India is a nation where history is always present—but often misremembered. We sing songs of freedom, chant slogans of patriotism, and recall our martyrs. And yet, somewhere along the way, the definition of who is a patriot—and who is not—has been quietly rewritten.
Today, India’s political landscape is dominated by two major ideological legacies.
One belongs to a camp whose ideological ancestors were linked—directly—to the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. Nathuram Godse, Gandhi’s killer, emerged from the ideological ecosystem that saw Gandhi’s pluralism as dangerous and his compassion as betrayal. While the connection was once a mark of shame, it is now brushed aside or rebranded.
The other camp belongs to a party that gave India two Prime Ministers—Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi—both assassinated by extremists. Whether or not one agrees with their policies, their deaths were tied to the risks they took in service of the nation. They were targeted because they held power, made decisions, and bore consequences—deadly ones.
And yet, in a stunning reversal, supporters of the former are today celebrated as patriots, while supporters of the latter are often labeled anti-nationals.
How did this happen? Who flipped the narrative?
The Long Game of Narrative Capture
This shift didn’t happen overnight. It was crafted over years, by those who understood that controlling the story is more powerful than just winning elections.
A sophisticated media ecosystem emerged—news channels, social media influencers, troll armies—all aligned to one mission: to equate nationalism with loyalty to one political party and its ideology. Dissent, disagreement, and debate became suspect. Students, activists, journalists, even army veterans—anyone questioning the status quo—were painted as traitors.
Rewriting History in Broad Strokes
Parallel to the media strategy came the reimagining of history itself. School textbooks were revised, historical figures reframed. Icons like Nehru and Gandhi, once revered, were subtly maligned or ignored. Figures like Savarkar, who once apologized to the British to escape prison, were elevated as misunderstood heroes.
The story of India’s founding was no longer about unity in diversity, but about strength through conformity.
Patriotism, Now a Weapon
The word “anti-national” is now hurled like a stone. No context needed. You are anti-national if you question policy. You are anti-national if you mourn the wrong deaths. You are anti-national if you demand accountability.
And yet, the party that lost two leaders to extremist violence has remained hesitant to assert this legacy. Its silence has allowed others to rewrite the record, to steal the language of patriotism and redefine it in their own image.
The Real Meaning of Patriotism
True patriotism is not performative. It is not about waving flags louder than the next person or echoing the government’s every word. Real patriotism is rooted in conscience. It means defending the soul of the country—not just its symbols.
It is about speaking truth to power, remembering the sacrifices made, and protecting the spirit of the Constitution.
So yes, the narrative has changed. But the truth remains.
Two Prime Ministers died for this country. One was assassinated by religious extremists. The other, by foreign separatists. They didn’t die because they were weak. They died because they stood at the centre of power in a democratic republic—and they chose not to run.
The question is not just who changed the narrative.
The question is: Why did we let them?
Because in forgetting our past, we risk losing our future.
Let us remember: the soil remembers, even when textbooks forget.