Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwaway4425 | Hacker News Reader

I think this will depend on how much of an ally they are in the future.

If they are seen as an economic threat, like Japan in the 80s, the media will probably start to report more on the atrocities committed in Kashmir along with the new Citizenship Law that appears to target or disadvantaged Muslims.

Vietnam might he another alternative, but they are also a communist country, so the optics might not be better than China.

View on HN

It is appalling how despite the availability of information online, people still choose not to verify what they hear on the MSM. Here is the link to the Citizenship Amendment Act of 2019 on GOI website. It's only a 2 page document.

http://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2019/214646.pdf

It was amended to accommodate persecuted minorities from *neighboring countries" of India. It has nothing to do with the Citizens of India.

This is blatant disinformation by omitting context. The CAA itself is discriminatory, since it does not apply to muslims, but in the context of the National Register of Citizens (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Register_of_Citizens) it becomes even more sinister. The NRC requires people to prove their citizenship through documentation, which is very difficult for large parts of India's population, who might be straight up illiterate or lack any kind of documentation whatsoever. The CAA makes it easier for non-Muslims to claim citizenship while Muslims slip through the cracks; that is the point of contention.

> The CAA makes it easier for non-Muslims to claim citizenship while Muslims slip through the cracks; that is the point of contention.

No it doesn't. Here's the relevant part of CAA(http://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2019/214646.pdf) that mentions non-Muslims

> Provided that any person belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan, who entered into India on or before the 31st day of December, 2014

If you are a non-Muslim who wants to get Indian citizenship under CAA, you must prove (1) you are a citizen of one of these neighboring countries and (2) you entered India before 2014. It is just not enough to not have papers to "slip through the cracks".

Dude, you literally are spreading false information and you're literally quoting one thing on one line and contradicting it on the second line.

CAA makes it easier for non Muslims. you say 'no it doesn't' and then you literaly cite this:

Yeah, it specifically mentions Hindu, SIkh Buddhist Jain Parsi Christian. It leaves out MUSLIMS.

Let's go over. the law specifically excludes Muslims.

What does it mean? it fast tracks citizenship of ALL except MUSLIMS. meaning? it excludes Muslims

now comes the NRC, in this exercise, in Assam, they asked everyone to prove their citizenship by showing their grandfather's documents or ancesteral land documents. grandmother or parents document is not valid because what if your grandparents are illegal immigrants.

your documents like voter ID was NOT A VALID DOCUMENT FOR CITIZENSHIP because you have to prove that your GRANDFATHER WAS NOT AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT.

Assam NRC took thousands of crores of money to undertake. Just imagine what'll happen when everyone in India is asked to prove their grandfather's citizenship.

Nationwide NRC is different from NRC for Assam.

Nationwide NRC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Register_of_Citizens) is mandated by 2003 Amendment of Citizenship act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_(Amendment)_Act,_2...). Look at the definition of illegal migrants there. It doesn't mention anything about your grandfather's papers.

Assam NRC is an entirely different beast (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Register_of_Citizens_...). This was conducted as part of 2013 Supreme Court order. The entire process and the rules was prescribed and monitored by the Supreme court of India. The definition of illegal migrant is a far more stringent here since it hinges on 1971 Bangladeshi refugee crisis and subsequent bloody protests by the Assamese people.

The protest in Assam was/is not to include muslims. But, to exclude all illegal Bangladeshi immigrants. It seems, from Assam, CAA was brought to give citizenship to the hindu Bangladeshis that were left out of the NRC conducted in Assam.

> It leaves out MUSLIMS.

All those three countries in the context have Islam as their state religion. I would always welcome Muslim refugees in India but what was the point of partition if Muslims are suffering religious oppression in countries that were created as safe heavens for Muslims? Should we undo it?

And even recent searches show that minorities (the religions covered under the CAA) are not exactly doing better in those countries.

https://www.wionews.com/afghanistan/sikh-abducted-in-afghani...

https://theprint.in/opinion/letter-from-pakistan/pakistanis-...

This is post-facto legitimization of the logic of partition.

Why shouldn't we undo partition (if possible)?

Partition doesn't need legitimization. It has been legitimate since the day both nations recognized each other.

How does citing the official source of the truth become blatant disinformation? Did you read the Act? Your comment reads more like a rhetoric than a real argument based on logic and facts.

The guidelines for a nation wide NRC have not been formulated. What you're pedaling is nothing more than a conspiracy theory

I never said guidelines have been formulated but the Modi govt has said so in SC that a country wide NRC is necessary

"Centre Tells Supreme Court NRC Necessary, Contradicts Shah's 'No NRC' Declaration"

link: https://thewire.in/government/caa-counter-affidavit-centre

I had the same mindset initially. The CAA in itself is benign. Simply reading the Act will not give you the perspective on how it is going to be implemented. The statements given by the Home Minister of India - who is also a senior member of the ruling party - will give you a better idea of the situation. The backlash due to the passing of the CAB led the Prime Minister to make multiple statements that directly contradict ones made by the Home Minister just a few months before[1]. This, along with the general attitude of senior party ministers[2] is leading the people to be (IMO rightly) concerned about the motives of the government.

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEfaRmQIDU4 [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCyBL8dBOEo

> Vietnam might he another alternative, but they are also a communist country, so the optics might not be better than China.

It's already a booming manufacturing alternative center to China. It's also a center of booming tech manufacturing. Samsung has invested a huge amount of money into factories there.

Their GDP has gone from $35 billion in 2003, to $261b in 2019. They've had one of the fastest growing economies for the past decade.

US imports from Vietnam have climbed from $14b in 2010, to $30b in 2014, to $66b in 2019. 371% increase in one decade. The US imports more from Vietnam than France ($57b) or the UK ($63b) now.

US exports to Vietnam by contrast are a mere $10b, so we're pouring an epic positive trade surplus (surplus for them) into the country. The same exact way China developed. US investment is going to build Vietnam into a middle income country in the span of 20 years. We'll probably soon have nearly a $100b trade deficit with Vietnam. If they keep on the right track, they'll develop very rapidly.

The Communism isn't a problem. The US wants Vietnam to develop so it can help be another strategic counter to China. The people of Vietnam also hold the highest opinion of the US of any people of any nation.[2] The US also doesn't have to worry about Vietnam becoming a superpower competitor, so they don't pose a China-like strategic threat. They're an excellent ally accordingly, we have many shared interests.

"40 years after fall of Saigon, Vietnamese see U.S. as key ally"

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/04/30/vietnamese-...

"84% of Vietnamese people view the US favorably"

[2] https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2017/06/26/tarnished-amer...

And to top it all off, Vietnam forever and ever will hate China. The enemy of my enemy...

Which is kind of ironic after what the US has done to people in Vietnam. But it's similar to what happened in Japan, only Japan was under US occupation, while Vietnam was not.

Whether Vietnam (to use your example) is communist is irrelevant, in the same way it is in fact that China is nominally communist.

The 'issue' is that China is a big country so can develop to become more powerful than the US and Europe. Vietnam cannot so is not a threat and can be bullied into submission if necessary.

In fact the US is courting Vietnam for this reason and as a regional opponent to China. Clearly the political regime is not important.

Believe it or not Capitalists love Communist countries as manufacturing hubs, they can circumvent labour laws, unions etc. Vietnam Is an ok destination for skilled labour but is hardly the resource heaven than China is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com