Vinod Dhall

Wow! - moneycontrol.com/news/india/…

There is something deeply cynical about the way some of the ultra rich put on public displays of religious devotion. Whether genuine or staged, these performances help create an image of piety while encouraging superstition among ordinary people. Think about the class divide. The rich have money, power, the best education and every opportunity life can offer. Yet they publicly display their religious devotion in front of millions who struggle to make ends meet. The message to the poor is simple: if even billionaires rely so heavily on religion, perhaps it is their only hope too. This is how religion can become a tool of social control. The rich hold on to their wealth and privilege, while the poor are encouraged to pray for miracles instead of questioning inequality or demanding a fairer society. Meanwhile, self proclaimed godmen and babas make money out of their desperation. The wealthy do not need divine intervention to protect their interests. They have money, power and privilege. It is the poor who are sold the fantasy of salvation while being denied the means to change their material conditions. A society that teaches the poor to pray rather than question inequality is doing a tremendous service to the rich. 🤔🤔

Nothing that Sharjeel Imam says has not been said before. Asim Ali educates the sophisticated sanghis trying to demonise the IITian for his "Islamist" views in an interview. @ttindia @AsimAli6

ON SOROS WHO FUNDING ANARCHISTS IN INDIA ! Answer by Grok on X 📷📷📷25 sources George Soros is regarded by many critics as funding anarchist or radical movements primarily because of the Open Society Foundations’ (OSF) extensive grants to progressive and left-wing activist groups. Some of these groups have been linked to protests that involved violence, property destruction, or tactics associated with anarchist “direct action.”Documented Funding Links A 2025 report by the Capital Research Center analyzed OSF grants and concluded that the foundations have given over $80 million since 2016 to organizations “tied to terrorism or extremist violence.” Specific examples cited include:Funding to the Center for Third World Organizing and its partner Ruckus Society (anarchism-associated), which has trained activists in tactics that include civil disobedience and property destruction, and which claimed involvement during the 2020 George Floyd riots. Grants (at least $2 million) to the Sunrise Movement, which endorsed the Stop Cop City / Defend the Atlanta Forest coalition. Activists in that campaign faced dozens of domestic terrorism and racketeering charges related to arson, sabotage, and attacks on police or workers. Support for other groups involved in racial justice organizing, bail funds, or movements that critics argue enable or glorify disorder.⁠Thecentersquare OSF has also long funded criminal justice reform efforts, anti-police initiatives, immigration advocacy, and groups active in large-scale protests in the U.S. and Europe. Critics argue this creates infrastructure for unrest even if individual grants are not explicitly labeled “for riots.”Broader Context and Criticisms In the U.S., OSF has supported organizations connected to Black Lives Matter-related activities and progressive district attorney campaigns that emphasized reduced prosecution. Historically, Soros foundations backed “color revolutions” and opposition movements in Eastern Europe and post-Soviet states, which some governments and analysts labeled as externally funded destabilization. Similar accusations have appeared regarding funding linked to recent unrest in France and other countries. Counterarguments and Debunked Claims OSF and fact-checkers (including PolitiFact) state that neither Soros nor the foundations fund Antifa, pay professional protesters, or support violence. Many viral claims (e.g., flyers offering money for “professional anarchists” or direct payments to rioters) have been shown to be fabricated. OSF describes its mission as supporting open societies, human rights, democracy, and justice; it says it does not fund groups that engage in violence.⁠Api.politifactIn short, the perception exists because OSF is a major funder of left-wing activism, and some of its grantees have clear ties to radical or anarchist-aligned groups and protest tactics that have crossed into violence or property destruction. Whether this amounts to deliberately “funding anarchists” is disputed: critics see a pattern of enabling disorder, while OSF and its defenders describe it as legitimate advocacy for social change. The evidence is strongest on the existence of funding flows to radical organizations rather than on direct, explicit support for pure anarchist violence. @PMOIndia @NIA_India

India needs more Jamnagars... Chronic fear of capital, anti-business mindset, knee-jerk anti-Americanism all hurt national interest … #NationalInterest Illustration: Shruti Naithani @Shrru_art theprint.in/national-interes…

I remember the late Arun Jaitley, lawyer, politician, spin master, describing Rohington Nariman as the most brilliant mind in the Supreme Court of that time. Since he was talkative no doubt Jaitley would have said this to others as well. Now hear what Rohington Nariman is saying here.

Grateful to @SurjitBhalla for applying the Article 326 test, and for concluding that by it the blame lies with the ECI and the government. One more step, by the same test: if the State must prove a citizen is not entitled, then the 5.2 crore never-registered young are the State's failure, not their choice. And rights don't net: a surplus in Bihar does not restore a voter struck off in Kolkata. Without netting, his own table shows ~1.5 crore short, not 1. @surjitbhalla @IndianExpress @grewal_sharma

Jean Drèze is being hailed as the economist who stands with India’s poor. But his ideas would leave the poor where they are. They make factories harder to build, and factory jobs are what lift people out of poverty. 🧵

The language of 'prayers' and 'Mylord' has lulled the judges into thinking of themselves as deities making oracular pronouncements, instead of seeing themselves as working judges, paid by taxpayers to read & assess evidence and arguments. See this article: indianexpress.com/article/op…

This so-called U-turn by Election Commission “cannot erase its crimes” CEC Gyanesh Kumar must go. @DeccanHerald #Editorial

Dr Bhalla, thank you for doing what the Election Commission should have done: counting. I agree with more of your piece than you might expect. The rolls needed cleaning, the dead and the duplicates had to go, and the 130 million in the headlines was never a count of the disenfranchised. Your Assam comparison is valuable. So is your finding that about five million eligible citizens were removed in West Bengal. But let me put the citizen back where the Constitution puts him, at the centre. Article 326 sets three conditions, and only three: a citizen of India, eighteen years of age, ordinarily resident. A person who meets them “shall be entitled to be registered”. Everything else is fluff. So the question is not how many names a “clean roll” should hold. It is this: how could anyone who met all three conditions fail to get onto the roll? Ask the people who were left out what they had to do to get back in. They were “mapped” against a roll of 2003 and served notices for a “logical discrepancy” in a parent’s spelling. Some were told to find their grandparents’ entries. Many were made afraid that their citizenship itself was in question, which no Electoral Registration Officer has the power to decide. In Punjab, 39 of every 40 people served notice turned out to be entitled all along. In West Bengal, 93 per cent of the appeals decided so far restored the voter. And the Commission itself has since had to relax that process and retreat from it, with hearings waived and BLOs sent back to doors with Form 6. That retreat is its own verdict. Rights don’t net out. A surplus name in Bihar doesn’t restore a deleted voter in Kolkata. And seven million is not “almost nothing”. It is Uttarakhand’s entire electorate. Dr Bhalla, please don’t defend the indefensible. KBS Sidhu @surjitbhalla

Who is funding them? @thehawkeyex @Iyervval

There have been petitions filed against blanket immunity provided to CEC and ECs under a recent law. My article in the Hindu discussing the concept of equality, nature of other immunities in the Constitution and why this immunity to CEC/ECs is not necessary.

And finally the mask slips. The dynasty’s motormouth strikes again. After the failed protests by clown prince, Rahul Gandhi's mentor-in-chief Sam Pitroda wants George Soros to invest $10 billion in India. Basically poodles of the dynasty wants to bring in the money before FCRA hits them hard where is hurts the most.

Pratap Bhanu Mehta @pbmehta, you've written the most uncomfortable line in Indian foreign-policy writing this year: India's "realists" aren't realists. They're apologists using realist vocabulary. You're right. But you've left India with a diagnosis and no prescription. 🧵

Senior Advocate and Human Rights Lawyer Vrinda Grover (@vrindagrover) questions why the Indian diaspora is celebrated when it supports the ruling government, but faces restrictions when it expresses a different political opinion. “My right to not agree with my government is the most foundational tenet of a democracy.” Watch Vrinda Grover in conversation with Nidhi Razdan (@Nidhi) on DeKoder: youtube.com/watch?v=RjOSpK9d… #India #DelhiProtest #DelhiPolice #GyaneshKumar #JantarMantar #SupremeCourt #ECI #RightToProtest #SIR #FreedomOfSpeech #RightToDissent

In 2014 when Modi became PM, India's nominal GDP per capita was $1,573, while Bangladesh's nominal GDP per capita was approximately $1,118. That is, India's was 40% higher in 2014. Modi pushed India behind.

ओह हाँ! 2002 याद आ गया….