The perversion that played out in Leicester against the Hindu community and the subsequent conduct of the media, the UK police, politicians who rose to fame on the backs of diaspora Hindus and certain Hindus themselves have left one with a lot to ponder. That Islamists went on a rampage against Hindus and then hijacked the narrative to paint themselves as victims, aided by a traditionally spineless and deracinated British media comes as no surprise. While Leicester Hindus stood up for their Dharma valiantly in the face of grievous provocation, violence, and propaganda, amidst the unexpected heroes made in the face of adversity, Leicester also exposed a sore wound that the Hindu community has battled for long.
After days of Islamist violence and hate directed at the Hindu community, on the 20th of September, the president of the Iskcon Hindu temple of Leicester issued a statement, surrounded by Muslim “leaders” and Imams of the Jame Mosque. Reading out the joint statement outside a mosque, President of Leicester’s ISKCON temple Pradyumna Das said, “This is a statement of unity between the Hindu and Muslim community. We, the family of Leicester stand in front of you, not only as Hindus and Muslims but as brothers and sisters. Our two faiths have lived harmoniously in this wonderful city for over half a century. We arrived in this city together. We faced the same challenges together.”
“We arrived in this city together. We face the same challenges together; we fought off racist haters together and collectively made this city a beacon of diversity and community cohesion,” the statement said. “That is why we are saddened and heartbroken to see the eruption of tension and violence. Physical attacks on innocent individuals and unwarranted damage to property are not part of a decent society and, indeed, not part of our faiths,” it added.
Pradyumna Das carried on and called for “inciters of violence and hate to leave Leicester alone” and that they “do not need to call upon assistance from outside the city”. “Leicester has no place for a foreign extremist ideology that causes division”, he said, while asking people to respect the sanctity of religious places, both mosques and mandirs.
Muslim-Hindu Unity Statement by Temple President, Pradyumna Das, outside Asfordby St Mosque.
— ISKCON Leicester (@IskconLeicester) September 20, 2022
“#Leicester has no place for any foreign extremist ideology that causes division. Our message to anyone that sows disharmony between us is clear ‘we will not let you succeed.’” pic.twitter.com/qhYY7bqzff
Throughout this pathetic statement that muddled the truth, the Muslim leaders and Imams kept quiet, menacingly surrounding the Priest making this statement. The bonds of mythical brotherhood that this statement seems to be alluding to, was devastated the moment Muslims of Leicester attacked Hindus for passing by a “Muslim area”. The illusionary harmony was pierced the moment a temple was attacked. No amount of tiptoeing will dilute the fact that no Mosque was attacked by Hindus, contrary to the fake news that was spread by Islamists. While the Iskcon priest repeats ad nauseam that what happened in Leicester is not a part of their “faiths” (meaning Hinduism or Islam), the truth is, that every Islamist out there perpetuating violence is unequivocal on how this violence is indeed part of their faith and they can quote the verses better than anyone trying to de-hyphenate the two.
More than the blatant capitulating, what was far more disappointing was the Iskcon priest toeing the Islamist line while talking about “foreign extremist ideology that causes division”. Surely, Das was not talking about Islam because the Muslim community does not believe that any such division in their faith exists. Therefore, it is only fair to assume that Das was explicitly toeing the Islamist/Left media line, claiming that the violence by the Islamists was caused by the presence of “Hindutva forces” in Leicester, terming it a violent, foreign ideology.
These observations aren’t novel and this author is not the first to point them out. The only difference is that the Twitter handle of Iskcon can’t possibly censor my views as they did to several others who tweeted to them. There were hundreds of tweets that expressed discontent and rage over the statement by Das, which were “hidden” by the Iskcon handle. Here is an archived version of the responses they hid.
Over the past several days, I have personally written extensively on the Islamists who instigated violence against Hindus of Leicester, the conduct of the police and the media in shielding Islamists and how the Hindu community was standing up to blatant intimidation, however, as the dust settles, it is also important that the Hindu community looks inwards and realises that our dignified survival as a global community is impeded when cowering to bullies becomes the conditioned response of community leaders.
It is indeed a fact that most of the noise that was created on social media on Leicester came from India. The awareness that Hindus in Leicester were attacked would not have completely been possible had the Hindu community as a whole, from Leicester and from India, not come together to talk about the spate of Islamist violence. That itself brings forth the hollowness of the statement made by Das and a trope I have heard numerous times by Leicester community leaders (and a few diaspora Hindus) over the past few days – “This is a diaspora issue”.
Essentially, while Das, a Hindu himself, capitulated and ended up calling Hindutva a “foreign ideology”, some community leaders and diaspora Hindus reiterated, over and over again, that the Leicester violence was a “diaspora issue” and therefore, the nuances of how it should be talked about or how it should be handled, was something that Hindus in India might not fully comprehend. I concede – every region and the manner in which an issue is handled overall is going to certainly be different. However, the underlying malaise is far more serious. What several Hindus seem to have alluded to, including Das, is that the Islamists are only attacking Hindus who they believe are rooted in Hindutva, and therefore, by terming this a “foreign ideology” or calling the issue a “diaspora issue”, they wish to safeguard themselves by disassociating from the tags that the Left media and Islamists wish to thrust upon them. “You are attacking us because you believe we are rooted in Hindutva, that we support RSS and Indian PM Modi. But that is not true. So please spare us. We are brothers”, seems to be the narrative for some. When pointed out, in so many words, the defence that is mounted suggests, “This is a diaspora issue. We need to handle things differently. Hindus from India won’t understand”.
Again, while I understand that certain nuances only the locals who are under siege can understand, in the larger scheme of things, this strategy is not only useless in safeguarding the diaspora Hindus but also terribly endangers those Hindus who are speaking up for them, relentlessly. When they try and distance themselves, in whatever casual capacity, from Hindutva, the diaspora Hindus are essentially saying that Islamists are wrong in attacking them not because they don’t deserve to be attacked only because Islam treats them as Kafirs, but also because they don’t associate with this “foreign ideology”. In that sense, they only signal that those who do associate with the Hindutva ideology or support RSS/PM Modi are fair game as far as Islamist hate is concerned – they don’t say it explicitly, of course, but they unwittingly partake in the demonisation of Hindus globally.
One has to realise that Hindutva’s primary purpose was to concretely define the concept of nationhood around Hindu identity rather than along regional or caste identities. In a heterogeneous polytheistic society, it was not such an easy endeavour as various identities were regularly in conflict with each other. But for the polytheistic order to survive, Hindu society had to overcome such fault lines to sustain its continued existence. At its core, Hindutva is a reactionary ideology. It emerged as a reaction to a world order based on nation-states and the task of ensuring the political unity of the lands of India once the British left Centuries of conflict with invading ideologies made Hindu intellectuals acutely aware of the urgent need to ensure the political unity of the Hindu populace. Hindutva was the product of such endeavours and its purpose was explicit: To ensure that the whole of Hindu society lends its allegiance to a nation-state which would then protect and serve the interests of the Hindu social order – self-preservation is the foundational core of Hindutva – a principle that is the natural right of every indigenous people.
Instead of articulating why Hindutva as a concept is vastly different from political ideologies carved around Abrahamic faiths, several diaspora Hindus were seen trying to tacitly disassociate with that identity. The Islamists need to demonise Hindutva to use it as a euphemism to target Hindus and to create a boogey monster that they can use to dilute the frightful effect that Islamism as an ideology has globally. Hindus who aim to disassociate themselves with Hindutva, basically leave all Hindus vulnerable to be stereotyped and attacked with the attacks being justified just like the genocide of Jews was justified after Hitler cast them in a stereotypical stone.
At this point, a disclaimer becomes imperative. Not all diaspora Hindus do this. Many wear their faith proudly on their sleeve, however, when community leaders further this problematic narrative, one notices several other average Hindus follow suit because they believe this is the ultimate strategy for survival.
The truth is that the Hindus of Leicester were attacked because they were Hindus. Islamists are predisposed to look for polytheists and slay them wherever they find them. The only difference between a Delhi anti-Hindu riot and a Leicester is the fact that far more blood was spilt in Delhi and the nature of the euphemism used to target Hindus varied greatly. While in Delhi, they used CAA as an excuse to target Hindus, they used Hindutva, RSS and Modi as an excuse in Leicester – but euphemism it all is.
If certain diaspora Hindus and community leaders believe that disassociating themselves with Hindutva, RSS or Modi would save them today, tomorrow, they will have to disassociate with their temples, their faith, their core and eventually, their very Dharmic existence. That is the progression that Islamists will thrust down their throats. Today, Hindutva is “violent” and a procession from a “Muslim area” makes you liable to be attacked. Tomorrow, the existence of their temple and your house in a “Muslim area” will be used as an excuse. The day after, they will say that their existence as a polytheist is an affront to their faith and if they don’t give up their Dharmic existence, you will be responsible for their own genocide. We have seen this play out over and over again and history is replete with stories that remind us of this pattern.
No matter who the Hindus distance themselves from, they will always be a target for Islamists because it is their existence that they have a “beef with”, not particularly what they believe in or stand for. The diaspora Hindus might believe in the myth of brotherhood if only they can display their soft power, but survival is a messy business and truth, the cold truth, and its articulation, is at the heart of it.
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi too believed in what certain diaspora Hindus believe in today. He believed that his non-violent ways and soft cultural power would be enough to make the Mohammadans see the error of their ways. Today, Gandhi is considered and touted as one of the leading symbols of India’s soft power. Despite all of that, and despite the fact that he cowered to Islamist hate, treated Hindus as sacrificial lambs and is revered by the very perpetrators who want Hindus annihilated, he too would be cancelled someday because he was “too Hindu”.
As OpIndia CEO, Rahul Roushan often says, Gandhi’s idea of Hindu-Muslim unity, much like the ISKON priest, was turning a blind eye to the Malabar genocide of Hindus, blaming Swami Shraddhanand for his own murder by an Islamist and inserting Allah into Hindu bhajans with no reciprocation. However, Gandhi was indeed a Hindu. He spoke unabashedly about cow protection, the need to preserve traditional Hindu values, and the importance of temples in the Hindu society and while his counterparts, some of them, were busy talking against idol worship, Gandhi proudly wore his religion on his sleeve and never said anything against our polytheist ways. This is precisely why most Hinduphobes only use Gandhi to keep Hindus subjugated by talking about his ideas of extreme pacifism but would denounce him just as easily for being “too Hindu” – a phenomenon we are bound to see play out in the next few years, given the meteoric rise of Hindumisia.
Today, priests like Das may call Hindutva a “foreign ideology” and some diaspora Hindus may want to play nice by calling this a “diaspora issue” and capitulating to Islamists and Leftists, but that won’t shield them from Islamist hate. It may, for the time being, but they will forever remain idolaters who deserve to be annihilated. No matter who or what they disassociate with, the Left media will not understand their culture and certainly, not proclaim them the victims of sectarian violence even if the truth were to smack them in the face. The Muslim community functions on the principles of Ummah where a Muslim hurt, anywhere in the world, is the problem of every Muslim no matter where they geographically reside. The Jews, who have successfully managed to make the world aware of their own persecution would never denounce Israel or its “internal politics” for the sake of survival – an attack against a Jew is rightfully anti-semitism, no matter what euphemism is used. Hindus need to realise that as long as they function in their neatly crafted silos, they will alienate a community that is their only chance of survival.
To quote Sita Ram Goel, “The point that all of you are trying to make is that Hindus should not stand up and speak in defence of their own religion and culture, that Hindus should not try to analyse and understand the factors and forces in the field around them, in short, that Hindus should remain at the receiving end for all time to come. We are sorry we have to reject your advice”.
