> the Indian food in Britain is the best in the world
Got about a billion people here who'd like to disagree. In fact, of all the crimes against humanity the British visited on India, I think that assertion might just be the worst.
You’re being heavily downvoted but I can’t imagine by who or why. Certainly not by people who’ve eaten Indian food in both India and the UK.
While there are a few good restaurants, most Indian restaurants in the UK are bland beyond reason, catering to the common palate. There’s nothing wrong with liking bland food or restaurants catering to that preference, but let’s not make this extraordinary claim that it’s better than the food in India. For most part the food is plain and plays it safe. For example, it’s rare to find Indo-Chinese, a cuisine nothing like Chinese or Indian but a staple of cuisine in India.
This isn't an argument over say Italian vs French cuisine. That's undecideable.
This is an extraordinary claim that by taking Indian food to the UK, stripping it of it's spice to suit the locals somehow made it better. It'd be like claiming Italian cuisine became better without the tomatoes or Mexican cuisine better without the beans.
TBH I am sick to death of this website and am therefore clearing this comment. Apologies to the commentor responding below - I posted a response to your comment in a previous edit of this comment. Somebody please invite me to the land of crustaceans.
The comment doesn't appear downvoted now, but it was possibly because "No it's not!" isn't much of an argument.
Maybe you find British Indian food too bland, too dry, too sweet, to have a lack of variety or to use low quality ingredients. Whatever it is, it could more usefully continue the discussion.
However, I think even people who've tried food in both countries (I haven't) will often find themselves arguing, based on their experience. The majority of "Indian" restaurants in Britain are cheap -- a step above a takeaway. Like similar restaurants in Britain, they have a menu based on combining pre-prepared ingredients/sauces to lower costs. There are also middle and some high-end Indian restaurants. I can easily imagine people experiencing "takeaway+" and assuming this standard of food is universal in Britain, or (especially on HN) someone on a business trip to London being taken to a high-end restaurant and generalizing from there.
I find a lot of Americans display a belief that 'democracy' can only refer to a direct democracy and 'republic' is the accurate term to refer to representational democracies, but with the implication often being that the point of representative democracy (vs direct democracy) is primarily to prevent majoritarianism or 'mob rule'. None of that meshes with my knowledge of political science gleaned from education in my home country (parliamentary system) or in the United States, so I really wonder where this idea began.
As per my knowledge, representative democracies have an advantage over direct democracies primarily in ease of administration and legislation. I don't think there are any particularly strong reasons to suggest representative democracy is less prone to a tyranny of the majority than a direct democracy.
My hypothesis is that the idea is borne out of a necessity to resolve the dissonance between the US founders and constitution being in many ways anti-democratic, with a culture that holds up democracy & freedom as its highest ideals. (democracy in this case defined as it would be in the dictionary)
The "We're a republic, not a democracy," comes from the 1930s as an isolationist slogan to argue against getting involved with "the defense of democracies" (the FDR argument) during World War II. From there it became a quip from the John Birch Society to delegitimize a political party. I know that sounds, hyperbolic, but it's true.
Jamelle Bouie recently did yeoman work tracking down it's start.
They sold batteries on trains? I remember there used to be a pay phones on some German trains but they were using the analogue C network, which shut down in 2000.
It's amazing how many people have swallowed the line that stopping anthropogenic global warming is mostly about individual choices when there is clear evidence to show that the very same idea has been propagated primarily by the industries responsible for the majority of pollution.
Most of the devices have a switch for the microphone that is supposedly implemented in hardware rather than software. And the vast majority of smart home devices do not have cameras.
Granted, the ease of use of their functionality is largely dependent on the microphone being on at all times.
