It is time to call out bluff on this nonsense that West/America is invested in India’s rise. Or to put it more palatably as DC think tankers do ‘America wants India to rise and be successful because why wouldn’t they’. Let’s analyze this in detail.

Which countries has America ‘allowed’ to rise? China?Because they love Chinese? No.Because at one point they thought it was in their interest to send all manufacturing along with pollutants to China so that little Jack and Little Jill in Montana and Nebraska can breathe clean air
Of course China was allowed in WTO. Of course China was given a free pass on ‘human rights’ as defined by the US. Of course China was a friend. Well that lasted till the dragon actually started breathing fire and then America did not know what to do.
No DC think tank will write what a disaster it was to allow China to rise even when China never gave up on economic imperialism/acquisition of territory.Besides when China was allowed to rise & was a direct threat to India why did we not read about strengthening Indian democracy
So it is time to reject the BS that America has altruistic interests in any Country’s rise.Of course it doesn’t. And why should it?Foreign Policy is governed by national interests. Charity has no place in Foreign Policy. I mean it does but again if motivated by national interests
So coming back to the original question. Which countries has America ‘allowed’ to rise? Or let’s keep DC circuit happy- Rise of which countries has been ‘facilitated’ by America? :) The answer is - Either American military outposts or Larger market for America’s goods.Fair enough
India is an anomaly for America.Even when India was not as stable politically or economically,it refused to be America’s military outpost.And as far as economic cooperation is concerned, India (that was colonized by a trading company)has been cautious & has asked for reciprocity
Of course America does not like this. They want India to fall in ‘ally or enemy’ trap. India steadfastly has refused. America cannot dismiss India because well India is too big to be ignored and India now is a rising economic superpower.
So what can America do now to bully India into submission? Their familiar trope of being the vanguards of democracy and human rights. Remember America was exporting democracy to Middle East? What happened to that? Well.. Never mind :)
So the point here is America may perhaps want to facilitate India’s rise, but at what cost to India? India will rise because her people are fueled by ambition and desire to rise. India will also rise because it has a vibrant democracy that has all the safeguards built in.
It is in America’s interest to reach out to India as much as it is in India’s interests to cooperate with America. Net Net America is a positive force in the world. But this relation has to be of equals.This game of good cop, bad cop where DC think tankers are bad cops is amusing
India is equally worried of health of American democracy given the race riots and Capitol insurrection. But India trusts American institutions. As a fellow democratic nation, America should learn to trust India’s institutions and Indian people who have the power of vote.
Let this be a relationship of mutual respect and trust. It is okay to play games with your allies and enemies but with a vibrant and civilizational democracy like India, America should reset her Foreign Policy paradigm. Good for the US, India and rest of the planet - End.

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
MASTER THREAD on Short Strangles.

Curated the best tweets from the best traders who are exceptional at managing strangles.

• Positional Strangles
• Intraday Strangles
• Position Sizing
• How to do Adjustments
• Plenty of Examples
• When to avoid
• Exit Criteria

How to sell Strangles in weekly expiry as explained by boss himself. @Mitesh_Engr

• When to sell
• How to do Adjustments
• Exit


Beautiful explanation on positional option selling by @Mitesh_Engr
Sir on how to sell low premium strangles yourself without paying anyone. This is a free mini course in


1st Live example of managing a strangle by Mitesh Sir. @Mitesh_Engr

• Sold Strangles 20% cap used
• Added 20% cap more when in profit
• Booked profitable leg and rolled up
• Kept rolling up profitable leg
• Booked loss in calls
• Sold only


2nd example by @Mitesh_Engr Sir on converting a directional trade into strangles. Option Sellers can use this for consistent profit.

• Identified a reversal and sold puts

• Puts decayed a lot

• When achieved 2% profit through puts then sold
राम-रावण युद्ध समाप्त हो चुका था। जगत को त्रास देने वाला रावण अपने कुटुम्ब सहित नष्ट हो चुका था।श्रीराम का राज्याभिषेक हुआ और अयोध्या नरेश श्री राम के नेतृत्व में चारों दिशाओं में शन्ति थी।
अंगद को विदा करते समय राम रो पड़े थे ।हनुमान को विदा करने की शक्ति तो राम में थी ही नहीं ।


माता सीता भी हनुमान को पुत्रवत मानती थी। अत: हनुमान अयोध्या में ही रह गए ।राम दिनभर दरबार में, शासन व्यवस्था में व्यस्त रहते थे। संध्या को जब शासकीय कार्यों में छूट मिलती तो गुरु और माताओं का कुशल-मंगल पूछ अपने कक्ष में जाते थे। परंतु हनुमान जी हमेशा उनके पीछे-पीछे ही रहते थे ।


उनकी उपस्थिति में ही सारा परिवार बहुत देर तक जी भर बातें करता ।फिर भरत को ध्यान आया कि भैया-भाभी को भी एकांत मिलना चाहिए ।उर्मिला को देख भी उनके मन में हूक उठती थी कि इस पतिव्रता को भी अपने पति का सानिध्य चाहिए ।

एक दिन भरत ने हनुमान जी से कहा,"हे पवनपुत्र! सीता भाभी को राम भैया के साथ एकांत में रहने का भी अधिकार प्राप्त है ।क्या आपको उनके माथे पर सिन्दूर नहीं दिखता?इसलिए संध्या पश्चात आप राम भैया को कृप्या अकेला छोड़ दिया करें "।
ये सुनकर हनुमान आश्चर्यचकित रह गए और सीता माता के पास गए ।


माता से हनुमान ने पूछा,"माता आप अपने माथे पर सिन्दूर क्यों लगाती हैं।" यह सुनकर सीता माता बोलीं,"स्त्री अपने माथे पर सिन्दूर लगाती है तो उसके पति की आयु में वृद्धि होती है और वह स्वस्थ रहते हैं "। फिर हनुमान जी प्रभु राम के पास गए ।