top of page

By:

Correspondent

21 August 2024 at 3:50:16 pm

Real Fascism

The systematic attempt by sections of the so-called ‘left liberal’ elite in the Western, in alliance with Islamic outfits, to suppress RSS Chief Mohan Bhagwat’s address at Madison Square Garden exposes the performative nature of Western ‘free speech’ discourse. For decades, Western institutions have preached pluralism, yet the moment when the head of a major Hindu civilisational organisation seeks to engage with its diaspora, the entire apparatus of Western left-liberal and activist networks...

Real Fascism

The systematic attempt by sections of the so-called ‘left liberal’ elite in the Western, in alliance with Islamic outfits, to suppress RSS Chief Mohan Bhagwat’s address at Madison Square Garden exposes the performative nature of Western ‘free speech’ discourse. For decades, Western institutions have preached pluralism, yet the moment when the head of a major Hindu civilisational organisation seeks to engage with its diaspora, the entire apparatus of Western left-liberal and activist networks mobilizes to enforce ideological censorship while working itself to a frenzy in conjuring the bogey of ‘saffron terror.’ Western democracies have positioned themselves ad nauseam as the ultimate guardians of open dialogue and pluralism, championing free speech as a non-negotiable cornerstone of human rights. This commitment routinely falters when applied to perspectives that challenge Western liberal orthodoxy or the interests of established political blocs. The coordinated opposition against Bhagwat’s international engagements by coalitions of left-liberal political groups and Islamist organizations exposes a selective framework where democratic rights are treated as privileges reserved exclusively for specific ideologies The coordinate suppression of American Hindus for Engagement and Dialogue (AHEAD), whose X account was targeted and temporarily taken down via automated abuse, is a case study in such censorship. The political manoeuvres around Bhagwat’s event highlight the stark double standards of figures like New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who has consistently targeted democratic Hindu institutions with labels like “fascist” and “exclusionary” while maintaining a notable silence when radical or anti-Hindu rhetoric emerges from political allies or interfaith gatherings. When figures like Mamdani and various Western activist coalitions mobilize to delegitimize Hindu gatherings, they demonstrate that their allegiance is not to universal free expression, but to an ideological gatekeeping that brooks no genuine pluralism. The same Western activist networks and academic institutions frequently platform, tolerate or explicitly defend radical Islamist movements, framing their rhetoric under the umbrella of “anti-imperialism” or protecting “minority expression.” Bodies such as the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), led by figures like the Pakistani Asif Mahmood, routinely weaponize human rights reporting against India and Hindu organizations, operating with an institutional bias and a complete lack of credibility. While Western cities regularly host extremist ideologues, controversial political dissidents and radical preachers under the banner of broad constitutional protections, Hindu civil society groups are met with security threats, algorithmic botting and open political hostility. This convergence of Western left-liberal political networks and Islamist advocacy groups functions as a cartel of speech control. They embrace free expression only when it serves as a vehicle for their own ideological hegemony. It seems the real fascism of our era does not march in uniform but speaks in the language of Western liberalism, operates through algorithmic suppression and brooks absolutely no dissent.

Lingua Pragmatica

Updated: Mar 20, 2025

As Southern leaders like M.K. Stalin rage against Hindi, Andhra Pradesh’s Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu offers a model of pragmatism over parochialism.

Chandrababu Naidu
Andhra Pradesh

Amid the cacophony of opposition in southern states to Hindi, Andhra Pradesh CM N. Chandrababu Naidu has taken a markedly pragmatic stance by remarking recently in the state Assembly that there was no harm in learning other languages. Hindi, Naidu noted, was useful for communication across India, particularly in political and commercial hubs like Delhi. His remarks, though avoiding explicit mention of the NEP, were widely seen as an endorsement of multilingualism and a rebuke to the linguistic chauvinism that has gripped parts of the South.


Few issues in India stir political passions quite like language. It is not merely a means of communication but a marker of identity, a relic of colonial resistance, and a source of political mobilization. In the southern states, where anti-Hindi sentiment has long been entrenched, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and its three-language formula have reignited old tensions. No state embodies this defiance more than Tamil Nadu, where the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by M.K. Stalin has framed the policy as an assault on its linguistic autonomy.


Naidu’s words, welcomed by his ally and Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, mark a sharp contrast with the DMK’s position. Tamil Nadu’s hostility towards Hindi dates back to the 1930s, when C. Rajagopalachari’s attempt to introduce it in schools met with fierce resistance. The anti-Hindi agitations of the 1960s cemented the DMK’s ideological stance, with its first Chief Minister, C.N. Annadurai, famously warning that Hindi imposition could push Tamil Nadu towards secession.


The question, however, is whether this rigid opposition serves Tamil Nadu’s interests. While Stalin, with an eye to the upcoming Tamil Nadu Assembly polls, has been relentlessly portraying Hindi as a threat to his state’s regional identity, Naidu, a partner of the BJP-led Centre, is framing it as a tool for economic mobility. His argument is not that Hindi should replace Telugu or English but that it offers a competitive advantage.


The economic case for multilingualism is compelling. Indians who speak multiple languages tend to have better job prospects, higher earnings and greater geographic mobility. Andhra Pradesh’s Telugu-speaking diaspora is a case in point. Telugus make up a significant proportion of Indian-origin professionals in the United States, the Gulf, and Southeast Asia as Naidu pointed out, hinting that this success story was built not on linguistic rigidity but on adaptability.


In a country where inter-state migration is rising and where Hindi remains the most widely spoken language, refusing to learn it amounts to self-imposed isolation. Tamil Nadu’s approach, by contrast, risks limiting its youth. The DMK government has refused to implement the three-language policy, keeping schools strictly bilingual with Tamil and English. Its justification that Hindi is not necessary for global success could be true in a narrow sense but ignores the domestic context. If Tamil filmmakers can dub their movies into Hindi to expand their audience, why should Tamil students be denied access to the language that could open more doors for them within India?


The DMK has accused successive central governments, particularly under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of pushing Hindi at the expense of regional languages. Yet, rejecting Hindi outright is an overcorrection. The reality is that Hindi is an important language in India’s economic and political landscape. Naidu’s position, one of accommodation rather than confrontation, offers a middle ground that other Southern leaders would do well to consider.


Some states already recognize this. Karnataka, despite its own history of linguistic pride, has allowed Hindi to be taught as an optional language. Kerala, whose migrants work in Hindi-speaking regions and the Gulf, has been less hostile to Hindi education. Naidu’s model, balancing regional identity with practical necessity, offers a way forward. Languages should be embraced, not politicized. Southern leaders would do well to listen to him.

Comments

bottom of page