129
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] xuxebiko@kbin.social 32 points 1 year ago

The city will also be put in lockdown for the 3 days of the summit. Schools, colleges, govt and private offices will be shut. Daily-wage labourers, vegetable vendors, and street hawkers will have to go hungry because Modi wants to present a Delhi that doesn't exist. What will happen to anyone needing urgent medical care or an ambulance in the city is anyone's guess.

G20 world leaders travelling to Delhi will be supporting this charade, this curtailing of people's rights, to pander to the Hindu supremacist dictator.

[-] reagansrottencorpse@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

What's the point, isn't the G summits like capitalist pals summits? Capitalists already know they cause misery, they don't care so why hide it.

[-] dan1101@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

Don't want anyone getting feelings for the poors.

[-] dustyData@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

They don't like to see the poor suffer. So they prefer they suffer far away from them and out of sight.

[-] beigeoat@110010.win 8 points 1 year ago

This is a very hard topic to take a side on.

The razing of these shantytowns has been happening for quite a few years now and has mostly become a part of daily life. In preparation for G20 they have only speed up this in some places.

The reason for razing these places has been simply because of them being built on Unauthorised land and people encroaching on government land.It is also true that the people were being provided basic necessities like electricity and water even when living illegally, with bills in their names address to the unauthorised building.(It is important to note electricity and water bills are controlled by the gov in Delhi)

The Government is correct in their try to reclaim stolen land from illegal occupiers. But it is also true that the residents were promised permanent legal housing right where their houses stood.

The residents were wrong to occupy government land illegally, but it is also morally wrong to remove thousands of people suddenly.

[-] xuxebiko@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The residents were wrong to occupy government land illegally

Govt land is public land. These people are the homeless public. They have no place to live, so they live in slums. Should they just die?

Most of the posh housing societies in Dwarka are also on encroached land. But even their paintwork doesn't get scratched. here homes and livelihoods of the have-nots are destroyed.

[-] beigeoat@110010.win 2 points 1 year ago

Uhm, what? Dwarka's societies don't really have a land encroachment issue. Most of them were built by DDA and other cooperative housing societies. There are other posh areas where land encroachment is an issue but Dwarka's societies aren't one of them.

Government land doesn't mean, you can just show up and build your house there .For example there has been land which was under ASI, which is land under various monuments. There are many monuments whose land is encroached by both the poor and rich. Both are wrong, be they rich/poor, when removing such encroachment it has been fair for the most part (The only really bad cases which come to my mind are, high level government officials just having big mansions built there). This is the case for forest land as well as land coming under various departments of the government.

Many a times the land has been left there for a reason, for future development, parks, forest land, etc. Land encroachment causes a lot of issues. Also being homeless doesn't mean they can just build a house wherever they please. You would not be okay if someone one day just shows up and builds a house on the road right in front of your house.

It is known to the people who are building their homes and livelihoods that what they are doing is illegal and there way of life can be destroyed any day, because what they are doing is illegal. The Government for a really long time had been understanding of their situation and just let them be, providing them with basic services on the encroached land. This doesn't mean that they are right, it just means that they have their house another day.

Also, it isn't technically correct to call these people homeless, most of them are migrant workers that came here to find better work opportunities. they found work and decided it was better to stay on unauthorized land nearby than to find legal housing which may be further away from their work. Rent in these shanties is pretty similar to legally available housing.

[-] xuxebiko@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

and so the voice of the privileged drones on, equating the rich with the poor.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 6 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Many of the city’s poor say they were simply erased, much like the stray dogs and monkeys that have been removed from some neighborhoods, as India’s capital got its makeover ahead of this week’s summit of the Group of 20 nations.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government hopes the elaborate effort to make New Delhi sparkle — a “beautification project” with a price tag of $120 million — will help showcase the world’s most populous nation’s cultural prowess and strengthen its position on the global stage.

But for many street vendors and those crammed into New Delhi’s shantytowns, the makeover has meant displacement and loss of livelihood, raising questions about the government’s policies on dealing with poverty.

The two-day global summit will take place at the newly constructed Bharat Mandapam building, a sprawling exhibition center in the heart of New Delhi near the landmark India Gate monument — and scores of world leaders are expected to attend.

In July, a report by the Concerned Citizens Collective, a rights activist group, found that the preparations for the G20 summit resulted in the displacement of nearly 300,000 people, particularly from the neighborhoods that foreign leaders and diplomats will visit during various meetings.

In 2020, the government hastily erected a half-kilometer (1,640-foot) brick wall in the state of Gujarat ahead of a visit by then-President Donald Trump, with critics saying it was built to block the view of a slum area inhabited by more than 2,000 people.


The original article contains 868 words, the summary contains 243 words. Saved 72%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
129 points (97.8% liked)

World News

38978 readers
1393 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS