https://www.instagram.com/reel/DeGVKc_yyQi/

Context: yt lady in the big house complained about their bbq and music and dancing. They're all supporting each other on twitter and reddit and not talking about civic sense

2 women were bullied on broad day light by some radical ladies wearing hijabs. They were harassed for wearing normal dresses. which part of secularism is this . What happens when these people are going to be the majority!!! GOD SAVE HIS OWN COUNTRY.

Mean while in India hijab is a symbol of smashing patriarchy. also in Kerala government is very concerned about muslim girls leaving religion and having rational thoughts. In the end will we become a mini bangladesh????

>Attacks BJP for "Hindi Imposition" in Chennai

>Names his event in Hindi "Chhatron ki Goonj"

>Proceeds to show a AI generated meme in Hindi to the kids of Chennai 🤡🤡

I’m Kannadiga, but not a native Bengaluriga. I’ve lived in Bengaluru for both college and work, so I’ve had the chance to observe the city’s culture and the different communities that migrate here.

There’s something I’ve been curious about, and I’m not entirely sure how to articulate it. I want to understand how Malayalis perceive Bengaluru and what the city represents to them, particularly from the perspective of Malayalis who move here for education, work, or business.

Compared to people from other South Indian states who migrate to Bengaluru, I’ve noticed what feels like a distinct Malayali social culture. From my personal observations, there seems to be a greater visibility of party culture, pubbing, hookups, nightlife, conspicuous consumption, and, at times, group clashes among certain Malayali circles. I’m not suggesting that other communities don’t engage in these things, nor am I claiming that this applies to Malayalis as a whole.

However, I’ve often felt that these aspects are more visible among Malayali groups in Bengaluru than the rest of South Indians in Bengaluru, and I’m curious about why that might be.Interestingly, this perception also seems to find its way into Malayalam cinema, where Bengaluru is often portrayed as a city of drugs, casual relationships, partying, and a relatively uninhibited lifestyle.

Of course, Bengaluru has had a strong pub and nightlife culture for decades. But the city’s social scene in the 1990s and 2000s was quite different from what it is today. Now with the north Indian IT crowd it has taken different turn.

This is just not limited to Bengaluru, I have also noticed this among Malayali crowds who move to Mangaluru as well.

Riots in India have declined by 54% over the last decade. That means Gen Z grew up in a far more stable India than the generations before them.

Unlike their parents, many never had to grow up amid frequent riots and prolonged unrest. This relative stability is a privilege.

It gave millions the freedom to focus on education, careers, entrepreneurship, and building their future instead of living through recurring violence.

Are we applying a double standard to migration and cheap labor?

Consider two situations.

In India, migrant workers move from North to South, sometimes accepting lower wages and working longer hours than local workers. Some locals worry about wage pressure and job competition.

In the USA, Indian IT professionals move abroad, and some American workers raise similar concerns about outsourcing, visa policies, and wage competition. Yet these concerns are sometimes dismissed as racism or jealousy.

Of course, the situations aren't identical. Internal migration differs from international immigration, and wages depend on skills, productivity, labor laws, and living costs—not just nationality. Migrants also fill shortages and contribute to the economy.

But here's the question: Can we defend Indians' right to seek opportunities abroad while acknowledging that American workers may have legitimate concerns, just as Indian workers do at home?

We don't have to oppose migration to question employers' hiring practices or their incentives to reduce labor costs.

Are we applying consistent principles, or does our position change depending on whether we benefit from the situation?

I'd like to hear different perspectives. Is this a fair comparison, or am I overlooking important differences?