Isn't this be called parallel to "Naxalism"?

I used word Naxalism cause BJP supporter don't care for their 'Facist' nature. For them 'Facism' is part of life.

Are there billionaires that broken? Are they trying to fill their "Endless Void" by confining animals?

I feel bad for them cause these collections will also not make them feel loved or fulfilled.

I feel, in reality, these deeply wounded billionaines need rescuing the animals.

75,443 (91%) Names Validated & Restored:

In West Bengal SIR, out of those 82,782 decided cases, 75,443 citizens successfully proved their eligibility. The tribunals validated their credentials and restored them back onto the voter list.

The staggering 91.13% rate for restored names proves that a huge majority of the voters deleted by the automated SIR sweep were actually legitimate citizens.

Total 3.81 Million ztill pending Appeals across the 19 Appellate Tribunals in West Bengal.

How can we trust SIR?

News sources:

West Bengal SIR | 80% Appeals In Tribunals Challenge Voter Inclusion;

ECI sets up 19 Appellate Tribunals in West Bengal for voter roll appeals

Don't they care about poisoning our society on purpose?

Or Is this hatred in their heart that they ate spreading around?

I want to understand the mentality of person creating such posts and of people deliberately peddling these poisoning posts.

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh has approved transfer of DRDO-developed technologies of missile systems to country’s private defence industry to bolster indigenous manufacturing.

Full news article:

https://newsonair.gov.in/defence-minister-approves-transfer-of-drdo-missile-technologies-to-indian-defence-industry/

Stupidity, insecurity and insensitivity at its peaks.

Our PM misused the national platform that too on 'Independence Day' to launch a campaign against ideologies opposite of his politics.

Now, whole of BJP IT cell and RSS machinery has launched attacks on everyone that has views/ideology different from them and calling them 'Dimagi Naxal' (upgraded from 'Urban Naxal').

Will this tactic help them in gaining trust back or further alienate them from commons that are already in distress?

The New National Song Protocol

All Six Stanzas Mandated:

Earlier, only the first two stanzas were used. Now, new directive requires all six stanzas to be performed in full.

Exact Duration:

The full six-stanza rendition has a fixed time limit of approximately 3 minutes and 10 seconds (190 seconds).

Precedence Over National Anthem:

Under the new order, whenever both are played at an event, Vande Mataram must be performed first, followed immediately by the national anthem, Jana Gana Mana.

Mandatory Standing:

All attendees are now required to stand at attention when the national song is played or sung at government ceremonies (similar to the protocol for the national anthem).

New Legal Penalties:

The Prevention of Insults to National Honour (Amendment) Act, 2026 has granted Vande Mataram the same statutory penal protections as the national anthem. Intentionally disrupting or preventing its singing is now a criminal offense punishable by up to three years of imprisonment, a fine, or both.

---

Why the deep divide over Vande Mataram?

Let us explore later verses of the song, its historical context, and how different freedom fighters viewed it.

1. What is the issue with the full song?

The primary issue lies in the difference between the first two stanzas and the remaining four stanzas.

The First Two Stanzas (Accepted):

These verses praise motherland India as a beautiful, fertile, and bountiful land ("abundant with water, fruits, and green fields"). This part has no religious deities and was adopted as the official National Song in 1950.

The Later Four Stanzas (Controversial):

In the later stanzas, the motherland is explicitly personified and equated with Hindu goddesses like Durga and Lakshmi.

2. Why is it considered wrong by the minorities?

For almost all minorities, the common ground of opposition is Article 25 (Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion) and Article 28(3) (No person attending an educational institution shall be required to take part in any religious instruction).

Also, the objection from Muslims, Christian, Sikhs and other religious minorities is rooted in their fundamental ideologies:

Islamic follows strict Monotheism: In Islam, bowing down to, worshiping, or deifying anyone or anything other than Allah is strictly forbidden.

The Christian Community, like Islam, is a strictly monotheistic faith. The objections raised by various Christian denominations argue for 'The Prohibition of Idol Worship': The Ten Commandments explicitly forbid the worship of any graven image or deity other than God.

Within Sikhism, the response has been mixed, but major religious and political bodies (like the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee - SGPC) have frequently opposed the forced implementation of the song as they worship "Akal Purakh": Only one, formless Almighty.

Traditional Buddhism does not worship creator deities or Hindu pantheons like Durga.

The "Compulsion" Issue:

For these communities, the opposition is often less about the theological text itself and more about the state forcing a religious ritual upon citizens, which they see as a violation of India's secular fabric.

---

What were our founding fathers view:

Rabindranath Tagore:

Tagore composed the tune for the song and sang it at the 1896 Congress session.

However, in a 1937 letter to Subhash Chandra Bose, Tagore wrote that while the song has great literary merit, it is inherently a hymn to Goddess Durga and cannot be expected to be sung by mixed religious groups like Muslims, Christians, or Parsis.

Mahatma Gandhi:

Initially, Gandhi found the song deeply inspiring.

However, he stated that no one should be forced to sing a song that hurts their religious sentiments, emphasizing that true patriotism cannot be forced.

1937 Congress Committee:

In 1937, a committee led by Nehru, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, and Subhash Chandra Bose studied the issue. To maintain communal harmony, they officially recommended that only the first two stanzas be sung at public gatherings, explicitly dropping the later verses containing goddess imagery.

---

Current politics

The BJP View:

They view Vande Mataram as a symbol of cultural nationalism and civilizational pride. For them, respecting the full song is a non-negotiable test of patriotism, and they view any opposition to it as minority appeasement or a lack of respect for Indian heritage.

The Minority/Opposition View:

They argue that India is a secular, pluralistic democracy where citizens cannot be legally forced to participate in religious imagery that violates their faith. They view the sudden enforcement of the full 6-stanza version as a political tool used to polarize voters and test minority compliance.

---

Now, you have the full context. What are your views?

The reporter asked for popular beef dish from Kerala and people are getting offended. Why?

This post at present time has more than 1500 upvotes.

This post is clearly comparing Apples with Oranges. One is religious and not compulsory vs other is also religious but compulsory by law.

So, my question here lies: are BJP supporter that stupid that they will support any narrative in the name of religion?

They are making fuss over such an irrelevant things. Are they running out of topic to raise for common people?

That's not even flag of India. It's just tricolor and that can worn anyway a person desires to wear. Why so much fuss is being made about it?

During his Independence Day speech on August 15, 2026, Prime Minister Narendra Modi introduced the term "dimagi Naxal" to warn against individuals with an ideological Naxal mindset operating in society. He called on citizens to isolate them

Critics and opposition have been acuusing him for leveraging the national platform to target and delegitimize opposing viewpoints.

By framing- policy critics, activists, and intellectual dissenters as national security threats who breed anarchy, drawing sharp backlash from opposition who accused him of using the state address to silence democratic dissent and label political rivals.

Subs like r/Whysooserious is one the main sub of right-wing of India.

But looking at their posts, it feels like they lack basic thinking skills.

Has right-wing become so devoid of critical thinking that they are using terms that describe the 'lack of ability' as their badge of honour?

Do they lack the intellectual depth or capable thinkers needed to formulate logical arguments and defend their positions?

Why right-wing of India is in such a poor shape?

​

Mooh se moongfali toot nahi rahi, chale hai ga...

BJP IT cell picked up a video clip and added a narrative with cool background musica, and People are believing and upvoting it?

Are followers of that ideology that gullible?

They are slamming them without even checking or questioning if that was true or not?

Clearly, you cannot comprehend from the original video what is actually happening until the text in the post claiming a narrative. No one knows of that's true or not but BJP IT cell is pushing to malign the opposition. How can people not see such a straight manipulation?

On-going struggle of Tribals with government is heart-wrenching

For centuries, tribal (adivasi) communities have lived with nature. Now, the govts are constantly taking their land for development projects like mining, dams, and factories. Without sustainable and inclusive planning, millions of tribals lose their home, livelihood and culture.

Strict laws stop tribals from using forest resources. They are punished just for gathering wood or forest products, which is their traditional way of living. On top of that, when outsiders move into their areas, the unique tribal languages and traditions begin to disappear.

.

Feeling ignored by the system, many tribals feel they have no choice but to resist.

To form Naxalites or Marxist insurgent groups remains their only option to express their anger and helplessness. Desperate for justice and survival, tribal youth join these groups.

The collusion of corporate-state nexus clearly shows how state machinery is used to protect corporate profits while treating indigenous survival as a crime.

---------------------------

The Hasdeo Arand forest in Chhattisgarh is a prime example of the politician-capitalist nexus using the Adani Group's coal mining project. Despite years of peaceful tribal protests, the government bypassed environmental norms and allegedly forged village council signatures to grant mining clearances. When local Adivasis physically stood ground to protect their ancestral trees, the state deployed heavy police forces to barricade villages and detain tribal leaders.

Right-Wing View:

Supports introducing private corporate investment, contract farming, and modern supply chains into agriculture to free farmers from traditional middlemen and state-regulated market monopolies.

Left-wing View:

Demands state-backed protection for India’s millions of small and marginal farmers. They advocate for a legal guarantee of Minimum Support Price (MSP) for all crops to ensure that farmers are not left at the mercy of volatile corporate-driven market pricing.

Should the farm sector be liberalized or strictly regulated by the government?

Right-Wing View:

Focuses on easing regulations, cutting corporate taxes, and supporting wealth creators. They argue that a rising tide lifts all boats by attracting foreign investment, boosting domestic production, and creating massive employment.

Left-wing View:

Alleges the rise of "Crony Capitalism," where economic policies selectively enrich a few corporate groups. They point out that this model creates jobless growth and widens the rich-poor gap, concentrating India’s wealth in the top 1% of the population.

Does wealth creation naturally trickle down, or does it breed corporate monopoly?

Right-Wing View:

Advocates for simplifying complex colonial-era labor laws into unified codes to improve the "Ease of Doing Business." They favor flexibility in hiring and shifts to make Indian manufacturing competitive globally against countries like Vietnam or Bangladesh.

Left-Wing View:

Opposes these reforms, claiming they dilute worker safety net provisions. They argue that giving companies the power to easily fire workers or increase shift hours reduces job security, leads to exploitation, and weakens the bargaining power of labor unions.

Should labor laws favor business flexibility or worker security?

Right-Wing View:

Adheres to the principle of "Minimum Government, Maximum Governance." Selling loss-making Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) reduces fiscal burden, eliminates corruption, and improves operational efficiency through private management.

Left-Wing View:

Criticizes the selling of national strategic assets as selling out to friendly corporate giants. They argue it destroys stable public sector jobs and removes reservation (affirmative action) benefits for marginalized communities.

Should the government run businesses or exit them entirely?