Skip to main content

How AI understands the uses of the term pseudointellectual used by Hindutva ideologues

Recently, I made a post about the city of Kolkata and its contributions to global intellectual history. 

Figure 1: My original LinkedIn post

In response to the post on LinkedIn, an account launched an ad hominem attack, claiming his city Bangalore is better than my city Kolkata (although I didn't really claim in the post that Kolkata is my city), followed by calling Kolkata a city that produces pseudointellectuals like me. 

Full disclosure, I did point to the person posting that Bangalore is a hub of Hindutva hate, that produces misogynist Hindutva disinformation on technological platforms and circulates this hate on platforms (posting the link to the following blogpost about the #BrahminGene campaign that was launched by a Bangalore-based entrepreneur: The ideological infrastructures of racist Brahminism, Indian techno-capital, and architectures of violence).

The term pseudointellectual is often used by Hindutva to discredit critical analyses of Hindutva propaganda. 

So, I turned to an AI platform, ChatGPT, asking it to define for me how Hindutva ideologues use the term "pseudointellectual." 

Here's what ChatGPT produced. I think it is pretty accurate. What do you think?

"The term "pseudointellectual" is often used in Hindutva discourse as a strategic label to attack critics, particularly those who question or challenge the ideology's core tenets. Hindutva, a right-wing Hindu nationalist ideology associated with organizations like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has employed this term in several key ways:

  1. Dismissal of Intellectual Opposition: Hindutva supporters use the term "pseudointellectual" to discredit critics as pretenders to genuine intellectualism. The label suggests that these critics do not possess true intellectual rigor but instead promote a distorted or fake understanding of issues. This is often directed at scholars, journalists, or activists who criticize the ideology, particularly those who advocate for secularism, pluralism, or a more inclusive understanding of Indian history and culture.

  2. Contradiction of Nationalist Narratives: Many intellectuals who challenge Hindutva’s emphasis on a singular, exclusionary vision of Hindu identity are labeled "pseudointellectuals." This is especially true for those who question the historical narratives promoted by Hindutva, such as the portrayal of pre-colonial India, the relationship between Hindus and Muslims, and the role of minorities. By labeling them as "pseudointellectuals," Hindutva adherents undermine the credibility of those who offer alternative views on Indian society, history, or culture.

  3. Skepticism of Western Influence: The term is also used to criticize intellectuals who are perceived as influenced by Western liberal or Marxist ideas. Hindutva positions itself as a more authentic representation of Indian culture, in opposition to what it sees as the imposition of foreign ideologies. Critics, particularly those with academic leanings, are accused of being "pseudointellectuals" because their ideas are perceived as detached from "Indian values" and influenced by Western or post-colonial thought.

  4. Undermining Secularism: The Hindutva ideology is often critical of secularism in India, viewing it as a concept imposed by colonial powers that has diluted India's Hindu identity. Secularism is frequently promoted by intellectuals as a central tenet of Indian democracy, but Hindutva advocates call such intellectuals "pseudointellectuals" for defending a system they believe undermines the Hindu-majority character of India.

  5. Cultural and Political Conformity: The term is also used to pressure intellectuals and critics into conforming to the political and cultural norms set by the Hindutva movement. By labeling someone as a "pseudointellectual," the movement seeks to delegitimize them, creating an atmosphere where dissent or critical thinking is viewed as a betrayal of the nation or an act of intellectual dishonesty.

In summary, the use of the term "pseudointellectual" by Hindutva is a tool for discrediting and marginalizing critics, particularly those who oppose the ideological foundations of Hindu nationalism, secularism, or the rewriting of history to suit the narrative of the Hindutva movement."

Popular posts from this blog

The whiteness of binaries that erase the Global South: On Communicative Inversions and the invitation to Vijay Prashad in Aotearoa

When I learned through my activist networks that the public intellectual Vijay Prashad was coming to Aotearoa, I was filled with joy. In my early years in the U.S., when learning the basics of the struggle against the fascist forces of Hindutva, I came in conversation with Vijay's work. Two of his critical interventions, the book, The Karma of Brown Folk , and the journal article " The protean forms of Yankee Hindutva " co-authored with Biju Matthew and published in Ethnic and Racial Studies shaped my early activism. These pieces of work are core readings in understanding the workings of Hindutva fascism and how it mobilizes cultural tropes to serve fascist agendas. Much later, I felt overjoyed learning about his West Bengal roots and his actual commitment to the politics of the Left, reflected in the organising of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), a political register that shaped much of my earliest lessons around Global South resistance, collectivization, and orga...
Read more

Zionist hate mongering, the race/terror trope, and the Free Speech Union: Part 1

March 15, 2019. It was a day of terror. Unleashed by a white supremacist far-right terrorist. Driven by hate for brown people. Driven by Islamophobic hate. Earlier in the day, I had come across a hate-based hit piece targeting me, alongside other academics, the University of Auckland academic Professor Nicholas Rowe , Professor Richard Jackson at Otago University, Professor Kevin P Clements at Otago University, Dr. Rose Martin from University of Auckland and Dr. Nigel Parsons at Massey University.  Titled, "More extremists in New Zealand Universities," the article threw in the labels "terror sympathisers" and "extremist views." Written by one David Cumin and hosted on the website of the Israel Institute of New Zealand, the article sought to create outrage that academics critical of Israeli settler colonialism and apartheid are actually employed by universities in New Zealand. Figure 1: The web post written by David Cumin on the site of Israel Institute ...
Read more

Whiteness, NCA, and Distinguished Scholars

In a post made in response to the changes to how my discipline operates made by the Executive Committee of the largest organization of the discipline, the National Communication Association (NCA), one of the editors of a disciplinary journal Rhetoric and Public Affairs (RPA), Professor Martin J. Medhurst, a Distinguished Scholar of the discipline, calls out what he sees as the threat of identity (see below for his full piece published in the journal that he has edited for 20+ years, with 2019 SJR score of 0.27). In what he notes is a threat to the "scholarly merit" of the discipline, Professor Medhurst sets up a caricature of what he calls "identity." In his rhetorical construction of the struggles the NCA has faced over the years to find Distinguished Scholars of colour, he shares with us the facts. So let's look at the facts presented by this rhetor. It turns out, as a member of the Distinguished Scholar community of the NCA, Mr. Medhurst has problems wit...
Read more