Marco Rubio was all praise for missionaries in his address at the Munich Security Conference. We need to tell him something about missionaries in India—they failed to take over Indians in large numbers.
In his new book ‘Gods, Guns, and Missionaries: The Making of the Modern Hindu’, historian Manu Pillai traces the roots of Hindutva to the British Raj’s Christian conversion project.
In ‘Vivekananda: The Philosopher of Freedom', Govind Krishnan V talks about the monk's deep interest in Christian theology, topics that are arcane for lay Christians.
It is not that Indian churches are without their problems. But Dilip Mandal is wrong to use proselytisation as the yardstick to measure Indian Christianity.
New Delhi: The outsourcing industry, India’s largest white-collar employer, is a juggernaut that has all but stopped moving. The dollar revenue at the top...
By pairing Indian drone engineering with Japanese semiconductor expertise, the two firms aim to develop more advanced autonomous systems tailored to both defence & commercial use.
American objectives are unmet. They neither have muscle nor motivation to resume the war. As for Iran, the regime didn’t just survive, it’s now led by more radical individuals.
What if Bharat simply amended its Constitution to prohibit organised religious conversion? Not a debate about democracy or dictatorship — but a straightforward assertion of a civilisation’s right to preserve itself culturally, spiritually, and linguistically from alien, externally-driven projects.
Abrahamic religions spread historically through war, military conquest, missionary indoctrination, and ideological pressure. In doing so, they committed cultural genocide across entire regions that were living perfectly coherent lives on their own terms. That is historical record, not prejudice.
Hindus have no equivalent history of conversion ‘in the western sense’. Ramakrishna Mission and Arya Samaj are not conversion machines — they are reform and consolidation movements, and their very existence is a deterrent to predatory proselytization, not a mirror of it.
Had this been addressed cleanly at the founding in 1947, much of the reactive identity politics we see today may never have taken root. The illiberal responses we now witness are downstream consequences of a wound that was never treated.
Many countries restrict proselytization without being considered uncivilised. Bharat has every right — and arguably the responsibility — to do the same. The real question to Bharat’s citizens is: how long will you wait?
To be fair to history, Muslim, then Mughal, rule did not make India an Islamic country. Nor will the slightly higher rates of reproduction for Muslims, as compared to Hindus, in India in future.
What if Bharat simply amended its Constitution to prohibit organised religious conversion? Not a debate about democracy or dictatorship — but a straightforward assertion of a civilisation’s right to preserve itself culturally, spiritually, and linguistically from alien, externally-driven projects.
Abrahamic religions spread historically through war, military conquest, missionary indoctrination, and ideological pressure. In doing so, they committed cultural genocide across entire regions that were living perfectly coherent lives on their own terms. That is historical record, not prejudice.
Hindus have no equivalent history of conversion ‘in the western sense’. Ramakrishna Mission and Arya Samaj are not conversion machines — they are reform and consolidation movements, and their very existence is a deterrent to predatory proselytization, not a mirror of it.
Had this been addressed cleanly at the founding in 1947, much of the reactive identity politics we see today may never have taken root. The illiberal responses we now witness are downstream consequences of a wound that was never treated.
Many countries restrict proselytization without being considered uncivilised. Bharat has every right — and arguably the responsibility — to do the same. The real question to Bharat’s citizens is: how long will you wait?
Wait for the next census. You might get a shock.
To be fair to history, Muslim, then Mughal, rule did not make India an Islamic country. Nor will the slightly higher rates of reproduction for Muslims, as compared to Hindus, in India in future.