The India Menace - Street shitting, unsanitary practices, scams, Hindu extremism & other things
- Thread starter The Noise
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
A Distant Northern Land
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2024
Please remember to comment on the basis of the regulation itself because “delete the Jeet” is going to be disregarded while Indian telegram group spam is going to be considered.
Here is the detailed explanation of the rule:
So right now any H1B visa holder is chosen at random. Indians get applications filed by companies, some of them get picked from a random lottery, from IT help desk SAARs to unironic doctors and lawyers. Trump admin has already made one slight tweak so staffing firms can’t file multiple applications of the same person, but that isn’t as relevant when there’s a trillion Indians applying anyways. The proposed rule change is that the lottery will be weighted so the chances of higher wage applications are more likely to be chosen, but it’s still ultimately random. I am going to write that this rule doesn’t go far enough in halting outsourcing firms from getting lottery spots, contributing to US jobs being outsourced and domestic talent not being developed.
Economic research that you can cite:
Especially pages 3-4 of this paper
look at the abstract of this one too
Here is the detailed explanation of the rule:
Under the existing H-1B registration process, prospective petitioners (also known as registrants) seeking to file H-1B cap-subject petitions must first electronically register for each prospective beneficiary. USCIS then runs the H-1B selection process to randomly select unique beneficiaries based on properly submitted electronic registrations. If the unique beneficiary is randomly selected, then each registrant that registered for that beneficiary receives a registration selection notice and may file an H-1B cap-subject petition on their behalf.
DHS proposes to amend the process through which it selects registrations for unique beneficiaries to move away from a purely random selection process to a weighted selection process. This proposal would cover registrations for petitions subject to the regular cap and those asserting eligibility for the advanced degree exemption. The proposal would also change how USCIS selects petitions in circumstances where USCIS has suspended the registration process (for instance, because of technical issues with the electronic registration system).
Specifically, the proposal would weight registrations (or petitions) for selection generally based on each beneficiary's equivalent wage levels. When random selection is required because USCIS receives more registrations than USCIS projects to be needed to meet the numerical allocations, USCIS would conduct a weighted selection among the registrations for unique beneficiaries (or petitions) received generally based on the highest Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) wage level that the beneficiary's proffered wage would equal or exceed for the relevant Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code in the area(s) of intended employment. The proffered wage is the wage that the employer intends to pay the beneficiary.
DHS proposes to amend the process through which it selects registrations for unique beneficiaries to move away from a purely random selection process to a weighted selection process. This proposal would cover registrations for petitions subject to the regular cap and those asserting eligibility for the advanced degree exemption. The proposal would also change how USCIS selects petitions in circumstances where USCIS has suspended the registration process (for instance, because of technical issues with the electronic registration system).
Specifically, the proposal would weight registrations (or petitions) for selection generally based on each beneficiary's equivalent wage levels. When random selection is required because USCIS receives more registrations than USCIS projects to be needed to meet the numerical allocations, USCIS would conduct a weighted selection among the registrations for unique beneficiaries (or petitions) received generally based on the highest Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) wage level that the beneficiary's proffered wage would equal or exceed for the relevant Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code in the area(s) of intended employment. The proffered wage is the wage that the employer intends to pay the beneficiary.
So right now any H1B visa holder is chosen at random. Indians get applications filed by companies, some of them get picked from a random lottery, from IT help desk SAARs to unironic doctors and lawyers. Trump admin has already made one slight tweak so staffing firms can’t file multiple applications of the same person, but that isn’t as relevant when there’s a trillion Indians applying anyways. The proposed rule change is that the lottery will be weighted so the chances of higher wage applications are more likely to be chosen, but it’s still ultimately random. I am going to write that this rule doesn’t go far enough in halting outsourcing firms from getting lottery spots, contributing to US jobs being outsourced and domestic talent not being developed.
Economic research that you can cite:
Especially pages 3-4 of this paper
look at the abstract of this one too
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
I described Izzat all the way back in 2021 without even knowing there was a word
for it.
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2023
I hope whatever bureaucrat goes through these has the good sense to filter out the AI-generated jeet crap. It’s so blatantly obvious that they might actually ignore it. 
TURBONIGGERKIKE
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2024
More like DICKS HOURS HAHAHA
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2021
A politician at some point should probably make it illegal for foreigners to even comment on suggested American policy proposals.
- Joined
- May 9, 2017
It's not enough in the sense that we do ultimately need to Delete Pajeet, but it's a step in the right direction, and should be supported for what it is. Basing visas on salary will put a major dent in the practice of importing Jeets as cheap slave labor.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2021
Some more posts on izzat:
Source (Archive)
Source (Archive)
Long explanation on "izzat," the bizarre honor system of India. It explains almost everything Indians do: their constant scamming, their rude behavior, their unwillingness to address their problems, their psychotic dedication to harassing anyone who criticizes them.
I've lived in countries that have similar, less extreme systems. Albania was traditionally governed by the Kanun, a system of tribal governance defined primarily by gjakmarrja, a custom where Albanians are socially obligated to murder anyone who attacks their family's honor. Gjakmarrja can be triggered by something as innocuous as failing to pay someone back, and it even authorizes the murder of the offender's family members. Blood feuds, if left unresolved, cause a loss of honor for family members, so you face social pressure from your family to resolve them by any means necessary. There are Albanians whose relatives got entangled in a gjakmarrja blood feud and essentially cannot leave their homes; they are seen as "in blood" and are fair targets for murder, even if they had nothing to do with the "crime," even if the "crime" happened generations ago.
The Kanun, including gjakmarrja, was outlawed by Albania's communist government as even communists recognized that an endless series of escalating blood feuds would keep them from creating the new Socialist Man. Then the Cold War ended and the Kanun made a comeback due to the incompetence of Albania's post-communist government. This version of gjakmarrja is a bizarre wigger version that disregards actual laws in the Kanun; for example, gjakmarrja often now involves women and children being murdered, which was forbidden under the original rules.
There are similar blood feud systems in the Caucasus, though again, these were outlawed and suppressed during the Soviet days. About the only positive benefit of entrenched blood feuds is that they help keep the peace to a certain extent. In Georgia, for example, you can wander the city at 4am and nothing will happen to you, because Georgians know that stepping on someone's toes for no reason can set off a Hatfield/McCoy feud. The downside is that you can't trust anyone and you have to constantly keep your guard up to avoid being scammed. It's a mentality completely incompatible with a functioning, prosperous society.
I don't know how you would eliminate izzat from the Indian subcontinent. It would take an insane, centuries-long fascist or communist dictatorship. Enver Hoxha was able to suppress gjakmarrja because he was enough of an insane Stalinist to pile the bodies up until he created the new Socialist Man, but the Albanians went right back to shooting each other over property disputes barely a decade after he passed. One thing is clear: Indians cannot be allowed to live in the West. Izzat makes them incompatible with us, it makes them incapable of basic morality and ethics.
DEI: Deport Every Indian.
I've lived in countries that have similar, less extreme systems. Albania was traditionally governed by the Kanun, a system of tribal governance defined primarily by gjakmarrja, a custom where Albanians are socially obligated to murder anyone who attacks their family's honor. Gjakmarrja can be triggered by something as innocuous as failing to pay someone back, and it even authorizes the murder of the offender's family members. Blood feuds, if left unresolved, cause a loss of honor for family members, so you face social pressure from your family to resolve them by any means necessary. There are Albanians whose relatives got entangled in a gjakmarrja blood feud and essentially cannot leave their homes; they are seen as "in blood" and are fair targets for murder, even if they had nothing to do with the "crime," even if the "crime" happened generations ago.
The Kanun, including gjakmarrja, was outlawed by Albania's communist government as even communists recognized that an endless series of escalating blood feuds would keep them from creating the new Socialist Man. Then the Cold War ended and the Kanun made a comeback due to the incompetence of Albania's post-communist government. This version of gjakmarrja is a bizarre wigger version that disregards actual laws in the Kanun; for example, gjakmarrja often now involves women and children being murdered, which was forbidden under the original rules.
There are similar blood feud systems in the Caucasus, though again, these were outlawed and suppressed during the Soviet days. About the only positive benefit of entrenched blood feuds is that they help keep the peace to a certain extent. In Georgia, for example, you can wander the city at 4am and nothing will happen to you, because Georgians know that stepping on someone's toes for no reason can set off a Hatfield/McCoy feud. The downside is that you can't trust anyone and you have to constantly keep your guard up to avoid being scammed. It's a mentality completely incompatible with a functioning, prosperous society.
I don't know how you would eliminate izzat from the Indian subcontinent. It would take an insane, centuries-long fascist or communist dictatorship. Enver Hoxha was able to suppress gjakmarrja because he was enough of an insane Stalinist to pile the bodies up until he created the new Socialist Man, but the Albanians went right back to shooting each other over property disputes barely a decade after he passed. One thing is clear: Indians cannot be allowed to live in the West. Izzat makes them incompatible with us, it makes them incapable of basic morality and ethics.
DEI: Deport Every Indian.
I'll add to this: the inability of figures like Richard Hanania, Anna Gorisch, and other pro-immigration figures to comprehend izzat, the Kanun, and other shame-based social systems is why they ludicrously argue for a pan-racial alliance against wokeness.
You've heard the arguments already; there was a major push for this in 2023 after the underwhelming Republican results in the midterms. "Official" organs of right-wing policy like COMPACT were astroturfing this. "Indians, Mexicans, and other immigrants are social conservatives. They only vote Democrat because Republicans are racists. Republicans need to be pro-immigration to win them over." It was essentially reheated Bush-style "compassionate conservatism" and it's just as retarded now as it was 20 years ago.
Whites operate on a guilt-based system of morality, while most non-whites operate on a shame-based system. They are not the same thing. Guilt is the recognition that you have done something wrong. Shame is the feeling that YOU are wrong. Guilt is about recognizing truth, while shame has no connection to truth and is more about public perception of yourself and those close to you.
In Christian (white) morality, people strive to do good out of a conscious desire to modify their actions and behaviors. Whether you believe in works-based or faith-based salvation (or secular versions thereof), the result is the same; behaviors and actions based on YOUR personal moral code. If you do wrong in a guilt-based morality system, your own conscience (assuming you aren't a psychopath) gnaws away at you. People strive to do the right thing because of their PERSONAL guilt over doing wrong. Hell, even Charlie Kirk's assassin felt enough guilt over what he'd done to turn himself in.
Shame-based (non-white) morality is arguably an oxymoron, as it resembles amorality more than anything. If you are driven by shame, your primary motivation is to gain public prestige, or at least avoid losing it. Immoral actions are acceptable if they personally advance you or your family and you are not caught doing them. Additionally, if you are driven by shame, you have no consideration of society as a whole, only yourself and your family. Being publicly embarrassed is worse than committing a crime.
Moreover, guilt requires empathy and shame does not. In guilt-based morality, you do good (and avoid doing evil) because your empathy allows you to place yourself in the positions of other people. You avoid doing things like ripping people off because you can imagine what it would be like to be ripped off and can understand why ripping someone off would hurt them. Shame is almost opposed to the concept of empathy; it's a purely selfish emotion that only incorporates YOU (or your family).Consider Asian "face" culture, which is in many ways just a milder version of Indian izzad. Asians often behave in ludicrous or self-destructive ways because they fear losing "face" more than the consequences of their actions. For example, in BLACK PASSENGER YELLOW CABS, Stefhen Bryan wrote about how Japanese women avoid buying birth control because they feared being publicly perceived as slutty and losing "face." As a result, they sleep around without protection, get pregnant, and then get abortions; Japan has one of the highest abortion rates in the world, which Bryan referred to as Japan's "abortion industry."
When you understand the difference between guilt and shame, you understand why the "social conservatism" of immigrants is a fraud, a mask that hides parasitism and thuggery. The Hananias at the world look at, say, Pakistanis in Britain protesting LGBT school curriculums and think "gosh, they would make natural Republicans." But the shame-based nature of systems like izzad, "face" culture, the Kanun, and so forth prevent the cultures that engage in them from developing the empathy required to universalize their actions.
Ramesh from Bangalore doesn't want his kids to troon out, but he doesn't care about Earl from West Virginia's kids. He doesn't gain izzad from fighting for Earl. If anything, Earl's kids trooning out means less competition for HIS kids. So Ramesh will fight to keep schools from trooning his kids, but he'll also vote for the party that is trooning out Earl's kids because he---and his family---personally benefit. Ramesh has no empathy for Earl because izzad, being based on shame, precludes empathy. It's entirely based on public image and personal gain.
Shame-based morality is in part a product of non-whites being dumber than average. Below a certain IQ, people literally cannot understand empathy. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of psychopaths are stupid and low-IQ, more like Decarlos Brown or Karmelo Anthony than Ted Bundy. Prison psychologists have conducted studies where prisoners are asked to conceptualize how other people might feel in response to their actions and they literally cannot do it; they aren't intelligent enough. This is the source of the "how would you feel if you didn't have breakfast this morning" meme. If you cannot develop even the most basic theory of mind, you cannot conceive of morality beyond what is personally advantageous to you; you're basically one step above an animal. Reminder that India has an average IQ of 76, which is one point higher than the threshold for mental retardation.
The world's youngest serial killer is an Indian, Amarjeet Sada, who killed three babies---including his own sister---when he was eight. His first victim was his cousin; he smashed the baby's head in with a brick and then buried him in the backyard, proudly announcing this to his mother. Sada's parents begged their relatives not to go to the police because if it became public knowledge that their son was a murderer, it would cause such a catastrophic, generational loss of izzad that neither of them would be able to find work and might die homeless. Contrast this with Tyler Robinson, Charlie Kirk's assassin, being urged to turn himself in by his father. That is the difference between guilt-based and shame-based morality.
Again, I do not see how you could eliminate this behavior from Indians and other non-whites. In Europe, blood feuds and the like were stamped out through a combination of Christian morality enforcement via the Catholic Church and the state gradually developing a monopoly on violence. The Catholic Church also strictly forbade incest; incestual relationships incentivize shame-based morality and clannishness. And even then, it took centuries to weed these bad behaviors out of Europeans, and in some fringe parts of the continent (like southern Italy and Albania), they persisted into the 20th century. Mass immigration is quite literally regressing white societies back to the Dark Ages.
You've heard the arguments already; there was a major push for this in 2023 after the underwhelming Republican results in the midterms. "Official" organs of right-wing policy like COMPACT were astroturfing this. "Indians, Mexicans, and other immigrants are social conservatives. They only vote Democrat because Republicans are racists. Republicans need to be pro-immigration to win them over." It was essentially reheated Bush-style "compassionate conservatism" and it's just as retarded now as it was 20 years ago.
Whites operate on a guilt-based system of morality, while most non-whites operate on a shame-based system. They are not the same thing. Guilt is the recognition that you have done something wrong. Shame is the feeling that YOU are wrong. Guilt is about recognizing truth, while shame has no connection to truth and is more about public perception of yourself and those close to you.
In Christian (white) morality, people strive to do good out of a conscious desire to modify their actions and behaviors. Whether you believe in works-based or faith-based salvation (or secular versions thereof), the result is the same; behaviors and actions based on YOUR personal moral code. If you do wrong in a guilt-based morality system, your own conscience (assuming you aren't a psychopath) gnaws away at you. People strive to do the right thing because of their PERSONAL guilt over doing wrong. Hell, even Charlie Kirk's assassin felt enough guilt over what he'd done to turn himself in.
Shame-based (non-white) morality is arguably an oxymoron, as it resembles amorality more than anything. If you are driven by shame, your primary motivation is to gain public prestige, or at least avoid losing it. Immoral actions are acceptable if they personally advance you or your family and you are not caught doing them. Additionally, if you are driven by shame, you have no consideration of society as a whole, only yourself and your family. Being publicly embarrassed is worse than committing a crime.
Moreover, guilt requires empathy and shame does not. In guilt-based morality, you do good (and avoid doing evil) because your empathy allows you to place yourself in the positions of other people. You avoid doing things like ripping people off because you can imagine what it would be like to be ripped off and can understand why ripping someone off would hurt them. Shame is almost opposed to the concept of empathy; it's a purely selfish emotion that only incorporates YOU (or your family).Consider Asian "face" culture, which is in many ways just a milder version of Indian izzad. Asians often behave in ludicrous or self-destructive ways because they fear losing "face" more than the consequences of their actions. For example, in BLACK PASSENGER YELLOW CABS, Stefhen Bryan wrote about how Japanese women avoid buying birth control because they feared being publicly perceived as slutty and losing "face." As a result, they sleep around without protection, get pregnant, and then get abortions; Japan has one of the highest abortion rates in the world, which Bryan referred to as Japan's "abortion industry."
When you understand the difference between guilt and shame, you understand why the "social conservatism" of immigrants is a fraud, a mask that hides parasitism and thuggery. The Hananias at the world look at, say, Pakistanis in Britain protesting LGBT school curriculums and think "gosh, they would make natural Republicans." But the shame-based nature of systems like izzad, "face" culture, the Kanun, and so forth prevent the cultures that engage in them from developing the empathy required to universalize their actions.
Ramesh from Bangalore doesn't want his kids to troon out, but he doesn't care about Earl from West Virginia's kids. He doesn't gain izzad from fighting for Earl. If anything, Earl's kids trooning out means less competition for HIS kids. So Ramesh will fight to keep schools from trooning his kids, but he'll also vote for the party that is trooning out Earl's kids because he---and his family---personally benefit. Ramesh has no empathy for Earl because izzad, being based on shame, precludes empathy. It's entirely based on public image and personal gain.
Shame-based morality is in part a product of non-whites being dumber than average. Below a certain IQ, people literally cannot understand empathy. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of psychopaths are stupid and low-IQ, more like Decarlos Brown or Karmelo Anthony than Ted Bundy. Prison psychologists have conducted studies where prisoners are asked to conceptualize how other people might feel in response to their actions and they literally cannot do it; they aren't intelligent enough. This is the source of the "how would you feel if you didn't have breakfast this morning" meme. If you cannot develop even the most basic theory of mind, you cannot conceive of morality beyond what is personally advantageous to you; you're basically one step above an animal. Reminder that India has an average IQ of 76, which is one point higher than the threshold for mental retardation.
The world's youngest serial killer is an Indian, Amarjeet Sada, who killed three babies---including his own sister---when he was eight. His first victim was his cousin; he smashed the baby's head in with a brick and then buried him in the backyard, proudly announcing this to his mother. Sada's parents begged their relatives not to go to the police because if it became public knowledge that their son was a murderer, it would cause such a catastrophic, generational loss of izzad that neither of them would be able to find work and might die homeless. Contrast this with Tyler Robinson, Charlie Kirk's assassin, being urged to turn himself in by his father. That is the difference between guilt-based and shame-based morality.
Again, I do not see how you could eliminate this behavior from Indians and other non-whites. In Europe, blood feuds and the like were stamped out through a combination of Christian morality enforcement via the Catholic Church and the state gradually developing a monopoly on violence. The Catholic Church also strictly forbade incest; incestual relationships incentivize shame-based morality and clannishness. And even then, it took centuries to weed these bad behaviors out of Europeans, and in some fringe parts of the continent (like southern Italy and Albania), they persisted into the 20th century. Mass immigration is quite literally regressing white societies back to the Dark Ages.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2022
Look man this is the anti-India thread, take your anti-semitism elsewhere
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2024
I would've liked it more if it stayed as an in-joke on KF, muh sekrit klub and all that. Now we'll have to deal with groyperfags with anime PFPs on Xitter talking about Izzat in the same breath as defending lolicon.Some more posts on izzat:
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
I'd tell you to eat shit you fucking Dalit, but you'd probably enjoy it.
TarragonRespecter
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2024
Stop letting them in and forcibly assimilate any here or more realistically send their asses back. You cant unteach that behavior and you cant legislate it away unless you assume everything they do is because of izzat
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2022
Will just repost what I said about comments from earlier
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2022
Josh's post is at 2 Million views on X. It's gone beyond da sektor and is on it's way to breach the wider internet. It is a good thing to further spread the truth of the Indian Menace to the wider world. Every post and share is a brick laid at the wall to stop indian migration
Honka Honka Burning Love
In Clown World, the only god is the one who Honks.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2019
Replace Izzat with Izzet.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2019
How about telling the shit golems to stay in shit country and leave us to figure out and solve our own shit, huh?
India will turn into a superpower afterall, wont they want to be there to witness such gloriousness?
Pajeet prefered to kill himself instead of being forced to tell the truth.
Thats jewish levels of inability to confront the truth, holy shit.
India will turn into a superpower afterall, wont they want to be there to witness such gloriousness?
Pajeet prefered to kill himself instead of being forced to tell the truth.
Thats jewish levels of inability to confront the truth, holy shit.
D-X-G-X
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2022
Sounds like a coordinated group of hillbillies could topple the entire nation of India given how absolutely fucking retarded this sounds.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2019
I'M DOING MY PART
Markiplier's Basement
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2025
Izzat is becoming understood as a concept like taqiyya, or chakra. When people read it it really is like having an epiphany on why the subcontinent acts the way they do... I think the tweet could be hailed as one of the death knells of Indian immigration. The unmoved mover strikes again.
That Matt Fourney guy is the reason I was even aware of the public comments. Another face for the shrine of total Pajeet extirpation
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2024
I'm glad I finally have a word to describe this awful culture, which helps fully contextualize the behaviors engaging in it vs. just referring to it as being fucking retarded.
I'm going to describe this as generically as possible to avoid power-leveling. I work for a company that was expanding their India workforce, and was in charge of training some of these "experienced developers" to get them up-to-speed on the software we develop. I start off walking them through our tools/APIs/etc, making sure they are all clear on how it works, which they constantly reassured me throughout my explanations was perfectly clear and fully understood. At the end, I ask them (as self-paced work to do on their own) to play around with our APIs using Postman, following examples from our documentation and using sample environments running our services, and if they have any issues navigating our APIs or making use of different features/functionality, they can reach out to me. We then have a follow up session later in the week, and when talking to them about the services we previously discussed, their explanations were a jumbled up mix of technical terms that made no sense, let's say the equivalent of "This feature allows us to database the front end wifi index". Baffled by the nonsensical explanation, I asked them to show me how they tested and played around with the services, and they assured me that they did quite extensively, while still rattling off more nonsense. I then asked them to show me an example from their Postman which relates to their explanation, which they then had to admit that they didn't even install it and had not actually tested any APIs.
I was so fucking frustrated because my thought process is that you are being onboarded and trained in the new code base you are going to have to work with at this new job, so why the fuck are you trying to hide your complete misunderstanding of what you are going to be working with? Let's say even if you are low skilled, at least presenting yourself as eager and interested in learning always goes a long way to accept issues while you are getting up-to-speed. It just seems nonsensical to pretend that you have no issues and fully understand whatever is being told to you, because I'm simply there to help ease the onboarding process and I'm not grading you or anything like that. It is obvious that you won't know everything when you are learning/working with things for the first time, so simply saying "no, I'm not clear on X, can you explain this more and how Y relates to this?" or something equivalent is totally reasonable.
If I was to re-frame this in terms of Izzat, the goal here seems to be to get through onboarding and working in this new job, so any perceived notion that they may not have the full expertise/understanding of what they'll be working on puts this at risk (in their eyes), so they must handwave any notion that this is the case. This results in these ridiculous reassurances that they fully understand what's being told to them and they have no questions/issues to work through, when in fact they have no fucking clue or at least have a significant gap in their understanding that would impact their effectiveness. Continuing down this path of pure incompetence will have devastating results in quality, as they figure out ways to cut corners around the guardrails put into place to prevent such issues in first place.
That whole situation was the first step in black pilling me on Indian outsourcing. I always thought of it as simply a lazy short term approach to cut costs (instead of hiring locally) while eventually dealing with higher downstream costs as a result of weaker talent pool introducing regressions/issues that require more work to fix (vs. doing things right the first time around). But the cultural incompatibility of Izzat with Western merit/morality makes this a death spiral for companies who embrace Indian outsourcing, and I'm perfectly fine with companies crashing and burning as a result. The only way that things truly change on this front is if there are more and more companies who rot as a result of such decisions. Without going full The Quartering, this is not that far off from companies crashing and burning as a result of DEI prioritizations. The issue of DEI isn't specifically race-swapping, substituting language/terms, hiring women/minorities/etc, rather it's the focus on the "appearance" of morality rather than putting out the best possible product. Outsourcing to people who value Izzat results in prioritizing of "appearance" of merit, which cannot produce the best possible product (as that's not the goal).