Thapar’s ‘Wokeism’

Entrepreneur Namita Thapar : A proponent of offering Namaz

Entrepreneur Namita Thapar, a proponent of wokeism, praised the many benefits and virtues of offering Namaz (Daily ritual prayer of Muslims) in her reel (a short video) on 26th March. (Wokeism refers to a distorted ideology that challenges the established social order, culture, and family system worldwide.) The explanation she later gave in response to criticism reveals how a vast group with a communist mindset, like the Thapar tendency, exerts influence over international establishments. Through this, an agenda of spreading hatred against Hindus and glorifying other sects is being carried out; thereby, indirectly working to fragment this Hindu Nation.

Responding to criticism, Namita Thapar claimed that Hindus who target women are now demanding reservation for women, thereby presenting a misleading argument. Even if a male entrepreneur had done the same, criticism would have followed. A woman like Namita Thapar, who has established herself in the business world, has conveniently taken the stance of being a woman here. She stated, ‘I am a health professional and also create reels on Yogasanas (Various Yoga postures) and Surya Namaskar; yet, no one objected then’. This explanation is not as simple as it appears. Thousands criticised her precisely because they understood the hidden intent in her statement.

It is important to examine how international establishments, elite industrialists influenced by wokeism, and the attacks on Hindu philosophy and Hindus are interconnected.

On Sony TV, the business reality show Shark Tank India features participants presenting new business ideas to investors. Prominent entrepreneurs (called sharks) invest in these ventures. Namita Thapar is one such shark and a judge on the show.

The term ‘woke’, derived from wake up, originally meant awareness. Emerging in the 1930s in the United States to highlight oppression of Black people by White Americans, this concept has now taken a highly distorted form. This awareness has turned against tradition, culture, and religious philosophy. Today, communist-leaning so-called intellectuals and journalists in the United States, and consequently in India, promote wokeism. Its roots lie in making societies uncivilised. It supports extreme feminism, rebellion, and homosexuality, while outwardly focusing on issues such as racial discrimination and climate change.

Criticising religious philosophy, traditional Scriptures, and customs has become its core. Anti-Hindu teachings imparted in certain Departments of American Universities also contribute to this, and notably, these Departments are funded by large international establishments – thus forming a cycle.

Peyush Bansal, Co-founder and CEO of Lenskart, who studied in Canada, had earlier adopted a Hinduphobic stance in his stores by allowing hijab (Headscarf worn by Muslim women that covers the hair, neck, and sometimes shoulders) but not permitting Hindu religious symbols such as kumkum or sacred threads. Although he later retracted this due to strong opposition from Hindus and economic reasons, it would be naïve to assume his mindset has changed.

Notably, Peyush Bansal is also an investor on the Shark Tank India show. This demonstrates how ultra-wealthy Hinduphobic individuals collaborate to implement anti-Hindu policies and gradually distance the majority of ordinary Hindus from Dharma.

Another example is seen in advertisements – whether it is tea advertisements showing a Muslim neighbour offering tea, jewellery advertisements depicting a Hindu woman without a bindi during festivals, or soap advertisements implying that Hindu festivals inconvenience Muslims. By now, Hindus have recognised how such portrayals spread Hindu hatred while glorifying other sects.

Pressure from Christian and Muslim sects on multinational establishments

In the reality show, Thapar partnered in a venture that promotes awareness against traditional restrictions observed in Hindu customs during menstruation. In the same programme, while strongly advocating the seemingly feminist stance of the right to wear what one wants, Thapar and Peyush Bansal also funded a burqa-selling enterprise, stating they liked the idea – ironically contradicting their earlier position. Had a woman appeared wearing a ghunghat (a woman covering her head and often her face with a section of her saree or dupatta), they would likely have criticised her as regressive. This reflects a growing risk of Stockholm Syndrome (a mental state where one develops sympathy towards the oppressor) among industrialists as well as the general public. The distress faced by Hindu youth in organisations such as Tata Consultancy Services is also indicative of this phenomenon.

According to experts and analysts, multinational corporations are under pressure from Christian and Muslim sects. In fact, there appears to be an implicit requirement to promote other sects as part of investment conditions. The institutions that determine global investment ratings are directly linked to the Vatican Church. To meet these standards, companies are compelled to promote environmental causes, third-gender or homosexual agendas, and especially the communist-favoured concepts of diversity and religious inclusivity. In this context, Thapar’s statement that ‘I have been taught to respect all religions’ becomes clearer. Overall, through these various factors and the medium of wokeism, it is evident that Hindus must be prepared at multiple levels to counter the attacks on them.