Talk:Anti-Hindu sentiment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Anti-Hindu sentiment article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Start a new topic

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 30 days

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

More information Article milestones, Date ...

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 16, 2006	Articles for deletion	Kept
March 7, 2014	Articles for deletion	Kept

Hinduism Mid‑importance

	Hinduism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion: Interfaith Mid‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.

Discrimination Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.

Discussions

Not moved, 28 June 2017, from Anti-Hinduism to Hinduphobia, see discussion.
Moved, 23 July 2017, from Anti-Hinduism to Anti-Hindu sentiment, see discussion.
Not moved, 8 December 2019, from Anti-Hindu sentiment to Hinduphobia, see discussion.
Withdrawn, 9 January 2025, from Anti-Hindu sentiment to Hinduphobia, see discussion.
Not moved, 14 November 2025, from Anti-Hindu sentiment to Hinduphobia, see discussion.

Article Revision Plan

Hi everyone!

I’m going to begin working on improving this article to make it more balanced and well-sourced. I plan to revise the definition section using the working definition developed at the 2021 Understanding Hinduphobia conference at Rutgers University. This definition appears to be widely used among scholars and is the most neutral version I can find. However, I will also include alternative interpretations from scholars who challenge this definition, as it is hard to find unbiased sources so I feel I must give both sides to maintain the article’s neutrality.

I also plan to add a few new sections and restructure the United States section to include more context and public responses. Certain sections will be combined into these new sections, but I do not plan on deleting any information unless it is found to be incorrect. I will most likely add/edit about 500-600 words and at least 8 sources from scholars and academic institutions. The sections will be as follows:

·Historical and Legal Context like United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind’' and how early immigration laws shaped perceptions of Hinduism (such as the Pacific Coast Race Riots of 1907).

·Cultural Representation like adding various sources that examine the affect of how American media portrays Hinduism (such as in The Problem with Apu (CNN, 2017) and The Believer (Aslan, 2017)).

·Academic and Educational Debates that incorporates information gathered from Vamsee Juluri (see his Wikipedia page) (2020) and the California textbook controversy (which also has it’s own Wikipedia page).

·Global and Digital Perspectives where I’ll add recent reports from the Rutgers Miller Center (2022) about online hostility and misinformation directed to/about Hindu people.

After I finish editing the US section, I do plan on expanding a few of the other sections to involve more sources and addressing the “reorganization” popup and the aspects of the article that do not follow Wikipedia guidelines. I will post another plan once I finish this one. If anyone would like to comment or suggest additional sources, please feel free to reply here or on my Talk Page.

Vasa17 (talk) 20:24, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Any changes to the definition section need to be discussed. The topic of this article is anti-Hindu sentiment.

I do not mind what you want to do to the American section. I suggest that you deal with that one first.-- Toddy1 (talk) 20:59, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

I agree with Vasa17 on editing the definition, I think that Rutgers University Conference definition would be clearer than the current definition. Nicorit4 (talk) 16:59, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

I personally reorganized the article a bit, but the prose, when read as a whole, seems a bit immatured
Regards, M.A.A 15:35, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Requested move 14 November 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 01:19, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

Anti-Hindu sentiment → HinduphobiaHinduphobia – Hinduphobia has become a widely used term to refer to sentiment against Hindus or Hinduism. It is now used in government documents and bills, for example in 2023, the Georgia state of the U.S. officially passed a resolution condemning 'Hinduphobia'. In 2024, a bill condemning 'Hinduphobia' was presented in the House of Representatives. See the Congress bill using 'Hinduphobia' Google Scholar results for Hinduphobia. A simple Google search shows how popular the term is. The 'criticism' section in the article already shows that the term Hinduphobia is well-known. Also, consistent with Islamophobia as well. Birla Kashyap (talk) 10:20, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

I'm neutral on this. On the one hand, Hinduphobia is linguistically consistent with Islamophobia, Homophobia etc; however the reverse argument can be made for antisemitism and anti-Christian sentiment, for example. For that reason I think we need strong evidence that 'Hinduphobia' is the preferred term by most news, academia &c as per WP:COMMONNAME otherwise we'd be changing it basically arbitrarily. Athanelar (talk) 10:44, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Well, antisemitism is rarely ever called "Jewphobia" in government documents & bills or any scholarly articles as antisemitism is a quite popular term. Same with 'Cristophobia' or 'Christianophobia'. I provided Google Scholars result showing academic usage for the term. As for news, Indian media generally uses this term on a daily basis. British prime minister Keir Starmer also used the term 'Hinduphobia' in 2022. If you want, I can provide international media sources in a while. Birla Kashyap (talk) 19:52, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Oppose. If this article were about anti-Hindu sentiment in the USA, then Hinduphobia might be a suitable name for it (though I would be dubious). But it is not. It is about anti-Hindu sentiment world-wide. There should be no analogy with American "Islamophobia"; c.3,000 Americans were killed by Islamic terrorists in 2001 and c.2,500 were killed during the American occupation of Afghanistan and c.4,500 in Iraq (total c.10,000); so it is not that surprising that Americans fear Muslims. But Hindus did nothing like this.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:09, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
This is based on flawed logic.

1. 'Islamophobia' is used to refer to prejudice of Muslims worldwide, not just in the US.

2. 'Islamophobia' does not refer to a literal fear of Muslims any more than 'Homophobia' refers to a literal fear of queer people or the term hydrophobic molecule refers to a chemical which is literally afraid of water. The term 'phobia' does not just mean fear but also 'an aversion to or dislike of' something. Athanelar (talk) 11:14, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

With the greatest respect, you seemed to have ignored both (a) that the proposer's evidence in support of the move was entirely in terms of U.S. government use of the term, and (b) that Anti-Hindu sentiment#Definitions defines it as an irrational aversion and the 1st sentence of the lead defines it as the fear of...-- Toddy1 (talk) 23:40, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

the fear of, hostility towards, or negative perceptions pertaining to... Athanelar (talk) 23:45, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Oppose - Hinduphobia is a neologism invented by the Hindutva right wing in order to curtail criticism of Hindutva right wing, anti-Hindu sentiment is not the same as Hinduphobia. Hinduphobia is also much less specific. This was discussed less than a year ago and consensus was overwhelming against the proposal.^[1]^[2] & Collins, Brian (2014). Koshuri ^(あ!) 13:31, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

The government of Georgia would disagree here, which defines the term 'Hinduphobia' as a “set of antagonistic, destructive, and derogatory attitudes and behaviours towards Hinduism.” It may be used by Hindutva organizations for self-defense, in the same way Islamophobia is sometimes used as a self-defense by certain Islamist organizations. There's a reason a 'Criticism' section here exists, critiquing the term 'Hinduphobia' in the same way there is a Criticism of the term' section in the Islamophobia article. And the fact that you recognized it as a neologism shows that the term is gaining acceptance. Birla Kashyap (talk) 19:52, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Oppose - We depend on how the terms are used in reliable sources, especially scholary sources. What happens in government circles matters little. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:01, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

I've provided scholarly sources above, see Google Scholars result for Hinduphobia. The term is widely used in reliable sources nowadays. And I don't see how government matters little here. How is the British prime minister Keir Starmer using the term 'Hinduphobia' insignificant? Birla Kashyap (talk) 19:52, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

The usage of words by politicians are not typically regarded in move discussions. We prefer scholarly sources. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 08:35, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

If your proposal is based on scholarly sources, then you need to read them and describe how it benefits the article to use the alternative terminology. I suspect that it may be possible to create a new page on Hinduphobia, and see how it develops. You cannot simply ask for articles to be renamed by the mere fact that some sources exist that say something about something. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:53, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Oppose per koshuri User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 20:14, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Support: It's a bit difficult to call "Hinduphobia" a neologism given that the earliest instance of it I can find dates to 1887. The word again appears in a 1910 article by Sudhindra Bose. For context, the word "Antisemitism" dates to 1880, which is only seven years prior. And similar to the word "antisemitism", the word itself is not neutral (it was called antisemitism because Jews were assumed to be an inferior biological race of Semites), but it is now the far more common name than the alternative "anti-Jewish sentiment". Even the fact that some consider the word antisemitism to be weaponized does not preclude Wikipedia from using it.

While I am not persuaded by arguments appealing to law and governments and politicians, the simple fact of the matter is that Hinduphobia is the more common name (per Google Scholar) and is categorically not a neologism. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 08:55, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

~~The first instance of the word appears to date to 1866 per here.~~ ―Howard • 🌽³³ 09:03, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

In addition, the Historical Dictionary of Hinduism titles the entry "Hinduphobia" while still noting criticism of the term ~~(although it erroneously claims Rajiv Malhotra (born 1950) coined the word which existed before he was born?.)~~ ―Howard • 🌽³³ 09:15, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

~~Neutral~~: after looking into the matter further, I have now discovered why the sense of "Hinduphobia" as hatred of Hindus specifically is considered a neologism, as well as criticism of CoHNA and similar groups' etymology:

Such in-between-ness in which the argument of academic Hinduphobia is grounded also characterizes the Hindu advocacy groups’ pursuit of documenting Hinduphobia. To incorporate Hinduphobia in their identity politics, organizations such as the HAF, UH, HSC and CoHNA (Coalition of Hindus of North America) face the need to not only record contemporary incidents of hate crime but also to revise history. The attempts to simultaneously universalize and localize Hinduphobia as a historical reality is reflected in the above-mentioned glossary produced by the HAF. As briefly shown, it decontextualizes definitions and examples, erases other victims of oppression, and irons out the heterogeneity of Hindu communities. Spearheading the historicization of Hinduphobia is the UH, which provides primary sources on its website that range from nineteenth-century newspaper reports from England, an essay written by Sudhindra Bose in 1914 for the Michigan-based journal The Cosmopolitan Student to the Indian Constituent Assembly proceedings. These sources are used to prove the historicity of Hinduphobia and to highlight that Hindus have always been subjected to prejudice. While Hindus, like other victims of colonialism, faced discrimination that often resulted in violence, [...] the linkage between the experiences of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Indians, like Bose, and the argument of perennial Hinduphobia rests on a tenuous thread. It neglects key contexts of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century: the fact that there were diverse groups of Indian migrants, that the term “Hindu” referred to those from India and that the cultural and religious representation of Hinduism enjoyed positive reception in addition to pushbacks.

As a result of this, I retract my above comments in support of the move. However there is still precedent with the Historical Dictionary of Hinduism titling its entry "Hinduphobia". Therefore, I am now neutral on the matter. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 09:55, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Oppose per Buidhe. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 00:16, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Provisional oppose The difficulties of writing this article are similar to antisemitism where actually existing prejudice and hatred are deliberately conflated with political criticisms of certain South Asian practices that are themselves discriminatory, like the caste system and Hindu nationalism. It also seems like Hindus are more likely to face general Anti-Indian sentiment that is also applied to other religious groups such as Indian Muslims. I would suggest keeping this article where it is and consider making another article "Hinduphobia" about the newer usage by the Hindu right that is opposed by some other Hindus. (t · c) buidhe 17:14, 15 November 2025 (UTC)
I also support a split because the word "Hinduphobia" appears to carry a much different connotation. It is becoming increasingly difficult to discuss these two concepts in the same article. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 00:14, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

References

[1]
"Bad Faith Bias Claims". Hindutva Harassment Field Manual. 9 June 2021. Retrieved 14 November 2025.
[2]
"Glossary". Hindutva Harassment Field Manual. 13 July 2020. Retrieved 14 November 2025.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 15 November 2025

Correction

@Kautilya3: apologies, I worded my edit summary incorrectly and should not have invoked WP:ONUS. What I meant to say was that there does not appear to be a reliable source which says that "Hinduphobia" is a less common word than "Anti-Hindu sentiment". If you have a source which says so, then please add it to the article. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 22:37, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Well, you have yourself accepted above that it is a neologism. It is not yet even accepted and some scholars have declared that it is a WP:HOAX, basically part of the Hindutva propaganda. So until the dust clears, you can't make any claims about what it is and whether it even exists. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:13, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, there is no source which disputes the existence of hatred against Hindus outright (the only academic debate is its exact nature and prevalence). But this is irrelevant to the present dispute: my only contention is whether using the word "sometimes" in the lead is acceptable considering that there is no source which comments on the frequency of the usage of the word. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 23:20, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

As it stands the article provides sources which say things similar to "Hinduphobia is a word that exists", but none which say something along "The word Anti-Hindu sentiment is more frequently used than Hinduphobia". If you do not have sources which back up the latter statement, then it is WP:OR and should be removed as such. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 23:22, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: would it suffice to say "Anti-Hindu sentiment, more recently known as Hinduphobia"? This would be backed up by the sources. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 23:31, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

This issue was discussed in the Requested move 9 January 2025. The proposer claimed that ngrams showed that "Hinduphobia" was a better title - but ngrams showed that "Hinduphobia" and "Hinduphobic" are much rarer than "anti-Hindu".-- Toddy1 (talk) 23:37, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Can we cite Google Ngrams on main? This is a discussion about article's content, not its title. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 23:39, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

The issue of what it is called have been discussed before. Three times in the past 24 hours, editors have tried to delete "sometimes" from the lead and been reverted. Now you are proposing that "more recently" replace "sometimes" - this implies that "anti-Hindu sentiment" is the old name for it and "Hinduphobia" the more recent name - rather like Londinium was the old name for London.-- Toddy1 (talk) 23:52, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

So what can we use as a citation to settle this problem? The closest thing I've found related to the subject is Jeffery D. Long saying the word Hinduphobia "has come increasingly to be referred" in 2023 per here. Should we write "Anti-Hindu sentiment, increasingly known as Hinduphobia" and cite Long or write "sometimes also referred to as Hinduphobia" and cite Ngram? ―Howard • 🌽³³ 00:00, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Come to think of it, Buidhe's splitting proposal would most likely solve this problem. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 00:17, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

No, all we know is that some writers have chosen to call it Hinduphobia. It is nowhere near being widely accepted. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:44, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

"Increasingly" only means more than in the past. Can't draw any conclusions from it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:45, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

In NGrams, in 2022, "anti-Hindu" was about five times as common as "Hinduphobia" and "Hinduphobic" put together; in 2002, it was about four times as common. The reason "Hinduphobia" and "Hinduphobic" are becoming more common, is that more people are writing about the topic than 20 years ago, but when they do so, they are more likely to use the term "anti-Hindu" than "Hinduphobia" or "Hinduphobic". This is easier to see if you set smoothing to 5.-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:43, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Addition of updates

I would like to request the moderators to add this additional info into the 'Definition' section

In 2024, the Hindu Council UK in collaboration with various other organizations which included the Chinmaya Mission, ISKCON, Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh & Vishwa Hindu Parishad among others, released a document called The Hindu Manifesto ahead of the upcoming elections which among many things, formally defined Hinduphobia.^[1] The document states ^[2]

Hinduphobia is a set of antagonistic, destructive and derogatory attitudes and behaviors towards Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism) and Hindus that may manifest as prejudice, fear or hatred.

Hinduphobic rhetoric reduces the entirely of Sanatana Dharma to a rigid, oppressive and regressive tradition. Prosocial and reflexive aspects of Hindu traditions are ignored or attributed to outside, non-Hindu influences.

This discourse actively erases and denies the persecution of Hindus while disproportionately painting Hindus as violent. These stereotypes are used to justify the dissolution, external reformation and demonization of the range of indigenous Indic knowledge traditions known as Sanatana Dharma

It describes manifestationns of Hinduphobia to range from microaggressions to calls for genocide, which is manifested as

Calling for, abetting or normaliaing the harming or killing of Hindus as a result of an extremist and illiberal view of (Hindu) religion and history.
Accusing those who organise around or speak (out) about anti-Hindu hate (or similar definitions, including persecution of Hindus) of bing agents, or pawns of violent, political agendas.
Making unsubstantiated claims about the political agendas of people who are simply practicing Hinduism
Claiming that Hinduism or Sanatana Dharma doesn't exist as a valid, cohesive category of spiritual traditions.
Outright denying or accusing Hindus or any people of inventing or exaggerating the persecution of Hindus, including genocide.
Maintaining that all inequality in Indian society, including but not limited to sati, caste, misogyny, communal violence and destruction of places of worship - stem from and are "inextricably bound up with" Hinduism
Conflating diasporic Hindu indentity with Indian citizenship, ethnicity and patriotism.
Erasure of colonisation, including but not limited to, calling Hindus, "the white people of South Asia".

It also describes institutionalised anti-Hindu sentiment being manifested in the form of

Anti-Indian sentiment
Lack of action and indifference of government bodies towards providing security and preventing attacks on Hindu temples.
Promotion of Orientalist or negative caricatures of Hinduism in school curriculum.
Indifference or hostility towards circulation of Hindu religious material composed in native languages
Discrimation against Hindu candidates in public institutions and political parties.
Delayed visa processing for Hindu preachers
Opposition to external manifestation of Hindu identity through religious symbols like the tilak and bindi and traditional clothing like the dhoti and saree
Implementing legislation affecting the Hindu community without consulting them.

The Coalition of Hindus of North America, a US based Hindu advocacy body defines Hinduphobia as^[3]

...historic colonial depictions of Hindus as bizarre and savage; acts of violence and bigotry towards Hindus or those who are perceived as Hindus; academic publications and commentaries that portray Hinduism, Hindu texts and Hindu society as inherently oppressive and regressive in the name of “academic freedom”; policies and laws that single out Hinduism and Hindus in the name of equality and social justice; characterization of popular Hindu festivals such as Diwali, Holi, and Navratri as oppressive and violent; characterization of Hindus as job stealers and a threat to the fabric of United States and Canada.

In addition to this, I would also request for the following data to be added in the section titled "United States"

According to Stephen Prothero, the first documented case of Hinduphobia in the US was the case surrounding the will of Mrs Sara Chapman Bull. Bull, who was a close follower of Swami Vivekananda, had bequeathed mkst of her estate (valued at around half a million US$) in Cambridge, Massachusetts to the Vedanta Society in her last will issued on 1911. This was challenged by Bull's daughter Olea Bull Vaughan, who claimed that her mother was 'mentally incompetent" while signing the will. Vaughan's attorney Sherman Whipple, argued that Bull had been driven insane by what he described to be a 'psychic conspiracy' involving 'drugs, oriental concoctions, thought viands, breathing drills, wish-waves, malignant vibrations, incense, incantations and orgies.' The case attracted considerable sensationalist and negative coverage of Hinduism in the contemporary American press, with the Boston Herald decrying Hinduism as 'public prostitution, idol worship, antisocial ascetics, child brides and the caste system.'^[4]

These additions can also been included in the section titled See Also Bhagavad Gita As It Is trial California textbook controversy over Hindu history 2022 Leicester unrest

[1]
"As UK goes to vote, a million-strong Hindu community shows its influence". India Today. 3 July 2024.
[2]
"Manifesto - Hindus for Democracy". Retrieved 2026-03-08.
[3]
"Hinduphobia - Resources for Understanding Anti-Hindu Hatred and Prejudice".
[4]
Prothero, Stephen R. (2004). "Hinduphobia and Hinduphilia in U.S. Culture". The Stranger's Religion (PDF). ISBN 0268033676.

~2026-14912-76 (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Could you please shorten and reformat it?
Regards, M.A.A 15:30, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles