Answering as a severly sight impaired but not fully blind person. But yes - of course! I'd throw it back at you - do you experience sexual attraction purely by looks alone? I seriously doubt it (and would be concerned if you did!). How a person sounds, smells, feels, behaves etc. all come into it. If your partner playfully blindfolds you, you wouldn't suddenly stop enjoying the experience.
Sure. And I think it's based on a bunch of factors coming together, voice being one of them. I don't know how it works if you have sight left, but I can't imagine that attraction is the same for everyone there as well. It's probably a lot more nuanced than that.
Few months back, in a similar fashion a Hindu Don was encountered by the UP cops. All Hindus still supported the cops.
For people like you, if the person is a Muslim irrespective of whether he is a terrorist, serial murderer he should be supported at any cost.
And don’t club Sikhs and Dalit among yourself to look good. They have a far larger contribution to society and don’t cry victimhood at any given opportunity.
We've banned this account for repeatedly abusing HN with political, nationalistic, and religious flamewar. Regardless of how right you are or feel you are, it's not what this site is for.
Posting like this will eventually get your main account banned as well, so please stop.
Let me restate my point. A persons reasons for supporting the Nazis in 1933 may be quite different from the reasons you think people are pro-Nazi in 2023. So such comparisons don't add very much to the discourse.
Apparently, death threats and actual deaths and rapes should only happen to Dalits and Muslims via periodically organized riots. It's also a great idea to jail the lawyer of the survivor of a lynch mob, Teesta Setalvad. Indias Supreme court is pleased.
I understand by "Indian friends" you mean upper caste Hindu Indian friends who are Modi acolytes and his primary voting demographic. Not Indian Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Dalits or Shudras who form greater than 50% of the Indian population.
No, I mean people with loads of common sense who can tell you both side of the story.
>> Not Indian Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Dalits or Shudras who form greater than 50% of the Indian population.
Acc to you, if they are more than 50% AND not happy with Modi, why is Modi winning back to back elections and almost certain to come to power again in 2024?
You only need 35% to win in Indias multiparty elections.
Additionally, Muslims in Gujarat and UP have been coerced into voting for BJP candidate by threatening them with shut down of municipal services when BJP wins. This is enabled because EVMs report summary statistics from each location which the government employees have access to.
Did you even read what I said? EVMs are not being tampered. But they make per polling booth data available to candidates. The BJP candidates use that summary data to withhold municipal services from constituents who didn't vote for them.
They are able to make this threat because of summary data made available by EVMs
15 years from now there will be no distinction between India and China in terms of freedom. There will be single party rule by BJP. The opposition is being coerced to join in with the BJP or be thrown in to jail for random offenses. BJP simply buys the legislators where it can't win elections.
In terms of economics, India will not be in the same league, of course.
Conservativism is about maintaining and perpetuating hierarchies in society and fighting hard against anything that might change the hierarchy. Different conservative groups differ on who should be at the bottom of the hierarchy.
In the USA, we have
1. Social conservatives - anyone who isn't white, heterosexual, Christian should be at the bottom hierarchy. Tucker Carlson informs them who they should focus on at the present moment. For now it is trans people. It was Mexicans and Muslims very recently and immigrants are a perennial favorite.
2. Libertarians - We already have people at the bottom of the hierarchy. Let's just keep them there by disallowing government support and subjecting them to monopolies and arcane private contracts. They are also highly supportive of bombing nations perceived to be lower in the hierarchy.
3. Big business - doesn't care who is at the bottom as long as they are guaranteed exclusive reign at the top.
Obviously, hierarchies are difficult to maintain in a democracy as the majority of the people are at the bottom of the hierarchy. This problem is solved by obfuscation and propaganda. Group 3 uses Group 2(rayiner et al) to construct messaging and propaganda to convince Group 1 to vote against their own interests. In fact, the US Democratic party is also center right and operates in a similar, but less blatant fashion. This can be seen from how Bernie Sanders was shut out of the party nominations even if it meant losing the 2016 elections.
You’re correct that conservatism seeks to preserve natural hierarchies. It arises from a worldview that says that things are the way they are for reasons, and that efforts to reshape the world according to human machinations are susceptible to failure. “Keeping people at the bottom” is often a side-effect of that worldview, insofar as conservatives are naturally distrustful of large scale efforts at social change.
> 1. Social conservatives - anyone who isn't white, heterosexual, Christian
Social conservatism is where “black and brown people” have the most in common with white republicans: https://news.gallup.com/poll/112807/blacks-conservative-repu.... By contrast, social liberalism was invented by white people. It arises out of the intense individualism that’s unique to white European societies.
That’s why the GOP had its best performance in decades among minorities in 2022, despite underperforming expectations among white people. Social liberalism—specifically abortion—didn’t motivate minority voters in the same way as it did white voters. That’s why DeSantis and Youngkin straight up won Hispanics in states Obama won twice, by focusing on cultural issues. That’s why, back in 2000, Muslims got George W. Bush elected: https://www.cair.com/cair_in_the_news/survey-shows-bush-supp... (“In key states like Florida, where Mr. Bush defeated Democrat Al Gore by just 537 votes, CAIR says Muslims in that state preferred the president over his opponent by 64-thousand votes.”). Luckily for liberals, it’s very difficult to get different groups of conservatives to trust each other.
I’m frankly offended at the insinuation that I’m a libertarian! I’m a typical “brown” American—I voted for Biden but tell my kids they can’t have tattoos like the white people.
> Social conservatism is where “black and brown people” have the most in common with white republicans:
Sure conservative blacks and browns, just like the whites can be compelled to vote against their own interests by group 2 and group 3.
> in 2000, Muslims got George W. Bush elected
Your ability to fish for random bits of data to reinforce whatever point you are making is exceptional.
> I’m frankly offended at the insinuation that I’m a libertarian!
I honestly don't care about getting your political category right, but now that I recall - you are a social conservative of the Clayton Bigsby variety.
Anyway, thanks for acknowledging that conservatism is inherently anti democratic.
> As to your point about self interest: I came to Reagan’s america—a country where poor kids “who look like me” have almost three times the economic mobility of poor white kids. “People who look like me” live longer than white people, are less likely to get shot or incarcerated than white people, etc.
Could you share the data showing this, or at least the point in time did the data reflect this? I'm not sure if you're referring to currently, or to Reagans times. I'd love to check it out for myself, as most of the data I've seen seems to point to the other direction. Always happy to learn more!
Regarding income mobility, see Figure III of this study by Chetty: https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/135/2/711/5687353. Figure III shows child income on the Y axis versus parent income in the X axis. Compare the green line (Asians) to the blue line (whites).
Although most Asians came here in the 20th century, this pattern holds historically: https://www.nber.org/papers/w22748 (“Asians achieved extraordinary upward mobility relative to blacks and whites for every cohort born in California since 1920. This mobility stemmed primarily from gains in earnings conditional on education, rather than unusual educational mobility.”). This paper shows that the upward mobility was shown “conditional on education”—I.e. even when comparing similarly educated people.
On the other statistics. Incarceration: https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/ji19.pdf (Table 2). In local jails, Asians are incarcerated at a rate of 25 per 100,000 versus 184 per 100,000 for whites.
Asian Americans have an average life expectancy of 86.3, versus 78.5 for whites: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4567918. The Asian-white gap is double the white-black gap. This is true even though Asians are slightly more likely to be uninsured than white Americans. The life expectancy for Asian Americans is 2 years longer than Japan, and a year and a half longer than Singapore.
There is no “bamboo ceiling.” Asians hold 4.6% of Fortune 500 board seats: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/.... That’s probably overrepresentation if you consider that Asians skew almost 8 years younger than whites and older Asians often aren’t English fluent/lack prestigious American degrees/etc.
In my opinion, the progressive Asian trend of jumping on the racial liberalism train is a profoundly bad idea. It’s not in our self interest for white people to start becoming race conscious.
Nobody cares about or loved drag shows. They care about the first amendment. Don't flip right wing drag-show-hatred to liberal love of drag shows. You are lying and you know it.
> pathologically individualistic
The ones who refuse vaccinations in the middle of the deadliest pandemic in a 100 years, NOT!
>> you are a social conservative of the Clayton Bigsby variety.
> I’m a social conservative of the “typical Bangladeshi” variety
Of course black/brown conservatives are not all the same.
Something I have been curious about. Do you experience sexual attraction yourself? Is it based on voice?