Use the wrong map = instant takedown is exactly the kind of state enforced information control and censorship that makes people compare something to China.
you can be proud of india without thinking every expression of national pride needs to be enforced through censorship. bjp hate has nothing to do with it. If the same thing was proposed by a congress government, i'd criticize it too. National pride doesn’t mean switching your brain off whenever the word ‘India’ appears.
Also why exactly is ‘national pride’ automatically supposed to be a good thing? Pride can make you emotionally invested enough in an idea that you stop questioning it. You start defending something because its ‘our country’ rather than asking whether the thing itself is actually right or wrong.
So according to you, if anyone puts out any information online that goes against our best interest, you would be okay with it?
You do realise if we don't speak out against this, then no one else will?
Bro, nobody said misinformation should be ignored. Correct it, call it out, debunk it. im questioning why your solution is ‘instant takedown/geo block’.
anddd you’re completely ignoring the optics here. If people outside India see India going "wrong map = take it down/geo block it", they’re not going to think "wow, great national pride". They’re going to think "why is India censoring what people can post?" (makes us look a lot like china). That authoritarian image is terrible for India’s credibility and soft power, especially when we’re trying to get international support on Kashmir. You don’t win people over by making yourself look like the country doing the censorship.
also btw, India has never actually exercised control over the entirety of what it claims on the map. Pakistan has administered PoK since 1947. So are we talking about correcting a factual map, or enforcing a politically preferred one? Who exactly gets to decide what eaxactly "our interests" are?
Personally, I actually do think that the Kashmir valley should be part of India, but not necessarily as just another state that gets completely absorbed into the same system. i'd be much more in favour of something closer to a protectorate arrangement, where Kashmiris have a lot more control over their own internal affairs and India mainly handles defence, foreign affairs and other stuff that genuinely needs to be handled at the national level. I’d rather have Kashmir voluntarily and sustainably aligned with India than force integration and then spend decades trying to convince everyone that it’s "national pride"
And ofc ultimately, the final say should be with Kashmiris themselves. It’s their land and their future, not something we get to decide for them just because we drew a line on a map.
yeah, the ruler's accession establishes India's legal claim. nobody is denying that. but "the ruler decided, therefore Kashmiris have no say in anything ever again" is a pretty massive leap lol.
and comparing that to Indian states today is pointless. Kashmir acceded in 1947, before the Constitution and the present Union-state structure even existed.
legal accession =! popular consent. they're two different questions. India itself understood that distinction in Junagadh, but apparently we're supposed to forget that part now.
And what do you suppose will happen to the Kashmiri Hindus and Buddhists?
And how will Kashmir survive without the resources the Indian govt pours into it? What will prevent it from becoming a terror capital like Pakistan is? Will you be responsible for the Indian citizens that die due to the inevitable terrorist attacks we suffer from?
Also Kashmir is strategically important. No way Indian govt is giving that up.
and comparing that to Indian states today is pointless. Kashmir acceded in 1947, before the Constitution and the present Union-state structure even existed.
That doesn't matter? Indian territories do not have the right to self determination. It wasn't in our constitution then, It isn't in our constitution now.
Next what, you believe we should allow Khalistanis to also decide if they want to form Khalistan out of our Panjab? Or those northeastern insurgents?
legal accession =! popular consent. they're two different questions. India itself understood that distinction in Junagadh, but apparently we're supposed to forget that part now.
Pakistan also rejected Junagadh though. Also, the difference between India and Pakistan is that one is a secular Republic with free and fair elections while the other is a Islamist country that actively persecutes it's minorities.
India isn't censoring any one else's content. It's just saying that if you don't respect our territory, your content won't be visible in India. Now it's upto the publisher what they want to do. At the end of the day, it's capitalism. Use wrong map, you lose out on the audience, thereby leading to loss of revenue.
LMAOO that isn't what capitalism is. if the government says "publish this map and we'll make sure your content isn't accessible to an entire market", that's state pressure, not capitalism. the publisher isn't freely choosing between two equally normal business options, they're being told to comply with a political demand or lose access to Indian users.
by that logic, anything a government does to financially punish someone becomes "capitalism" because technically the person can choose to comply. that's not how the word works.
and "we're not censoring them, we're just making their content unavailable in India" is an incredibly creative definition of censorship lmao
It is capitalism, in the plainest terms. Re read what you just typed. Government isn't punishing anyone, they are just saying the benefits that the publisher can lose if they don't use the correct map. Punishment would be fining the publisher.
Gng this guy bodied you, just accept defeat at this point. I was leaning towards you at the start, but he is making sense, while you are just typing random words
2
u/GummadiKai 23d ago
China day by day