Niranjan
First-time writer sick of the tirade against Anand, just voicing some support (not that Judge Saab needs it). Modi and government bashing is easy and we have Abhi to do it in very colourful words. I don’t expect Anand to participate in it. Rather than pass black and white judgements on incidents, he provides a historical/cultural/legal context which brings out tremendous nuance. That’s what critical thinking is all about, isn’t it?
Really enjoy listening to him speak, it is very instructive to see him take his time to carefully construct his thoughts (Mr Sekhri, take some notes jk). He’s said it before – he provides views which are not commonly obvious.
Been a while since you recommended some pleasant readings on the banality and meaninglessness of life, keep ‘em coming! Also would love a What’s Your Ism with Anand.
Cheers to the NL Team
Kunal Kamra
What do you guys think of stand-up comedians like Samay Raina? For context, his humour includes gems like “A few days ago, I tweeted something funny about my girlfriend, but when she didn’t like it, she made me delete it. Next time I suggest an abortion, I better not hear ‘my body, my choice’.”
When progressives call him out, he blames the left. Recently, he also urged people to burst firecrackers during Diwali, criticising environmentalists for their “selective awareness”. He’s a fan of The Kashmir Files and cracks jokes about Kashmiri Muslims, which are more about stones and bombs than actual humor.
I used to think everything could be joked about in the name of artistic freedom, but comedians like Samay are making me rethink that. Oh, and he’s a favorite of the bhakt crowd too.
Rohit
I noticed a thing in every other rally of Modiji. He notices some people climbing on walls or towers to see the stage and he calls them out, showing huge concern for their safety and well-being, and the media carries it out like what a good deed Modiji has done. I think it’s staged coz it happens very often and if you think the same, please do a story on this, it would be fun
RS
I am not saying Abhinandan Sekhri shouldn’t be on NL Hafta, but I have to say that I enjoyed the dynamic in South Central's first episode a lot more. I am just a petty feminist, but I think your conversations are richer when your interlocutors are people like Pooja Prasanna and Dhanya Rajendran.
Abhijeet
The Shehla Rashid interview was excellent. Unbelievably, I found her point of view persuasive. Abhinandan’s balanced approach had a lot to do with that. Great work again.
I haven’t received the e-mail about the Zoom call on the 12th(?). Please resend it. Thank you.
Sudipt Roy
Abhinandan need not have “punched down” while speaking with a struggling Shehla and could have tried to understand the pressure on her, resulting in an abrupt turnaround and the disappearance of her party with Shah Faesal. He should have used this sarcasm while interview the “Ram Winger” (Amish’s label) Amish Tripathi, with whom he was visibly deferential. That brings me to the challenges journalists face in gaining access to interview prominent people. Is polite but hard questioning ruled out at the outset by their respective teams? Manisha, for example, was lobbing softballs at Aaditya Thackeray and refrained from questioning his party’s yo-yo between hard and soft Hindutva lines and the role of election outcomes in choosing the strategy. We might be seeing another change in Shiv Sena (UBT) with the recent electoral reversal. Finally, young and fearless reporters at NL are doing a wonderful job of digging out meaningful ground reports and I am happy to contribute.
Vishnu
Chetan Bhagat already revealed he’s a closeted righty. He went crazy about caste census. I expected the NL team to push back but that’s my wrong. Data is always good and in the cases of large countries with high populations, it is even more relevant. The Supreme Court made a lot of idiotic statements in the subclassification verdict which is because there is no data, and even their judgement emphasised “empirical data” though they didn’t look at any data to make the judgement. CB and Nima Tai are the same when it comes to this. She asks ‘what patriarchy?’ and he asks ‘why caste census’. NL also brushed past my previous messages about the casteist nature of the Supreme Court.
Anonymous
Hi team, just wanted to write in to appreciate Abhinandan’s interview with SR. She seems to have launched a campaign on X to discredit NL – perhaps you could consider making the interview free so people can see and judge for themselves rather than just see the single clips she is sharing? Anyone watching the full interview would be able to see that Abhinandan asked other things as well and harped on the Modi point because she took so damn long to answer that question. I won’t judge her for switching sides and actually found her narrative of why she did so quite convincing, but you can make those points without entirely shilling for “our selfless PM and HM”. Her point about partition on Islamic rather than religious lines was also very interesting and gave me much to think about.
Noaman Khan
Oh dear heavens, this Bhagat chap is truly a marvel of idiocy. He’s out here comparing Modiji and his folks to the parents of voters – because, apparently, parental love now includes a side of communal violence. Who knew? Did your parents ever go around beating up Muslims as an extracurricular activity? Mine must’ve missed the memo.
And the cherry on top? Bhagat’s profound observation that voters “just want to feel safe”. Oh really, Chetan? When exactly were these voters in mortal peril? Was it during the great epidemic of overfriendly Muslims handing out biryanis? Meanwhile, Muslims are out here getting beaten, jailed, and shunned like they’re extras in some dystopian drama, but no, it’s Chetan and his tribe of comfortably cushioned elites who are trembling under their beds, clutching their laptops, and writing their next bestseller on victimhood.
Ankur Jalan
I’ve been a subscriber to NL for five years. Unfortunately, very few of my letters have been read on NL Hafta or Charcha. Despite Atul’s frequent encouragement to write, our letters are rarely acknowledged. Regarding Hafta 513, the claim that Anand merely analyses issues is absurd. Having listened to Anand for over five years, I can confidently state that his views lean towards the pro-Modi government. For instance, Anand once mentioned that communal conflicts were a common occurrence in Bihar during his youth. Did Muslims use loudspeakers in front of Hindu temples back then to incite riots? The provocative communal songs played by some Hindus in front of mosques during Hindu festivals are clearly intended to rile up Muslims. Why can’t right-wing Hindus celebrate their festivals peacefully without targeting Muslims? I also have a lot to say about the US elections, having lived here since 2012. Anand's perspective on US elections is inaccurate, I’ll elaborate on this in a separate letter.
Vatsal
Just watched Abhinandan's interview with Shehla Rashid, I don't know what Abhinandan felt as interviewer but as a watcher it was really frustrating. Shehla deflecting questions left, right and centre, making logical fallacies, loaded statements, along with a provocative attitude and just very juvenile (TV debate style) line of arguments. Probably the worst was her response to Abhinandan asking about her about hateful anti-Muslim slogans being raised everyday. Her recent “position” on things remind me of Thomas Hobbes’ theory of state being a leviathan against which it is futile for civilians to raise their voice. Perhaps it’s just a personal fatigue from realisation that as an activist it is much more difficult mentally and physically to have a life while you can get a lot done for yourself and own family if you just toe the line of establishment. After all, it takes a great courage to continue for what you once stood with integrity especially in the face of opposing headwinds.
Vatsal
Recently listened to Abhinandan's LTA Punjab Pt.1, made me reminisce about my reading of Mark Tully and Jacob’s book a few years ago. It’s somewhat interesting to note that probably the first major terrorist acts in India were committed by radical Sikh groups (as big as bombing of Air India flights) and not by radical Islamist groups (that emerged largely after the end of the Cold War and the cross-border spillover in Kashmir). For a lot of people of my generation (born in the mid-1990s), this would be a shocking detail as they have come to equate acts of terrorism with radical Islam and often argue on the lines of “why is only one religion across the world involved in terrorism”.
I think it becomes important for the youth to understand the politics of radicalisation and alienation of minorities as well as larger politics influencing the social divides. Keep up the good work, happy to contribute to the sensible version of “you are the media” rather than what Musk is propagating to his fanbois.
Manan
Hi NL team,
I am a subscriber of NL and super proud to support you guys. I am a regular Hafta listener and as a subscriber I feel a part of the NL team in that limited way. With that as context, I wanted to suggest an invite to Jeffrey Sachs to discuss the Russia-Ukraine war as a topic in focus. I would guess you will have to talk about it sooner rather than later, given the recent developments.
He is a unique fellow, as in he is an American economist who has extensively worked with the Russian government and was in fact also invited by Russia to address the UNSC on multiple occasions, most recently when the Nord Stream pipeline exploded.
He has worked with many governments, from Poland, Russia, the UN, he was a special advisor to the UN Secretary General.
I work with a Belgium based think tank, and we regularly invite Jeffrey to our events and he comes, he is good friends with the senior management and through them I can invite Jeffrey, I do not know at all of his availability or willingness to come but I want to try to invite him. I have personally heard him and it’s interesting.
Kindly let me know if you would be okay to have him, and when would you want him to be available like on the Friday around what time. I can explain that you record every Friday and what Friday in particular could work for him.
Best,
Manan
Anonymous
Apologies again for the length of the letter, certain clarifications seem to be required given Abhinandan's comments on my previous letter.
The previous letter was written with an attempt to redirect the conversations away from democracies and autocratic forms of governments towards the “undemocratic elements” within geopolitics itself. (That was the trigger.) And not whether or not Israel and the United States are democracies.
The argument was not about democracies and undemocratic countries and elections’ impact on policy in democratic countries. The argument was in regards to the undemocratic element within geopolitics, this undemocratic element is what equalises Russia, China and the United States on the international stage, even though domestically they have very different forms of government. This is why the letter was focused on distinguishing geopolitics from forms of government.
This confusion and conflation of geopolitical actions with forms of government at home is what creates this regularly heard “the hypocrisies of the United States/West” precisely because one fails to distinguish geopolitics from democracies.
The democratic element within democracies is what creates the disadvantage for countries like the US in their geopolitical pursuits, and de-democratising (rebounding of geopolitics) is the element of correction of price democratic countries pay in order to take part in geopolitical machinations. All three paragraphs of the previous letter were written in order to try and expand upon these specific conditions of geopolitics on democratic countries.
The first paragraph is the distinction necessary in order to understand geopolitical participation of different countries on an equal footing. Second para focused on examples and the disadvantages (de-democratising) along with its consequences within domestic politics in democratic countries taking part in geopolitics. Third being examples of the undemocratic element required for decision making which has geopolitical components. It was in this regard (the geopolitical component of statehood of J&K statehood) that Anand's statement on national security advice and J&K statehood was used, in order to give an example of the undemocratic element (bureaucrats and experts who are unelected) of decision making (the exact timing of statehood in this example) in matters relating to a sensitive geo political conditions, which is peculiar to J&K and Ladakh due to its geopolitical consequences (Pakistan and China), not a comment on a referendum or governance.
As to whether a particular country is a democracy or not can be judged on its behaviour, actions and performance within its own territory rather than on its actions abroad.
The argument is not that democracies are not answerable to its people; the argument is the effects of geopolitics rebounding weakens the democratic structures of democracies. Which means citizens have to go further and risk more in order to make their voices heard let alone be listened to.
Anonymous
After going through the Rashid interview, I have newfound respect for Abhinandan. Poor man probably exhausted his patience for an entire month (I know I did) while he patiently waited as she yapped on about everything but the question she was asked (the one about Gandhian philosophy).
The takeaways?
It reminded me so much of my vivas in college. I hope she was countered when she said “everyone needs to look at what’s the best for him” with “the best is they move abroad, the increased numbers show it, should they?”.
Her view – that improved civic sense should be top priority in India where 50 percent can’t feed themselves – was a facepalm moment. There was a “mask off” moment as well when she revealed how being “pro BJP” has opened up avenues for her while being “anti BJP” was the opposite, just proving that she had zero ideology or conviction in the past and was picking teams.
Sadly, she's going to be a player in the political scene and it’s quite obvious that she lacks intellectual depth.
Ishita
Well aware that I will not be the only one emailing about this. I heard the last episode with an open mind – Chetan Bhagat and his views. My point is that he has an opinion, like everyone does, but is it an informed opinion?
I remember a discussion on the podcast a while back about who can be ‘experts’ to be called on the show. By these standards, does Chetan Bhagat fit the criteria? What was his expertise about? And is that knowledge in-depth? A result of engaging with the subject topic for a while.
I also understand the need to move away from echo chambers, but as a long-time listener to this podcast, I am used to a quality of opinion and discussion, and I felt that was not met. Someone like Makarand Paranjape, professor at JNU has opposing views to our echo chamber. He supports the BJP and its ideology, but he is able to reason it. As much as I disagree with his opinion, I am sure it will not sound like a rant.
Anonymous
The case of Atul Subhash is actually not that surprising for a lot of people in the 25-40 years of age bracket and living in urban India. There have been so many cases of marriages just ending within months and the boy being literally extortioned into giving lakhs because laws just do not protect him.
The discourse around it, however, has been foolish and almost bad faith. Are women and girls taken advantage of in rural and some parts of urban India? Yes, they are. Dowry is still a big issue in India without a doubt.
At the same time, because of the way laws are framed in India, do men have equitable rights when it comes to sexual harassment? Or when it comes to filing for a divorce/separation?
No, he doesn't.
There's a basic tendency of humans where if you give them an inch, they'll take a mile, and they'll do it irrespective of gender.
It's just unfortunate that even here a basic reality that the laws are not equitable cannot be admitted or brought up for a discussion.
We take feedback from our subscribers very seriously. That is because they power are work, not ad revenue from governments and corporates. If you subscribe, we'll take your feedback seriously too. Click here and be part of the tribe that pays to keep news free.
Newslaundry is a reader-supported, ad-free, independent news outlet based out of New Delhi. Support their journalism, here.
