Contempt Jurisprudence in India

Judiciary

Contempt Jurisdiction of Courts in India: A Comprehensive Overview

The contempt jurisdiction of courts in India is a critical mechanism for upholding judicial authority and ensuring the rule of law. Rooted in constitutional provisions and statutory law, this power enables the Supreme Court and High Courts to address acts that undermine their dignity or obstruct justice. This article provides a detailed examination of the legal framework, historical evolution, significant cases, recent developments, controversies, and potential reforms related to contempt jurisdiction in India.

Legal Framework Governing Contempt

The contempt jurisdiction of Indian courts is grounded in both constitutional and statutory provisions, creating a robust framework for enforcement:

  • Constitutional Provisions: Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution of India designate the Supreme Court and High Courts, respectively, as courts of record, granting them inherent powers to punish for contempt of themselves. Article 142 further empowers the Supreme Court to issue orders necessary for delivering complete justice, enhancing its contempt authority.
  • Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: This statute defines two categories of contempt:
    • Civil Contempt: Involves willful disobedience of court orders, judgments, or decrees, such as failing to implement a court-directed policy or payment.
    • Criminal Contempt: Encompasses acts that scandalize or lower the court’s authority, interfere with judicial proceedings, or obstruct justice, including defamatory statements or disruptive courtroom behavior.
  • Suo Motu Powers: Courts can initiate contempt proceedings independently, without a formal complaint, enabling swift action against perceived violations.

The 1971 Act prescribes penalties of up to six months’ imprisonment, a fine of up to ₹2,000, or both. Courts exercise discretion in applying these penalties, often allowing opportunities for compliance or apology.

Significance of Contempt Jurisdiction

Contempt jurisdiction is integral to India’s judicial system for several reasons:

  • Upholding the Rule of Law: In a diverse and complex democracy, contempt powers ensure that court orders are enforced, preventing government officials, corporations, or individuals from undermining judicial authority.
  • Historical Context: Originating in colonial-era laws, contempt jurisdiction was retained post-independence to protect judicial independence in a nascent democracy facing political and social challenges.
  • Suo Motu Authority: The ability to initiate proceedings proactively allows courts to address systemic issues or public criticism that threaten their credibility.
  • Judicial Integrity: In India’s legal culture, the judiciary’s dignity is viewed as foundational to public trust in the justice system, making contempt powers a vital tool for maintaining institutional respect.

Landmark Cases Illustrating Contempt Jurisdiction

Several cases highlight the scope and application of contempt powers in India:

  1. M.S. Ahlawat v. State of Haryana (2000): The Supreme Court held a government officer guilty of civil contempt for non-compliance with its directives, reinforcing accountability for public officials.
  2. In re: Justice C.S. Karnan (2017): In an unprecedented case, the Supreme Court sentenced a sitting High Court judge, Justice C.S. Karnan, to six months’ imprisonment for criminal contempt after he made public allegations of corruption against fellow judges, demonstrating the court’s authority over its own judiciary.
  3. Prashant Bhushan (2020): The Supreme Court convicted senior advocate Prashant Bhushan of criminal contempt for tweets deemed critical of the judiciary’s functioning and the Chief Justice. A nominal fine of ₹1 was imposed, highlighting the court’s sensitivity to public criticism.
  4. Arundhati Roy (2002): The Supreme Court found writer and activist Arundhati Roy guilty of criminal contempt for remarks criticizing its handling of the Narmada Dam case, sentencing her to one day in jail and a fine. This case underscored the judiciary’s stance on protecting its reputation.

These cases illustrate the judiciary’s commitment to safeguarding its authority across various contexts, from bureaucratic defiance to public criticism.

Recent Trends in Contempt Jurisdiction

In recent years, the judiciary has shown a shift in its approach to contempt proceedings:

  • Increased Restraint in Civil Contempt: Since 2020, courts have often prioritized compliance through warnings or deadlines over immediate punishment, particularly in cases involving government agencies facing logistical constraints.
  • Cautious Approach to Criminal Contempt: The judiciary has exercised restraint in pursuing criminal contempt for public criticism, possibly due to growing debates over freedom of expression. The symbolic penalty in the Prashant Bhushan case reflects this trend.
  • Acknowledgment of Criticism: In 2018, the Supreme Court clarified that fair and constructive criticism of judicial decisions does not constitute contempt, indicating openness to reasoned dissent.

Despite this restraint, the judiciary remains firm in addressing deliberate defiance. For instance, in 2023, the Supreme Court initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against a state government for failing to implement court-ordered welfare measures, underscoring its commitment to enforcing compliance.

Controversies and Criticisms

Contempt jurisdiction has sparked significant debate due to its potential impact on democratic freedoms:

  • Freedom of Expression: Cases like Prashant Bhushan and Arundhati Roy have raised concerns that contempt laws may suppress legitimate criticism. The broad definition of “scandalizing the court” in the 1971 Act allows for subjective interpretation, potentially chilling free speech.
  • Proportionality of Punishment: The imprisonment of Justice Karnan and varying penalties in other cases have prompted questions about whether contempt proceedings are proportionate or occasionally used to assert institutional dominance.
  • Global Perspectives: Unlike India, some jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom, have liberalized contempt laws, abolishing “scandalizing the court” as a form of contempt in 2013. This contrast has fueled calls for reform in India to align with global standards.

Proponents of contempt powers argue that they are essential for maintaining judicial authority in a democracy where court orders are often challenged by powerful entities. Without these powers, they contend, the judiciary’s ability to enforce justice would be compromised.

Potential Reforms

To address contemporary challenges, the following reforms could strengthen and refine contempt jurisdiction:

  • Clarifying Definitions: Amending the Contempt of Courts Act to provide a precise definition of “scandalizing the court” could reduce ambiguity and protect freedom of expression while preserving judicial authority.
  • Encouraging Judicial Engagement: Courts could engage with constructive criticism through public statements or reasoned judgments, reducing reliance on contempt proceedings.
  • Proportional Penalties: Adopting a tiered approach to punishment—reserving imprisonment for severe cases and prioritizing fines or apologies for minor offenses—could enhance fairness.
  • Learning from Global Practices: Studying jurisdictions with reformed contempt laws could inform a balanced approach that upholds judicial authority while respecting democratic principles.

Conclusion

The contempt jurisdiction of courts in India is a vital mechanism for protecting judicial authority and ensuring the rule of law. Grounded in constitutional and statutory provisions, it empowers the Supreme Court and High Courts to address defiance and maintain public trust in the judiciary. While recent trends indicate a more restrained approach, the judiciary’s resolve to enforce compliance remains unwavering. As India navigates the balance between judicial authority and individual freedoms, refining contempt laws could strengthen their legitimacy and align them with evolving democratic values. The contempt jurisdiction remains a cornerstone of India’s legal system, ensuring that the judiciary’s role as a guardian of justice endures.

India’s most lucrative start ups: Political Parties

Political Parties

The Great Indian Dal-Con™

Tax-Free Political Parties, Coalitions, and the Art of Asset Allocation

By: A Tax-paying Observer with No Political Ambitions (Yet)


Welcome to the subcontinent’s most exclusive startup ecosystem: the Indian political party registry. For Political Parties, ideology is optional, but the suffixes Dal, Janta, and Congress are mandatory—like domain extensions for instant credibility. With over 2,600 registered parties, the nation has officially achieved peak democracy—or perhaps, a blockchain-level absurdity of tokenized political identities.


🗳️ Step 1: Naming Your Party

Every successful Political Parties must sound vaguely familiar. Choose one word from Column A and one from Column B. Add regional spice or emotional garnish.

Column A: Rashtra, Kranti, Azadi, Janmabhoomi, Samajwadi
Column B: Dal, Janta, Congress, Sena, Morcha

Winning Political Parties’ Combinations:

  • Azadi Bachao Janta Dal Congress – For patriots who prefer tax-free dissent.
  • Samajik Kranti Yatra Dal – Best launched during a strike or food festival.
  • Janmabhoomi Adhikar Congress Dal – Advocating rights of people born on Tuesdays.
  • Loktantrik Azadi Kranti Dal (LAKD) vs Lok Azadi Kranti Janata Dal (LAKJD) – Voters confused. EC even more so.

📁 Step 2: Get Registered and Reimbursed

Thanks to Section 13A of the Income Tax Act, political parties enjoy full tax exemption on:

  • Donations (including anonymous electoral bonds)
  • House property income
  • Capital gains and divine blessings

Compliance Requirements for Political Parties (aka soft guidelines):

  • Maintain some books.
  • Avoid cash donations above ₹2,000 (unless confident).
  • Submit ITR-7 with a party seal and an oversized sense of moral righteousness.

Think of it as India’s Cayman Islands for politicians—except it’s located in Parliament and powered by fuel taxes.


🎭 Step 3: Symbolism Over Substance

The Election Commission, exhausted by clipart overload of Political Parties, has unleashed a new wave of symbols:

  • ☕ A pressure cooker whistling sideways — grassroots steam.
  • 🔜 A broken USB stick — digital sovereignty meets emotional disconnect.
  • 💺💺💺 Three empty chairs — coalition readiness + accountability vacuum.

Political Parties’ Manifesto Must-Haves:

  • “Inclusive development” and “New India” on loop.
  • Quotes from Gandhi, Ambedkar, and that guy in your college WhatsApp group.

💼 Step 4: Join a Coalition, Mine Your Ministry

Welcome to the Coalition Wealth Generator™. Here’s the cheat code for new Political Parties to public-private profit:

  • Demand a ministry with discretion (Telecom, Coal, Urban Dev).
  • Award contracts to cousins. Preferably those without LinkedIn.
  • Route all donations through the party. Tax-free, of course.
  • Acquire ancestral property via friendly shell companies.

Case Studies in Coalition Capitalism of Political Parties:

💞 Sukh Ram’s Cistern Cache

1990s Telecom Minister. Raids unearthed ₹3.6 crore in pillows, suitcases, and a toilet cistern. The original “flush fund.”

🪨 Hemant Soren’s Self-Mining Scheme

As Jharkhand CM and Mining Minister, he awarded himself a mining lease. EC said “conflict of interest.” BJP said “sensitive tribal optics.”

🏡 Sita Soren’s Bribery Ballot

Accused of taking cash for her Rajya Sabha vote. Allegedly mistook envelopes for party pamphlets. A genuine printing error.

🧠 Sidebar: The Tribal Immunity Doctrine™

“We must protect tribal dignity,” said the spokesperson, as coal dust settled on the affidavit. Disqualifying a tribal leader is now “oppression,” while ignoring corruption is “inclusive democracy.”

This is not logic. This is Optics Constitutionalism™.


🎮 Party Formation for Profit: A Compliance Checklist

RequirementActual Practice
Transparent DonationsElectoral bonds. Anonymous by design.
Books of AccountsMaintained during raids. Misplaced otherwise.
Conflict of InterestMinister awards coal mine to himself. “Tribal context.”
Asset DeclarationFiled 6 months late. Includes farmhouse since 2009.

🎥 Classic Wealth Cases: The Coalition’s Asset Ballet

💃 Mayawati: From Dalit Icon to Diamond Dinnerware

  • Declared ₹111 crore in 2012
  • 380 carats of diamonds
  • 1 kg of gold
  • 20 kg silver dinner set
  • Bungalow on Sardar Patel Marg worth ₹62 crore

CBI probe dismissed by SC in Mayawati vs Union of India (2012). Reason? The agency was investigating without instructions.

🧱 Mulayam Singh Yadav: The ₹20 Crore Legacy

  • 7.5 kg of gold worth ₹2.4 crore
  • Land worth ₹7.89 crore
  • Residential property worth ₹6.83 crore
  • Loan of ₹2.13 crore from son Akhilesh

CBI probe since 2007. Closure reports contested over forgery & Section 17-A delays.

🛌 Lalu Prasad Yadav: Fodder, Land & ₹139 Crore Embezzlement

  • Convicted in 5 fodder scam cases, incl. ₹139 crore Doranda treasury fraud
  • Land-for-jobs scandal (2004–2009)
  • Properties gifted to family for railway jobs
  • ED attached assets worth ₹6 crore in 2023

His family is a syllabus in scam dynamics.


🛋 J. Jayalalithaa: From Amma Canteen to Crorepati Queen

A mature startup from Political Parties of Tamil Nadu was accused of amassing disproportionate assets worth over ₹66 crore:

  • 1,250 pairs of shoes
  • 10,500 sarees
  • 91 watches
  • Farmhouses, gold biscuits, bungalows

Trusted aide Sasikala convicted. Jayalalithaa, however, left behind a wealth profile that made Imelda Marcos look minimalist.

Verdict: Amma invested in silk, gold, and silence.


🪙 Arvind Kejriwal: The ₹20 Crore Simplicity Ceremony

A 2013 startup from Delhi political parties remained in government for over a decade. Aam Admi Party founder Arvind Kejriwal gave following speech at the time of his first victory. Remember to give similar speech after you win.

In 2024, Delhi CM Kejriwal’s daughter’s wedding reportedly cost ₹20 crore:

  • Designer lehengas
  • Imported orchids & gold cutlery
  • Vegan biryani for 5-star sensibilities

AAP said: “Private function. Public funds untouched.”
Public said: “Free bijli, expensive shaadi.”

Kejriwal: “She’s my daughter, not a mohalla clinic.”


🚀 Prashant Kishor: The Political Startup with Infinite Pitch Decks

After rebranding half of India’s netas, Prashant Kishor launched Jan Suraj™, a startup party in Bihar’ old political parties.

Tagline: “Neta nahi, Network hai.”

Model:

  • No MLAs yet. No manifesto.
  • Drone shots, padyatras, endless slide decks.
  • Plans IPO in 2029. Investment secured from nostalgia and PowerPoint.

📚 Dal-Con™ Index: ROI of Political Startups

ActionReturn on Investment
Register party₹10 lakh setup, ₹100 crore outcome
Join coalition7% vote share, 70% ministry share
Ministry controlUnlimited contracts to relatives
Income declaredZero tax. Full-page newspaper ad

🎨 Bonus: Party Name Generator

  1. Choose a Cause: Azadi / Kranti / Ram Rajya
  2. Add Suffix: Dal / Janta / Congress / Sena
  3. Final Touch: Local grievance / Festival / Weather event

Examples:

  • Ramrajya Kranti Dal (Cyclone-Relief Chapter)
  • Azadi Janta Morcha (Kite Flying Rights)
  • Vikas Nahi Mila Congress Dal (Youth Wing)

📣 Final Disclaimer:

Political Party Dinner

This post is satirical. All names, ministries, and cisterns are used for systemic critique. If offended, feel free to launch your own po

litical party and file an FIR under the Representation of Outrage Oranges Act, 1951.

Go forth. Launch your Samajwadi Azadi Kranti Jan Congress Dal.
If not for power, then for tax exemption and symbolic immortality.

 

Managing life with Strategic and Tactical decisions.

Strategic and Tactical Decisions:
Building a Secure Financial Future

Have you ever felt trapped in a cycle of financial stress, tackling one bill only to face another? Just as military generals plan campaigns to win wars while soldiers execute battlefield maneuvers, your financial life thrives on balancing strategic long-term goals with tactical daily actions. Understanding this interplay can transform how you navigate personal and financial decisions, leading to stability and growth.

What Are Strategic and Tactical Decisions?

Strategic decisions chart the course of your life. Like a general mapping out a multi-year campaign, these choices—such as pursuing higher education, buying a home, or starting a family—align with your values and long-term aspirations. They require careful thought, as they shape your future.

Tactical decisions, in contrast, are the immediate steps you take to support those goals, much like a soldier’s quick decisions in combat. These include budgeting for groceries, paying a utility bill, or choosing a cheaper commute. Tactical actions keep you on track day-to-day, but they’re most effective when guided by a strategic plan.

For example, consider Sarah, a 30-year-old teacher aiming to buy a home in five years (her strategic goal). Her tactical decisions—cutting subscription services and saving $200 monthly—directly support that vision, ensuring every dollar counts.

How Financial Pressure Disrupts the Balance

Financial stress often pushes people toward tactical decisions, like covering rent or fixing a car, at the expense of strategic planning. A 2023 Federal Reserve study found that 60% of Americans lack an emergency fund, leaving them vulnerable to reactive choices. This focus on short-term fixes can lead to:

  • Weakened Long-Term Goals: Prioritizing immediate needs over saving or investing can delay milestones like homeownership or retirement. For instance, skipping retirement contributions to pay off credit card debt might offer relief now but cost thousands in future wealth.
  • Increased Financial Risk: Quick fixes, like high-interest loans or speculative investments, can deepen debt. In 2024, the average credit card interest rate hit 21%, making borrowing a risky tactic without a repayment plan.
  • Vulnerability to Crises: Without strategic savings, unexpected costs—like medical bills or job loss—can spiral into financial chaos, trapping individuals in a reactive cycle.

While some, like low-income families saving for education despite tight budgets, manage strategic planning under pressure, many struggle to look beyond the present.

Balancing Strategy and Tactics for Financial Success

To break free from reactive cycles, integrate strategic vision with tactical precision. Think of it as a military operation: a general’s plan (strategy) succeeds only with well-executed maneuvers (tactics). Here’s how to align both in your financial life:

  • Set Clear Strategic Goals: Define objectives like “pay off $10,000 in student loans in three years” or “build a $5,000 emergency fund.” These guide your daily choices.
  • Use Tactical Actions Wisely: Adopt the 50/30/20 budgeting rule (50% needs, 30% wants, 20% savings/debt repayment) to manage expenses while saving. For example, redirect $50 monthly from dining out to your emergency fund.
  • Plan for Diverse Needs: Tailor strategies to your life stage. Young adults might prioritize loan repayment, while retirees focus on stretching fixed incomes. For instance, a freelancer might save irregularly but aim for a six-month emergency fund to account for income volatility.
  • Build Resilience: Save three to six months’ worth of expenses to cushion against shocks, reducing reliance on risky loans.
  • Evaluate Big Decisions: Before changing careers or moving, calculate impacts on income, benefits, and savings. For example, a higher-paying job might justify relocation costs if it accelerates debt repayment.

Conclusion: Take Control Today

Balancing strategic and tactical decisions empowers you to navigate financial challenges with confidence. While daily tactical choices keep life running smoothly, they must support a broader strategic vision to ensure lasting security. Whether you’re a student, parent, or retiree, aligning your financial decisions can unlock opportunities for growth and stability.

Start now: Set one strategic goal, like saving 1,000 for an emergency fund, and one tactical action, like cutting 25 weekly from discretionary spending. Review your progress monthly to stay on course. By blending strategy and tactics, you’ll build a financial future that’s both secure and fulfilling.

See also

How to deal or transact with wealthy people?

Not all Rich People would become Billionaires.

God to Gosh, a transition in Hollywood

🕊️Hollywood’s Godly Trajectory

From God to Gosh: How Network TV Turned Divinity into Decor

Two thousand years ago, humanity discovered “God” through divine revelation.

Two thousand years later, we discovered “gosh”—through CBS (Columbia Broadcasting System).

It’s been a long, strange journey.

📜 When “God” Meant Something

There was a time when saying “God” wasn’t just a word—it was an event.

In prayers, people called to Him.

In poetry, they praised Him.

In moments of fear or awe, they exclaimed His name—sometimes followed by words that were definitely not approved for family programming.

Then came Hollywood. And with it, a new trinity: Ratings, Regulations, and Risk Aversion.

🎬 Enter “Gosh”: The Divine’s Bland Cousin

Somewhere deep inside a television network office—wedged between a memo on cleavage angles and a list of disallowed words—someone nervously asked:

“Can we say ‘God’ on primetime? What if someone’s offended?”

And so, to keep audiences comfortable and advertisers calm, the Almighty was quietly swapped for His gentler cousin: “Gosh.”

He wasn’t born in a manger. He was born in a Standards & Practices memo.

📺 The Rise of Euphemisms

Let’s be clear: the U.S. government didn’t ban the word “God.”

The FCC (Federal Communications Commission), which regulates only broadcast television—like ABC, CBS, and NBC—never outlawed it. (It has no control over cable or streaming platforms like Netflix or HBO, which is why they can say pretty much anything.)

But network executives are a cautious species. Why risk a complaint from someone in Idaho or a boycott in Texas, when you can just replace:

– “Goddamn” with “darn,”

– “Oh my God” with “Oh my gosh,” and

– “Jesus!” with “Geez!”

Safer. Softer. Syndication-friendly. And thus, emotionally neutered language took center stage on American TV.

🕵️ Crime Shows: The Last Stand of “God”

Curiously, one genre held out the longest: the crime drama.

TV series like CSI (Crime Scene Investigation), NCIS (Naval Criminal Investigative Service), The Good Wife, House MD, Leverage, and Person of Interest had no problem using “God.”

Because when you’re standing over a corpse or grappling with moral collapse, “gosh” just doesn’t cut it.

But then came FBI—a show so squeaky clean, it could double as a hand sanitizer ad.

Gone was the weight of “God.” In slipped “gosh.” Quietly. Consistently. Like a linguistic cockroach.

🧠 The Mentalist: A God Among Gosh

Then there was The Mentalist—a TV drama about a former fake psychic turned crime consultant. Here, the word “God” wasn’t avoided; it was wrestled with.

Patrick Jane (the protagonist) mocked God. Lisbon (his partner) prayed to Him. The writers didn’t euphemize. They explored.

They let the tension between faith and doubt play out without tiptoeing around it. It wasn’t sanitized. It was sincere.

❓ So Why the Shift?

It wasn’t about theology.

It wasn’t about avoiding lawsuits.

It was about preemptive self-censorship—a kind of linguistic risk management.

No one forced networks to say “gosh.”

They just worried that saying “God” might lose them a sponsor or a syndication deal. So they hedged their bets. One emotional syllable at a time.

📡 Imagine If the FCC Regulated Blogs

Now imagine if these rules applied to websites or blogs.

You’d get pop-ups like:

“⚠️ This post contains three uses of ‘God,’ two ‘damns,’ and one existential sigh. Please replace with ‘gosh,’ ‘darn,’ and ‘network-safe ennui.’”

You’d have plugins like SanctifyPress—automatically converting divine language into polite neutralities. Every time you typed “God,” a compliance bot named Chad would flag it with a red underline and suggest:

“Try a less spiritually specific term.”

Welcome to Regulatory Fan Fiction, where even satire gets redacted.

🙏 Final Blessing

So next time you hear “gosh” in a crime show, remember:

It’s not just a word. It’s a market-tested, advertiser-approved, family-certified, FCC-friendly miracle. And somewhere, in a tired writers’ room, a screenwriter sighs…

deletes “God”…

types “gosh”…

and knows deep down:

The Almighty has just been networked.

Substack.com and it’s connection with Sam Altman.

Sam Altman and substack.com

The Interconnected Landscape:

Sam Altman, OpenAI, and Substack.com

Introduction

The interplay between Sam Altman, OpenAI, and Substack.com reflects a dynamic convergence of technology and independent publishing. It appears that Sam Altman’s influence on Substack is indirect, stemming from his leadership at Y Combinator during Substack’s formative years (2017–2018). OpenAI, under Altman’s leadership, engages directly with Substack through official publications and a technical integration of AI tools to enhance content creation. Additionally, Substack serves as a vibrant hub for independent discourse on OpenAI and AI, amplifying diverse perspectives.

AI and Independent Publishing

The digital era has fostered intersections between AI innovation and platforms like Substack.com, which empowers independent writers through a subscription-based newsletter model. Sam Altman, former President of Y Combinator (2014–2019) and current CEO of OpenAI, shapes both domains. OpenAI, a leader in AI research, drives advancements like ChatGPT, while Substack redefines publishing by enabling creators to connect directly with audiences. This article analyzes Altman’s indirect influence, OpenAI’s strategic engagement, and Substack’s role as an AI discourse hub, providing a clear, data-driven overview of their interconnections.

Section 1: Sam Altman’s Indirect Influence on Substack

Sam Altman’s impact on Substack is rooted in his role at Y Combinator (YC), not direct contributions.

Y Combinator’s Role in Substack’s Development

Substack, founded in 2017 by Chris Best, Hamish McKenzie, and Jairaj Sethi, joined YC’s Winter 2018 batch. During this period, Altman was YC’s President, overseeing strategic guidance for startups. Jared Friedman, Substack’s primary YC partner, provided direct mentorship, but Altman’s leadership shaped YC’s ecosystem, indirectly influencing Substack’s early strategy, funding (e.g., $2M seed round in 2018), and network access. This foundational support helped Substack scale to over 1 million paid subscriptions by 2023.

Altman’s Thought Leadership on Substack

While Altman does not publish on Substack, his ideas from YC’s “How to Start a Startup” lectures and productivity principles are widely discussed. Writers adapt his advice for Substack creators, as seen in posts like “How to Succeed With Your Substack (A Sam Altman Alteration)” (2024), which applies his fundraising strategies to newsletter growth. Discussions also cover his AI Startup School talks, reflecting his intellectual influence on Substack’s creator community.

Section 2: OpenAI’s Strategic Engagement with Substack

OpenAI directly engages Substack through official publications and AI tool integration.

Official OpenAI Publications

OpenAI operates two Substack newsletters: The Prompt: Insights from OpenAI Global Affairs (launched 2022), which clarifies AI’s societal impact for policymakers and the public, and ChatGPT for Education (launched 2023), offering resources for educators using Custom GPTs. These publications leverage Substack’s direct-to-audience model to control OpenAI’s narrative, bypassing traditional media.

AI Integration with Substack

In 2024, OpenAI introduced a “seamless integration” of its language models into Substack, enabling writers to use AI for drafting, editing, and optimizing content. This enhances creator efficiency and positions Substack as a tech-forward platform. However, Substack’s uncensored nature raises concerns about AI-generated misinformation, necessitating potential moderation policies.

Section 3: Substack as a Hub for AI Discourse

Substack hosts extensive independent commentary on OpenAI and AI, reflecting its role as a key platform for AI journalism.

Coverage of OpenAI and Sam Altman

AI-focused Substacks like Understanding AI by Timothy B. Lee and Import AI by Jack Clark frequently analyze OpenAI’s decisions, such as the 2023 board coup and ChatGPT Pro’s $200/month pricing. These discussions offer critical perspectives, contrasting with mainstream media’s broader narratives.

Substack’s Role in Independent AI Journalism

Substack’s open platform supports newsletters like The AI Break (daily) and AI Policy Bulletin (bi-weekly), covering technical, social, and policy aspects of AI. This diversity fosters nuanced debates about OpenAI’s influence, empowering experts and independent voices to shape AI narratives.

Consolidated Reference Table

The following table summarizes key connections between Sam Altman, OpenAI, and Substack, addressing the original article’s lack of a comprehensive reference.

EntityType of EngagementDetailsKey Impact/ThemeDate (Approx.)Source
Sam AltmanIndirect Influence (YC)Leadership during Substack’s YC Winter 2018 batchShaped Substack’s early strategy and growth2017–2018YC records, Substack funding announcements
Sam AltmanThought LeadershipIdeas from “How to Start a Startup” adapted in posts like “How to Succeed With Your Substack”Influences Substack creators’ strategies2020–2024Substack posts (e.g., Za_Mad_Scientist, 2024)
OpenAIOfficial PublicationThe Prompt: Insights from OpenAI Global AffairsClarifies AI’s societal impact2022–presentOpenAI Substack
OpenAIOfficial PublicationChatGPT for EducationProvides educational AI resources2023–presentOpenAI Substack
OpenAITechnical IntegrationAI language model integration for content creationEnhances creator efficiency, raises moderation concerns2024OpenAI announcement
SubstackAI DiscourseNewsletters like Understanding AI, Import AICritical analysis of OpenAI and AI trends2020–2025Substack publications

Conclusion and Future Outlook

Sam Altman’s indirect influence through YC, OpenAI’s strategic publications and AI integration, and Substack’s role as an AI discourse hub highlight a symbiotic relationship. OpenAI benefits from direct communication and expanded AI tool adoption, while Substack gains advanced tools and credibility as an AI commentary platform. However, challenges like AI-generated misinformation require Substack to balance its uncensored ethos with responsible content oversight.

Looking ahead, Substack’s AI content will likely grow, driven by OpenAI’s tools and increasing creator adoption. This could create a feedback loop, with Substack data refining AI models and AI enhancing content creation, solidifying Substack’s role as a critical space for AI discourse.

Silicon Valley: Racism and Colonialism to Gaslighting Contribution of Bharat

The Tech Paradox:

Racism in the Age of Indian Innovation

Racism is invisible but omnipresent in USA. In the glittering campuses of Silicon Valley and the boardrooms of global tech giants, Indian minds have been pivotal in architecting the digital future. From Sundar Pichai at Google to Arvind Krishna at IBM, and thousands of anonymous engineers powering codebases and cloud networks, Indian talent is the invisible infrastructure of global tech. Yet, racism—sometimes subtle, sometimes glaring—is a persistent undertone that shadows these contributions.

The paradox has moved beyond quiet murmurs into the open. During Sam Altman’s 2023 visit to India, the prominent AI pioneer and OpenAI co-founder made an offhand, stereotypical comment regarding India’s potential role in artificial intelligence. This wasn’t merely a slip of the tongue—it exposed an underlying bias. While Altman subsequently issued an apology saying that he was taken out of context, the harm had already been inflicted. It highlighted a troubling question: If this is how leaders of the AI revolution think aloud in public, what remains unsaid behind closed doors?

The irony couldn’t be starker. India is not just another participant in the tech race—it is arguably the backbone. Consider this:

  • Over 4 million Indian-origin professionals work in the global tech industry, from entry-level coding jobs to C-suite leadership.
  • Nearly 70% of H-1B visas in the U.S. go to Indian nationals.
  • Indian-origin researchers and scientists are at the forefront of AI, quantum computing, cybersecurity, and space tech.
  • India’s Unified Payments Interface (UPI) is now operating in Dubai, Singapore, France, and beyond—a soft power projection of public digital infrastructure unmatched even by Western nations.

And yet, the average Indian engineer in the West still encounters bias, microaggressions, and sometimes outright discrimination. This is not just anecdotal—it’s systemic. Universities have reported incidents of bullying and isolation of Indian students. In workplaces, Indians are often praised for their “work ethic” but rarely considered for leadership unless they erase all traces of their accent, culture, or dissent.

This is not new. It’s colonial residue.

From Colonial Racism to Corporate Gaslighting

In colonial times, the British openly displayed signs in parks and clubs: “Dogs and Indians Not Allowed.” Today, those signs have vanished, but their spirit lingers. The gatekeeping is now done in softer fonts—in hiring panels, venture capital meetings, and editorial boards. The narrative has shifted from overt exclusion to polite sidelining. “We love your hard work—but leadership requires cultural alignment.”

It’s not just personal slights. The economic history is damning:

  • After World War II, the UK owed India £1.16 billion in sterling balances—India’s share of war contributions. That debt, roughly 10% of India’s GDP, was never fully honored.
  • India had no Marshall Plan. Unlike Europe, rebuilt with U.S. aid after the war, India faced a series of crises—famines, communal riots, and partition—without any international help.
  • Instead, it was sanctioned repeatedly by the West—for nuclear tests, for aligning with the Soviet bloc, for defending its borders. Even today, despite being a democracy of 1.4 billion, India is lectured on human rights while arms are sold to regimes with far worse records.

No Peace Dividend—Yet Here We Are

Unlike post-war Europe or post-Cold War Eastern Europe, India never got a peace dividend. Instead, it faced:

  • Wars imposed by Pakistan, a U.S. ally.
  • Betrayal by China, whom India supported diplomatically in the early years.
  • Constant pressure to devalue its currency and open its markets before it was ready.

Despite this, India has:

  • Launched a world-class Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) stack (UPI, Aadhaar, DigiLocker).
  • Built ISRO, sending missions to the Moon and Mars on a shoestring budget.
  • Provided cheap, high-quality STEM education at scale.
  • Created the world’s largest democracy with continuous elections, without military coups.

“India” as a Slur: Rediscovering Bharat

The resurgence of the name “Bharat” in diplomatic forums—from G-20 summits to bilateral visits like that to France in 2023—is not merely a cultural assertion but a historical correction. While official explanations trace “India” to the Indus River, older British-era dictionaries reveal the term Indian was often used to connote uncivilised, exotic, or savage populations. It was a label constructed by colonizers who wanted to frame the subcontinent as backward and passive—a land needing “civilising.”

Signs that read “Dogs and Indians not allowed” were not innocent slippages of language; they were ideologically constructed racial hierarchies, and “India” was a useful term to enforce them. “Bharat,” on the other hand, is indigenous, constitutional (Article 1: “India, that is Bharat…”), and civilisational—one of the few names that predates both colonialism and even Abrahamic religions.

The reclaiming of “Bharat” is not about erasing the past but rejecting the slurs embedded in it.

Historical Evidence Supporting “India” as a Slur:

  • Webster’s 1828 Dictionary:

    “Indian: Pertaining to India or its people, who are generally considered to be of darker complexion and inferior civilization.”

  • Oxford English Dictionary (early editions):

    “Indian: Used sometimes contemptuously to refer to natives of the East Indies, especially as a class seen to require civilising influence.”

  • James Mill, History of British India (1817):

    “The Hindus are credulous and weak… their intellect inferior… their civilization not real but illusory.”

  • Thomas Macaulay, Minute on Indian Education (1835):

    “A single shelf of a good European library is worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia.”

  • Colonial Signage:

    “No Dogs or Indians Allowed” — a phrase seen across clubs, parks, and railways in colonial India.

These were not isolated instances but part of a larger ideological framework in which “India” was more than a name—it was a colonial slur backed by policy, prejudice, and pedagogy.

Accent Translators in the Oval Office

In a revealing moment in 2025, the U.S. President reportedly used an accent translator—a tool or interpreter that modifies spoken English to an American accent—during press interactions, allegedly in scenarios where strong foreign accents made comprehension for the President difficult. Mercifully the executive orders of 2025 focused on language (making English the official language) but did not mandate or mention translators whose sole role is to render English in an American accent

In 2025 itself the President Trump complimented the UK Prime Minister on his accent. He said ““What a beautiful accent. I would have been president 20 years ago if I had that accent.” The remark was met with laughter from the audience and appears in multiple official transcripts, including the official White House transcript released by the Office of Communications.

This was not just about linguistics—it was a projection of cultural hierarchy. It showed how language, tone, and delivery are still used to mark who belongs in the room and who must be ‘interpreted.’

Modern-Day Sanctions: Economic Bullying in a Globalised World

The colonial playbook may be gone, but its tactics live on in economic coercion. In August 2025, the United States imposed a 25% tariff on Indian goods— and a week later an additional 25% as a punishment for India’s continued oil trade with Russia. This, despite the fact that the USA and Europe themselves have not stopped business with Russia, with the U.S. importing $17.5 billion worth of goods like palladium, uranium, and fertilizers from Russia in 2024. India’s Ministry of Commerce issued a detailed press release rebutting the move, pointing to the blatant double standards and emphasizing that India’s oil imports are driven by market factors to ensure energy security for its 1.4 billion people.

This is not just economic policy—it’s a slur in tariff form. Another version of the old refrain: “You bloody Indian.” A reminder that rules-based order often means “rules for you, exceptions for us.”

Conclusion: Tech Without Justice Is Just Another Empire

The West’s technological success has been built significantly on Indian intellectual capital—developers coding applications, engineers testing systems, researchers training AI models. Yet when discussions turn to acknowledgment, collaboration as equals, or fair representation, the conversation often becomes evasive. This isn’t about harboring grievances or playing victim; it’s about demanding historical honesty and contemporary fairness.

India stands as the sole ancient civilization that remains vibrantly alive—not preserved in archaeological sites or museum displays, but actively shaping the future through cutting-edge technology, space exploration, digital innovation, and democratic governance. This living legacy commands respect not merely when it serves others’ interests, but especially when it challenges comfortable assumptions. Because if there’s anything more formidable than artificial intelligence, it’s dignity rooted in millennia of contribution and continuity.

 

When Dexter writes to Rahul Gandhi.

Dexter Morgan’s suggestions for Rahul Gandhi

CLASSIFIED: Behavioral Dossier on Mr. Rahul Gandhi
Compiled by: Dexter Morgan, Forensic Analyst (Consultant to the Shadow Operations Desk)
Intended Circulation: Senior Strategy Committee, Congress Party Leadership
Timestamp: Concealed; Applicability—Ongoing


The Enigma Smile Protocol

Mr. Rahul Gandhi’s smile persists as his tactical shield, enigmatic yet inviting. It occupies a spectral threshold: too genuine to provoke suspicion, too unreadable to allow intrusion. Such a smile is an intelligence asset—a cipher, onto which onlookers project hopes and anxieties. In field terms: maintaining a smile with interpretive elasticity generates loyalty from some, intrigue from many, and certainty from none—a rare balance in the high-noise corridors of electioneering.

Stillness as Psychological Warfare

Stillness, properly deployed, compels adversaries to reveal themselves. Analysts note that Mr. Rahul Gandhi’s subtle reticence—his measured gestures, the calculated economy of his posture—amplifies his presence far beyond words. Opponents, disoriented by the lack of excessive movement or reveals, tend to underestimate strategic depth; supporters interpret such control as gravitas. Much like a crime scene’s conspicuous absence of evidence, his composure generates unfillable gaps—prompting questions, never closure.

The Precision Gaze Matrix

The ‘three seconds direct, two seconds philosophical’ eye contact matrix is strategic ambiguity at its finest. Sustained gaze draws focus, while the shift to abstraction hints at vision—an unspoken suggestion that larger frameworks are always under review. Used correctly, this technique blurs the boundary between introspection and inscrutability, creating an impression of ongoing calculation, never fully disclosed.

Deploying Speech as Absorptive Camouflage

In line with best practices from intelligence psychology, Mr. Gandhi’s rhetorical device—strategic generalities such as “change must come” or “the people must be heard”—functions as semantic camouflage. Stakeholders interpret these phrases in accordance with their own priorities. This ‘echo chamber’ effect disperses risk of commitment while deepening audience investment. Such language keeps targets engaged, reduces vulnerability to direct counter-argument, and allows dynamic repositioning as circumstances shift.

The Value of Unpredictable Signals

Case file update: the “Flying Kiss Protocol”—considered irregular in legislative dogfights—serves as a pressure-release mechanism and brand signature. When enacted sparingly, such gestures disrupt conventional expectations, confounding opponents and recalibrating public discourse. Field recommendation: preserve this unpredictability, but regulate its frequency. Power lies in novelty, not routine.

Final Assessment—The Utility of Mystery

In high-stakes public arenas, clarity poses risk. History favours those figures who induce interpretation rather than exhaustive understanding. As operational lessons from behavioural profiling show, the greatest leverage comes from the gaps—what is unspoken, unexplained, unresolved. Mr. Gandhi’s ungraspable persona, incubated by these protocols, continually shapes narratives instead of submitting to them. Interpretation becomes the asset; ambiguity the advantage.

End of Briefing: Dossier to be reviewed quarterly.

(Analyst’s note: Maintain operational mystery. Interpretations multiply in darkness.)

Property Dealer in Oval office

The Token Money Diplomacy

A Property Dealer’s Guide to International Relations:

In Mumbai’s bustling property markets, Tappu bhai has perfected the art of customer management. It starts innocently enough. 

“Sir, just give ₹5,000 token money,” he says, leaning back in his luxury revolving chair in his plush office. “Fully refundable registration fee to be adjusted in my brokerage! This shows you’re serious, and I’ll find you the perfect property.”

The customer pays. Within a week: “Sir, that property got sold to someone else. But I have something even better! Just ₹2,500 more for documentation fees.”

Another payment. Another week: “Small complication with the paperwork, sir. Another ₹3,000 for municipal clearance, then we’re completely done.”

By month three, the customer realizes an uncomfortable truth: they’re not buying property. They’re funding Tappu bhai’s chai, his phone bills, and probably his son’s wedding. One “small fee” at a time. Nobody expects promises to be kept, terms to remain unchanged, or principles to survive the next client meeting. Time to move to a better property dealer, possibly a scrupulous one.

The Oval Office Property Exchange

Somewhere in Washington, this business model has found new management.

Phase 1 – The Token:
“India, just remove all tariffs on American goods. Totally reciprocal! This shows you’re serious about our partnership.”

Phase 2 – The Documentation Fee:
“Excellent! Now about that Russian oil situation… that needs to stop. Buy our oil.  It’s affecting our deal.”
Sir You had told us to buy Russian Oil. Mr. Garlic Chutney said it on TV. “Oh..I have to check for details. But you stop that.”

Phase 3 – The Clearance Fee:
“Actually, your IT companies are taking American jobs. We’ll need new restrictions.”

Phase 4 – The Processing Fee:
“Your defense deals with France? That’s problematic for our partnership. Buy American instead.”

Phase 5 – The Realization:
The customer—sorry, ally—discovers they’re not getting partnership. They’re funding someone else’s campaign promises, one concession at a time.

Professional Standards

The difference between Tappu bhai and his international counterpart? Professional reputation.

Last month, Tappu bhai was sharing a beer with a client when his maternal uncle dropped by. Offered a drink, the uncle declined: “In the middle of the day?”

“So what,” Tappu replied, “we’re drinking too.”

His uncle shrugged: “Why would you be concerned? You’re just a property dealer.” (In Punjabi he spoke: Twada ki hai, tusi te property dealer ho)

Even family members don’t expect moral consistency from property dealers. The job already comes with flexible standards for honesty, reliability — and whatever’s left of a conscience.

The tragedy isn’t that the Oval Office now operates like a property dealer. The tragedy is that it has earned the same reputation:

Naturally, we all understand that promises are made to be broken, terms are made to be rewritten, and principles are made to be sacrificed—usually by the next client meeting.

The Global Property Portfolio

Today’s diplomatic catalog reads like Tappu bhai’s listings:

  • Same property, different pitch: American energy is “freedom fuel” to India, “job creator” to Texas, “strategic necessity” to Europe
  • Artificial urgency: “Limited time offer” changes daily based on tweet schedule
  • Moving goalposts: Yesterday’s handshake becomes today’s “renegotiation opportunity”
  • Token fee psychology: Once you pay the first “small” concession, each subsequent demand feels reasonable

The only difference? Tappu bhai works from a 200-square-foot office. The new management has considerably more space.

Market Reputation

In property circles, everyone knows the rule: Once you pay token money, you’re committed to the cycle. The dealer won’t find you property—he’ll find you reasons to pay more.

In diplomatic circles, the same rule now applies. Pay the tariff-removal token, and discover it was just the entry fee. The real costs come later, itemized as “strategic partnership maintenance charges.”

Tappu bhai’s uncle had it right. When someone’s professional reputation precedes their promises, why be concerned about their principles?

The difference is that most property dealers can only damage individual bank accounts of clients. But politicians play with global payment systems like toys — crashing markets, sinking businesses, and stealing food from the mouths of the marginalised.

© 2025 – A satirical commentary on modern diplomatic practices

Kite game between India and USA

The Art of Diplomatic Kite Fighting:
How India Mastered the Ancient Game

A 26-Year Strategic Chess Game Disguised as Humility

It is the kite flying season in India but picture this: It’s Raksha Bandhan in New Delhi, but the rains have grounded all the kites. The rooftops that should be alive with colorful paper diamonds dancing in the wind are empty and wet. But perhaps that’s fitting, because the most spectacular kite fight of our times isn’t happening in the Delhi sky—it’s been playing out on the global stage for over two decades, and most of the world only just realized the game was on.

“It may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal,”

(An observation by Henry Kissinger)

The Master’s Opening Move (1998)

Every kite fighter knows the secret: let your opponent think you’re just enjoying a casual flight while you’re actually positioning for the kill. In 1998, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee came to power, the world saw India’s nuclear tests and thought they understood the move. What they missed were the two quiet revolutions that would reshape everything.

First, Vajpayee began building India’s naval manufacturing from scratch—shipyards, aircraft carriers, even submarines. While everyone focused on the nuclear spectacle, India was quietly ensuring it could never again be held hostage by foreign naval suppliers. No more depending on others for spare parts or facing sanctions that could cripple your fleet.

But the second move was pure genius, invisible to almost everyone: the appointment of shikshamitras—education friends—in schools across India. While the world’s strategic analysts were counting warheads and naval vessels, Vajpayee was investing in something far more powerful: the minds of an entire generation. Those children who learned basic literacy through shikshamitras in 1998 are the adults using smartphones and digital payments today. Without that foundation, Modi’s Digital India would have been impossible.

And then, the masterstroke of appearing humble: Vajpayee cozied up to the USA through further liberalization. The Americans saw the economic opening and thought, “Perfect, India is integrating into our system.” They never realized they were providing the capital and technology India needed to build its independence.

The Stalled Decade (2004-2014)

Every chess game has moments where players lose sight of the bigger picture. The UPA years were India’s lost decade—not economically, but strategically. The Congress-led government essentially put Vajpayee’s long-term vision on pause, becoming too comfortable with the “junior partner” role rather than building independent power. It also killed the small scale industries by opening the doors for Chinese products without any reciprocation.

It’s like having a brilliant kite fighting position and then… doing nothing with it for ten years. The pieces were on the board, but nobody was playing the game.

The Acceleration (2014-2024)

When Modi returned in 2014, he didn’t start from scratch—he picked up Vajpayee’s chess game exactly where it had been left off. But now the conditions were perfect:

The shikshamitras had done their work. India had hundreds of millions of people who could read, write, and operate digital technology. The foundation was there for the great leapfrogging that followed.

Just as India jumped from no phones to smartphones for everyone, bypassing landlines entirely, the defense sector leapfrogged decades of gradual development. No more importing Bofors guns with their corruption scandals and foreign dependencies. Indigenous BrahMos missiles, Akash air defense systems, even India’s own answer to the American Humvee.

And when the Kargil conflict showed how dangerous it was to depend on others’ GPS systems—remember, the US denied GPS access to India while reportedly providing it to Pakistan—India built NavIC, its own navigation system. Never again would Indian forces be blinded during crucial moments.

The Kite Fighting Technique

Here’s where the kite fighting analogy becomes perfect. Every good kite fighter knows the classic technique:

  1. Let loose the kite – appear casual, let it fly high and far
  2. Position above your opponent’s thread – gain the crucial advantage
  3. Swift, sharp pull back – the moment of truth, speed is everything

Modi executed this flawlessly on the global stage. Years of appearing humble, praising Biden, Trump, whoever was in power. Everyone thought: “Modi is so accommodating, how can he refuse anything?” The world saw a deferential leader who would always be compliant.

But while appearing humble, India was gaining altitude—building economic strength, defense capabilities, strategic partnerships. The “Swift pull back” came when India suddenly wasn’t the accommodating partner everyone expected. Instead of being the compliant kite flying below, India started asserting its own interests decisively.

The genius is that opponents often don’t realize what’s happening until their string is cut.

The Domestic Foundation

None of this would have worked without genuine popular support. Modi’s welfare programs—subsidized housing for over ten million families, free food distribution, free healthcare for the poor—created an unshakeable domestic base that external pressure couldn’t penetrate.

This wasn’t just politics; it was strategic necessity. When the CIA tried regime change operations through the farmer protests and Shaheen Bagh demonstrations, using the classic color revolution playbook, Modi’s genuine mass support meant these movements couldn’t gain the critical momentum needed to topple governments.

The 2024 election victory was the final confirmation: the regime change strategy had failed completely.

The Global Chessboard Today

By 2024, the pieces were perfectly positioned. India’s COVID diplomacy—sending vaccines and medical aid to the Global South when the West was hoarding—created the same kind of gratitude and alignment that America built with the Marshall Plan post-WWII. Except India’s version was more powerful because it came from one developing country helping others, not a rich power helping devastated allies.

The results speak for themselves:

  • Putin, Xi, and Lula all backing Modi
  • Spain and Switzerland canceling F-35 orders after Trump’s tariffs
  • France, even under leftist leadership, supporting strategic autonomy
  • Australia and UK (Five Eyes countries!) signing FTAs with India
  • The Gulf becoming India’s largest trading partner
  • Both India and EU as observers in mBridge, the possible alternative to SWIFT
  • Even Indonesia’s president proudly declaring his Indian DNA

When Trump Forced the Hand

USA was not happy when India hit Kirana Hills which had housed it’s nuclear assets and frantic behind the scene pat on Pakistan ensured a smooth surrender for Trump to claim Noble Prize. Alas, Modi denied that opportunity in full public glare on the floor of Parliament.

However the real turning point came when Trump himself moved the goalposts. A mini-FTA deal had actually been reached between India and the USA—carefully crafted to keep American agricultural products out. This wasn’t protectionism; it was civilizational necessity.

American genetically modified food products simply lack the taste that Indian consumers expect. More critically, milk is part of morning prayer rituals for nearly a billion Indians. Milk from cows fed with non-vegetarian feed is religiously unacceptable. Even if Modi wanted to accept such imports, his government would be finished—some red lines cannot be crossed, no matter the economic pressure.

But Trump refused this carefully negotiated compromise. He moved the goalposts and insisted that agricultural products must be made duty-free imports into India. In essence, he demanded that Modi commit political suicide for a trade deal.

That was the moment the kite strings were truly positioned for cutting. Trump announced 25% tariff. Modi remained unmoved. No call. No rapprochements. Tariff raised to 50%. Still no reply.

A 30 trillion economy imposed tariff so high to bar import over an balance of payment of 41 billion on a 4 trillion economy. No flutter from the former colony of UK. Stoic silence was the only reply. Trump escalated further and announced there would not be any negotiations with India. Still no reply.

The Moment of Recognition

Yesterday, India’s defense ministry issued a statement without any triggering news report: they haven’t canceled any trade deals with the USA. The very act of denying something unprompted sent the clearest message possible: “We have that capability, we’ve been thinking about it, and it remains an active option.”

Airlines of India have already placed orders for over 500 Boeing Aircraft. These include Air India and Akasa Airlines. The value of these would be over 100 billions. India cancelled just one order for P8 reconnaissance aircraft from Boeing, signalling that more could follow. In fact the India could just impose reciprocal tariff of 50% on the import and deal would go to Airbus.

It’s like a kite fighter positioning their manja, (glass-coated thread) right above an opponent’s thread and casually mentioning, “Oh, by the way, I’m not planning to cut anything today.” When nobody even asked.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu is tweeting about wanting to visit India to help resolve US tensions. Even traditionally US-aligned countries are recognizing they need to hedge for the post-American-hegemony world.

And here’s a detail most people don’t know: India has a very old treaty with Israel that includes commitments aggression against Israel, that no other country has received from India—the only such arrangement in Indian diplomatic history. Subramanian Swamy revealed this years ago, and significantly, no one ever denied it. In diplomacy, that silence speaks volumes. That secret treaty puts India and Israel in special relationship. Both have never hesitated to make supplies in times of war faced by other.

The Tactical vs Strategic

The fundamental difference is now clear. Trump is a tactical player—he sees an opponent’s kite and immediately tries to cut it with aggressive moves, tariffs, threats. Quick wins, immediate confrontations.

Modi and his coalition are strategic players—they think in decades, not news cycles. They set up positions quietly, build alliances methodically, and wait for the perfect moment to execute.

When P. Chidambaram former Finance Minister of India, set a target of reaching a $4 trillion economy by 2043, he was thinking conventionally—linear growth, traditional development patterns. Modi’s team achieved it 19 years early because they understood the strategic pieces were already in place, waiting to be activated.

The Endgame

Today, we’re witnessing the climax of a 26-year strategic masterpiece. The “humble kite” that spent decades appearing accommodating while building strength is now positioned above everyone else’s strings.

Countries that thought they could control India through defense dependencies, economic pressure, or political interference are discovering their traditional tools don’t work anymore. When your opponent has indigenous defense manufacturing, alternative payment systems, genuine popular support, and strategic partnerships across multiple blocs, the old playbook becomes useless.

The chess game that began in 1998 has reached its decisive moment. And just like in kite fighting, by the time you realize you’re being outmaneuvered, your string is already being cut.

The monsoon rains may have grounded the kites over Delhi today, but the most important kite fight in modern geopolitics is soaring high above us all—and India is holding the winning string.

The art of kite fighting, whether with paper and manja or nations and treaties, remains the same: patience, positioning, and knowing exactly when to make your move.

Problem of Colonial attitudes in Hospitality

Dress Code in Hospitality

The Colonial Table Reserves the Right to Exclude:

Dress Codes, Speech Codes, and the Postcolonial Banquet

In the age-old Indian hospitality scene, where butter chicken meets British binders, a curious phenomenon flourishes—one serving up colonial hangovers not on plates but in protocols. Welcome to the layered performance of power scripted by accents, attire, and playlists, where even your salwar-kurta might be the uninvited guest.

 The Gatekeepers’ New Clothes: Dress Codes as Colonial Echoes

Long gone are blunt signs declaring, “Dogs and Indians not allowed.” Instead, a new breed of gatekeepers brandish the “Dress Code Enforced” disclaimer like a velvet whip.

Recently, at a shining restaurant in Delhi’s Pitampura—“Tubata”—a couple faced this very modern gatekeeping. The woman, enveloped in the humble yet dignified salwar-kurta, was asked to stay out while patrons parading revealing Western attire sailed past unchallenged. The man’s recorded protest echoed through social media: “They insulted Indian culture and disrespected a woman.” Delhi’s Chief Minister, Rekha Gupta, promptly ordered a probe, calling the act “unacceptable.” The restaurant swiftly apologized, promising no further ethnic-wear exclusions, even offering Raksha Bandhan discounts for the culturally attired.

This incident punctuates a persistent colonial script: Western aesthetics remain the gatekeepers’ gold standard, while Indian attire is either “off-brand” or “cultural contraband”—at best a tolerated exception, and at worst a trigger for exclusion.

The Missi Roti Doctrine: Culinary Citizenship or Cultural Contraband?

Our satirical memoir hails from Delhi’s 1992 Hotel Meridian, where a father-son duo navigates the same colonial playbook. Draped in kurta-pajama and speaking impeccable Queen’s English, the father’s linguistic prowess becomes the ticket past velvet ropes that shun his ethnic silhouette.

They ordered and were served baked vegetable in Continental Restaurant. Missi Roti was brought in from Desi restaurant “Dawat”. Now past the “dress code” barrier, the hospitality knew no bounds in service.

This is The Missi Roti Exception: where ethnic wear is grudgingly tolerated only when paired with elite English and implied power. “He must be a NETA,” another host muttered approvingly, recognizing that power language overrides dress code.

Doctrine NameThe Missi Roti Exception
DefinitionEthnic wear tolerated only if paired with elite English and status.
Trigger Phrase“He must be a NETA.”
Cultural OverrideFluent English trumps dress code.
Culinary OutcomeMissi roti served alongside English soufflé.
Institutional LogicGatekeeping collapses when power is performed.
Satirical DiagnosisAesthetic profiling beaten by linguistic dominance.

Entry to Delhi’s posh restaurants is less about what one wears, more about who one sounds like. The kurta-pajama farmer? Denied. The kurta-pajama fluent English speaker? Revered. The three-piece-suited poet? Ignored. The suit beside a powerful political patron? Admitted.

Waiters Speak Empire: The Accent, The Apology, The Tip

Inside, colonial service scripts play out with unsettling precision. The waiter’s accent is neutralized, rehearsed—the colonial English, engineered not to serve but to soothe imagined white patrons, and signal class compliance to domestic elites. “Sir,” “Madam,” and scripted apologies rain down like perfunctory prayers, ritualizing guilt and servitude.

Tipping becomes less transaction, more tribute. Digital tipping interfaces peppered with folded hands and “thank you, kind sir” pop-ups encode colonial hierarchies into modern UX.

Menus and Music: Fusion or Confusion?

Menus blur regional identities into bland continental or ‘oriental’ catch-alls. “North Indian” and “South Indian” clustered like buffet options for Buckingham Palace, regional gems erased unless trendy. Playlists default to Ed Sheeran in a Rajasthani thali house—because if empire is gone, its Spotify algorithm lingers.

From Incident to Institution: The Contemporary Stakes

The Tubata incident surfaced the sharp edges of these coded hierarchies. As Indian attire clashed with a Westernized restaurant ethos, the outrage was swift, but the underlying bacterial colonial mindset remains endemic. Public pressure forced a reversal, but how many deny entry silently, coded by attire, accent, or accentless attire?

Final Pour: Decolonize The Script, Not Just The Spice

Indian hospitality’s true revolution lies not in spices or soufflé finesse, but in tearing down colonial scripts—from dress codes to dialogue—reclaiming spaces for cultural pride, linguistic plurality, and genuine inclusivity.

So, next time you hear “May I take your order, sir?” with clipped British cadence, or see a “Dress Code Enforced” sign quietly excluding heritage, remember: the table is set, but the performance needs rewriting. Otherwise, every meal is a reenactment. Every salwar-kurta an act of subtle defiance.

And every “sir” is a whisper from the past.