, it is necessary to point out there is no proof that IISc is simply filling seats and assertion to that end, are more based on bias against these communities than any lack of merit.
Even if they were a panellist, we have no way of knowing what thr other members think and if they are actually in agreement with them or not. It is quite likely they are not.
Sri Krishna’s Vishwaroopam is giving very god emperor of dune vibes. It’s a great representation, but now that it’s in my head, I thought I should ruin it for everyone else.