God, power, and the politics of fake debates: Ignoring caste on Prime Time

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*

I stopped subscribing to newspapers and magazines over fifteen years ago. Before that, I regularly received several publications, but I discontinued them entirely. Since then, I read only what I feel I should. In that sense, social media platforms—especially Twitter—have become useful. People now share clips and links to videos and articles. Often, if I do not react to something, it is simply because I am unaware of it or have not come across it.

Recently, a video clip was widely circulated and celebrated on social media. It featured a debate titled “Does God Exist,” aired by a channel well known for spreading fake news and hate propaganda aligned with the ruling party. We must understand that corporate media culture in India thrives on managing contradictions.

Owners of what I call the “Manustream media” are smart enough to cultivate an image of impartiality. They own publications in Hindi, English, and various regional languages, in addition to their visual media platforms. While they continue to project themselves as “unbiased” and “neutral,” one or two of their flagship channels openly peddle hatred and misinformation. India Today, Times of India, and The Indian Express all broadly share the same politics. One outlet behaves in a seemingly liberal manner, while another spews venom and communal hostility.

This context is important to understand the so-called debate on the “existence of God,” projected as something unprecedented, or as though only Javed Akhtar has ever spoken on the subject. One must examine the framework of this debate and the choice of participants. A Brahmin liberal anchor invites two Muslims to debate. Javed Akhtar speaks of rationalism, while a Maulana defends the presence of God. Overnight, Javed Akhtar becomes a favourite of Hindutva groups and is widely quoted and praised for his rationalism.

I am not interested in debating whether God exists. It is a futile exercise that serves little purpose. Those who believe should be free to do so, and those who do not should be equally free to reject faith. Faith does not emerge from rationality; in fact, faith begins where rationality ends. My concern lies not with belief itself but with the intent behind such debates and the purposes they serve.

Muslims are not the only believers in God. Hindus believe in thousands of gods, while Christians speak of miracles through the Holy Father and the Holy Spirit. So one must ask: what was the intent behind staging a debate on God’s existence between Javed Akhtar and a Maulana? Why was no Shankaracharya invited? Why were Hindu priests not asked whether they reject the existence of God? Why were other faiths kept out entirely?

Pandit Dwivedi, who now wears the cloak of a “great” interviewer, thrives on a platform that offers celebrities opportunities to multiply their popularity. The debate on God’s existence is centuries old. We all know this. The real question is whether Brahmanical liberals are willing to reject the existence of God altogether. If they do, will they also declare that temples and maths across India are meaningless because there is no God? Many of the arguments Javed Akhtar made by citing Gaza can equally be applied in the Indian context. Then why do we witness relentless conflicts over temples and mosques?

Indian liberals seem to enjoy these manufactured debates. I have no objection to anyone believing in God. A believer can be a good human being, just as a so-called secular or liberal person can be deeply inhuman. Faith or lack of it does not concern me. Values do.

The Brahmanical media cleverly avoids debates on real issues. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar challenged the Shastras and sought to reform them to make society more humane. Yet he was prevented from speaking and asked to remove his text at a conference organised by the Jat-Pat Todak Mandal, even though he was invited as the chief guest.

Challenging God is not merely about dismantling statues or critiquing religious texts. I challenge Javed Akhtar and his admirers to speak out against caste discrimination and untouchability. I have rarely come across his writings or speeches addressing these issues. Are these not irrational practices?

I welcome debates if the intent is honest. But if one is unfamiliar with India’s rich humanist and rationalist traditions, the Brahmanical Manustream experts would do well to read Charvaka, Buddha, Raidas, Kabir, Jyotiba Phule, and Babasaheb Ambedkar to understand the historic struggle against Brahmanical orthodoxy.

And when we speak of rationalism and atheism, how can we forget the towering legacy of Periyar, who made Brahmanical hegemony tremble in Tamil Nadu? Brahmanical liberals may invoke many names to justify their atheism and secularism, but they rarely mention Periyar—because he exposed God as an instrument of power wielded by the Brahmanical elite. His struggle against God and Brahmanical dominance was not a mere intellectual exercise; it was a commitment to backward classes, Dalits, and non-Brahmin communities who had long been pushed to the margins by entrenched power structures.

So the issue is not whether God exists or does not exist. The real issue is who controls power. God today is power; God is political. For millions, faith remains deeply personal. But for a small elite, it is an instrument to control politics and society. Let us not waste time on fake debates. Let people practise religion or reject it, but keep both within the private domain. The real challenges before us are the political use of religion, the spread of superstition, bigotry, and organised hatred.

The task before us is not to prove or disprove God, but to confront religious bigotry and injustice. Let us work together—believers, atheists, and rationalists alike—to make the world more humane and just.

---

*Human rights defender

Comments

Gram sabha as reformer: Mandla’s quiet challenge to the liquor economy

By Raj Kumar Sinha* This year, the Union Ministry of Panchayati Raj is organising a two-day PESA Mahotsav in Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, on 23–24 December 2025. The event marks the passage of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA), enacted by Parliament on 24 December 1996 to establish self-governance in Fifth Schedule areas. Scheduled Areas are those notified by the President of India under Article 244(1) read with the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution, which provides for a distinct framework of governance recognising the autonomy of tribal regions. At present, Fifth Schedule areas exist in ten states: Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Telangana. The PESA Act, 1996 empowers Gram Sabhas—the village assemblies—as the foundation of self-rule in these areas. Among the many powers devolved to them is the authority to take decisions on local matters, including the regulation...

MG-NREGA: A global model still waiting to be fully implemented

By Bharat Dogra When the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MG-NREGA) was introduced in India nearly two decades ago, it drew worldwide attention. The reason was evident. At a time when states across much of the world were retreating from responsibility for livelihoods and welfare, the world’s second most populous country—with nearly two-thirds of its people living in rural or semi-rural areas—committed itself to guaranteeing 100 days of employment a year to its rural population.

Policy changes in rural employment scheme and the politics of nomenclature

By N.S. Venkataraman* The Government of India has introduced a revised rural employment programme by fine-tuning the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), which has been in operation for nearly two decades. The MGNREGA scheme guarantees 100 days of employment annually to rural households and has primarily benefited populations in rural areas. The revised programme has been named VB-G RAM–G (Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission – Gramin). The government has stated that the revised scheme incorporates several structural changes, including an increase in guaranteed employment from 100 to 125 days, modifications in the financing pattern, provisions to strengthen unemployment allowances, and penalties for delays in wage payments. Given the extent of these changes, the government has argued that a new name is required to distinguish the revised programme from the existing MGNREGA framework. As has been witnessed in recent years, the introdu...

When a city rebuilt forgets its builders: Migrant workers’ struggle for sanitation in Bhuj

Khasra Ground site By Aseem Mishra* Access to safe drinking water and sanitation is not a privilege—it is a fundamental human right. This principle has been unequivocally recognised by the United Nations and repeatedly affirmed by the Supreme Court of India as intrinsic to the right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. Yet, for thousands of migrant workers living in Bhuj, this right remains elusive, exposing a troubling disconnect between constitutional guarantees, policy declarations, and lived reality.

Rollback of right to work? VB–GRAM G Bill 'dilutes' statutory employment guarantee

By A Representative The Right to Food Campaign has strongly condemned the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB–GRAM G) Bill, 2025, describing it as a major rollback of workers’ rights and a fundamental dilution of the statutory Right to Work guaranteed under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). In a statement, the Campaign termed the repeal of MGNREGA a “dark day for workers’ rights” and accused the government of converting a legally enforceable, demand-based employment guarantee into a centralised, discretionary welfare scheme.

A comrade in culture and controversy: Yao Wenyuan’s revolutionary legacy

By Harsh Thakor* This year marks two important anniversaries in Chinese revolutionary history—the 20th death anniversary of Yao Wenyuan, and the 50th anniversary of his seminal essay "On the Social Basis of the Lin Biao Anti-Party Clique". These milestones invite reflection on the man whose pen ignited the first sparks of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and whose sharp ideological interventions left an indelible imprint on the political and cultural landscape of socialist China.

'Structural sabotage': Concern over sector-limited job guarantee in new employment law

By A Representative The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has raised concerns over the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (VB–G RAM G), which was approved during the recently concluded session of Parliament amid protests by opposition members. The legislation is intended to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

India’s Halal economy 'faces an uncertain future' under the new food Bill

By Syed Ali Mujtaba* The proposed Food Safety and Standards (Amendment) Bill, 2025 marks a decisive shift in India’s food regulation landscape by seeking to place Halal certification exclusively under government control while criminalising all private Halal certification bodies. Although the Bill claims to promote “transparency” and “standardisation,” its structure and implications raise serious concerns about religious freedom, economic marginalisation, and the systematic dismantling of a long-established, Muslim-led Halal ecosystem in India.

Making rigid distinctions between Indian and foreign 'historically untenable'

By A Representative Oral historian, filmmaker and cultural conservationist Sohail Hashmi has said that everyday practices related to attire, food and architecture in India reflect long histories of interaction and adaptation rather than rigid or exclusionary ideas of identity. He was speaking at a webinar organised by the Indian History Forum (IHF).

Search This Blog