Language is a double-edged sword: it can be used to illuminate truth or fabricate deceit. In political parlance, those who control language control perception, and perception can either anchor a nation’s identity or distort it into oblivion. Over the past century, a linguistic invasion has occurred in India. Leftist ideologues, with a lexicon of borrowed terminology, have peddled the notion that Indian nationalism is an imagined fallacy: a falsehood invented by reactionaries. However, the drawback to this formulation is that these ideologues are so eager to paint nationalism as a fabrication that they conflate ‘invention’ with ‘falsity,’ rather than appreciating the notion of ‘imagination’ and ‘creation’ as Benedict Anderson in “Imagined Communities” points out in his critique of Gellner’s ideas.
Leftist thinkers and intellectual opportunists have, time and again, tried to frame India’s cultural resurgence as a regressive reaction, ignoring that communities are to be distinguished, not by their falsity or genuineness, but by the style in which they are imagined. They have failed to recognise that Indian nationalism is not some concoction by opportunistic elites, it is an organic construct born of an ancient civilisation, vibrant with the spirit of Sanatana Dharma. This nationalism is an act of imagination that binds an incredibly diverse people under a common civilisational ethos. Yet, in their anxiety to modernise and secularise, these self-proclaimed custodians of intellectual integrity have adopted a colonial vocabulary, reducing India’s heritage to a caricature of their Marxist imaginings.
In Perversion of India’s Political Parlance, the author, Sita Ram Goel meticulously dissects how Leftist language has systematically infiltrated and corroded the discourse of Indian nationalism. It unmasks the Communist imperialism that masquerades under the guise of progressive rhetoric. Through this book, we are forced to confront the reality that the very language used to frame our politics is tainted, loaded with concepts and categories that are meant not to uplift, but to demean and diminish. The author lays bare the imperialist nature of this linguistic subversion, urging a reclamation of India’s authentic narrative: a revival of a language rooted in its ancient cultural and spiritual values, as opposed to the divisive imports that have plagued us for too long. This is not merely an academic treatise; it is a clarion call to restore the authenticity of our imagination, and to assert a nationalist vision that is unapologetically our own. This work constitutes a significant contribution to the understanding of the interplay between language, ideology, and national identity in India.
The author adopts a staunchly nationalist and critical stance, asserting that India’s political language has been systematically corrupted by external ideologies: namely Islamic, Christian, and Communist influences. Central to this critique is the depiction of Leftist language as a form of “Communist imperialism” that has undermined authentic Indian nationalism. By dissecting the contributions of pivotal figures such as M.N. Roy and analysing the internal dynamics of the Indian National Congress, the author emphasises on the necessity of purging these detrimental influences to restore genuine Indian nationalist discourses.
From the first chapter, titled “Something Seriously Wrong Somewhere,” the book takes readers on a journey through a systematic critique of the vocabulary that has infiltrated India’s political and ideological space. The author spares no punches in his assessment of the forces that have sought to pervert Indian society’s foundational cultural and nationalist elements. The book contends that the consequences of this perversion have been devastating to India’s self-image, unity, and identity.
The book commences by delineating the bifurcation of Indian nationalism into two distinct schools of thought during the freedom struggle. The author, serving as secretary to Shri Jayaprakash Narayan (J.P.), recounts an encounter that reveals the schisms between different schools of thought during the independence struggle.
● Bourgeois Liberals: Described as “denationalised intellectuals,” this group was heavily influenced by British liberalism and sought to reform India in the image of 19th-century Britain. They dominated the Indian National Congress until the advent of the Swadeshi Movement. The author notes, “Roy refers to them as bourgeois liberals, modern intellectuals, radical leaders, moderates, radical intelligentsia and also as denationalised intellectuals – a name bestowed upon them by the opposite school of thought.”
● Orthodox Nationalists: Labeled as “Hindu nationalists” and “extremists,” this faction drew inspiration from India’s ancient culture and spirituality, aiming to build a self-reliant nation rooted in Sanatana Dharma. On this, he marks on the notoriousness of MN Roy, by stating “He makes a distinction between Hindu nationalism and Indian nationalism which, according to him, is a more comprehensive term.”
The author critically examines M.N. Roy’s role, portraying him as the “harbinger of Communist imperialism” in India. Roy’s denial of India’s historical nationhood and his critique of Gandhism are depicted as foundational elements that have significantly shaped Leftist political discourse in the country.
Chapters such as “The Sources of Leftist Language” and “The Character of Leftist Language” methodically lay bare the ideological underpinnings of the language that has hijacked India’s socio-political narratives. The book forcefully argues that this language was deliberately imported from Soviet Marxism, with an agenda of cultural subversion. The author also highlights that this was no accidental infiltration: it was a targeted, planned, and insidious effort to alter India’s political lexicon, so much so that words like “progressive,” “secular,” and “revolutionary” now have meanings that differ vastly from their original definitions.
It’s frightening how powerful words can be. Here’s a simple table that outlines some of these words and shows the established binaries:
These binaries have produced a battleground in which the Hindu is always wrong. These binaries represent a restricted spectrum into which the enormous Hindu worldview has been shoved and compressed. These binaries, to use the phrase of Prime Minister Hun Sen of Cambodia, “cut the head to suit the hat.”
One of the central tenets of the book is how the terminology associated with “Leftist language” has been deliberately crafted to delegitimise genuine nationalist movements. Terms like “Hindu communalism,” “reactionary,” and “revivalist” have been turned into pejoratives to demonise any efforts towards cultural self-reclamation. The author’s argument that such terms have been selectively used to paint anything remotely connected to Indian tradition or cultural pride as inherently backward and bigoted is forcefully presented. By pointing to historical figures like Mahatma Gandhi and how even Gandhism was labeled as “the most reactionary form of Indian nationalism,” the author sheds light on the utter ideological bias embedded in this rhetoric, further supported by the assertion that “Leftists appropriated Gandhi’s legacy posthumously,” using his principles to “delegitimise Hindu nationalism.” Roy’s assertion that “India had never been a nation before the British conquest” is another point highlighted in the book , which is a serious and derogatory remark on how India has been imagined for centuries, demeaning indigenous nationalism and imagination of community by portraying it as a construct of Western-influenced intellectuals.
The chapter “The Sources of Leftist Language” is particularly insightful, delving into the influence of Soviet-backed intellectual groups that gained prominence during the Cold War. By citing specific instances where prominent leftist thinkers were funded or inspired by Soviet propaganda, the author provides a detailed account of how these terminologies entered academic curriculums, political speeches, and ultimately the mainstream consciousness. The infiltration wasn’t merely limited to the adoption of Marxist terminology but extended to the framing of Indian history itself, where colonial-era narratives were reshaped to present India as a fragmented society that was ‘unified’ by outside forces, thereby undermining indigenous accomplishments and unity.
Then, the book put light on how this linguistic manipulation served to entrench certain ideologies, making it difficult for opposing viewpoints to gain traction within public discourse. By co-opting these key terms, the leftist narrative was able to frame political arguments in a way that made dissent seem regressive or even morally wrong. The chapter “Words Which Defy Dictionaries” is an examination of how these terminologies have evolved to suit particular ideological agendas, effectively becoming weapons of propaganda, thus turning language itself into a battleground for political dominance. This manipulation led to what the author terms as ‘ideological imprisonment,’ where political language was strategically engineered to delegitimise nationalist thought. By citing Orwellian parallels, the author effectively paints a dystopian picture of the Indian political landscape, wherein language has become a tool for societal control.
Another compelling argument presented is how figures like Jayaprakash Narayan, who were initially antagonistic towards organisations like the RSS, eventually changed their perspectives after interacting with them directly. This anecdote in the beginning was to outline the dangers of ideological propaganda and the necessity of firsthand experience and rational judgment. Narayan’s experience is portrayed as a classic example of how preconceived biases, rooted in years of indoctrination by leftist rhetoric, could be shattered when confronted with the reality. The author uses this example to argue that the leftist hold over media and academia has been so strong that individuals are systematically kept away from any engagement with nationalist groups, hence perpetuating false stereotypes.
The narrative of Narayan’s transformation is backed by letters and interviews that provide an unfiltered glimpse into his changing thoughts, highlighting how genuine exposure to the ideological ‘other’ can deconstruct years of cultivated bias.
The book also takes on the role of the intelligentsia and academia in perpetuating these distorted narratives. In the chapters “The History of Leftist Language” and “The Role of Leftist Language,” the author accuses the so-called intellectuals of being willing agents of ideological imperialism. From Communist sympathisers in academia to those pushing Soviet-backed narratives during the freedom struggle, the book spares none in its critique. The author argues that these individuals have done immense harm to India by perpetuating foreign ideologies that were inherently incompatible with the Indian ethos.
Furthermore, the book presents evidence of how this intellectual class deliberately marginalised voices of indigenous traditions, creating an environment where Indian cultural values were portrayed as backward or out of touch with modernity. This systematic sidelining of native perspectives, the author contends, has led to a form of intellectual colonialism that persists to this day, stifling the true potential of Indian thought and innovation. The chapter also includes interviews with academics who faced ostracism for promoting indigenous viewpoints, presenting the intellectual intolerance that the left had fostered within academic institutions.
SRG analyses the source, character, history, and role of Leftist language, revealing its weaponisation. He highlights a common linguistic thread across imperialism that undermined India’s unity and ideals. Using these characteristics, SRG maps each wave of coloniality and how it “checked the box” with its own flavour of imperial language:
Perhaps the most powerful part of the book is the call for reclaiming a language of Indian nationalism. In the chapter “Towards A Language of Indian Nationalism,” the author passionately advocates for a renaissance of Indian thought and language—one that draws from the country’s cultural heritage and is rooted in Sanatana Dharma. This section is the culmination of the book and ideas presented by the author, and towards a solution, against this ideological subjugation that has kept India intellectually colonised even decades after political independence. The author’s insistence that India must craft its political language without the influence of imported ideologies is compelling.
The book encourages readers to look beyond mere political independence and recognise the importance of cultural and intellectual sovereignty. The author goes further, analysing how traditional Indian concepts like dharma, karma, and swaraj have been misinterpreted or simplified in mainstream political discourse, and urges a return to the profound, nuanced understanding that these terms originally conveyed.
While the book makes a persuasive case against leftist ideologies, it largely ignores the shortcomings of right-wing groups and does not adequately address the complexities of India’s socio-political landscape, leaving it vulnerable to accusations of being one-sided and rather more lenient towards nationalist historians. In conclusion, Perversion of India’s Political Parlance is a must-read for anyone looking to understand the ideological battles that have shaped contemporary India. It is not an easy read—both in terms of content and tone—but it is an essential one for those who wish to understand how language shapes thought, and how, in the Indian context, it has been used to systematically undermine the idea of India itself. It is a timely reminder that political narratives are not benign: they are powerful tools that can either uplift a nation or drag it down into chaos. This book is a wake-up call for those who care about India’s future and are willing to confront the harsh realities of its political discourse head-on.
Comments