Washington Post downplays anti-Hindu propaganda of NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani as ‘harsh criticism’ of PM Modi
On Thursday (26th April), The Washington Post made a glaring case of narrative distortion in a propaganda piece downplaying anti-Hindu rhetoric of Zohran Mamdani as ‘harsh criticism’ of PM Modi.
Mamdani is a New York State Assembly member of Indian-Ugandan origin, has now become a so-called voice in progressive and anti-establishment political circles. His recent mayoral primary win in NYC has been celebrated by many media outlets, but his remarks on the Indian Prime Minister have drawn widespread attention in India.
Zohran used the terms ‘war criminal’ and “mass slaughter of Muslims” for Prime Minister Modi, but his vision suggests something else. The Amercian daily ‘The Washington Post has tried to frame this solely as ‘criticism of Modi,’ but it is more the intent which is politically bent and reflects a deeper anti-Hindu propaganda.
At a candidature forum last month, Mamdani referred to Modi as a “war criminal,” in the same manner as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This statement underlined his criticism of the war in Gaza. Interconnecting it, he dated back to history, recalling the Gujarat riots and blamed Modi for the deaths of Muslims during the violence while he was serving as Chief Minister of the state. Zohran’s personal hatred toward Hindus was seen as politically oriented, rooted in his long-standing animosity toward the Hindu religion.
At one such protest outside the Indian Consulate, Mamdani accused the Ram mandir temple inauguration of being a “celebration of the destruction of a mosque” and a “tool of oppression.” Such language deliberately erases the decades-long legal and democratic process that led to the Ram Mandir verdict by India’s Supreme Court. It also insults millions of Hindus worldwide who see the temple not as a political symbol, but as the restoration of sacred heritage.
However, his stance on Indian politics extends far beyond democratic dissent. In January 2024, Mamdani co-organized and endorsed protests in New York City that condemned the consecration of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, branding the event as “Hindutva extremism.” The temple—revered by Hindus as the birthplace of Lord Ram—was not just criticized as a political symbol but denounced as a project of “fascism,” equating Hindu religious aspirations with violent majoritarianism.
A video, shot in August 2022, surfaced on social media, showing Mamdani leading a hate mob against the Hindu community at Times Square. Citing “Who are the Hindus? Harami (Bastards),” the mob was heard yelling. Mamdani remained unflinching despite the dehumanization of the Hindu community by his supporters. He instead began spewing vitriol against the Ram Mandir.
The Washington Post’s unsupported claim, in a recent tweet referencing Abhishek Manu Singhvi, that described “the decades-long enmity between Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan,” is a completely flawed and vulnerable act—directly harming and assassinating the internal harmony of Indian communities. This highlights this is not just anti-Modi rhetoric; this is anti-Hindu propaganda masquerading as secular concern.
A person responded to this on X by writing: “As an Indian, this should’ve been a moment of pride—the mayoral primary victory of Zohran—but I can’t support Mamdani for spreading lies [about] India to gain sympathy, such as ‘there are no Gujarati Muslims left.’”
“Mamdani is a terror sympathizer. A Hindu-hating bigot,” Sreemoy Talukdar, an editor at Firstpost, an Indian media outlet with ties to the Hindu right, wrote on Wednesday on X.
Zohran Mamdani and The Washington Post downplay the anti-Hindu propaganda of NYC’s Zohran Mamdani as ‘criticism of Modi’. A bomb blast in Malegaon, a town in Maharashtra, in September 2008, killed six people and injured dozens. What made this case stand out was that, unlike most terror attacks in India until then—which were often attributed to Islamist terror groups—this attack led to the arrest of individuals linked to right-wing Hindu organizations. The Washington Post report published on November 24, 2008, titled “In India, controversy over Hindus’ arrests,” used the phrase “Hindu terrorism,” connecting it with how members of India’s Hindu majority were implicated.
In addition, Mamdani’s alignment with radical groups such as the Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC), which has been accused of spreading anti-Hindu disinformation in the U.S IAMC has previously amplified claims that Hindu groups in America are exporting “Hindutva terror,” often without substantial evidence, fostering a climate of fear and mistrust against Indian-American Hindus.
It is this selective framing by media outlets like The Washington Post that contributes to a broader problem: delegitimizing Hindu concerns while sanitizing hate under the convenient banner of political dissent. The paper’s failure to distinguish between reasonable critique and bigoted activism reflects a worrying trend in Western media—where the complexities of India’s socio-religious landscape are flattened to fit their ideological preferences.
By branding anti-Hindu actions as mere anti-Modi expressions, publications not only ignore the lived experiences of Hindus but also embolden voices that conflate Hindu identity with extremism. True dissent in a democracy must allow space for critique without indulging in cultural erasure. The burden lies with responsible journalism to make that distinction clear.
News