Namaste everyone! This is Ritu Rathaur here. There is a growing awareness in the Hindu society about the state sponsored discrimination wherein they feel their places of worship, their places of educational institutes are not being controlled by them. And there are schemes which are pro-minority and majority have no role to play in this. And these are the issues which they feel should be discussed and debated upon. I have with me Rahul Diwan. Hi Rahul, welcome aboard. Rahul runs, he is the founder of a foundation called Srijan Foundation, which runs non-formal schools He also runs a YouTube channel by the name of Srijan Talks. Rahul is one of the founder members of this Hindu Charter movement. The second guest that we have is Sankrant Sanu. Welcome Sankrant. -Thank you! -Sankrant is a very popular figure on social media, very active person on twitter who keeps giving his commentary on Indic civilization. Started a venture called Garuda Prakashan wherein he is publishing books related to Indic renaissance. He has recently published a, his organization Garuda has recently published a book on Urban Naxals which has been a bestseller written by Vivek Agnihotri. He himself has written a book on languages called, “The English Medium Myth”. wherein he feels that Indian languages are not getting the importance that they should get. And the third person is our rockstar, Rajiv Malhotraji. Welcome aboard Rajivji. Thank you! -So, my first question here goes to Rahul Diwan from Srijan. What is Hindu Charter all about? -There is no real founder members, so, I would like to correct you. Everybody is a member. Anybody can make it a, you know, their own charter. The primary point on our minds was the Dr. Satyapal Singh Bill which is in the parliament. Yeah? It actually asks for amendment of Articles 26 – 30. That’s how it all started. -My question to Rajivji is that you have been living in US for decades now. And you have also travelled across the world. Rajivji please tell me, have you ever experienced this kind of state sponsored discrimination against the majority of the country that you are living in? The idea of minority assumes that the majority has been powerful. In the US the minorities are the people who were either finished off the native Americans were devastated and destroyed. And they are living as a minority and need protection because the white Euopean majority came in. Or they are blacks who were brought in as slaves. They are the minority. And similarly, in Europe, the minorities are, for example, Muslims in France and England, they are immigrants from somewhere else. India is the only major civilization I know of where it has been ruled by a foreign minorities for a thousand years. So, it is very interesting. Numerically they are minorities. The Muslims are minorities. The Christians are minorities, but in terms of power for a thousand years, they are the ones who ruled over the majority. So, here you have a case where minorities who are former rulers and who have language an advantage and lot of infrastructure owned by them and lot of links with foreign nexuses where, who sent them to come and rule. You have all of that advantage in their hands. But numerically because they are minorities, the idea of minority rights which is applicable in the west is being brought to India on that basis. So, I think, the whole question of who is the minority needs to be debated and I have asked for that kind of a thing for many years. Now, as far as rights are, as far as giving privileges is concerned, you know, there is no anti-Christian clause in the United States in a way which says that the Christians are the majority we should take quotas away from them and give it to non-Christians. That would be considered laughable. It would be considered total joke. It would be a violation of the constitutional separation of church and state. So, there is no you know, muzzling the Christians because they are majority and they are too powerful. There is no such thing in United States, as there is in India taking the majority religion and trying to suppress it, trying to push it down on the basis that, you know, maybe it’s too powerful, too large and so on and so forth. So, there is no example of this sort where the constitution, the law, the systems are anti majority religion. I don’t see that anywhere. Certainly, you will not see anti-Islam in any Islamic country. You will not see anything anti-Confucianism in China. You will not see anti-Christianity in any European country or United States. So, I think this is a very strange thing in India. It’s actually a colonial inferiority complex that our elite have. They are trying to prove to their western masters that, you know, we are really going to beat ourselves up, we are going to beat ourselves up to prove to you that we are very liberal. So, it’s a great way to break up a country. To kind of really bashing at the start bashing at the majority and then look for a reaction against, from them. And when the reaction comes you can go to all the social media and all your sponsors in the western world and say, Oh, you know, the Hindus are angry without explaining why they are angry. So, I am quite concerned about this anti majority-ism, and minority-ism in India which has become very stable politics. -Sankrant, I want your response on this. You yourself having lived in US for such a long time. Sure! It’s a really a strange phenomenon in India. In fact, practically in any other country of the world, the minorities would be vying to get the same rights as majority. The very fact that we have to have the Hindu Charter and the very first clause of the Hindu Charter is, upgrade the status of the majority to that of minorities in India. If we look at how ridiculous that ask is, you see what strange situation India has created. And I think there are a couple of impulses here. If you compare to the US for instance, what the US understand by secularism of by what they call establishment clause, a state and religious institutions are completely kept separate. So, the state will not fund religious institutions which will teach for instance, religion officially. Nor will they interfere in the functioning of religious institutions. In India it’s the exact opposite. The state can and does fund religious institutions as long as they have the minority tag. This would be completely illegal in the United States. You could not do this at all. Not only that, in the United States all the sorts of scholarship and the schemes that India has put together, you know, you have special schemes for craftsmen from minority communities, you have special scholarships that only if you belong to certain religion, as long as you are not Hindu, you can get. These would be completely illegal under the US Constitution. In fact, the US census cannot even ask for the religion. Let alone do it for a scheme of our government scheme that would discriminate on the basis of religion. So, it’s an absurdity I will just add one final point which is, you know, our former Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh had made the statement that minorities have the first right on resources. Now, I have to ask, what kind of country or what kind of system would say minority of people should have more rights than the majority. The only modern era state that I can think of is South Africa where a minority white people had more rights than the majority of coloured people. So, the system in India is what I would call a religious apartheid state in which the minority has greater rights than majority and the majority is pleading to the state to give them the same rights. -The hegemony between the media, the judiciary, the left radicals co-occupy this, legitimize this apartheid and any voice which is trying to, you know, which comes up asking for equal rights for the majority is termed as nonsense. Absolutely! Asking for equality, asking for pluralism, you become a right-wing Hindu fascist. Right? And supporting a system of apartheid of discrimination is supposed to be the liberal order of things. -Major Hindu temples are being controlled by the state. By this government, the central government, the state governance, all the donations, funds are being used by the state. The exclusive, The excuse they give is, the excuse they give is that the Hindus will not be able to manage their religious organizations very well. What’s your take on this? Many times I have said that if Christians in India can manage their own churches and Muslims can manage their own mosques, and Gurudwaras by the Sikhs and so on, you can go around this, you know. Then why is it that only Hindus are considered irresponsible and not able to manage their own temples. And the government has to force itself, it’s not a voluntary takeover, it has to force itself on the pretext that this is good for the Hindus that the government is managing their temples. This is utter nonsense. This was done by the British. This whole temple control stuff started by the British. And the Indian authorities have not had the courage, the audacity to kick this whole colonial laws out. They just continued these kind of a laws. The British did it to divide different religious people against each other. So, you know, Hindus being the majority it was very important to control their temples because lot of money was being given to the temples. And rather than the temples being free to reinvest that money for the civilization, for its education and writing books and scripts and manuscripts and preserving all the culture rather than letting the tradition fund itself, the British wanted to kind of get their hand on it. So, Indian government has continued this. It is completely ridiculous. So, you don’t have to give the analogy of how do the US Of course, there is no such thing as government, there is no government department that can run any religious organization. The department even such a thing doesn’t even exist in the US. But why do we want even bother with US, even in India, all we seek is the same treatment as the other minority religions are getting. When I tell this to my American friends, they can’t believe it. They think that this is a joke. And this is something so outrageous. How is it tolerated? And yet it is being tolerated. Rahul, my question to you. As Rajivji said that we are, you know, facing this state sponsored discrimination. You said just a while back that Articles 25 to 30 are the reasons that we are facing this kind of religious apartheid. Could you please explain a little bit about them? Sure. -What are Article 25, what exactly is happening between them? -So, I will not go into the legalities too much, but, you know, first a little background here. What happens is that Hindus normally tend to get very emotional about say, temples or RTE or our educations, instituitions, you know us not being able to teach Mahabharat and Ramayana in our schools or even yoga, for example. Right? And there is this whole narrative about, you know, This is what we need to do. We have to change the system. What we do not realize is that, and we vent our anger against say the judges and the Supreme Court and so on so forth. They are only interpreters of law. Where does the law comes from is the constitution. Now, Articles 25 to 30 were inserted during the constituent assembly debates. And they were inserted because, you know, we wanted to create an equal state for all minorities. Right? So, they were very anxious that is India going to be an, give equal rights to all minorities when the new modern nation state you know, as it was being formed. So, these articles were inserted for all of that. Now, there are some nuances You know, for example, there is a history of discrimination against purportedly lower classes among Hindus. So, there was, for example, 25(2)(b) a clause of throwing open temples to Hindus of all sections of society, for example. Now, these things between 25(2)(b), 26, there has been a lot of interpretation, misinterpretation and so on so forth which has led to, you know, various kinds of judgements. You know, just to give you an example, there is, you know, use of the phrase, religious denomination which has come up in the Sabrimala case. There is no definition of religion or a definition of a denomination. So, everything has to be interpreted. Right? Now, all of this leads to varying judgements. Right? And what happens is where the situation has arrived, which is not how the people who framed the constitution would have ever imagined, is a state which actually is not only not giving equal rights to the majority, but is actually against the majority. It is putting, it is given like a chair to the minorities while the majority is sitting on the floor. All the ask of the Dr. Satyapal Bill which is in the Parliament. It’s a private member bill. Is that please upgrade the status, like Sankrant was saying. So, it asks for some amendments. For example, remove the words, remove the word, minorities and replace it with all sections of society. -So, Rahul, are you trying to say that these sections 25 to 30 only apply on the majority Hindus? They do not apply on the minorities. They can run their own institutions. They can control their own religious places. Is that what you are trying to say? Yes, so, I will give you an example. So, see, India is a secular country and by that definition when the state touches any form of subsidy for example, whether on land or with teacher subsidies or anything like that. Because the state has to keep an arm’s distance, from promoting any religion, what happens is it, first later, sorry, I will take a step back. It has classified all religious, all even itihasa, like Mahabharat and Ramayana as religious texts. Firstly, that classification has happened. Now because the state cannot promote any religion, what happens is that and if it funds any institution either by land subsidy or teacher subsidy salaries and all of that, from that institution state has to withdraw its hand from promoting anything that is religious. What happens is that and if you, if I am Rahul Diwan, you are Ritu Rathaur and you form an institution, you are given a land by the government, you will not be allowed to teach Mahabharata or Ramayana or yoga in your school. However, the state will not interfere in if I am if my name is Jacob Dsouza or, you know, Jacob Dsouza. -But this cannot be secularism. Then I am free to teach however I want to, you know, run the curriculum. So, Jamia Milia Islamia can have a mosque inside the campus which is all funded by the centre. But an Arya Samaj cannot teach the Satyarth Prakash in DAV Schools which is run by the Arya Samaj. So, my next question again goes to Rahul, to you. It’s on your demand, Charter’s demand on complete ban on beef exports. Why? Right now, only about 75 or 80 legal slaughter houses in the country. India has become the largest exporter of beef in the world. It can be argued that this is not cow meet, which is typically beef, but nobody in the world creates a dinstinguition, distinguishes between buffalo meet and cow meet. India is the only place that makes that distinction. Yes, we export buffalo meet. There are about three crore buffalos which are killed every year. About 45% female buffalos and a large proportion of the rest of them is you know, calves, which is, you know, for tender meat. Now 50% roughly is from Uttar Pradesh alone. What this does is, that there is mass movement of cattle from all over the country because Uttar Pradesh, for example, or Derabassi in Punjab does not produce so many buffalos. When there is such mass movement, there is theft and there is theft of cows also for illegal abettor. Then there is rift in society because all said and done Hindus are sentimental about cows being slaughtered. You can you do away with that? No. Then there is all the gau rakshaks that are coming and the lynching that happened and there is whole rift in society. Our ask is, all these exports, we don’t want to interfere with your dinner you know, wherever you are, in North-East, Kerala or in Madhya Pradesh or Delhi, don’t care about it. Just ban export of beef. Do we really want the two billion dollars that comes in via this? There are only about by our estimates about 50,000 to 75,000 people employed. All of these can be done away and you know, over a course of some period of time a new businesses can be, these people can be assisted to start new businesses. So, there is a proposal coming up the right to return on Indic origin religions. The question is, will this make India into a religious state like Israel? How do you justify this? -Well, I think that the freedom to convert on one’s own initiative should be from any religion to any religion provided it is an act of genuine conversion for your own, by the consumer. It should not be that the seller, the marketer, the supplier is making you convert. So, I think that there is a difference between right of the producers and the right of the consumer. I think there should be no producer right to go around converting people. There should be a consumer right to convert on your own because you have a, from any religion to any religion. If you, once the supplier side the institutionalized religions, start competing against each other which is what is happening to convert more people, and then they are funded by foreign agencies and then they have a lot of reason to, you know, kind of spread kind of negative stuff about each other. Spread nonsense and rubbish that you are going to go to hell, that you are pagans and you are this and that. That is what creates conflict. Conflict is not that one guy had an awakening and he want to be following a certain Isht Devata, he can follow the Isht Devata. It should be a consumer right to have freedom of religion. It should not be a right of an institution to go around converting people on a large scale. That is how I feel about it. Sankrant, a quick question to you which Hindu Charter also speaks about is, you have been advocating Indian languages will boost our economic development, our overall development, cultural, economic, everything. You also wrote a book, the English medium myth. But how does this workout in a country like India which has so many languages and every state is possessive about its language. How do we homogenize this? So, a quick answer to your question. Firstly, I went to about 35 countries or so to study this issue and I found that there is no major country on the planet which has developed without developing its own languages. And without bringing science and technology education into the mass languages of the people. And so, neither will India develop. Only a small fraction of people are able to progress, the vast mass is left behind. Now the question for we have so many languages, we also have so many people. The population of India is one and a half times that of Europe. If you look at the European Union, they have 24 official languages. And you have science and technology happening in 24 languages. You can communicate with the European Union government in any of the 24 languages. You can email them, you can write to them, you can phone them in any of the 24 languages. So, India really needs to develop as a multilingual state and it is the government of India which forces English today. We think that India, the government is promoting Indian languages, but it forces only English IIT It funds only English IIMs, only English AIIMS, it forces English in most of the courts of India. The Supreme Court can only function in English. So, it is the government’s policy which is forcing English and this needs to change. -I think that Sankrant the people will not change the language of instruction unless it leads to jobs. Because the reason, in Punjab they are shutting down Punjabi schools for English is because that’s how you get jobs. So, you your movement needs to shift its focus to the employment market. You need to figure, you need to go convince employers that they should hire people with local language, skills, rather than the interview the HR. You have to go and lobby with the HR departments. The personnel department. That is the department which is holding which is creating English language opportunity and when they are hiring English language people, the interviews are in English, everything, resume, everything written in English. Then, you know, naturally, those guys, their parents send them to English schools. And then naturally the local language schools keep shutting down. So, you have to start with the end product which is jobs. And so, if you look at the jobs, I did this study, if you look at the jobs they will tell you that certain professions lack professional text books in those languages. So, we need engineering books written in Indian languages, we need the law, case studies, the legal case studies are only in English. So, if a lawyer is good, and he wants to represent your case, he has to look at all the case law and this case law is in English. If he is a Hindi speaking educated fellow, who doesn’t know much English, he is not going to approved represent your case. So, now there is language translation, mechanical language translation. What Garuda, your publishing house should do in my opinion is rather than the next few books being in English, you should the focus on Indian language books for science, technology, law, medicine where you set up a centre where you use this mechanical language translation, with the help of human beings who can perfect it later but efficiency with machine assisted translation will be much better. And then you produce, you crank out, Indian language books. Now, that, once that is available, then, you know, then the professional institutions which are creating the job oriented, you know, graduates, they will have the tools for engineering, medicine, business, law, in a local language. Now this is a huge ecosystem job. I have an experience in this, I want to relate to you. We have this history of science and technology in 14 languages. and so, Ganesh Arnal, a very dear friend of ours in Mumbai took his personal money and got five of them translated into Marathi. He did, he spent lot of money of his own, thinking that he will seed something and then the Marathi speaking education minister state level and all that will endorse it. They did not. He went to Marathi speaking publishing houses, they did not. He went to political groups that are rabble rousing the Marathi, you know, Maharashtrian ethnicity. And they did not. He is not been able to get his money back. Nobody sponsored him. So, you know, you have to look at real case studies of what, you can’t just say as a kind of political policy that, you know, stop English and do all this. You got to go down the value chain and see now, why will they do it if they don’t have jobs. And they don’t have jobs because there are no text books in those languages. And those who, people like Ganesh Arnal, who have tried to create the text books, and I gave him rights to all our volumes and said, you translate them to any language. and you keep the money, market, sell, do whatever you want. We don’t want anything, any royalty, any of that. But he is not able to get sponsors. So, really the issue is much deeper than a kind of something that some education HRD Minister can do. -Thank you, so I will just respond to that quickly. Firstly, of course, Garuda is doing this. Garuda has started a medical effort. We are starting, we, our aim is to do both the MBBS curriculum and the engineering curriculum into Hindi to start with another languages. Of course, as you saw with the Marathi example, there is no money for this. This is going to be, -No money. -This is going to have to be funded by people, funded by philanthropists because it’s not a commercial viable proposition at this point to do it. Right now, the AICTE, the governing body for engineering institutions does not even allow an engineering institution to be set up using anything other than English. So, it’s a ban on anything other than English. And the government is not going to fund anything other than English. And as far as the jobs go, a very simple example I will give you. Multinational company when it goes to any other country, when it goes to Thailand, it goes to Korea, it goes to Germany, it goes to France, it gives jobs in those languages. Why is it that in India it’s requiring English? It is because the talent, we are not producing engineering graduates in English What they are going to hire if they give jobs in here? We are not producing management graduates in Hindi. Right? So, it is a, I agree with you but for the complete ecosystem you have to look at all the parts of it. And government policy is a huge part of it and of course, we have to do individual efforts as well. But right now you have a, we have a linguistic apartheid state which simply does not allow, by law, you cannot practice in the Supreme Court. There was a recent case where the judge scolded a district judge who had come to the Supreme Court he was arguing in Hindi and the Supreme Court judge says, don’t you know you cannot speak in Hindi in this court? So, this is the state that we have right now. We have a, you know, as you have said, we have continued the colonial state. We haven’t changed it. -This whole ecosystem is self-funding, self-feeding. And you cannot isolate one place because all of these things feed each other. Policy of the government, the employers, the job market, the training institute, education all of these. Now, the breakthrough can come through technology of language translation. That is a big breakthrough. It is happening. And, you know, it is Panini’s engine in computational linguistic which is doing all this, the brain, the work. So, I think that there is an opportunity to create language base, I mean, machine-based translation which would be 95% accurate, not hundred percent. And flood the market. Why don’t they take, like for instance, you know, take the important books that are being written on any subject and just translate them and distribute them. And you can even distribute them electronically, you don’t even have the cost of printing. So, somebody needs to take this on and this could be the kind of thing to take to the HRD Minister. That, you know, you have to do this. And the Minister of Labour, the HRD and the people who are trying to create jobs, educating them and creating jobs for them, they got to come together. And this has to be a very major agenda for nation building in local languages. So, I would love to move this forward because I am very clear on this that we cannot be colonized and expect to build a great nation that where we are trying to pretend that we are some kind of a European country. Rajivji, you are giving your full blessings to Hindu Charter. -So, you know, my feeling is the issues being raised to the Hindu Charter are all legitimate and valid issues. The question is, how do you go about it? And as I said in an earlier interview, I would take it department by department, ministry by ministry and not just hit all to everybody. I would say that you should take the education issues and let’s set up and appointment with the right people in HRD, let’s take cultural issues, Take them there. Let’s take legal issues. You know, let’s take the Charter, organize it to map it according to government, ministry level breakdown. of specialized things. Then, you know, nobody has an excuse to say, bhai ye to, you are asking me, I am the, I am the wrong guy to ask. I think we should take it like that. And then see what happens. And I would love to be part of it. -That’s a fantastic suggestion. -Absolutely! I think that’s the kind of strategic thinking we need which is how do we actually make it happen. I mean we all have good ideas but how do we actually make it happen. I think Rajiv is absolutely on the right track on that. -One of the things you can do is like in the in my old days, they, you know, you have marketing force which is called a strategic client marketing. So, they are marketing like instead of one salesman having 50 accounts or 500 accounts, this is the other way round. You are marketing to IBM and you have a sales force of 100. You have a 100 people marketing only to IBM. And you know, you have a thousand people in a large company marketing only to the federal government. Like that! And so, when you are doing very very big client marketing the first thing you do is you build up map of that organization. Who makes decisions, what are the departments, what permission this guy needs, who has the authority to do what. You don’t walk in and start telling everybody the whole thing because they feel ki you are just a, you are making no sense. You got to do a lot of research on how the Indian government makes decisions, where are the wheels moving, where are the departments that have what authority. This is a piece of due diligence that has to be done. And I would like to participate in that. I can help you with that. Then, you know, you go to this guy and he has got no excuse. You have taken his excuses away. You tell him this is according to your charter, according to this article that article. This is your job. I am bringing you the proposal. Now, he can’t run away. I think this is how we have to do it. Perfect. Good idea! -Rajivji, aapne bahut achha suggestion diya. Ab ek suggestion aur bhi de dijiye ki ye jitna bhi left liberal media ka gang hai ye sabse pahle attack karega Hindu Charter ke ooper bolkar ki ye to Hindus bematlab pe victim play kar rahe hain. Barkha Dutt ne bhi recently ek video nikala where she actually said, that Hindus are doing propaganda by bringing on this Hindu Charter. There is nothing, there is nothing against Hindus, it’s complete nonsense. How would, how should the Hindu Charter team deal with this? See, I would, I think that I can convince some Christians I know, who are based on my work as swadeshi Muslim and swadeshi Christian I have had actually a lot of private. I haven’t gone public with this, but I have a lot of private, you know, support from Christians, from Muslims saying, haan ham swadeshi hain. So, kya karein? How do we join? So, what I have told them is the way you join is we support each other. If it’s a reasonable Muslim issue we should support it. If it’s a reasonable Hindu issue, you should support it. Let’s, so, I think we can collect, we can collect sort of like a coalition, very diverse coalition that supports this because Specially things, see, there are certain things that are controversial which will affect them negatively. But there are certain things like right to education, it doesn’t affect them. Freeing our temples doesn’t affect them. So, there are certain things which are clearly anti-Hindu which are not for the benefit of any other religion. I mean we should at least form a unity on those points and get them moved first. That’s what I would do. -There is, there was a growing perception that this Hindu Charter is anti-BJP. Yes – no? Is it? Certainly not. To the contrary if I may say, actually what the Charter will do for this government is that if it takes up any one of these points as Rajivji said. They are all legitimate. There may be some nuances to how they are implemented and so on so forth. If anyone of these are implemented there actually be a very large Hindu consolidation in the country. -So, thank you Rahul, thank you Sankrant, thank you Rajivji for this wonderful show and this wonderful talk on Hindu Charter. We will catch you again soon. Thank you! Namaste!