To find the Ambani wedding distasteful

I must admit I hadn't heard of them :-). I looked up the Ambani wedding and saw photographs, with text, on 'Hello' magazine. They did look splendid!

The thing is with billionaires and the like, they are very philanthropic and help a lot of people. There is no reason why they should not also splash out on themselves. Weddings are a huge thing for Indian people and everyone stretches themselves for the occasion which is very much enjoyed by all.

There are plenty of rich people in India and they do a lot of good as well as enjoying their wealth. The poor people aspire to that, they work towards being well off and having a better life, it is that sort of society and India is the world's fastest growing major economy.

Don't be too quick to judge.

Oh no no no this isn't about public interest. This is absolutely about power

They don’t care if the little people are interested - they are not doing this to entertain, they are just showcasing their wealth, but more specifically their power and influence. They can cause excessive noise disturbance in Italy and France and block off an entire bay while on a party cruise with impunity. They can effectively block off Mumbai’s financial business district with impunity. They can have a local airport redesignated as an international airport for their convenience. They can buy up a luxury hotel in the UK and block access to it. They can buy the attendance of all sorts of internationally known figures at their parties. They don’t have to be considerate - they are the Ambanis.

At some point real life will have to start. Then what?

Do they think people are interested? Are people interested? My interest is in a kind of fascination with the grotesque, but maybe some people see it as similar to following Taylor Swift in the news?

Oh joy! It's coming to the UK!

https://www.indiatimes.com/entertainment/celebs/anant-ambani-radhika-merchant-likely-to-host-post-wedding-festivities-in-london-fans-react-638136.html

This is starting to look like those couples who want to prolong their honeymoon BC they are starting to realise they probably can't stand each other.

@marcopront - thank you for the link, that’s interesting. BKC is clearly a wealthy financial area, with banks, insurance companies, consulates, hotels, concert venues and posh restaurants. The access roads that were closed to non-event traffic for this “public event” were also clearly extremely important for getting into, around and out of the Complex, so I can see why there was an entirely negative public backlash against the closures from those affected by what was in reality a private event. It’s not as if the people most negatively affected would be shy of expressing their opinions, or lacking in the technology to make the world aware of them.

It has always been like that. Why are you surprised?

@Walkaround

Jio World convention centre believes itself to be in Bandra Kurla Complex which is in the posh suburb of Bandra.
It is not in central Mumbai.

It is in a place where ex pats and rich Indians live.

According to this link

www.99acres.com/articles/the-cbds-in-mumbai.html

There are at least 3 CBDs in Mumbai.

Quote from the Hindustan Times - not a western newspaper, and read by 8.6 million people across India: “Several roads leading to the Jio World Convention Centre will have restricted access between 1 pm and midnight during those three days. The traffic curbs have sparked outrage online.” The Jio World Convention Centre definitely believes itself to be in the Central business district, not a posh suburb.

Personally, I would see roads in the central business district as being important roads, the closure of which would most definitely have an impact. It would be an odd central business district if it were in a posh suburb where few people would be impacted.

A map of Mumbai shows the road closures as being in the City’s central business district.

Also, @marcopront, as you have specified that words matter, what do you think about the use of the words “public event” to describe the Ambani wedding? And why have you repeatedly used the word “caused” as though you believe it to be a synonym of “worsened”?

@marcopront - since when is The Hindustan Times my Western press?

@Walkaround

Look at a map of Mumbai.

The wedding took place in the posh part of the posh suburb of Bandra.
Those roads being closed would not have had a major impact.

But you and your western press know better than me.

@marcopront - care to engage in the substance of the points I have made several times on this thread? As set out in my post to @HucklefinBerry?

As for important roads - if closing them worsens the impact of monsoon flooding, they are obviously important. Besides which, I doubt such a wealthy family would choose to hold their wedding somewhere they deemed unimportant and out of the way 😂. And, tbh, I do find more credibility in the reporting of the BBC, Time Magazine, Reuters and The Hindustan Times than I do in the reporting of a total stranger on the internet who has spoken to a few of their friends in Mumbai.
Also, why did the Mumbai police describe the wedding as a public event?

@Walkaround

Is it of no concern that for several days, important roads in Mumbai should be closed for the majority of the day, during heavy monsoon rains, just for one private wedding?

Since when have roads in BKC been important roads?

@Walkaround

Please do not tell me what I can and cannot discuss.

Words matter.

If worsening is not related to cause then what do you mean by "worsening the effects". You can't have it both ways.

I am not denying there were problems but I have talked about this with people in Mumbai and they have a different opinion to you. I trust them more.

@marcopront - yes, I understand the difference. Do you understand the difference between “worsening” and “caused”? And do you understand the difference between engaging with the substance of an argument and focusing obsessively on something that is irrelevant to the original point made (that many people in Mumbai may well have preferred the wedding to have taken place elsewhere - which would be the case whether the wedding miraculously managed to cause flooding, worsened the flooding, or worsened the impact of the flooding)?

@HucklefinBerry - at no point did I ever claim the wedding caused monsoon flooding - ffs. Why not try reading the content of people’s posts, rather than misinterpreting them, or reading other people’s deliberate misinterpretations, instead? I have explained exactly what I meant by worsened several times now and the word worsened has at no point in history ever meant “caused,” in any event. Yea, it would have been more clear to specify that it worsened the effects of the monsoon flooding, but the flooding was never the point of the post, which was pointing out that the wedding was not as uncontroversial in India as some were trying to claim.

So, why not try engaging instead with the substance of the posts made, rather than avoiding that so as to comment on the meaning of the word “worsened,” which is utterly irrelevant to the substance of the argument made, and if anything at all simply goes to show that you are one of the many who would fail a comprehension test.

So, here we go again… Are the Ambanis a private family or holding themselves out as something more than that? Should it be of no concern to anyone that a private family can persuade the government to redesignate an airport an international airport simply to facilitate their pre-wedding celebrations? Is it of no concern that for several days, important roads in Mumbai should be closed for the majority of the day, during heavy monsoon rains, just for one private wedding? Is it of no concern how many government contracts are awarded to Ambani businesses? Is it of no concern that income inequality in India is now greater than it was during the British Raj? Is there “nothing to see here” that some people are describing Indian billionnaires as the new maharajas of India - and people are even comparing the Ambani wedding to events relating to the British royal family? Is there not some confusion here between public and private and very clear evidence of the connection between extreme wealth and political influence so great it begins to look like real and very undemocratic power?

How about responding to that, rather than pretending that the meaning of “worsened” is desperately important to everyone’s comprehension of the above? Why not read some of the articles I have linked?
https://www.hindustantimes.com/trending/mumbai-traffic-restrictions-for-anant-ambani-radhika-merchant-wedding-spark-outrage-101720255902005.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c87repz4yx8o

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq5x22w0xl0o

https://time.com/6961171/india-british-rule-income-inequality

Exactly

a private event and affect many public place

Economical 😂

Crossing fingers, like many Brits, for a future Monarch who rejects such frivolities.

For many, the Royals aren't 'essential' or 'sacred', never mind the OTT parades and ceremonies that occur in their honour.

No, it was necessary. The head of state must be inaugurated and the UK still practices coronation, making kingship and sovereignty sacred things as well as political matters. That is part of the integrity of the UK itself. And it was 100 M, not hundreds of millions btw, which is why I said it seemed admirably economical.

Clearly it's not the same if many people want their road closed for a specific purpose. A street party for the coronation, or a cycle race which hundreds are going to watch are both occasions when most would agree a road can be closed for an afternoon. However, when zil lanes were put in during the Londone Olympics most Londoners objected, pointing out that Olympic officials etc could use the tube, and - if I remember correctly - the lanes were not strictly enforced. How many roads were closed and for how many days was it done for the PRIVATE Ambani wedding?

if two people asked closed your street and paid an official to do so would it be the same as 200 people in your street asking to close the street for a party and no money being given to officials?

@Grammarnut

Closing public roads for a private wedding is a bit thick. What gave them the right to do that?

What about closing public roads for a coronation street party?
Or a cycle race?