As we all watch Hindu nationalists burn effigies of foreign women...
It seems a relevant moment to bring up a light change, made on a legal advice, to The Language of History (my most recent book). Take a look for yourself. I had to take out "Hindutva" here to publish in India:
Background knowledge --
India censors stuff all the time -- books, movies, news, etc. This isn't new, but it has ramped up with the BJP in power since 2014. They use colonial-era laws that were designed to restrict Indian freedoms and extrajudicial means (e.g., violence).
Largely because of a high-profile lawsuit concerning an academic book in India several years ago, publishers now act with caution.
In my case, this has meant that all 3 of my books have been subject to a legal read prior to publication in India. The lawyer recommends changes, both to comply with good-faith and bad-faith applications of Indian law and also to avoid threats of violence.
Let's pause and appreciate how extraordinary this is.
In the United States, the idea that a lawyer would need to vet an academic's publications on premodern India... well, it's laughable. I remain enraged that the Indian government treats its own citizens this way.
I wrote about the censorship of my book on Aurangzeb here. I actually had to take out historical information there about Shivaji (which is, ironically, largely included in The Language of History)... censorship can be haphazard. historytoday.com/history-matter…
For anyone wondering -- the self-censorship of The Language of History is light; it isn't worth paying more for the US/Worldwide edition (unless you like maps, which the Indian government really does not).
But I found it notable that a key issue was talking about #Hindutva.
A reminder: Hindutva is a hateful ideology, a type of ethno-nationalism; it is distinct from Hinduism, a diverse religion.
Criticizing Hindutva is beyond fair game, it is the right thing to do given the intolerance and violence stemming from this ideology.
So, I'm going to persist in both my scholarship on premodern India and my accurate, timely criticisms of Hindutva. Just, increasingly, not in India.
28 years since a mob destroyed the #babrimasjid, a rare Babur-period mosque. How much do you know about this event and its repercussions?
On some of the lead-up to this terrible event:
Basic timeline of key events (note that 300+ year gap between events 1 and 2... the #babrimasjid dispute has always been a modern issue, not a premodern one): bbc.com/news/world-sou…
Folks, I'm on a real bender of reading up on colonial-era India (don't judge; this is just how historians are). My recent and current reading lists include:
Durba Mitra's Indian Sex Life: Sexuality and the Colonial Origins of Modern Social Thought amazon.com/Indian-Sex-Lif…
Debjani Bhattacharyya's Empire and Ecology in the Bengal Delta: The Making of Calcutta amazon.com/Empire-Ecology…
To suspend this professor is a horrifying example of Western hegemony, cultural ignorance, and anti-Chinese bias.
@USC -- There are words in lots of languages that sound off to English speakers. Learning and overcoming one's own biases are part of learning a foreign language.
I once had an English-only American tell me that Pakistan should change the name of Lahore, to avoid confusion in English. No joke. I responded: "Maybe you should learn Urdu."
Sikh. As in, imagine in an intro to South Asia course, "The person you see on this slide is Sikh."
Note that there is a clear difference between the Indian term (in many languages) "Sikh" and English "sick", but English-only speakers usually cannot hear the difference.
A few follow-ups, largely for the benefit of @BloomsburyIndia. They should see what they are doing with an unvarnished gaze.
Many observers and scholars consider the Delhi riots a pogrom, i.e., an organized massacre of an ethnic or religious group. In this case, Muslims.
During the 2020 Delhi riots / pogrom, Hindu right-wingers targeted Muslims with violence.
This wasn't a debate; it wasn't a clash about which reasonable people can disagree. One group tried to massacre members of another, and succeeded in taking dozens of lives.
A few points of clarification, especially for those not super familiar with US law and culture—
In the US, you have freedom of speech, but no right to a platform. Supremacist groups are free to articulate offensive views, but no company must give them advertising space.
Most Americans still know nothing about Hindutva. But one way of thinking about this issue in the US is as follows:
Would you platform white supremacists?
If yes, then give Hindutva ideologues airtime. But if not, then steer clear of hateful Hindutva.
The Babri Masjid was probably built in 1528 by a general of Babur. At the time, it likely wasn’t a big deal. Babur doesn’t even mention it in his memoirs.
Babri Masjid may have been built over temple ruins, but, owing to bad and politicised archaeology, we aren’t sure.
If it was built on temple ruins, they could be Jain, Hindu, or Buddhist in origin. They also could’ve been ruins for hundreds of years by the 1520s (or not).