Hypocrisy and bigoted agendas are a blight on India’s crores.

Swarajya Magazine editor R. Jagannathan’s editorial piece of December 23 criticizes Hindu leaders at the Haridwar conclave for their open calls for violence; but then he goes on to say, “The truth is extreme pacifism may not be the answer when your core religious and Dharmic interests are at stake. Hinduism does not advocate ahimsa in all situations.”

The double-speak is not surprising, given Jaggi’s own call in a 2020 tweet for a “civilizational war” on Islam and Christianity, which he refused to delete (see below). In that tweet, he had cleverly juxtaposed a clip of 4th century B.C. Chanakya seething against foreign Greek invaders (from a TV series), with his own call against India’s minorities, as if they were today’s foreigners. His disgusting war cry came a day after the 2020 Delhi riots, even as the ashes were still cooling, at a time when better angels were calling for justice and peace.

Too bad for Jaggi that those saffron-clad bigots at Haridwar spoke their minds without the cover of double-speak, showing up the sophistry of Hindutva elites.

In a case of the kettle calling the pot black, Jaggi now wants the speakers at Haridwar to retract their statements and to do prayaschit (penance). At the same time, in another example of double-speak, he wants them to “clarify what they really meant” -- as if calls to exterminate 20 lakh Muslims need further explanations.

So, it is only fair that we ask Jaggi if he is also ready to retract his incendiary tweet of 2020 and perform a bit of soul-searching himself. We will be happy to send some suggestions for prayaschit his way.

He could start by calling out Prime Minister Modi for his complete silence on the Haridwar hate speeches, instead of attempting to rationalize them: “This is not to suggest in any way that the fears and aspirations of the sadhus were wrong.”

Speaking of rants, Jaggi packs his editorial piece with a staggering number of baseless allegations. We pick a few obvious ones to respond to:

“[Hindus] face existential threats...”

Really? This must sound like a cruel joke to millions of Muslims and Christians who are the ones facing an existential threat under Prime Minister Modi’s rule. Does Jaggi really want to feed into the irrational fears in the majority community, which vastly outpowers the minorities — often a formula for mass violence?

“Global academic move to delegitimise Hinduism itself by ‘dismantling Hindutva.’”

It must take a deep sense of insecurity and a contrived sense of victimhood to conflate Hindutva with Hindu traditions.

As we have often said, Hindutva defines itself by its violent words and actions on the ground, including lynchings, attacks on Muslim and Christian places of worship, false charges and arrests of opponents and journalists, and so forth. It was obvious to anyone who attended the Dismantling Global Hindutva (DGH) conference that a majority of the speakers were focusing on that extremist and hateful Hindutva. In any case, does Jaggi not have the confidence in the capacity of Hindu traditions to take legitimate criticisms, e.g., on caste discrimination?

As a supporting organization and a participant in the DGH conference, we can assure Swarajya readers that over 1,000 academics and scholars across the world supported the conference for its focus on critiquing Hindutva, which is certainly not the same as “delegitimising” Hinduism.

“…aggressive efforts by evangelical and jihadi organisations to speed up religious conversions in India.”

If there is any possibility of accelerated conversions away from Hinduism today (a claim that has been debunked by Pew Research Center data), it would not be on account of Muslim and Christian organizations, which are facing unprecedented threats under the BJP rule. On the contrary, it would be due to the bigotry of Hindutva elites and their foot-soldiers, who have succeeded in associating Hindu identity with mass violence, and who wish to dictate what one may eat and whom one may marry.

Perhaps, it is time for politicians to recognize that it takes more than sloganeering and photo ops (e.g., washing the feet of sanitation workers) to end caste discrimination. If oppressed peoples, especially Dalits, wish to leave Hinduism, they have good reasons to do so, a personal choice, which is not for Jaggi or anyone else to judge.

“…the judiciary slowly eviscerating Hindu interests.”

As for the judiciary, almost everything that the Supreme Court has done (and not done) in recent times has been in favor of the BJP government and the Hindu majority in general – from the Ayodhya judgement, to failing to act on the inhuman Kashmir lockdown, to sitting on a slew of challenges to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), intimidating public interest lawyers like Prashant Bhushan, not taking suo moto notice of the recent threats of genocide from Haridwar, and so on.

So, what exactly is Jaggi talking about when he posits that the judiciary is anti-Hindu and repeats the “Defending Hindu interests” mantra? Who defines “Hindu interests”? Is it in the Hindu interest to declare an authoritarian Hindu Rashtra, throw out the constitution, and treat Muslims and Christians as second-class citizens?

If that is what he has in mind, then I don’t think a majority of Hindus are with him. If his mantra is merely a rhetorical bait, then I am afraid that it is bound to end without the usual "Om Shanti! Shanti! Shantihi."

***

Jaggi’s Swarajya magazine proudly displays the cover of the first issue of the original Swarajya from 1956, with these famous words from its founder, Shri. Khasa Subba Rau:

“Freedom does not mean simply absence of restraint. The need for restraint is eliminated by conscious elementary adjustments which writers and others learn to make to standards of behaviour considered part of the obligations of service or of duty to the institution served by them. It will not shrink from correcting a blunder when it realises that one has been committed. It will not, for the sake of consistency or false prestige, go on committing other blunders to make the original one look more plausible. It is attached to no party and recognises no loyalty except the public interest.”

Sadly, today’s Swarajya seems to have forgotten its founder’s core values.