And no, hindu and muslim conquests were NOT alike. Krishnadevaraya defeated kalinga. Instead of destroying konark sun temple, he came back and built a similar stone chariot in hampi.

The same hampi was plundered and burnt down a century later by islamic foreign invaders.

The marathas defeated mughal empire, but you dont see delhi, fatehpur sikri etc in ruins.

Hindu conquests were like regime or government change for ordinary people. At best some changes in taxation. Islamic conquest meant their cities burnt down, institutions destroyed and life destroyed.

These are not my hallucinations, the turkic invaders proudly wrote about this themselves.

they deffo colonise the soundscape with call for prayer blaring 5 times a day everyday and i cant turn my ears off!

You wrote all that to make a nearly worthless semantic argument about how an act of invasion, genocide, and theocratic authoritarianism is different from what you’re calling colonialism? Okay.

Indians and Hindus were obviously subordinated under Islamic rulers who arrived from elsewhere. A simple five second search would show you they imposed different taxes if you were not a Muslim. What are you even arguing about here?