/lounge/ - Lounge

>>256611
If you're indian I don't find it that weird that you're into hindu texts. Or are you the muslim kind of indian?

another day, another shitpost

>>256611
Bhagavad Gita is shorter. I began with it.

Also, you should research about the prophecies of this Kali Yuga and compare them to what's happening actually…

if you after that, ever feel like to research about semitic monotheism… compare Mahdi with Kalki, the Gita with the Quran, and the Kali Yuga with Ahir Zaman.

I did and… I am not digesting things very well. If there's an easy option, take it, for you may end up in a way of hardships: Stay away from whoever makes you feel your sanity crumble (every sect). never stop investigating once you've felt it until find consolation. And be discreet.

https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Go_Mad_from_the_Revelation

I am not Indian but I also like reading Hindu texts, they are far more interesting than Abrahamic religious texts. I also like Hindu art, it has a very nice aesthetic.
It seems like most Indians (except for maybe the Muslim ones) are very secular/atheist though, why do you think that is?

Don't Indians force their sons into arranged marriages?

>>256823
I think ancient time india does not have much to do with the shithole it is today

>>256827
Not sure if memeing or just really thirsty.

>>256829
lol

>>256829
what does he know about india

>>256870
clearly a lot

>>256611
Glad to see a fellow Indian here. Bhai kaisa hai? :p

>>256824
Traditionally yes. But the norms are evolving. Especially in cities, standard love marriages and even live in relationships are common. As Dylan sang , "The Times They Are A Changin".

>>256827
Ancient India was advanced in certain terms. For eg, The Indus Valley civilization had one of the earliest documented instances of a proper sewage and drainage system. We could know more about them from certain texts and wall carvings left from that era, but sadly that calligraphy isn't deciphered yet.

>>257045
>india had a proper sewage system

question for the street shitters

so like… what happened? ☹️

>>257049
Islamic rule, the. British rule and after independence India was very poor. It has improved a lot but a lot of progress is still required.

>>257045
ancient india was so advanced that the buddhist chinese wanted to become indian, and suffered greatly from the fact they were on the "borderlands"

>>257045
The Indus civilization disappeared and took that culture along with it. I've tried looking at Indian history to measure technology and they clearly lag after that high note. The problem is waves of invaders and high r selection from a disease environment

>>257170
That is true. Parts of India such as the Chola empire in the South were still rich and influenced the naval areas upto Thailand and Malaysia as well. However, north India was under Mughals and it wasn't that religiously tolerant there. Still, the money remained in India and economically India was alright.

But once the British came, India became a dumping ground for British goods and NO industry was allowed to develop here. As Manchester industrialised, India lacked. Despite having some of the most fertile lands in Punjab, the country starved. There is a reason why letting a private person/company rule a country sucks. Look at Congo under the personal rule of King Leopold. That was disaster on another plane.

>>257300
Oh yes, south Indians are very different than northern ones. Even dating to the gupta period they were engaging in different social patterns such as delaying marriage and having fewer children. The smartest people in India are all in the south particularly around the ex-colonial trading posts.

India was rich, but it seems to have been a function of their exotic resources rather than outstanding talent. Despite being one of the most affluent places in the world all they did was build palaces and temples with it.

The British did not cause India to become an economically Marginal power. They retarded production like you described and artificially kept their currency high, but by that time the writing was already on the wall. India would never have survived the industrial revolution, the thing keeping it in the game was a large population running cottage industry and that would have inevitably have been replaced.

For all the harm Britain did do, they also industrialized India and raised living standards. They made the railroads and gave India it's first industrial Ironworks. They created an affluent and literate middle class that was able to decolonize without instantly becoming despotism. Britain also also trying to make India a primary resource economy in the process, but on balance it was still a good deal particularly when they funded industrialization under Nehru.

About famines. This is not a feature uniquely consequent of British policy. It's a reoccurring feature of Indian civilization being highly r selected. In fact despite some early disasters Britain eventually led famine relief efforts, which was unprecedented in Indian history.

If we're talking about Colonial powers, British ones have typically done well. This is not at all like Belgium's experience

>>257379
India, at least under the East India Company rule, was made to serve only as an agricultural place and export location. While Europe industrialised, India kept lagging behind. As for railroads, they may have helped India in the long run but they were made primarily for transfer of goods and British troops(it just happened to prove good for India in the long run).

As for civilizing, Britain did NOT touch the natives(Hindu and Muslims) native customs, especially after the 1857 mutiny. There was little effort from them to bring either religion to the modern era. It was the efforts of stalwarts like Madan Mohan Malviya, Ram Mohan Roy that led to Hinduism shed some of its bad stuff. By contrast, the Muslims stood more or less the same.

>>257490
Again, ask yourself honestly. Would a country of hand looms have ever stayed competitive with international markets? No, it never would have and India stood to be colonized like every other nation on earth. By that metric British rule looks merciful if not fairly benign. For the first few decades Indian elites envied the western gentleman's upbringing and strove to emulate it. The fact that the EIC was able to conquer India using it's own people, and last without a serious revolt for 100 years, should tell you something.

Life expectancy rose under colonialism. Nutrition improved, and disease rates gradually lowered. Ghandi, Nehru, Gokhale,Jinnah, and really everyone else of note were western educated. The British also brought newspapers which allowed national politics in the first place. Infanticide was also prohibited and the Thugees were eliminated. Considering every prior conqueror of India had made almost no effort to improve the state of their people at all, their record looks pretty good

Obviously Indians would have done better if they weren't foreign-dominated, had a unitary state, and had western technology. The first decade of native rule showed that. But nothing is free. The Indian tendency has always been to dissolve into feuding states under the wedge of corrupt government and interethnic feuding. See for yourself how even contemporary India falls true to that pattern

>>257492
If you measure mere material wealth every country is better off than say 100 years or something
I would rather be a poor peasant with my own house far away from the hords of filthy normalcattle working the fields whole day than to continue to live this shitty existence. Aimlessly consuming japanese media the whole day and feeling depressed.

>>257550
I was with you until you insulted anime.
have you considered you would have to be a normalfag to eat back then?

>>257550
Have you ever try being "a poor peasant with my own house far away from the hords of filthy normalcattle working the fields whole day"
Sounds like a case of the toilet is less stinky. You can always move to Africa where things are cheap and poor.

>>257845
Which reminds me of the larper who asks who people even get a job instead of just being homeless.

>>257846
what am I supposed to do?
I was never taught basic agriculture n'sheet

>>257492
Being better than cucked Aurangzeb isn't a high bar, IMO.

>>257164
being poor never stopped anyone else from finding a hole to crap in instead of the middle of the road

I love cows very much, so much in fact, that I wanted to move to India as they were what I thought to be the only place on the planet where cows are treated well. When you live in the United States, you literally cannot leave your house more than 3 steps without being able to count at least 30 instances of cow abuse, especially when you get into the more hardcore stuff like animal products present in electronics and tires.

It took all of one hour to realize that Indians treat their cows just as bad as Americans, if not worse.
They only care for the animals the bare minimum that their retarded Bible demands of them and they offer them no comforts beyond that.
The cows in India are living in basically prison. Many people can't afford much land and grass is kind of scarce in India as it is, so you'll almost never see a cow in a grassy plain where they belong; instead, they'll be standing in their own shit and piss chained to a concrete stall that isn't large enough for them to even turn around or lie down. They'll get a dirt floor if they're lucky.

This is becoming out of fashion now, but there was also a time that cow cart racing was very popular, and the sport was extremely cruel and unusual slavery.

I discovered this writer named Savitri Devi who discovered these hypocritical atrocities decades before me. "After World War II, she wrote books propagating Nazi esotericism and ethical vegetarianism. Using Hinduism as her prime example, she argued that 'selfish' vegetarians abstain from meat for fear of retribution in the afterlife, whereas "unselfish" Aryan vegetarians demonstrate their superhuman qualities and racial superiority by caring for the welfare of 'all' sentient creatures."

I couldn't have said it better myself. Sympathy for animals is a trait only and exclusively white people can exhibit. I volunteer at a cat rescue and there have been exactly zero non-white volunteers, and exactly zero non-white people have made donations or adopted a cat from us.

Like everything else in Hell world, India disappoints me.
I wanted so badly to have a place on this rotten shithole that treats such an intelligent and peaceful animal, the cow, with decency. Turns out, India's the worst of the lot! and getting a shameless death and getting fed to fat retards here in the United States is somehow a better outcome for the animals than to be kept barely alive and malnourished on a diet of cheap hay chained to a wall all day with no cow friends in sight for 15-20 years. The ones who get humiliated in cart races are maybe the lucky ones since they at least get to see sunlight and move around a bit.

>>258052
I was going to try to refute your statement that "Sympathy for animals is a trait only and exclusively white people can exhibit." by passive aggressively mentioning your quoting of an Indian who shares your opinion, but she's actually white. Oh well.

>>258038
It is in India. The biggest crime of the British? Perpetuating village debt slavery that had already existed since time immemorial. There is no winning with these people, they treat each other like dirt and scam the system constantly whether under colonial power or not. The level of intergroup competition in India is so high from constant racemixing and disease exposure that it is simply impossible to have a functional society in this century

>258052
yet another disgusting animalfag

I'm SIKH

Please stop bumping this shitty thread.

>>262905
I know, Dhalsim with a beard looks fucking awful!