Tag: Religion

Psychology Of Terrorists – Key Takeaways

Psychology of Terrorists Book Cover

I recently finished reading Psychology of Terrorists by Raymond H. Hamden. I decided to write this post to analyze the key ideas the author has included in the book and see how they apply to India.

This post is a deeper dive than my usual posts, so settle in for a longer read.

Reasons for Radicalization

The book places a strong focus on understanding why someone becomes radicalized in the first place.

It could stem from a difficult past shaped by parents, relatives, or even state officials. In such situations, terrorism becomes a way for them to channel their suppressed anger. It could also come from a long sense of discrimination or oppression, which makes people vulnerable to extremist groups looking to push their own agenda.

While this explanation works in many cases, it can’t be applied to everyone.

Take India, for example. Kashmiri Hindus faced years of injustice, yet they didn’t turn to violence. Their response shows that not everyone reacts to trauma in the same way. It also raises a bigger question. Can radicalization really be justified by blaming external factors alone? At some point, there has to be honest introspection about why disproportionate numbers of extremists emerge from certain sections of society. And this introspection can’t come from outside. It needs to happen within the communities themselves, just as the book explains in detail.

Different Takes on Terrorism

When we deem someone a terrorist, it remains clearly subjective and depends on which side we as individuals are on.

If we are on the side of the victims, we will easily call it terrorism. If we are on the side of the aggressor, we might call it something else entirely to justify self-defense.

As the author mentions, one person’s terrorist can be another person’s freedom fighter. So while I might see someone as an extremist for supporting a particular group, they could just as easily see me the same way for sympathizing with another.

This clash of morals isn’t something that can be fixed easily, but it can at least be recognised.

Disguise

Among the aims of terrorists is to delegitimize the government in the eyes of the people as an attempt to bring to the surface what they view as wrongful actions being taken by the government, and have the public on their side.

One of their techniques is to disguise themselves as civilians and provoke governments into attacking the wrong group, which casts the government in a terrible light.

In today’s social media world, it has become incredibly easy to gather people around a cause. We saw this during the 2020 Delhi Riots, where religion-based WhatsApp groups were created to organise protests against the CAA. Protests are a normal part of any democracy and often help highlight important issues. The problem begins when large gatherings get infiltrated or managed by groups that want to cause harm or steer the movement in a direction that was never intended.

Bringing students or young people into political movements isn’t new, but history shows that outcomes can sometimes take unexpected turns. Events like the Iranian Revolution or Bangladesh remind us that unrest and sudden regime changes can lead to even more restrictive systems coming into power. The most vulnerable tend to be women. In Iran and Bangladesh, women-led protests are becoming the norm, but it is met with uncomfortable silence by the global majority.

A concerning pattern is how quickly narratives can shift. When a protest turns violent, and action is taken against those involved, it can be reframed as persecution. In a country like India, where claims of victimhood often circulate through celebrities, politicians, and media, these narratives can be picked up and amplified. This creates an environment where genuine concerns get overshadowed, and the focus slowly shifts from raising awareness to pushing an agenda. It’s becoming harder to take action against someone who has actually done something wrong because the narrative shifts so quickly.

Global Terror

The age of modern terrorism commenced when the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) hijacked an El Al plane coming from Tel Aviv and going to Rome. Planes had been hijacked before, but this had symbolic value as it had a certain aim. It was also the first time in history where hostages were used to meet demands. This operation gained a lot of attention from the media, which worked to increase both awareness and moral panic.

The point about media attention is important because many terror groups depend on heavy media coverage to spread fear. This particular incident marked a shift where the media became a tool for amplifying messages of terror.

The book shares an interesting view on how the media should be careful when reporting such events. Detailed coverage can unintentionally motivate lone wolves to copy these attacks. But there’s another side to it. If an incident doesn’t get enough attention, groups might feel pushed to plan something even bigger just to be noticed. It feels like there’s no real win here, no matter how the media handles it.

Funerals

The first was the so-called Islamic sea burial that the United States had for bin Laden. Several Muslim scholars, such as the Grand Sheikh of Al Azhar (leading world institution for Islamic decisions) in Egypt, condemned this type of burial and confirrmed the fact that a sea burial is against Islamic traditions and requirements. The United States argued that its reason for this type of burial was to prevent having bin Laden’s burial place become a shrine.

In India, the idea of a burial site turning into a shrine is often raised in public discussions, especially by nationalist voices. Historical figures from the Mughal era, who arrived as conquerors, now have grand memorials that many people celebrate. We’ve also seen large gatherings at the funerals of individuals linked to extremist activities. For example, reports noted that Yakub Memon’s funeral in Mumbai drew a crowd of around fifteen thousand people, while Abdul Kalam’s funeral on the same day saw much smaller public participation.

The argument at the time was that there wasn’t enough proof against Yakub Memon, and many attended the funeral as an expression of empathy for what they believed was unfair treatment. But this pattern repeats often. Even when solid evidence exists, parts of society dismiss it as manipulated or fake. This creates confusion and frustration, especially among vulnerable groups, and can unintentionally push some people toward more extreme opinions.

This gap in how different groups perceive guilt and justice is why global events, like the killing of Osama Bin Laden, triggered such mixed reactions. Even when someone is widely known to have committed violent acts, the responses can vary dramatically depending on personal beliefs, political views, and community narratives.

Though President Obama did come out after this event and declare that the United States was not at war with Islam, and that bin Laden was in fact not a Muslim leader, the event was interpreted in a number of different ways by different individuals, politicians, and states.

For instance, Hamas leader Ismael Haniya and the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt both condemned the killing of Osama bin Laden, whereas Palestinian Authority spokesman Ghassan Khateeb and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad both provided positive feedback from the event, saying that it was a landmark event marking the end of an individual who was involved in terror and destruction.

Difference Between Extremism and Terrorism

People like me often use the terms extremism and terrorism interchangeably, but the author clearly differentiates the two:

Terrorism is a call to and threat of violence. Extremism is about achieving a political goal and changing minds to fit one’s own agenda. Al Qaeda engaged in terrorism, and the Iranian revolution was about extremism.

He goes on to cite a report that says extremism will be more of a threat than terrorism in the years to come:

A report by the Strategic Foresight Group (2007) estimates that extremism will be more of a threat than terrorism in the years to come. The objectives of extremist groups focus largely on infiltrating their ideas into the minds of individuals, especially youth.

Extremists are no longer engaging in terrorist acts but are instead aiming to and promising the people of reaching a “better world.” The term better, of course, is relative, since it originates from their own perspective. Their strategy has been proven successful in several countries. For example, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt won a large percentage of Parliament seats in the elections of 2005. Likewise, the theocratic regime in Iran has currently grown and become more powerful and influential.

Since extremism tends to act as a precursor to terrorism, the main issue is how those extremists enforce their beliefs. If a violent means is taken, then those extremists have now become terrorists (Martin, 2009). This smooth dispersion of extremist groups and their success across a number of countries is viewed by many as a dangerous phenomenon facing the coming generations.

In Kerala, there have been instances where groups like Jamaat-e-Islami make statements suggesting that a true believer should naturally support the idea of an Islamic Republic. Views like this find an audience, often strengthened by political narratives and by those who want communities to feel that only a religion-based party can truly protect their interests.

We’re beginning to see similar patterns in small pockets across India. A recent example was the BMC election in Maharashtra, where a noticeable share of Muslim votes shifted from the Congress to Owaisi’s AIMIM. It shows how identity-driven messaging can influence political choices, especially when people feel their concerns aren’t being addressed by mainstream parties.

Victimhood Narrative

When well-known figures like AR Rahman speak publicly about feeling targeted, it pushes the broader anti-minority narrative that is often circulated about India. In many cases, the larger context gets lost. Is the person actually being targeted for their religion, or is there another reason behind it? When the feeling of communalism becomes dominant, fueled by media, politicians, global platforms, and society in general, every other explanation gets brushed aside.

This isn’t unique to India. The victimhood narrative is a global trend, especially in countries with strong free-speech cultures, where organised groups know how to shape public opinion.

The victimhood narrative also pops up when a government is pushed into taking strict action against extremist activities. This creates a cycle where narratives overshadow facts, and public perception becomes the real battleground.

Research conducted by Jeanne Knutson in 1981 allowed her to argue that victimization remains the motivating force behind much political violence in the contemporary world.

Victimization is defined as a personally experienced injustice, which the victim recognizes to be unnecessary (or unjust), and which creates a basic fear of annihilation. Discrete events that may cause victimization and have the strength to change the victim’s perception of the world can cause them to defend themselves or their group in order to reduce the chances of experiencing secondary victimization against the self, family, community, or all three.

Since a majority of terrorist activity will involve some form of victimization, we recognize a vicious cycle where terrorism and victimization breed and feed into one another.

Education

Though many people argue that better education would prevent radicalisation, events like the 2025 Delhi terror attack show that even well-educated individuals can be drawn into violent ideologies.

In November 2025, a car explosion near the Red Fort in Delhi was treated by Indian authorities as a terrorist incident after it killed and injured several people, and investigations linked it to suspects with professional backgrounds. This shows that no level of formal education alone can make someone immune to extremist beliefs.

The author emphasizes this point:

With regard to their educational background, findings suggest that the majority of participants have received some formal education, with 38.5% holding bachelor’s degrees and 23.1% having received high school diplomas. Most participants were reported to have been married (46.2%), while 38.5% admitted to being single and 7.7% divorced.

People across varying socioeconomic statuses, levels of education, cultures, and nationalities can be influenced by radical ideology. In fact, it is noted that many individuals within well-known Middle Eastern terrorist groups, such as Al Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), come from middle-to-high-income families and possess high levels of education. Often, these individuals have specializations in aeronautical engineering, chemistry, and information technology; skills that are used to meet specific goals of the organization, particularly with planning violent attacks.

In matters of extremism, religious influence can outweigh education and even personal relationships.

One clear-cut example of psychopathic traits in a terrorist is illustrated in Nezar Hindawi, a Jordanian terrorist who, upon sending his pregnant girlfriend on a flight to Israel, had a bomb planted in her luggage, unknown to her. This terrorist clearly demonstrates psychopathy in that he was willing to sacrifice his girlfriend and his unborn child, with callousness, and no sense of remorse in doing so.

Blaming External Factors

When terror attacks take place, supporters of the violence often shift the blame to the victims by claiming they somehow enabled the situation. We’ve seen this in debates where writers like Arundhati Roy framed the Mumbai attacks as a reaction to the situation in Kashmir, or where the October 7 Hamas attacks were described by some as a response to the suffering of Palestinians. This was seen even after the recent Pahalgam attacks. Yet the same reasoning is rarely applied when discussing the persecution of Kashmiri Hindus or minorities in Bangladesh and Pakistan. Despite these groups never resorting to violence, their experiences are still dismissed or minimised by people who otherwise speak strongly about human rights.

This selective empathy reflects a broader human tendency. We often assign positive motives to the actions of our own group and negative motives to others. For example, if someone from our social circle fails to contribute to a donation, we might assume they have a genuine reason. But if an outsider does the same, we’re more likely to label them as selfish or uncaring.

The psychopathic terrorist will make “you statements,” thereby accusing his opponent of being involved with criminal and/or terrorist-related activities. He is likely to see himself as the victim rather than the perpetrator. He is likely to make statements such as “I am not the terrorist. You are the one causing terror. You are the reason for all this destruction.”

In such an instance, he is essentially blaming his opponents for his own destructive behavior. If involved with a religious or political terror group, he may use their ideologies to blame oppositional religious or political groups for the destruction from their own violent attacks.

In most of the research, fundamental “terrorists generally do not regard themselves as terrorists but rather as soldiers, liberators, martyrs, and legitimate fighters for noble social causes. Those terrorists who recognize that their actions are terroristic are so committed to their cause that they do not really care how they are viewed in the outside world. Others may be just as committed but loathe to be identified as terrorists as opposed to freedom fighters or national liberators” (The Psychology of the Terrorist, n.d.).

Stockholm Syndrome

According to the author, feelings similar to Stockholm Syndrome are quite common during hostage situations involving terror groups.

While the psychopathic terrorist holds no concern for his hostages, it is possible that he may display a charming persona toward them. Assessing for Stockholm syndrome is vital, especially if the crisis is drawn out for a long period of time, as it could increase the chances of hostages experiencing feelings of affection and trust for the terrorist. If hostages develop positive feelings toward the psychopathic terrorist, this can be dangerous and can interfere with the successful capture of the terrorist, as hostages with Stockholm syndrome may work with or even risk their own lives to help the terrorist.

Religious Angle

The religious angle remains one of the strongest factors behind many modern terror attacks. This pattern isn’t limited to any single faith or community.

“It is certainly true that many horrible things have been done under the cover of religion—the inquisition springs to mind along with Islamic terrorism and the Catholic–Protestant wars that have raged and influenced European and American politics for centuries” (Desai, 2013; see also Valencia et al., 2011).

Dulles (2002) further observes that Christianity has had more than a fair share of religious tensions in human history. Christians have persecuted Jews and fought wars against Muslims, within Christianity; there have been internecine wars, especially between Roman Catholic and Protestants, but sometimes with Eastern orthodox. Influenced by these postulations, casual observers accept as fact, even in western culture, that religion is the worst culprit of the global terrorist attacks (Okoro, 2008)

These characteristics may be illustrated in the followers of many religious groups having the sense of a messianic or apocalyptic dream in their political vision, which comprises the thought of political dominance of a state (or the world) through its association. Believers of these groups take the dream of future prominence gravely, where power and control compensate for their present deprivations.

Methods of Countering Radicalization and Prevention

There are methods to counter radicalisation within communities. In India, these efforts are often difficult to put into practice because they face immediate pushback in the name of persecution or discrimination, a narrative that can easily gain momentum in India and abroad through media and political voices. Still, there’s a lot India can learn from places like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE, where structured deradicalisation programs have shown promising results.

When national security is at stake, the focus needs to stay on addressing the issue rather than endlessly worrying about political correctness.

This approach was utilized by the Saudi Arabian government as part of a multipronged terrorist deradicalization program. By having clerics of the Islamic faith engage in an in-depth discussion of the Islamic text versus misinterpretations used by terrorist organizations, these facilitators served as mentors and built strong relationships with those in the program. In doing so, the Saudi Arabian government claims to have a success rate of 80–90% within their participants, with low recidivism (Bouchek, 2008).

As part of their multipronged approach, the Saudi Arabian deradicalization program utilized family members of the terrorist to help with the reintegration process. In doing so, the program was highly eective in changing the ideology of a large portion of the participants in their program (Bouchek, 2008). If the individual feels a need for belongingness with his family and community, he is unlikely to rejoin his terrorist group.

The process of deradicalization is only one aspect of counter-terrorism, and if utilized in insolation it will likely result in partial success. Family members and the community must be involved in creating positive change for the detainee.

These are some of the reasons why many Gulf countries see fewer terror attacks and remain relatively safe. They have systems in place to identify and address extremist ideas right at the root.

There are two measures mentioned in the book that I do not necessarily agree with:

  1. Another aspect of the deradicalization process involves improving the quality of life for the terrorist. Quite often individuals become a part of terrorist organizations as a result of external factors, such as difficult socioeconomic conditions, as well as internal factors, including low levels of self-efficacy and self-esteem and challenges gaining control of their lives. Therefore, this aspect seeks to reduce potential economic barriers by providing educational opportunities, vocational training, and job placement. By being provided the opportunity to be a contributing member of society, the terrorist will experience an increase in self-worth and self-esteem. Terrorists can also be helpful in deradicalization efforts and researching the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs for other terrorists. This process allows released terrorists to reintegrate back into society.
  2. In addition, the state must be able to provide incentive as positive reinforcement in keeping the terrorist away from the terrorist group. These incentives can come in the form of housing, monetary income, or education or through providing employment opportunities.

Improving someone’s quality of life doesn’t always work when their mindset is already deeply radicalised. Many individuals involved in extremist activity may have a stable education and enough resources to take care of themselves, so their motivations can be more ideological or political than economic.

Better living conditions might help people who aren’t fully radicalised and who take part in lower-level acts, like stone pelting, mainly for quick financial gain, but it doesn’t address those who are already committed to an extremist worldview.

I also don’t fully agree with the idea of using financial incentives as a solution. India has seen examples where offering money or support to separatist figures like Yasin Malik didn’t lead to moderation. Reports over the years have suggested that leaders who were expected to act as mediators continued to support extremist ideas despite the assistance they received. This shows that financial rewards alone cannot shift someone who is already strongly influenced by radical beliefs.

What does work, and what India needs more of, is a strong prevention-first approach. Violent extremism should be tackled early through families and local communities. Prevention programs in schools, workplaces, and community centres, along with clear public awareness campaigns, can make a real difference. These efforts help build resilience at the grassroots level before harmful ideas take root.

Media Exposure

The media has been both a boon and a bane. On the one hand, it keeps the public informed when terror attacks take place. On the other hand, incorrect or sensational reporting has sometimes ended up becoming a useful tool for terrorists.

Media exposure is a goal of many terrorist groups. Attracting the audience’s attention is important to terrorist groups who value the media as they offer a direct outlet for them to attract this attention and get their message across, for free.

In India, we often see extremist actions being described as “mental health issues” to prevent lone attackers from gaining attention or becoming examples for others. But this approach can have the opposite effect. When members of a group feel their actions aren’t being acknowledged, some may escalate to more violent methods in an attempt to get their message noticed.

Though there have been efforts made by the media to censor certain people or organizations that carry out terrorism in hopes of prevention, this may in fact act to further exasperate the situation and cause unheard of or suppressed terrorists to become even more violent and attract the attention they desire.

Some argue that the media has played a huge role in the spread of Islamophobia. To the dismay of many, the media also “protects” individuals who are terrorists, by portraying them in a way that defends their acts of terrorism—for example, by attributing their motivations to mental health issues even though this may be inaccurate.

How Terror Groups Look for Recruits

In the age of social media and constant online access, it has become very easy for terror groups to look for potential recruits on the internet.

The comments sections on websites covering terrorism news reveal a divided world and provide easy access for terrorist groups to leverage their resources to mobilize more support for their cause by spreading propaganda and receiving funds. Terrorist group manifestos are easily available online for the public to access. Terrorist groups have websites that provide information in detail about their cause and how to become a member.

Terrorist groups have Twitter accounts (Murgia, 2017), post videos on YouTube, and have an active social media presence. The millions and billions of accounts present on social media websites provide a huge pool of potential “candidates” for terrorists to recruit.

People who have faced inequality, discrimination or long-term social injustices often become the most vulnerable to radical ideas. When someone feels marginalised or unheard, it’s easier for them to be drawn toward groups that promise protection, identity or a sense of belonging.

Recruiters usually look for individuals who lack strong family support, are dealing with financial stress or are searching for acceptance. These situations make a person more likely to absorb extremist ideas without fully thinking through the harm such ideologies can cause.

Cognitive Dissonance

We also see cognitive dissonance among terror sympathizers. Research shows that while many people may agree with or support a group’s ideology from a distance, most are not willing to actually engage in violence. When someone believes in an idea that promotes violence but also believes that harming others is wrong, the clash creates an internal conflict. This is what we call cognitive dissonance. In simple terms, it’s the uncomfortable, anxious feeling a person gets when they hold two opposing beliefs at the same time.

Conclusion

Understanding terrorism isn’t just about looking at the violence itself. It’s about recognising the layers beneath it, the personal struggles, community influences, political narratives, and global patterns that shape how people think and act.

Psychology of Terrorists highlights how complex these motivations can be, and looking at them through the Indian context makes the picture even more layered.

If there’s one takeaway, it’s that radicalisation doesn’t grow overnight. It grows in silence, in neglected corners of society, in unchecked narratives, and in environments where fear or resentment is allowed to spread. Countering it needs awareness at home, in schools, in communities, and in the way we talk about these issues in public. Prevention, more than punishment, is what actually helps.

The topic is uncomfortable, but it’s necessary. Only by understanding how radicalisation works can we build stronger, safer communities and ensure that extremist ideas find less space to grow.

An Ode to Feminichi Fathima

Feminichi Fathima Movie Poster

Feminichi Fathima is a Malayalam movie I had been waiting to watch for a long time. The film received strong appreciation at several film festivals. Many critics also spoke highly of it in their reviews. Now that it has finally released on OTT, the wait feels worth it. After watching the film, I can say it truly lives up to the praise it received.

The movie is a bold and thoughtful effort by director Fasil Muhammed to explore feminism from the perspective of a Muslim woman. This is a refreshing shift in Indian cinema, where feminist narratives are often shown through a cultural Hindu lens. Films like The Great Indian Kitchen (Mrs. in Hindi) and Thappad shaped much of that earlier conversation. Against that backdrop, this film feels timely and necessary. It adds a new voice to discussions on gender, faith, and everyday patriarchy.

What’s It About?

Fathima is married into a conservative and deeply religious family in the Malappuram district in Kerala. Her husband is a usthad (a religious leader) who expects his household to follow every rule without question. Life in the home is seen only through a strict, conservative lens.

Trouble begins when their young son wets the mattress. Fathima cleans it and leaves it outside to dry, but a dog later urinates on it. Since dogs are viewed as ritually impure, her husband reacts with anger and disgust. What follows is Fathima’s quiet struggle to fix the situation, facing resistance at every step.

The film makes a strong point that a woman in religious clothing can also be a feminichi (a slur often used by Malayalee misogynists to dismiss feminists).

Thoughts

Shamla Hamza and Kumar Sunil deliver standout performances. Shamla Hamza, in particular, is remarkable throughout the movie. It is hard to believe this is only her second project, after 1001 Nunakal, released in 2022. She performs with the ease and control of a seasoned actor. Her expressions carry much of the film’s emotional weight. Shamla winning the Kerala State Film Award for Best Actress feels well deserved. The storyline is fresh and quietly rebellious, which makes her performance even more powerful.

In many ways, the film feels braver than other feminist movies. Dissent is rarely encouraged in conservative Muslim families, which makes this narrative more powerful. The story shows how questioning norms itself becomes an act of courage. That is what sets this Malayalam feminist film apart. It opens space for conversations that are often silenced. Ideally, it will inspire more Feminichi Fathimas to speak up and stand for their rights.

Even though the subject is heavy, the movie never becomes overwhelming. It avoids melodrama and keeps emotions grounded. Light comedy is woven into the narrative. This balance makes the film feel surprisingly breezy. The pacing is tight and engaging throughout. You can easily watch the full 1.5 hours in one sitting without needing a break.

I would call this movie a must-watch for anyone interested in meaningful Malayalam cinema. Feminichi Fathima is now streaming on Manorama Max. You can also watch it via Amazon Prime with a Manorama Max subscription. English subtitles are available.

Nobody Wants This: Exploring Conversion & Interfaith Relationships in India

Nobody Wants This Poster

I recently watched Nobody Wants This Season 2. If you haven’t seen Season 1 of this Netflix series, I really think you should. It deals with a topic that most interfaith love stories never touch — conversion. It’s a sensitive issue, especially among Abrahamic religions. So it felt quite bold that the makers decided to go into it at all.

Season 1 had already touched on the idea of conversion. But Season 2 takes it a little further. This time, you see the boyfriend, who is a Jewish rabbi, and his family, constantly pushing his Christian girlfriend, who seems more atheist or maybe agnostic, to convert. It adds a new layer to their story and makes the whole situation feel even more complicated.

However, this post is not a detailed review of the series, but the many thoughts that came to my mind while watching it, mainly concerning conversion and how it is seen in India.

There are many abroad who have a distorted idea of religious freedom in India, no thanks to misleading, half-baked news articles, often written by left-leaning Hindus or non-Hindus, and I wish to debunk those notions as well and present them from the perspective of a centre-right Hindu who was, till two years ago, a leftist.

Be prepared for a long post, because this is a topic I feel strongly about. If you’re short on time, you may want to save or bookmark it and read it when you’re free.

A Hindu’s View on Conversion

Before I begin, I want to make my religious beliefs clear. I’m not a religious Hindu in the traditional sense, but I’m still a staunch Hindu. If that sounds confusing, it’s only because Hinduism allows this kind of pluralism. You can be spiritual, non-religious, or even an atheist, and still remain Hindu.

The faith makes space for many ways of thinking, which is why someone like me fits comfortably within it. I’m not ostracized for eating beef, nor am I ostracized for not following religious beliefs properly. I can question and I can push back against religious rules I don’t believe in without repercussions.

This freedom that my belief generously allows me is exactly why I strongly stand by the community and call myself a “staunch Hindu.” I advocate for the rights of my community, which a religious Hindu in India may not always do, as they wish to appear secular and tolerant of even the injustices against us.

Now that my beliefs are out of the way, I want to say that even as a non-traditional, progressive Hindu feminist, I don’t support conversion. I don’t understand why anyone has to give up their identity for love, marriage, or even politics, no matter how much anyone would try to justify it.

Most Hindus in India feel the same way, which is why you rarely see the community protesting against anti-conversion laws in some states. Among ourselves, we often say the same thing quietly: “What’s the need to convert?” Of course, many reasons are given. I address them later in this post.

Then we see Indian-origin Hindu politicians in America converting to Christianity to stay relevant and gain acceptance, and it makes us pause. It makes us wonder, “Is America really the land of the free?” And on what basis do they judge India on religious matters when they themselves have not reached full religious secularism yet?

However, in Abrahamic religions, conversion is considered a matter of freedom of faith. This is acknowledged. But this is also a major reason for communal tensions in a Hindu-majority country like India. Most Hindus do not believe in conversion or proselytization, while Abrahamic faiths consider it a part of their practice.

Hindus are of the belief that everyone should be free to practice their faith without disturbing others or disrespecting anyone else’s faith. Proselytization goes against that idea. It feels disrespectful because it implies someone’s existing faith is not good enough. It involves putting down those beliefs, so they are convinced enough to join the new one. So, this “freedom of faith” often comes at the expense of disrespecting others, which was tolerated for the longest period of time, till the Hindu community got the strength to say “enough is enough.”

This pushback is the part that’s often presented to the world as a “lack of religious freedom” in India. Or, to put it more frankly, the lack of freedom to convert Hindus. This clash of beliefs has no solution, and I see it continuing even after a change of government. It’s a label the country has to live with, because there can be no middle ground when people feel their identity is being erased.

A thought I often hear is, “There are so many Christian-majority and Muslim-majority countries in the world. Why can’t they just leave us alone?” It reflects the frustration many Hindus feel when they see constant pressure to convert despite already being a global minority.

Pressure to Convert in Interfaith Marriages

The topic of conversion in marriages is prevalent in Indian Reddit circles. Almost every other day, you see someone saying, “My partner’s parents want me to convert. What should I do?”

From what I’ve seen, it’s usually the Hindu who is expected to convert. And often, the Hindu partner is unaware of what that really means. They hear lines like, “You just need to get baptized. After that, you can follow your own culture,” and they assume there’s no conversion involved. Many agree because they don’t realize the deeper implications. We walk into these situations thinking others are as pluralistic and flexible as we are, and that’s where the misunderstanding begins.

Conversion is also very normalized. When I ask my Christian friends if someone needs to convert to marry into their community, they casually say “yes,” as if it’s the most ordinary thing in the world.

We recently saw this when JD Vance openly and coolly said he hopes his wife, Usha Vance, a Hindu, converts someday. Ironically, the same line appears in Nobody Wants This Season 2 as well, where the Jewish rabbi says he hopes his Christian girlfriend converts one day.

Vance wants Usha Vance to convert to Christianity

For us Hindus, it’s a culture shock, almost regressive, because we never expect something like this from others. At the same time, Abrahamics and international news channels are confused when they report that there’s outrage in India over Vance’s statement. They have no idea why Hindus are angry. So they brand it as “far-right Hindutva.”

Why Do Hindus Dislike Conversion?

Most Hindus find the idea of conversion strange, because the religion itself accepts that God can appear in many forms. It is naturally pluralistic. So someone like me, who is not religious, or even someone who is an atheist, is still seen as a Hindu, because schools like Carvaka already accept that. We also tend to readily accept other gods because of this pluralism. We don’t consider them as fake. We don’t believe that ours is the “only true god” either.

This pluralistic mindset of Hindus is both a boon and a bane. A boon because we naturally accept all faiths, and a bane because we expect the same openness from others, and we don’t always receive it.

On top of that, many Hindus today focus more on careers and less on having children. So there is a natural tendency to protect the current Hindu population from inducements. The Chattisgarh High Court reiterated the same thing recently:

Conversion by inducement a social menace
Chhattisgarh High Court Condemning Induced Conversions

With all this in mind, it’s natural that the majority of Hindus don’t look at conversion in a positive way. Our faith is already mocked by many Abrahamics around the world, who use words like “demon-worshipping pagans.” This makes it even more important to push back against that narrative and simply exist as we are.

Hindus, in short, want the freedom to be seen and respected in their own identity. But this way of thinking is often dismissed by, ironically, the very same people who speak loudly about secularism and freedom of religion. If others believe Hindus can be freely converted, then Hindus also have the right to openly object to it.

Ghar Wapsi

Now, some may argue that even Hindus encourage conversion in the form of Ghar Wapsi (reverting to Hinduism). However, Ghar wapsi is not a core part of Hinduism. It is more of a reaction to the aggressive conversions that have been happening in the country.

Most people I know converted to Abrahamic religions because of perks, not out of faith. They were poor and needed money. They were promised financial benefits if they converted. The fact that they are openly admitting this is nothing any faith should feel proud of. The only reason to convert to another faith should be faith itself. You should feel that the new faith and its principles are right for you, not be influenced by inducements or pressure.

If you ask why the Hindu side can’t match these perks, the answer is simple: we don’t have multiple Hindu-majority nations funding such activities. India is the only major Hindu-majority country, so the playing field is not equal.

Ghar Wapsi is simply an attempt, based on faith alone, to help those who genuinely want to return to Hinduism.

Arguments Used to Justify Conversions in India

1. Charity

There’s this belief that the money given during conversions is out of pure kindness. But I know many Christians who are struggling, working extra hours just to manage their basic needs. If the intention is genuine help, why not support them first?

And, most importantly, why should any help come with the condition of conversion?

Real help doesn’t demand a change of faith. If it does, you have to wonder whether it’s truly help or part of an agenda.

2. Caste Discrimination in Hinduism

It’s also misleading to say that converted Christians escape discrimination to enter a better way of life after they leave Hinduism. Many are treated as “lower-level” Christians, and some have even gone back to Hinduism because of this.

Dalit Christians protesting against Church
Source: New Indian Express (July 2025)

Additionally, consider the points made below (took help from Google Search AI):

Dalit Christians facing discrimination in India

One person told me about a convert in her family who wants to return but cannot, because they signed a financial help agreement that now holds them back.

The good thing is that the caste system within Hindu society is slowly being dealt with. Families are becoming more open to inter-caste marriages, including in my own family. This change is happening faster in the South than in the North. It’s not perfect yet, but progress is real. In this situation, constantly blaming a community that is actively trying to fix the problem does not help.

Yes, many Hindus still support caste, and as long as they exist, the issue will continue. But this divide is also kept alive by leaders, both political and religious, because it benefits them. If caste truly disappears, many of these leaders lose their power to divide or convert Hindus, and that is why the system hasn’t faded away completely.

Instead of building bridges, the “narrative builders” choose to burn them by feeding divisive stories, which only pushes people of different castes further apart. Missionaries often highlight caste discrimination so aggressively because it helps them drive conversions. So you have to ask — are they really helping, or are they using the problem to serve their own goals?

4. Freedom of Faith

The tricky side of conversion in India is that Hindus openly say they are against it. But in Kerala, I often see Christian groups shift their stand based on who is converting and to which religion. They welcome anyone who joins their faith, but they loudly object when someone chooses to leave it.

Churches often use the term “love jihad” when a Christian woman converts to Islam for love. Yet the same groups talk about “freedom of faith” when a Hindu woman converts to Christianity for love.

Since both Abrahamic religions support proselytization as part of their belief system, you would expect them to be supportive of conversions into each other’s religion. But that rarely happens.

Complications of Conversion in Interfaith Relationships

Spoiler Ahead for Nobody Wants This Season 2

Click to reveal spoiler

Considering the many unwanted complications related to conversion, I was really hoping the female character in Nobody Wants This would take a stand. I wanted both partners to accept that two religions can live side by side without one needing to disappear. The ending didn’t go the way I hoped, but since there’s a Season 3 coming, I’m hoping they fix things and take the story in a better direction.

*Spoiler Ends*

In many interfaith relationships, I notice that the Hindu partner often gives in to the Abrahamic faith — if not through marriage, then through the children.

Take Usha Vance, for example. All three of her children were baptized because her husband couldn’t accept the kids growing up Hindu. That feels like a loss of her own identity. It shows that even an educated woman like her is not fully protected from this pressure.

If it were up to me, ideally, I would want the kids to grow up with both religions. But if we had to choose one religion for my “imaginary” children, I would fight hard to raise them in my own. Purely because Hinduism is naturally pluralistic, and it doesn’t invalidate any other faith. It would also matter to me because Hindus are a global minority, while the other religions face no existential crisis. It’s like the global majority religion being generous enough to make space for the growth of the minority.

Also, if I had to pick, I would choose a court marriage. But if the partner insists on a religious ceremony, then it would have to be a temple wedding. You don’t need to convert for that. You only need to respect the rituals. It’s simple, fair, and inclusive.

This is probably why I feel an interfaith marriage may not work for me. I believe in equality between religions, while an Abrahamic partner may not always see it the same way. There would be constant tension, and I am not the kind of Hindu who would compromise on my identity.

When I was younger, I probably would not have thought this way. Back then, love felt like everything. But growing older makes you see the bigger picture.

Pushback Against Conversions in India

More Hindus today realize that they don’t need to give up their beliefs for anything, which is why you see fewer people willing to convert.

Banning of conversion in Indian villages
Hindu Villagers in India Fighting Back Against Conversion

This awareness is slowly growing. I recently saw a post on Reddit where an Indian Christian said they felt sad that many Hindus in India are no longer open to conversion or to “the way of the Lord.” To me, this is actually a positive sign for the Hindu community. It shows that more people are choosing to stay firm in their identity.

And honestly, this should be true for every religion, because love and true secularism do not require anyone to change who they really are.

Netflix Movie Spotlight: Baramulla

Baramulla Movie Poster

What defines horror? We often think of ghosts, possessed souls, or strange creatures with no clear form. Yet I realized there’s another type of horror that hits harder. The ones that combine these supernatural ideas with the harsh truths of real life. This is a type of blend that creates an impact, which stays with you long after the movie is over. This is where Baramulla is about.

What’s It About?

Baramulla opens with a policeman who moves to Kashmir and stays in an old house filled with secrets. He is there to investigate the disappearance of children in the area. Strange events start to unfold at once. The elder daughter senses a foul, “dog-like” smell in the house, even if there are no dogs. The caretaker carries a plate of food every day to a locked room. What lies behind these mysteries? Why are children vanishing? These questions drive the heart of the story.

Thoughts

I can’t, unfortunately, share everything I felt without giving away the main plot. Since I wanted to share my thoughts in full, I placed them in a separate “Spoilers Ahead” block after this section. You can skip it if you prefer to avoid spoilers.

Baramulla left me with many emotions. I was genuinely amazed by how the team crafted it.

The movie tries something that Indian cinema, to my knowledge, hasn’t attempted before in a horror movie. That is, blending the past and the present into a story that’s rooted in historical events. It reminds you that horror has layers. It’s not only about the unknown, but also the known. The horror of trust turning into betrayal. The horror of being dismissed or gaslit. The horror of violence, both mental and physical. Baramulla captures all of this with sharp clarity.

The performances are strong across the board. Personally, I would say it’s a must-watch.

Baramulla is now streaming on Netflix.

**Spoilers Ahead**

I felt emotional through many scenes. The acting was powerful and honest. The pain never felt exaggerated.

By now, you probably know that the film draws from the suffering Kashmiri Hindus faced in the late ’80s and ’90s. Many cast members are Kashmiri Hindus who had to flee their homes. Manav Kaul is one of them. He left Kashmir when he was in grade 4. He moved on to become a competitive swimmer in his late teenage years and participated in state and national-level championships. He has more than 14 national medals in swimming to his credit.

The end scenes also show Sanjay Suri, which is befitting, since his father was killed by terrorists in Srinagar when Suri was just 19. He moved to Delhi after that and became a known face in the film industry.

The producer and writer, Aditya Dhar, who is also Yami Gautam’s husband, is a Kashmiri Pandit. He has been using his craft to share Kashmir’s story with care and technical prowess.

Some Kashmiri Pandit celebrities, like Kunal Khemu, have chosen not to explore their past, and that is their personal choice. In an interview with Smita Prakash, he said he doesn’t know much about that period, even though his own family lived through it.

I feel it’s important for us to understand our history so we don’t repeat old mistakes. Stories like these should be passed from one generation to the next. My only regret is not asking my grandfather about his experiences—how Kerala felt during the Indian freedom struggle, and what life was like then. Those anecdotes have been lost forever, as he did not pass on the stories to his children as well.

It’s remarkable that so many Kashmiri Hindus who had to flee the valley are using art to express their experiences instead of resorting to violence. Their goal is empathy and understanding, something they were denied for a long time, not provocation. Choosing storytelling over violence is admirable, especially in a world where violence is often justified in the name of resistance.

There are also a few Kashmiri Hindus with left-leaning views who defend problematic groups and take part in “Free Kashmir” sloganeering, similar to how a very small number of non-Zionist Israelis speak in ways that don’t reflect the wider population.

Most Kashmiri Hindus (and some Kashmiri Muslims) have appreciated the movie. However, left-leaning Hindus are also criticizing the movie for “propaganda,” even though the events have been well documented. Films that depict and educate the viewers on crimes against Muslims in India are welcomed, while films showing crimes against Hindus are often dismissed as Islamophobic, nationalist, or propaganda. This imbalance is where many activists struggle. They accept one truth but not the other.

People like me have slowly stepped out of that mindset to face the whole truth.

It may take a while, but I really believe the truth will eventually reach wider acceptance sooner or later. And the stories can’t stop until the pain is finally acknowledged. They need to be told, retold, and carried forward. Only then will they finally find the place they deserve.

From 26/11 to Delhi Blasts: Why the “False Flag” Narrative Must End in India

What surprises me more than the terror attacks in India is the speed with which some Indians dismiss them as “false flag operations.” For instance, a look at the comments under Faye D’Souza’s Instagram post about the Delhi terror blasts shows several users mocking the incident and blaming the Indian government instead of the perpetrators. Many genuinely seem to believe it’s a political ploy to influence votes rather than an act of terror.

The “false flag” narrative isn’t new. It has surfaced after nearly every major terror attack in India. Even the 26/11 Mumbai attacks were, at first, misrepresented by some as an internal operation. The claim gained attention mainly because Ajmal Kasab, one of the attackers, wore a saffron thread on his wrist. Those spreading the theory strangely assumed such a thread could only belong to members of BJP or RSS. They overlooked the possibility that it might have been deliberately used to mislead investigators.

Ajmal Kasab with Saffron Thread on His Wrist
Ajmal Kasab with Saffron Thread on His Wrist

Kasab’s real plan, as later revealed, was to die appearing as a “Hindu” and thus shift suspicion away from Pakistan-based handlers, reinforcing the myth of “saffron terror.” Thankfully, due to the extraordinary courage and sacrifice of Assistant Sub-Inspector Tukaram Omble, Kasab was captured alive and later confessed to being a Pakistani national trained by terrorists.

Tukaram Omble and Mumbai 26/11 Attacks
Tukaram Omble

By then, however, the false-flag theory had already gained widespread circulation. Well-known public figures even released a book titled 26/11: RSS ki Saazish? that promoted the “false flag” theory surrounding the attacks.

Influential Figures Promoting RSS ki Saazish Book
Influential Indian Figures Promoting “26/11: RSS ki Saazish?” Book

The “false flag” narrative resurfaced after the Pulwama terror attack, when a suicide bomber from Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) drove an explosive-laden vehicle into a CRPF convoy in Pulwama, Jammu & Kashmir, killing 40 soldiers. Following the attack, some voices in Pakistan, including senior officials, suggested that India might have staged the incident to influence the upcoming 2019 elections. Commentators in India echoed similar theories online, framing the tragedy as politically motivated rather than acknowledging it as an act of cross-border terrorism.

Then came the recent Pahalgam attacks, where Pakistani media outlets and online commentators claimed that India had staged the incident to divert attention from domestic issues and influence elections. They described it as part of an alleged “Indian playbook” of false-flag operations. Soon after, similar talking points appeared in sections of Indian social media and commentary spaces.

In each case, claims of “false flag operations” lacked credible evidence and were primarily rooted in conspiracy theories first circulated in Pakistan and later amplified by certain opinion groups in India.

The Global “False Flag” Obsession

It’s worrying that many people in India tend to believe external narratives about terror attacks rather than trusting verified investigations at home.

This pattern might have been up for serious debate if it only happened locally, but the deflection from religious extremism appears to be a global trend. To cite a few examples:

  • The 9/11 attacks are still viewed by some as a “false flag” orchestrated by the U.S. or Israel to malign Muslims. This is a theory long disproved but still used by extremist groups to recruit followers. They thrive on anger, convincing vulnerable minds that violence is the only response to perceived oppression. In India, extremist recruiters have similarly exploited stories like the Babri Masjid while dismissing events like the Godhra train burning as conspiracies, weaving grievance into a tool for radicalization.
  • The October 7 attacks in Israel were also met with widespread conspiracy claims, framed as a false flag operation meant to discredit certain groups.
  • Likewise, criticism of regimes such as Iran’s leadership, the Taliban, or Hamas is often dismissed as Western propaganda. This is another form of deflection that prevents honest introspection.

Conspiracies Shield Extremists

It’s time to move past the overused “false flag” narrative.

Each time a terror attack is dismissed as a conspiracy, it insults the victims, weakens trust, and blurs the line between truth and propaganda. These baseless claims don’t protect anyone. They only embolden extremists and deepen divisions.

Real courage and national unity will come from confronting facts, condemning violence without bias, and demanding accountability from those who spread hate, no matter where it comes from.

Ending the false flag obsession is the first step toward restoring integrity in how we respond to terrorism.

Kerala Christians and Politics: Which Parties Really Stand With Them?

A picture of a church in India for an article on Kerala Christians and politics

As someone who’s chronically online and keeps up with news from all kinds of sources, mainstream, regional, left, and right, I’ve noticed something important: Christians in Kerala don’t really have a go-to political party anymore.

For a long time, people assumed the Indian National Congress (INC) was the party in Kerala that understood what every community wanted. But that idea seems to be changing fast on the ground.

Communal Conflicts in Kerala: Who Supports Whom?

If you’re new to Kerala politics, here’s a simple way to understand how parties respond to communal issues here:

  • Hindu vs Minority: CPM and Congress usually back the minority community.
  • Upper Caste Hindu vs Lower Caste Hindu: CPM and Congress generally side with the lower caste.
  • Christian vs Muslim: CPM and Congress often stay neutral at first, saying things like “we’ll look into it,” but in the end, they tend to side with Muslims. Examples include the Munambam Waqf issue, Professor Joseph’s case, Sona Eldhose’s conversion, and incidents involving SDPI bullying, such as the hijab case at the Christian-run St Rita’s school in Kochi (details in the image below).
Hijab controversy in Kochi school
News Source: “Hijab controversy forces school in Kochi to close temporarily after parents’ protest” (Mathrubhumi.com)

If you look at any case in Kerala, the pattern more or less stays the same. I’m not sure about regional politics in other states, but I suspect it’s similar elsewhere.

While BJP clearly positions itself as a Hindu party, there’s a growing sense in Kerala that Congress and CPM lean pro-Muslim. Why? It’s not really about religion. It’s about vote-bank politics. Christians are a minority among minorities in Kerala, so pandering to them doesn’t win many votes and can even cost support from other minority groups.

Growth of Chrisanghis in Kerala

Now, in Kerala, there’s a growing group called “Chrisanghis,” a term left-leaning voices like Arundhati Roy have used. These are Christians who support the BJP. Arundhati recently warned Christians in Kerala not to become Chrisanghis, citing conversion attacks in the North as a concern.

So why do some Christians support the BJP? It’s because they view Islamist groups like SDPI and Jamaat-e-Islami as a bigger threat than BJP. Many point to the persecution of Christians in countries like Nigeria by Islamist groups and feel that, compared to such threats, the BJP’s Hindutva agenda poses a lesser danger. At the same time, parties like Congress and CPM often downplay or ignore the activities of these Islamist groups in India, mostly for political gain, leading some Christians to see BJP as a safer option.

Congress support for Jamaat-e-Islami
News Source: “Congress in a fix as Jamaat arm readies to back theocratic state” (NewIndianExpress.com)

Notably, Jamaat-e-Islami has frequently been in the news, even recently, for persecuting minorities in Pakistan and Bangladesh. In India, its branch presents a secular image, likely to gain acceptance and influence within mainstream politics, using it as a pathway to gain power.

It’s also true that Kerala’s two mainstream parties have largely ignored such concerns from the Christian community. Their typical response is often, “Don’t fall for RSS/BJP propaganda,” even when the issues have nothing to do with RSS or BJP.

Thoughts

So what can the Christian population in India do in this situation? On one side, there’s a pro-Hindu or “Hindutva” party that will never fully accept conversions under “freedom of religion,” and on the other, there are parties that haven’t supported Christians when they faced threats from Islamist groups.

From my perspective, Christians should keep all parties guessing about where their votes will go. They shouldn’t strongly back any party, since none fully meets their needs. Take the Munambam Waqf issue, for example: the removal of Section 40 in the Waqf Bill allowed the Kerala High Court to rule the Waqf claim over Munambam land as illegal, protecting Christian landowners. Congress leaders like Hibi Eden tried to persuade residents to drop their case, saying nothing would come of it, while the only BJP MP from Kerala, Suresh Gopi, stood by the people, largely comprising Christian fisherfolk, and supported the amendment that ensured their land rights.

When missionaries face attacks by far-right Hindus in the North, that’s when Opposition parties step in. But in cases like the Chhattisgarh nuns’ arrests over alleged conversions, the local Congress in Chhattisgarh hardly protested, as taking a stand would have cost them votes. On the other hand, in Kerala, protesting the arrest of the nuns would have earned them support, which is why several Opposition leaders from Kerala traveled to Chhattisgarh to show solidarity.

This shows that Christians can’t rely fully on any party and should strategically make their political influence felt.

This is how politics works: there are no fixed principles for political parties. They act based on the local political context. Christians in India should remember this and avoid fully backing or rejecting any party. Instead, they can use this knowledge strategically and wisely, since different parties support them in different situations.

***

Photo by Pratheesh S