@Energon , I am curious, is USA a civilised republic in your opinion? Because you said India with that mob violence against that Muslim was a banana republic. So this is what civilisation looks like huh?
I do not know what you mean by "civilised republic". The United States is a healthy constitutional republic and a developed nation (based on socioeconomic indicators). When compared on a global scale the US also does pretty well on things like protection of individual and property rights and social mobility indices. Based on these foundational elements the American society has managed to build an extensive (and unparalleled) network of inclusive public and private institutions in virtually all arenas of societal and intellectual development which in turn drives the American economy. It is precisely this fundamental pyramid that attracts people (knowingly or unknowingly) to the United States from all over the world.
When it comes to societal pathology (which I think is what you want to stress upon) the United States has a very well documented legacy spanning issues such as genocide, ethnic cleansing, misogyny, slavery and state imposed bigotry. To paraphrase Ta-Nehisi Coates, racism and organized suppression isn't a footnote in American history, it's
our heritage. Not only did Jim Crow laws reign supreme well into the middle of the last century but the effects of state sponsored racism pervade most aspects of American society today (and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future).
But just as the American society built racism into its structure it has continually institutionalized progressvism in order to address its innate social pathologies. This is not a static picture of course, but rather a continual sequence of intellectual and public action that can be objectively observed and put into context. And even though the phenomenon has always been fluid it has a definitive and quantifiable skew in the favor progressvism.
Also, regarding lynchings, the context of my overall argument isn't merely predicated on one singular incidence in Dadri, but rather the concept of what it means to use mob violence as a publicly codified form of jurisprudence.
I am more than happy to discuss and debate the nuances of social injustice, racism, various forms of extrajudicial acts and how different acts of violence signify different things. However based on the nature of all your posts on IDF thus far I do not think you're interested in doing that.