The Arrogance of Meta

 The Arrogance of Meta

​I have repeatedly argued that social media companies have turned into demons, acting like sovereign "super-governments."

​Such is their arrogance that company officials dared to remove a post by the Prime Minister of India. I refuse to believe they are foolish enough to delete a PM’s message without careful deliberation. They likely operate in deep collusion with seasoned politicians.

​It is no secret that global powers dislike seeing India emerge as a formidable force. All they want is an India that stands with a begging bowl in hand, relying on the West and China for help. Those arrogant nations must remember: those days are long gone. The New India will not behave like a slave.

​They cannot dictate terms here—they must abide by the rules and regulations of India.

​The Incident: Meta Summons & Key Details

​The Indian government summoned Meta's global head of public policy after the platform briefly removed a video post by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Although Meta apologized and restored the post—claiming an automated filter glitch caused the error—the government firmly stated the explanation was insufficient.

• ​The Post: A July 23 video message in which PM Modi addressed youth and student protests regarding examination paper leaks, promising strict new laws and fast-track courts.
• ​The Removal: The video was temporarily taken down on Facebook with a notice claiming regional restriction due to a legal request.
• ​The Response: Meta restored the content, called it a mistake, and blamed automated filter errors.
• ​The Action: The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) rejected Meta's reasoning as unreasonable and issued a formal summons, stating the matter is "far from settled."

​A Wake-Up Call for the Ministry

​The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B) and MeitY must pay serious attention now. It is time for them to wake up from their deep sleep. They have far more crucial responsibilities to handle than trivial matters.

​If the ministry does not act decisively, these platforms will destabilize the government. If officials believe that PM Modi’s individual efforts are enough to manage this, they are living in a myth. They must shed this complacency and wake up immediately! Officials and ministers cannot disown their responsibilities; they must be held accountable.

​Big Tech and social media giants consistently work against this nation's interests. The time has come to put them in their place. Just as China developed its own digital ecosystem, India must build and rely on its own sovereign social media platforms.

Agitations and Governments

Agitations and Governments

In today's society, where social media is always in a hurry to sensationalize the news, public agitations have become an everyday reality. They seem almost impossible to prevent.

From basic demands like clean drinking water and better public transport to larger issues like NEET, people regularly take to the streets seeking justice. Every struggle has its own merits. NEET, for instance, isn't 100% right or 100% wrong—there are compelling arguments on both sides.

When these struggles spill over onto the streets, governments face immense paranoia. They cannot afford to openly take sides. After all, every country has its adversaries. Whether it's deep-state politics or right- and left-wing extremists, opportunistic forces are always waiting for the right moment to strike. They don't care about ethics or justice; their sole goal is to topple the government, and they will hijack any struggle to achieve it.

We have seen this happen in Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Bangladesh, where rioters overthrew governments. But were their demands ever met? Was a paradise achieved after the fall? No.

Here in India, when the Delhi NEET protest was launched, hostile organizations quickly joined hands and jumped into the fray. Was it to find a solution to the exam issue? No. Their demand was the resignation of ministers. Are students really naïve enough to believe that resignations are a magic wand? No. Fortunately, before this street protest could be fully hijacked by these 'forces,' it subsided—much to the disappointment of social media opportunists who wanted the unrest to spread across the country.

At the same time, pro-government voices can be equally vociferous, demanding to know why the protests weren't simply crushed. These are thoughtless reactions.

History offers precious lessons on how such agitations unfold and how they should be tackled:

Chile: A simple truck drivers' strike was enough to collapse the government.

Europe: Massive protests in Germany and England often fail to alter government stances.

China: The infamous Tiananmen Square protests were ruthlessly crushed.

India: After the Emergency, Jayaprakash Narayan called for nationwide non-cooperation. Yet, Indira Gandhi was ultimately unseated through the electoral process, not through street violence.

Everyone has learned lessons about how to conduct—and manage—these struggles.

Unreasonably high-stakes demands, such as reinstating Article 370, are simply not going to happen. Even if the opposition or political outsiders were to win power, they could not easily override the consensus of the armed forces and the bureaucracy.

Today, the Government of India called the organizers for talks after three days, demonstrating a clear strategy. Instagram-style agitations might win clicks with memes, but they don't hold up in reality. Let the government reach a resolution with them. After all, the agitators' egos are usually satisfied just by having a platform at Jantar Mantar.

Let us hope things move toward a positive outcome.

 

Government Survival

 

Interesting article found in SM

The 8 Structural Requirements for Government Survival

Most conversations about governance focus on who should be in charge. This focuses on what structural properties a government needs to survive regardless of who's in charge.

These aren't ideological positions. They're engineering requirements. A government missing any one of these has a specific, exploitable vulnerability.

---

## 1. Continuous proof of operation

The government must continuously demonstrate that it's functioning. Not periodic elections. Not annual reports. Continuous, visible, verifiable operation. If the proof stops, that itself is the alarm.

**If missing:** The government can be silently captured between verification points. Nobody notices until the next election, review, or crisis.

## 2. Shared fate with citizens

The enforcement mechanism must depend on the same infrastructure as the people it protects. If the enforcer can survive the collapse of everything else, it has no structural incentive to prevent that collapse.

**If missing:** The enforcement class becomes insulated from consequences. They can allow degradation of public systems because it doesn't affect them.

## 3. Continuous verification against founding principles

The government must constantly check its current state against its defined correct state. Not just during crises. Not just when someone files a complaint. Continuously. Automatically.

**If missing:** The government doesn't know what "normal" looks like anymore. Slow drift goes undetected. Norms erode. Principles are violated incrementally. Each step is too small to trigger response, but the cumulative result is total departure from the original design.

## 4. Detection by one triggers response by all

When any branch or institution detects a violation, the detection must propagate to all other branches immediately and automatically. Detection cannot be contained or suppressed within the branch that found it.

**If missing:** Violations are discovered locally and buried locally. Corruption in one branch is invisible to the others. Sequential capture proceeds unchecked because each branch only sees its own compromise.

## 5. Multiple independent mechanisms prevent removal of checks

No single action, no single actor, no single branch can remove a check on power. Removing protections must require coordination across multiple independent trust boundaries that have no structural incentive to cooperate on removal.

**If missing:** The checks are a single point of failure. One sufficiently powerful actor removes the check and then operates freely. The protection existed only as long as nobody tried to remove it.

## 6. Capture is automatically visible

If any institution is captured (i.e., begins operating against its stated purpose), that capture must produce visible signals that cross into independent institutions automatically. Silent capture must be structurally impossible.

**If missing:** Institutions fail silently. The public doesn't know a branch has been captured until the damage is irreversible. Evidence of capture stays within the captured institution.

## 7. New rights integrate naturally

Adding new rights, new protections, or new checks must not require shutting down or reconfiguring the entire government. New protections must be adoptable without coordination from a central authority.

**If missing:** The government can't adapt to new threats. Every new protection requires supermajority consensus, which means it only evolves when there's overwhelming agreement, which means it's always behind the threat curve.

## 8. Constitutional violations trigger automatic response

Response to violations must be pre-committed and automatic. Not "we'll deliberate." Not "we'll investigate." The violation triggers the response. No evaluation gate. No committee. The response is structural, not political.

**If missing:** The response window is exploitable. The violator acts during the deliberation period. The committee debates while the damage propagates. Sequential evaluation cannot keep pace with exponential violation.

---

## The diagnostic

Governments don't fail because of bad people. They fail because of missing properties. Bad people are always present. The question is whether the architecture handles them or not.

For each requirement your government is missing, there is a specific vulnerability that will eventually be exploited. Not theoretically. Predictably.

Count how many your government satisfies. Then look at what's missing. Then ask yourself if you've seen that exact vulnerability exploited recently.