@Kate_SdE @PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Hindu nationalism should not have a negative connotation. It’s not exclusivist because Hinduism isn’t a religion - rather, it’s a way of life, and the term “Hindu” refer broadly to the people around and east of the Sindhu. This transcends the modern construct of religions.

@PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew For “Hindus” - a broad-brush stroke for a people whose culture is underpinned by a knowledge system that provides logical structure for adopters of a plethora of philosophies, “Hindu nationalism” by definition, is inclusive and pluralistic. It gives space to everyone.

@PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew If Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Samkhya, Yoga, Purva-Mimamsa, Buddhist and Jain philosophies are studied in comparison with Abrahamic faiths, India’s unique Carl Popper Paradox comes to light. The imposition of a western matrix of secularism on a pluralistic culture has done much harm.

@PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Because the traditions are rooted in universalist philosophies, India gladly hosts followers of non-proselytizing faiths. Supremacist theocratic ideologies find little resonance with the people of the land. To understand “Hindu nationalism,” one has to study Indic philosophy.

@PriyamvadaGopal @ChathamHouse @AdomGetachew Equally, it is important to view history objectively, know the excesses of supremacist invaders/colonizers, and importantly, understand the asymmetries created by the “secular” state which structurally disadvantage the vastly heterogeneous so-called “Hindu” majority.