Even the BJP gave up Hindutva for civic nationalism, Gandhian socialism, and positive secularism in 1980s.
Hindutva does not belong to Modi nor his party, it belongs to the people as a unifying, decolonial ideology similar to pan-Africanism or Yugoslavism.
His own brand of "positive secularism" is even milder - deepening special rights and welfare schemes for religious minorities.
I'm not entirely comfortable with Modi's "Hindutva".
— Onye Nkuzi (@cchukudebelu) February 2, 2021
I know many of my Indian followers will come at me, angrily - but let me just say this out.
I'm not sure it is a great model for democracy in a diverse, multi-cultural developing nation.
Even the BJP gave up Hindutva for civic nationalism, Gandhian socialism, and positive secularism in 1980s.
The most radical policy they can dream of is religion-neutral laws and equal rights for equal citizens.
When British India was partitioned into a Muslim homeland and a Dharmic homeland, one state became a 'Ghazi' garrison state, and one the successor state to the Indic civilisation.
https://t.co/Jiy4gfJ6sD
That backfired when voters believed this and voted for Modi, thinking he was going to be the "Hindu nationalist" he was portrayed as.
https://t.co/yLPQf0AXSR
The centre-left party in power prefers to draft religion-neutral laws and hope for the best.
Inspired by Italian unification, similar to pan-Africanism, and compatible with a range of political ideologies once such sovereignty is established.
Some use it as a bogeyman to discredit indigenous knowledge systems.
Others use it for their election-winning machine, where right-wing voters go in, and left-wing policy comes out, and a bit of steam is released.
More from India
You May Also Like
1/ Here’s a list of conversational frameworks I’ve picked up that have been helpful.
Please add your own.
2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you
3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.
“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”
“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”
4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:
“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”
“What’s end-game here?”
“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”
5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:
“What would the best version of yourself do”?
Please add your own.
2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you
1/\u201cWhat would need to be true for you to\u2026.X\u201d
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) December 4, 2018
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody: https://t.co/Yo6jHbSit9
3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.
“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”
“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”
4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:
“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”
“What’s end-game here?”
“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”
5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:
“What would the best version of yourself do”?