Indian ‘journalists’ and ‘intellectuals’ have taken up the mantle of peddling the Pakistani narrative on Kashmir it appears. Apart from spreading their usual rhetoric on social media, a horde of articles is now appearing on international media outlets slandering the Indian government’s decision to abrogate Article 370.

‘Eminent Historian’ Ramchandra Guha painted an apoplectic picture of India in the Washington Post. In his article, he argued that it was time to downgrade India’s democratic credentials in light of recent developments. To summarize his argument in a single sentence, it can be said, “Because I didn’t like the outcome of the elections, India’s democracy is under threat.”

Sadanand Dhume, in his article for The Atlantic, wrote, “India has framed its actions in nonsectarian terms, but it’s hard to miss the symbolism of a Hindu nationalist government diminishing the power of elected Muslim representatives.” He argued further, “Who is to say that a future Indian government—or even this one, emboldened by the apparent popularity of its decision—won’t try something similar with a state such as Nagaland, Tamil Nadu, or West Bengal? That many BJP leaders routinely use shrill anti-Muslim rhetoric raises the stakes further.”

He concluded his article by saying, “In the seven decades since it gained independence, India has done well to hold together a large, multilingual, multifaith nation with democratic principles. It’s too soon to say whether this will change, but if Kashmir is a portent for India’s future, we need to start worrying.”

Suhasini Haider, Editor at The Hindu, shared an article by Arundhati Roy, a Far-Left loony with questionable motives, and said that it was an important read.

The Silence of Kashmir Is the Loudest Sound, writes Arundhati Roy in this comprehensive look at the state’s history. One doesn’t have to agree with every word in this @nytimes column by the author, but it is a very important read. https://t.co/zk7zzduHAp

— Suhasini Haidar (@suhasinih) August 16, 2019

In the article for the New York Times, Roy argued that it was “hard to feel” that India is great at the moment. She claims that the government has gone rogue and asserted that “it unilaterally breached the fundamental conditions of the Instrument of Accession, by which the former Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir acceded to India in 1947.”

The article was littered with other unfortunate ramblings of a mind softened by the tides of time. At one point, Roy stated, “The passing of the act was welcomed in Parliament by the very British tradition of desk-thumping. There was a distinct whiff of colonialism in the air. The masters were pleased that a recalcitrant colony had finally, formally, been brought under the crown. For its good. Of course.”

It’s understandable why Roy feels that way. Authors of fiction need to have a rather creative mind. Some of them can excel at their art only when they focus their mind on everything dark and gloomy and horrific and dystopian. It’s a fact that the fountain misery is where many writers find their ink in. However, such affinity towards imagined calamity often tends to leave irreparable scars on one’s consciousness. Before long, such scars manifest themselves in the real world.

Roy’s words betray the fact that she is not strictly dealing with facts here. She has allowed herself to use her literary skills to embellish, exaggerate and twist actual events to portray a series of events that have very little to do with facts on the ground. However, Suhasini Haider should have known better. She allows herself significant room to maneuver by proclaiming that one need not agree with everything Roy says. But she never mentions specifically exactly which parts we are not to take seriously, it’s quite a neat trick.

Sunetra Choudhury, the national political editor at Hindustan Times, asserted that no one could disagree with partisan hack Hasan Minaj who peddles his propaganda under the garb of comedy.

Can you disagree with anything @hasanminhaj says here? pic.twitter.com/q1whUfp0mM

— sunetra choudhury (@sunetrac) August 16, 2019

Again, it’s understandable why Hasan is quoting facts selectively to further a particular agenda, the Ummah comes first after all. However, for Sunetra to claim that there was no possible way for anyone to disagree with Hasan on the matter is preposterous. It does say a lot about the mentality of liberals. They live under the delusion that there is no possible way for anyone to disagree with the official party line. And anyone who does disagree is because they are too dumb, or racist, or sexist or a genocidal maniac.

The delusion they suffer from makes it impossible for them to appreciate the fact that people can have opinions on a matter that does not conform with the liberal narrative. It doesn’t make them immoral or demons incarnate. It only proves that they are approaching the matter from a different standpoint.

Zainab Sikander, columnist at ThePrint, used Khalistani and Pakistani propaganda to further her personal agenda on the Kashmir issue. Shekhar Gupta had claimed that protests in Kashmir are Pakistan’s best hope, then went ahead to ask the Indian government to lift restrictions so protests can be organized. It’s not just one or two liberal luminaries who have made problematic statements on the matter, liberals across the board endorse a position that undermines the national interests of our country.

The conduct of liberals after the abrogation of Article 370 has been deplorable, to put it mildly. Things have reached a point where it’s virtually impossible to differentiate between the words of our liberals and the Pakistani Prime Minister. People of Ladakh who have been in a celebratory mood ever since the 5th of August find no mention in the liberal narrative. The Hindus of Jammu have been conveniently ignored.

Liberals could never be accused of loving Kashmiri Hindus a bit too much but how they have completely ignored the sentiments of an overwhelming majority of Kashmiri Hindus regarding Article 370 speaks volumes for their integrity. In the liberal world, only the opinions of Kashmiri Muslims matter, the rest of the people in the region can be entirely ignored.

As has been clear for some time now, liberals are incapable of introspection. They are so focused on winning arguments and accumulating power that they never stop to introspect on their actions. If they had, it would have been clear to them why people often question their patriotism. It would have been clear why they have to announce their patriotism from their rooftops.

They have been undermining Indian national interests at the international level. Their conduct has absolutely zilch to do with values. They are supporting Jihadists here. For all their commitment to women’s empowerment, gender equality, religious tolerance, and peaceful coexistence, when the time comes to prove their mettle, they never fail to sacrifice it all at the altar of Radical Islam. Liberals have made it clear once and for all, their alliance with Radical Islam comes first. Everything else is secondary.