Hindu organizations have raised red flags about Hindu organizations and religious leaders being deliberately targeted in the Parliament of the World’s Religions in the USA’s Chicago. Hindu American Foundation (HAF) highlighted the boorish behaviour of IAMC (Indian American Muslim Council) in a series of tweets. They pointed out that the IAMC booth contained misleading information.

Hindu organizations targeted at Parliament of World’s religions

Over 100 years ago, Swami Vivekananda introduced Hindu Dharma’s teachings to the Western world through a speech at a global religious conference. This event aimed to promote understanding and respect among different faiths. Recently, a similar conference took place with diverse religious groups, including Hindus, attending.

However, some Hindu organizations felt they were unfairly targeted for their views on Bharat’s politics. They wondered why they were being connected to Bharat’s political issues at an event focused on bringing religious communities of the world together.

Not only did IAMC contain fraudulent and wrong information on their booth, but their volunteers were also selectively filming Hindu speakers to single them out and target them as ‘extremists’ thereby creating a dangerous situation for them.

“Volunteers at Hindu org booths then reported IAMC’s proxies hectoring & jeering them. HAF’s staff sought to report this tweet & rogue behaviour immediately but were stymied by certain board members. It is incumbent upon @InterfaithWorld to address this behaviour that violates the Parliament’s stated aim/mission. Will the Board act?”, tweeted HAF.

Mat McDermott, the communications director for the HAF, refuted the claims displayed on the banner of the IAMC, which suggested that his organization supports specific political actions like advocating for Bharatiya politicians and endorsing bans on beef and the hijab. McDermott personally faced criticism online and in-person during a discussion about Hindu nationalism, accused of collaborating with a “right-wing hate group”. He felt very angry about the situation. He emphasized that their conversation wasn’t related to Bharat or any past conflicts between HAF and IAMC.

McDermott explained that the HAF, established in 2003, has frequently become a target of criticism from academics and activists. He mentioned that their organization’s viewpoints tend to be moderate and balanced. He pointed out that expressing nuanced opinions about the Indian government is becoming harder in left-leaning spaces. In today’s public discussions, it often feels like a binary choice between supporting or opposing the Indian government, without much room for middle-ground perspectives.

The Hindu presence at the conference was diverse, representing different spiritual and philosophical beliefs within Hindu Dharma. They showcased practices like devotional chants and yoga nidra and discussed topics like climate change and the misuse of the swastika symbol.

Unfortunately, there was controversy when Nivedita Bhide, a speaker from a Bharatiya organization Vivekananda Kendra, was removed from the lineup days before the conference. Her social media statements and associations with a nationalist ideology in Bharat were used as excuses to stop her from speaking. It must be noted that Bhide was deliberately targeted by ‘activists’. The organizers also did not address the concerns raised by Hindu groups about this decision.

Despite the conference theme of defending freedom and human rights, some Hindu attendees felt that they were being unfairly singled out for their ancestral homeland’s problems. Some expressed frustration that Hindu voices were being silenced or cancelled.

Hindu Americans also engaged with groups from other faiths at the conference, like Bahai, indigenous traditions, and pagans. Still, some Hindus felt that their voices were being suppressed, which goes against the inclusive legacy of Swami Vivekananda.

“The parliament is open to people of all religions, spiritual paths and ethical convictions, consistent with the values of respectful dialogue. We seek to promote harmony and partnerships amongst the world’s religions and spiritual communities on issues that humanity faces today”, the parliament’s organizers insisted. However, by allowing one religious denomination to be singled out by bigots were they being true to their stated objective?

Also, given that the 2023 Parliament’s theme was “A Call to Conscience: Defending Freedom and Human Rights”, wasn’t dropping Bhide at the insistence of ‘activists’ unfair to say the least? Richa Gautam, the founder of Castefiles.com, rightly pointed out that Bhide’s cancellation was part of a series of attempts to target and cancel Hindu voices, even those that speak for spiritualism. “If you’re coming for a kumbaya conference, you might as well allow everyone. That is the magnanimity and generosity you would expect from people who are driven by spiritual or religious conversation and dialogue. But obviously, that wasn’t the case”, Gautam said.

In the past, politics has caused similar problems for Hindus participating in this conference. The cancellation of a celebration for Swami Vivekananda’s birthday in 2013 led to the resignation of Hindu members from the conference’s board of directors.

Overall, some Hindu participants believe that the legacy of Swami Vivekananda, which is about unity and understanding, is being overshadowed by political controversies at the conference. They feel that the event should focus on faith, spirituality, and bringing people together, rather than getting tangled in political issues.

Silver lining – divisive narratives fail to sell

Despite the attempts to suppress Hindu voices, divisive people like Audrey Truschke found no takers. The empty chairs and vacant hall were proof that people could now look through the fraudulent claims of the left-liberal cabal.

Controversial ‘historian’ Audrey Truschke’s event, which was supposed to talk about how freedom of speech defends human rights, didn’t have many people show up. The empty chairs at the venue suggest that many people aren’t interested in lies that ‘historians’ like Truschke resort to.

Truschke is known for saying things that conform to a certain agenda yet she was hoping a lot of people would come to her event. The lack of audience shows that the public doesn’t trust Truschke’s message. People have criticized Truschke for talking in a way that can make things worse in countries. They think she only uses facts that support what she wants to say, and she ignores the whole story.

While free speech is important, the event’s poor turnout shows that people want a responsible speech. They don’t want to believe things that could be harmful or not true. This situation reminds us that speakers and thinkers have to be careful with their words. They need to be honest and respectful when they talk about things.

The empty chairs at Truschke’s event might make her and others like her think about how they talk. It shows that people want fair discussions that help everyone understand, not ideas that make fights.

People like her could take a leaf from CoHNA’s book on how truth needs no advertisement and automatically find takers. However, Hindu hate blinds them.