Suttee Sati persisted in colonial India until the British stopped it - long after the presence of Muslim invaders. Its ending by the British was a piece of cultural colonialism, of course, a reminder that India had some very evil elements in its traditions.
It appears to have historic roots long before the Muslim invasion as well...
The demolition of the 16th century Mosque by out of control Hindus shows the fanatical element present in the religion. Such behaviour is a reminder that the streak of barbarism seen in Sutee and the maltreatment of untouchables is endemic in the faith. Don't let's pretend it's anything but evil.
Modi's de facto endorsement of anti-Muslim and riots, allowing anti-proselytising legislation despite the supposed freedom of religion in India and the growing marginalisation of non-Hindus and non Hindi speakers is not healthy.
And let's not forget the little matter of the untouchables as well as the expectation that widows should die on the funeral pyre of their husbands.
Once upon a time there was only one Buddhist - the Buddha himself. Now there are lots. How did this happen if it wasn't by 'proselytising' their truth because they felt that was the loving thing to do. The idea that a group of people has amazing news about how the universe works but refuse to make any effort to share it makes no sense to me.
Yes, I get that at times 'Christianity' and 'Islam' have been imposed by force of arms. But that doesn't prove that the religions aren't true, merely that some people didn't fully understand what the religions really pointed to - though there's a case for arguing that Islam is committed to spread by force, as Ayatollah Khomeni wrote:
'Islam’s jihad is a struggle against idolatry, sexual deviation, plunder, repression, and cruelty. The war waged by [non-Islamic] conquerors, however, aims at promoting lust and animal pleasures. They care not if whole countries are wiped out and many families left homeless. But those who study jihad will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world. All the countries conquered by Islam or to be conquered in the future will be marked for everlasting salvation. For they shall live under [God’s law].... Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless.'
Barry M. Rubin and Judith Colp Rubin, eds. Anti-American terrorism and the Middle East: A documentary reader. (Oxford: OUP, 2004) 29.
It's a good general rule about Hinduism to resist any claim about what it does or does not believe. As the Thugee cult's existence reveals, some elements are rather aggressive (yes, I'm aware that the origin of Thugees is not disputed, but noone denies they MIGHT have had a religious motivation).
And the various pre-Muslim empires on the Indian subcontinent didn't happen spontaneously by mutual agreement, did they?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Every religion has its dark bits and currently fashionable bits...
There was a significant Christian presence, which claims descent from missionary efforts by St Thomas. There's the little matter of the Jains. And then there's the BHUDDISTS, who started in India. And the Sikhs...
So no - 100% is not a good claim.
you've never been to Yorkshire, have you? The urban areas have attracted substantial immigration from the Indian subcontinent, so the name isn't a surprise to Brits.
After four years and seven months his official record will become invisible as it will be spent conviction. Even before that the information isn't normally easily available, though the publicity in this case has generated me be more of a problem for him, as an internet search will reveal him. So it may be less of a disaster than you think, though he may struggle.
So should be addressed. My local government wimped out of implementing a clean air zone because drivers whinged loudly - and here cars are THE major cause of air pollution deaths
https://www.rcp.ac.uk/news-and...
Indian urban air is spectacularly bad, so the idea of strong enforcement in this area is entirely appropriate. The inevitable whinging by those currently making money by selling murder devices is to be resisted. The polluter pays principle - which is merely the enforcement of the idea that you aren't free to damage me by your actions - should be the starting point. Sadly its implementation will be painful and it's always easier to look away.
Finished the PhD that he'd started in 1971 in 2007. So I see your Master's and raise you a PhD...
The Netflix' series 'Adolescence' is the most brilliant thing I've seen for years; I defy you to watch it without bursting into tears at some point. But yes, the suits are ever less willing to put money on something totally new, so we mostly get much the same thing reheated. And having expanded far too much in the past few years, the retrenchment underway in the film / TV is especially painful. Here's hoping that the trickle of good stuff will not disappear completely...
We don't bother to prevent orgies or other forms of 'interesting' behaviour as long as it doesn't frighten the horses. Where the problem lies is that artists have come to believe that they have a right to taxpayers' money.
In other words, AI will just continue the trend we have seen towards uninteresting garbage in every form of art since the 70s. There worst part is that people don't even seem to care, they just keep consuming it.
Do you really believe this has got worse since the 70s? Nah...
Especially in advertising, but in a lot of other fields as well, it's all instantly forgettable garbage and always has been. If the 'artist' is lucky, it will still attract enough paying customers to keep the artist in spondolicks.
Just occasionally true artists will arise who change what the world appreciates. They are rare, and usually even much of their output is actually less than amazing.
And very often governments fall for the idea that they should force taxpayers to cough up to support what the artistic elite thinks is impressive. Usually it's not, but the artistic elite provides such a chorus of denigration as 'philistines' of anyone who doubts that this government expenditure is worthwhile that noone is prepared to kill these subsidies.
In this context AI merely generates more garbage quicker, probably ensuring that people of mediocre talents won't be employed in the 'creative industry'. Is this really such a massive loss? And true geniuses will be able to use the new technology to create new and amazing material far more easily, potentially making such breakthroughs easier to achieve.
I have no hope that there will be a realistic response to climate change; in reality the 'cost of carbon' will remain far below the damage that it is causing. In that context geoengineering is the only solution. Perhaps you will be proved right, and I do hope so. I just don't think it's likely.
The freeloader problem is correctable, to some extent, by tariffs on imports from countries that don't impose a carbon tax. But of course it doesn't solve all the problem, and all tariffs are an excuse for domestic industries to get protected from competitors who keep their prices down. More broadly, expecting relatively poor countries to pay anything like as much as rich ones for the carbon they emit is unfair given that it's our emissions over the centuries that have got us into this mess; meanwhile they get to suffer the consequences.
ASCII a stupid question, you get an EBCDIC answer.
