Basic playbook for this kind of ruler is to dismantle democracy - and illegally spying on his opponents is the first step (to remove all opposition).
In the India context, nationalism is a unifying force finding a commonality beyond the hundreds of diverse languages and cultures that India is made of.
I do not see why that is a bad thing.
You may think that, but the people of India think otherwise and that if why he has an overwhelming popularity.
When it comes to state elections the Modi government has been getting creamed because his subordinates at the state level are not as good as lying to people.
You skipped the key plank of nationalist Indian politics - religion. Who are the new Jews of India? The backstabbers of the nation?
As the recent PEW survey shows, a large percentage hold Hindu values and think of it as culturally superior.
Hinduism is also the culture of converted peoples, as the vast majority were coerced to convert.
Importing the experience of Europe into India is meaningless.
1. Jews were also German
2. Indian muslims don't think of Hinduism as culturally superior
3. The vast majority were not forced at all. There have been only very few events of this nature.
Conservatism, all over the world, follows the same methodology. Fake and fantasy made up "history", identification of the "other" that must be eliminated, innate sense of superiority of the in group that the state must enforce, innate belief in hierarchy with little sympathy for those at the bottom.
2. PEW research states that.
3. The vast majority of the Islamic and Christian conversion happened under Islamic and Christian colonial rule.
I guess the problems you are referring to is the hallmark of Christianity & Islam which preach for the wiping out of nonbelievers.
If anything must change it is the Bible and quaran.
1. Jews were German
2. False. PEW research doesn't state that
3. The vast majority of conversion from native animist and dravidian religions also happened under hindu rule. Same holds for Buddhism in India. Islamic rule was not colonial.
2. ....... a significant percentage of xtian/Muslims mention somewhere around 30%
3. Syrian Christians in India pre date Christianity in Europe, yet it was insignificant until colonization. Buddhism in my view is a subset of Hinduism.
Islamic rule involved massive destruction of heritage, universities, libraries, temples, tributes to Perssia and the Caliphate, genocides and impossition of Persian script and Arabic, imposition of jizya.
If it's pertinent, by all means bring it up - but you're just bringing up theoretical seems all a bit ivory tower.
One reason is that if you try to talk about the political catastrophes, people try to shut you down.
> could perhaps accidentally have stumbled upon a policy that could make sense
'but how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?'
> I'm not saying the opposite or otherwise supporting Modi.
So what do you say about Modi?
Oh that's easier to answer; there is thread above. TL;DR
The GP of my first comment said:
"the best policies are that of the government in power"
The parent answered:
"Taking away Indians' freedoms, brutalizing minorities,..."
I just said that it's a bit unfortunate that most of these discussions never really touch whether what GP said is true or false, i.e. whether the policies of the government are indeed best. Instead the answer points out how other policies are awful.
Now, I personally agree that those things listed are awful and I'd never support such political party.
But, logically, that is not an argument against what original GP said. I find it unfortunate that we are unable to talk about those things candidly.