What if Indian academia is not producing knowledge but staging its simulation?
Vivek Dhareshwar calls it intellectual parasitism. A condition where concepts are consumed without being metabolized.
A thread on his radical vision for a new humanities. 🧵
Intellectual parasitism is not mimicry. It is dispossession.
It is when Foucault, Derrida, Butler are recited like mantras, their concepts floating free of the historical and social wounds that made them necessary.
Theory becomes a fetish. Thinking stops.
In this regime, the classroom is not a site of encounter. It is a theatre of citation.
Learning becomes procedural. Texts are mastered but not suffered. Concepts are deployed but never ruptured. Knowledge circulates without consequence.
Dhareshwar asks: What does it mean to think?
To think is not to comment, interpret, critique. It is to inhabit a problem-space so intensely that it reorganizes your perception.
It is to be seized by a question that demands a new grammar.
The Indian humanities/social sciences, he argues, are not structured by thought but by disciplinary consensus.
The human subject they presuppose is secular, rational, universal. But in practice, it is urban, English-fluent, estranged from vernacular intelligibility.
Certain experiences- of community, faith, pain, interiority- are excluded not by accident but by design.
They do not conform to the protocols of legibility. They are rendered unintelligible within the sanitized frameworks of liberal academia.
This is epistemic violence.
Dhareshwar is not asking for inclusion. He is demanding a different epistemology.
A new humanities would not add voices to the archive. It would disrupt the archive.
It would invent concepts adequate to life as it is lived, not as it is theorized from elsewhere.
Intellectual responsibility, for him, is the capacity to respond to the world by letting it restructure thought itself.
To think is to risk being undone. To let concepts emerge from the intractability of lived contradiction.
He offers no method, no toolkit. Because true thought cannot be routinized.
It begins where citation fails. Where language cracks. Where existing concepts no longer suffice.
This is not interdisciplinarity. It is incommensurability as pedagogy.
Sites of Learning and Intellectual Parasitism is not against the West, but against intellectual comfort.
Not a call for more critique, but for conceptual invention born of real stakes.
If the humanities are to live, they must learn to think again. (end)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
How did the British and missionaries react to bare-chested women in South India? A story of colonial morality, caste, and cultural erasure that still shapes our thinking on dress and modesty today.
A thread 👇
A company painting of a basket maker and his wife, late 18th century.
In pre-colonial South India, women—across many castes—often went bare-chested. This was not seen as shameful. It was part of local aesthetics, climate, and caste codes. Modesty had a different meaning.
Enter the British and Christian missionaries with their Victorian morality, which equated nudity or partial nudity with "barbarism" or "backwardness".
The bare-chested woman became, to them, a symbol of India’s moral decay.
"The construction of a mosque on a spot regarded as sacred by the conquered population was meant as an insult… an insult to an ancient idea, the idea of Ram.”
"A convert’s deepest impulse is the rejection of his origins.”
In an interview published in Outlook magazine, Naipaul had said;
"You say that Hindu militancy is dangerous. Dangerous or not, it is a necessary corrective to the history I have been talking about. It is a creative force and it will prove to be so."
"So in India at the moment, you have a million mutinies - every man is a mutiny on his own - and I find that entirely creative. It's difficult to manage, it gets very messy, but it is the only way forward."
Ancient Indian texts (Upavana Vinoda, Kathasaritasagara etc.) talk about two types of gardens.
One attached to a royal place and one that was a public garden.
These gardens were spaciously laid out to include water tanks, flowers, orchard, etc.
Then our historians made Mughals synonymous with gardens in India.
Kautilya's Arthasastra confirms that an expertise in planting trees, shrubs and curating gardens was recognised.
Such plantings are also extolled in the Matsya Purana, in the form of dramas, epics, and poems that contain references to well laid out gardens.
Vatsyayana, in his Kamasutra, the 2nd century Sanskrit text, talks about creating a garden around a house with fruit trees, vegetables, flowering plants and herbs.
The 3rd-4th century Sanskrit text Vrikshaayurveda of Parasara classified plants in considerable detail.
Reflections on schooling and learning by Mundiya Kepanga, the chief of the Huli tribe in Papua New Guinea.
It is westerners who have invented schools with tables, chairs and boards and diplomas. But in my tribe, we had a traditional type of school called Iba Gidja.
For weeks, we grew our hair and, at the same time, learned the rules and how to respect others. We learned to live together in harmony and take care of our planet.
Edwin Lutyens, who was largely responsible for architectural design and construction during the British Raj, when India was a part of the British Empire, had fairly negative opinions about Indian architecture.
"Personally, I do not believe there is any real Indian architecture or any great tradition," he wrote. "They are just spurts by various mushroom dynasties with as much intellect in them as any other art nouveau … And then it is ultimately the building style of children."
He once wanted to buy a Buddha for his wife, but nothing came up to his standard. 'Lord, how ugly everything Indian and Anglo-Indian is . . .' he despaired.
The history of "Made in Sweden" safety matches in India dates back to the late 19th century.
In the 1880s, a Swedish inventor named Gustaf Erik Pasch developed a safer alternative to the traditional friction matches, which were prone to accidental ignition and caused numerous… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
In 1891, the Swedish safety match company, Jönköpings Tändsticksfabrik, started exporting these safety matches to India under the brand name "Swedish Safety Matches."
The matches quickly gained popularity due to their improved safety features and reliable ignition.
However, in the early 20th century, an Indian businessman named Sivakasi Narayana Ayyar recognized the potential of the matchstick industry and established a match manufacturing unit in Sivakasi, Tamil Nadu.