“I Will Never Speak Kannada”

SBI Manager Sparks Language Flashpoint in Karnataka

A now-viral video captures a moment that feels both petty and profound: an SBI bank manager, posted in Karnataka, flatly refuses to speak Kannada to a customer. When reminded that Karnataka has its own official language — and that RBI guidelines encourage local language use — the manager responds curtly:

“I will never speak Kannada.”

She then walks off.

She has since been transferred, but not before the clip set off a digital firestorm.

This incident may seem minor — another viral tiff between state pride and bureaucratic indifference — but it exposes a deeper tension in India’s federal fabric. At its heart is a language question that never died: who accommodates whom in a multilingual republic? Full clip after the jump.

Continue reading “I Will Never Speak Kannada”

India’s Demographic Nervous System: Partition, Federalism, and the Fear of Muslim Majority Provinces

King Khan — I don’t think it’s irrelevant that Muslim-majority regions would have been liminal. Literally.

The previous post got me thinking about demographic engineering, and how it has quietly shaped post-Partition India — not just at the borders, but deep inside the Union itself. When Qureishi redefined the demographic weightage of the Indo-Gangetic, I was reminded of how states like Madhya Pradesh (I’ve had a post waiting on this for months), Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, and Bihar — the so-called “giants” of India’s federal structure — were similarly calibrated. Even the historical Andhra Pradesh (before Telangana split), Kerala, and distant territories like the Lakshadweep Islands show signs of internal rebalancing. The logic? To prevent the consolidation of another Muslim-majority province — something the Indian state has remained deeply wary of since Kashmir’s accession crisis in 1947–48.

The anxiety over Muslim-majority units lies at the core of why Kashmir remains “special” — not spiritually, but politically. Its sovereign ambiguity and constitutional exceptionalism stem directly from the post-Partition plebiscite logic, which India initially welcomed. At the time, Nehru and the Congress were confident of winning that vote. Quaid-e-Azam had thoroughly alienated Sheikh Abdullah, by backing the non-consequential “Muslim Conference” and the National Conference had significantly diverged from the Muslim League. The shift didn’t come until later — particularly after the rigged 1987 elections and the spillover from the Afghan jihad, which together detonated the insurgency.

This raises an unsettling but important question: Continue reading India’s Demographic Nervous System: Partition, Federalism, and the Fear of Muslim Majority Provinces

South India Makes British India Hindu?

TNT Saved Hinduism; Dravidia preserved Aryavarta?

S. Qureshi: “Muslims are today a majority of the population >50% of North British India. If peninsular south was made into its own country in 1947, India would be a Muslim majority country today. Many Muslims actually wanted South India to be a separate country and North India (including Pakistan/Bengal) to be one unit. To say that Indian Muslims who lived in the historical centre of Muslim power for centuries would just get up and leave for Pakistan is just farcical and delusional. These types of ideas were only proposed by extreme right-wing Hindu organizations after partition, and these ideas seem to become mainstream today with BJP. Historical reality, like always, is very different.”

The demographic map of the subcontinent tells a startling story. If South India had formed a separate state in 1947, the rest of British India — encompassing Pakistan, Bangladesh, and the northern Hindi belt — would today constitute a Muslim-majority civilizational bloc. This isn’t conjecture. It’s arithmetic.


The Numbers That Reorder the Narrative

Here’s what the Indo-Gangetic arc looks like today (please fact check me): Continue reading South India Makes British India Hindu?

Open Thread: Rajiv Gandhi, 34 Years On

On this tragic day 34 years ago, Rajiv Gandhi was brutally assassinated in Chennai. It would be timely and worthwhile to respectfully reflect on his legacy — the good, the controversial, and the unresolved.

Rajiv Gandhi - Wikipedia Continue reading Open Thread: Rajiv Gandhi, 34 Years On

Southasia Is One Word

Reflections on Pervez Hoodbhoy at MIT

Zachary L. Zavidé | Brown Pundits | May 2025

Pervez Hoodbhoy needs no introduction. As one of Pakistan’s leading physicists and public intellectuals, he has long stood at the uneasy crossroads of science, nationalism, and conscience. He spoke this week at MIT’s Graduate Tower — the final stop on a grueling five-city U.S. tour, a new city every two days — in support of The Black Hole Initiative, a cultural and intellectual space he’s building in Pakistan. Despite its ominous name, the initiative is a wormhole, not a void: a cross-disciplinary bridge connecting physics, literature, art, and civic life.

What followed was less a lecture, more an exposition — sober, lucid, and grounded in decades of hard-won clarity.


The Logic of Annihilation

Dr. Hoodbhoy walked us through Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine: under long-standing military assumptions, if the north–south arterial route is severed, a tactical nuclear strike becomes viable. But the calculus is disturbingly abstract. Hiroshima’s 20-kiloton bomb killed 200,000. India and Pakistan each possess an estimated 200 warheads. One general once told him that, by crude arithmetic — obscene as it sounds — “only” 80 million would die in the event of a full exchange. Continue reading Southasia Is One Word

Flame Thread Warning

Comments are starting to get out of hand. I usually just trim the offending lines, but moving forward, moderation will be stricter. If something crosses a clear line, I may delete the entire comment—editing takes too much time. This is still a forum for disagreement. But juvenile antics help no one.

If you disagree with the moderation or with me, you’re welcome to voice it—respectfully—in the comments. I don’t want my own subconscious biases contaminating the tone of this site. But I also won’t let it descend into brawling.

A personal view: if Pakistan gave up all claims beyond the LoC, it would be a historic act of good grace—and help South Asia immeasurably. Knowing when to stop is also part of dignity.

First, gratitude to @phyecho1 for flagging the tragic assassination of Dr. Sheikh Mahmood Ahmad, a respected Ahmadi physician. He was a genuinely good man—returning from the UK to serve Pakistan, often offering treatment free of charge. May he rest in peace, and rise in the highest heaven.

Prominent doctor shot dead at hospital in Sargodha Continue reading Flame Thread Warning

“What You Hate is What You Love” — Reflections on the Indo-Pak Obsession

I hadn’t expected my open thread to ignite such a volume of comments. But it’s confirmed something I’ve long suspected: many Indians claim Pakistan is not their rival—but their reactions say otherwise.

Let me be clear: I deeply love India. I venerate her civilizational breadth. But the passion with which some Indian respondents—particularly North Indian Hindus and sections of the South Indian Brahmin class—engage with Pakistan is disproportionate. China, despite being a far more formidable geopolitical competitor, rarely evokes this level of visceral response.

Why? Because Pakistan is the sibling to Bharat. It’s the mirror. And rivalry with a sibling is always more intimate, more consuming. Continue reading “What You Hate is What You Love” — Reflections on the Indo-Pak Obsession

Open Thread — On Foundational Clefts and Brown Pundits’ raison d’ĂȘtre

It’s been remarkable to see Brown Pundits flicker back to life—fueled not just by posts, but by the comments. I’m realizing now that much of what I write draws direct inspiration from those who engage here. This is less a broadcast than a feedback loop.

And it’s made something clearer to me: BP’s real niche isn’t commentary—it’s incision. Academic, civilizational, ideological incision into the deepest fault line of the subcontinent: the Two-Nation Theory.

Every society has a foundational cleft: Continue reading Open Thread — On Foundational Clefts and Brown Pundits’ raison d’ĂȘtre

From Yohani to Nora: How Bollywood Mughalizes Everything

I’ve been watching Royals—Netflix’s palace drama starring Bhumi Pednekar, Ishaan Khatter and featuring Nora Fatehi—and it struck a familiar chord with where our comment threads, concerning Pakistaniat, have been going post-conflict.

It all began with grace.

Years ago, a Sinhala pop hit — Manike Mage Hithe — went viral as an IndiGo air hostess danced mid-flight. Simple. Elegant. Subcontinental. Un-Bollywood.

Two years later, it reappears: Nora Fatehi and Sidharth Malhotra, glammed up in Mughal court-wear, gyrating under chandeliers, mouthing Urdu couplets. Same song, different universe. Bollywood hadn’t remixed it. It had annexed it.

That’s the pattern: Bollywood doesn’t just Hindi-fy — it Mughalizes. Every regional input is re-rendered through a Ganga-Jamuni lens. The vibe is Ganges. The look is Indus. And the aesthetic is unmistakably Mughal. This is the real Indo-Pak cultural divergence: Continue reading From Yohani to Nora: How Bollywood Mughalizes Everything

“Mimicstan”: the burden of Purity from Pagan origins

Kabir: Lastly, KGS and other schools like it are never going to replace English with anything else. English is the way to get ahead in Pakistan (as it is in India to a large extent). The real divide in Pakistan is between those who are Urdu-educated vs. those who are English-educated.

As Kabir states, correctly, that Pakistan’s real divide is between those educated in English and those in Urdu. But what’s startling is that the English-educated class who should, in theory, be intellectually equipped to think critically often recycles the same tired tropes, increasingly unmoored from history or reflection.

The irony is sharp: those schooled in Pakistan’s vernacular languages, closer to the soil, are often more grounded in the idea that Pakistan should not be an alien implant, but a natural outgrowth of the subcontinent. It’s the Anglo-Urdu elite, disconnected from both India and the Ummah, that has imposed a post-colonial ideology designed to obscure origin and suppress complexity.

Let’s call this what it is: a mimic elite with settler instincts. Like Israel’s Ashkenazi founders or apartheid South Africa’s Anglo-Afrikaner elite, Pakistan’s ruling class sought to distance itself from the land it governed while claiming divine or ideological legitimacy to rule it. The mass displacement of Pashtun nationalism, the long war against Baloch identity, the obsession with Kashmir, the suppression of Bengali, the toppling of Afghan regimes—these were not accidents. They were acts of statecraft designed to fracture any natural civilizational or ethnic continuity that could threaten the state’s ideological foundations.

By contrast, Indian nationalism, especially that of the Congress, was pluralistic, even if patronizing. Its flaws were real: Brahminical bias, Hindu cultural dominance, an elitist bent. But it emerged organically from within the civilizational matrix. Nehru and Gandhi, despite their faults, belonged to the land in ways Quaid-e-Azam never did or, rather more tellingly, never wanted to. A fifth generation Hindu convert, QeA cosplayed as a brilliant British barrister with Muslim sympathies (the Pakistani elite are so proud of his pork-eating proclivities). QeA’s creation was brilliant—possibly a poker bluff played to perfection. But it came at enormous cost.

Partition wasn’t merely territorial—it was a civilizational rupture, most violently felt in Punjab, the Urland of South Asia: once serene and syncretic, peaceful and prosperous, suddenly shattered. Continue reading “Mimicstan”: the burden of Purity from Pagan origins

Brown Pundits