Loading video...
Video Failed to Load
What is the RSS vision of citizenship? Political scientist Prof. Niraja Gopal Jayal discusses how she views the relationship between RSS ideology, BJP policies, and the constitutional idea of citizenship. She also shares her interpretation of Savarkar's Essentials of Hindutva and its relevance to the debate on who can... show more
14,904 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)
0 Comments
No comments available
Comments from the original post will appear here
![USCIRF Commissioner Asif Mahmood wants "dialogue" with RSS when he has lost the debate on FACTS. THIS IS AN EXHAUSTIVE LINE-BY-LINE 7-PT TAKEDOWN OF HIS USCIRF REPORT ON RSS, MODI & INDIA. 1. RSS “SUBGROUPS” & VIOLENCE MISCHIEVOUS USCIRF CONFLATION: “Members of RSS subgroups have perpetrated violent attacks against religious minorities, including Christians, Dalits, Muslims, and Sikhs.” WHY IT'S A DOUBLE STANDARD: USCIRF says “members of RSS subgroups”, not that the RSS ordered, funded or organised these attacks. If the conduct of a member or affiliate automatically establishes the culpability of the parent organisation, then should the Cong party be held institutionally responsible for 1984 anti-Sikh riots where Cong leaders were convicted? 2. “HINDUTVA INHERENTLY DISCRIMINATES” MISCHIEVOUS USCIRF ACCUSATION: “The BJP has enforced policies that closely align with the RSS' Hindutva ideology, inherently discriminating against religious minority communities.” WHY IT'S A SWEEPING STATEMENT WITHOUT EVIDENCE: “Inherently discriminating” is a conclusion. Where has USCIRF identified specific discriminatory provisions. Infact, under BJP rule in Karnataka, when backward-class categories were reorganised in 2023, Christians and Jains remained eligible for reservation under Category 2D 3. “RSS SEEKS TO EXCLUDE NON-HINDUS” UNSUBSTANTIATED USCIRF ACCUSATION: The RSS promotes a Hindu 'Rastra' that excludes Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Parsis and other religious communities. WHY IT'S TOO BROAD: Where is the RSS resolution saying “Muslims cannot be citizens,” “Christians cannot hold office,” or “non-Hindus must lose constitutional rights”? In fact RSS engages minorities through Muslim Rashtriya Manch. 4. CAA = ANTI-MUSLIM CITIZENSHIP LAW USCIRF ACCUSATION: The government has discriminated against Muslims through the Citizenship Amendment Act. WHY ITS FACTUALLY WRONG: The CAA creates an accelerated citizenship route for specified persecuted minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan. It does not contain a provision stripping an INDIAN Muslim of existing CITIZENSHIP. In any case the CAA draws upon the logic of U.S. laws like the Lautenberg-Specter Amendment. 5. NRC “FORCIBLY EXPELLED MUSLIM CITIZENS” USCIRF ACCUSATION: “Authorities have also forcefully expelled Muslim citizens in Assam under the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).” WHY IT'S FACTUALLY WRONG: The Assam NRC was published in 2019, but the legal process has not been operationalised to the point USCIRF's language suggests. The Gauhati High Court has recorded that the final NRC has not been notified in the Official Gazette, has not been given effect by the Government of India, and rejection slips have not been issued. 6. FCRA = THREAT TO FAITH-BASED ORGANISATIONS USCIRF ACCUSATION: “Pending amendments to the FCRA [are] threatening the ability of faith-based organizations to continue their operations in the country.” WHY IT'S MISLEADING: FCRA regulates foreign contributions, not religious belief or the right to practise religion. Faith-based organisations can operate in India; the question is whether and under what conditions they can receive foreign funding. The United States itself has FARA, which regulates certain activities undertaken on behalf of foreign principals. If the U.S. can, why can't India? 7. UMAR KHALID = PERSECUTED FOR BEING MUSLIM MISCHIEVOUS USCIRF CONFLATION: “Religious minorities—like Umar Khalid, who has been detained since 2020 for leading peaceful protests opposing the religiously discriminatory CAA—often spend years in jail without a trial.” WHY IT'S SLANDER: USCIRF presents Khalid's detention as though he were imprisoned for opposing the CAA. But SC'S Jan 2026 order records the prosecution material alleging that Khalid played a “central and formative role” in the violence and mobilisation.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2093581423018193080/amplify_video_thumb/2093581331670421504/img/Vy6nO1jUp8dd6VdO.jpg)
