m p says:

It’s “Pseudo-Secular Tweet Digest” not “Secular Tweet Digest”

The Hindu-Right lost many debates because They failed to develop a framework and lexicon with a set of key-words, and phrases, which would help get the message to the masses. In sixty years, Only two impactful keywords created by right are Rajaji’s “License,Permit,Quota Raj” and Advani’s “Psuedo-Secularism”. The easiest way to lose debate is to use word “Secular” (i.e. opponents self descriptive label) to describe an anti-hindu wolf hiding in secular skin. In USA, A pro-lifer will never be caught dead using term ‘pro-choice’ (i.e. self descriptive label) for his opponents. A pro-lifer would brand his opponents as ‘baby-killer’. In India, Anti-Hindus have successfully branded Hindu center-right but Hindu center-right has failed to brand it’s opponents. Much worse, Hindu center-right repeatedly makes the mistake of using opponents self descriptive label.

For example, Ayodhya debate, which is an easy debate around demolition of illegal construction, was lost because Hindus never linked it to broader frame-work of religious freedom, universal right to worship at sacred site, and did not use metaphor like dec 6th is ‘Ayodhya Freedom Festival’. On the other hand, Boston debate, which was a difficult debate around destruction of legal private property, was won, by Americans, because of metaphor ‘Boston Tea Party’.