Introduction:

• The concept of “decolonise” has gained significant prominence in contemporary intellectual discourse.
• It encompasses a broad range of actions, from reshaping education to redefining laws, rewriting history, reimagining public spaces, and reclaiming cultural identity.
• This movement is represented in influential books like J Sai Deepak’s “India that is Bharat” and shorter polemics such as Ambika Dutt Sharma’s “Bharatiya Manas ka Vi-Upniveshikaran.”
• While it has found a strong foothold in vernacular languages, particularly Hindi, it is also influencing policy changes, including debates over the Criminal Law Code, making decolonialism a widespread ideology.

The Attractiveness of “Decolonise”:

The term “decolonise” carries rhetorical power because it is difficult to oppose in principle. However, the current iteration of decolonial talk conceals a potentially exclusionary political agenda.

The Promise of Decolonising the Mind:

• One of the central promises of the decolonial project is the liberation of the Indian mind from colonial intellectual domination.
• It recognizes that colonialism worked through intellectual control and argues that this control has continued through the Indian state.
• It also addresses issues of language, suggesting that knowledge generated in Sanskrit or vernacular languages should not be relegated to second-class status.
• Renaming laws in non-English terms is seen as a step in this direction.

Critiques of the Decolonial Project:

1. Over-Determined Binary: It often simplifies complex issues into a binary opposition between the West and Indic cultures, overlooking the nuances within both traditions and the potential for divergence within Indian thought itself.

2. Narcissism: Some proponents of decolonialism claim that Indian society was self-reliant and self-complete, not needing engagement with other traditions. This perspective is criticized for its hubris and self-satisfaction.

3. Blood and Identity: Decolonial discourse sometimes relies on notions of origin or descent to determine what constitutes Indian intellectual tradition.

4. Use of “Indic“: The term “Indic” is employed as a metaphysical tool to assert the authenticity of arguments, potentially leading to a superficial understanding of the Indian tradition.

Resentment and Conspiratorial Thinking:

The current decolonial project often carries a sense of resentment and relies on conspiratorial explanations for the decline of Indian traditions. Instead of seeking self-examination and nuanced answers, it tends to attribute problems to external conspiracies, which may not fully explain the complexities of the issue.

Targets and Exclusivity:

• Islam and Christianity are explicit targets of the decolonial project, not just because they are foreign but because it is perceived as a project with imperial ambitions.
• Conditions for acceptance are set in a way that ensures they will always fall short, reinforcing exclusion.

Discomfort with Social and Epistemic Injustice:

• While the decolonial project acknowledges the misrepresentation of Indian knowledge, it is wary of an account of Indian history through the lens of social justice and systemic oppression.
• It tends to sanitize these issues in the name of preserving a “self-complete” tradition, which may benefit the privileged.

Concluding Thoughts:

The decolonial project tends to conflate modernity with colonialism rather than acknowledging the broader impulse to subject collective rules to practices of justification.

It raises questions about the terms on which citizens should relate to each other, suggesting that the answer cannot simply be “whatever is Indic,” highlighting the complex and potentially problematic nature of the decolonial agenda.