"I have spent the past 25 years on a full-time basis to pursue this research and writing that would correct our history. Scholars on our wavelength need to come together not just in petitions, but also in the kurukshetra supporting those among us who fight the tough battles with their necks sticking out, and without any official support or protection."
- There should be a Hindu Literary Festival (maybe with a better name) held annually, where all pro-Hindu scholars (and some purva-pakshins we have criticized) get invited. Nobody with serious credentials as a writer should be excluded. Note that "literary" means these ought to be producers of knowledge in extensive written works, not celebrities, netas, speech-makers, or old guard who are not active producers now. A few celebrity/neta names are ok to include so as to attract media attention, but not too many. This line of work should become professionalized and not some loose hobby to "feel good".
- The core home team must consist of researchers and writers with a proven track record. Then come bloggers and mouse-clicking activists, and others in the parade. But dont let this latter category upstage the researchers-writers, because any intellectual movement must be founded on tough scholarship and not on self-serving noise-making.
- Like NATO in military and the leftist scholars in the intellectual battlefield, there must be a pact that an attack on any one in the core team is an attack against all. Everyone must be required to stick their necks out and fight back. Every army worth its salt has a policy not to leave a wounded soldier behind, no matter what the cost to protect him. Otherwise morale would be low and everyone would be risk averse, fearing that if he got hit then his own cohorts will abandon him. An army that abandons its own wounded will surely lose. I felt like an abandoned wounded soldier last summer when I had to call fellow Hindu writers and almost beg for support. There was no standing support system like the leftists have. When I fight at great risk and cost to my personal life, everyone wants to share in the results, and they even claim credit. But when its their turn to help me, many of them refuse. (I am grateful to the large number who DID help me. I am referring to the larger number who refused, by citing various excuses.) I have faced this type of betrayal numerous times in the past 25 years. This is why I do not trust certain people, even if they publicly pretend to be great dharmic/nationalistic people.
- Collectively we must try to produce 5 solid books annually that are each a purva-paksha on a prominent opponent individual, school of thought or institution. Maybe we will start with fewer in the initial years, but we can grow our quality and capacity. Each such book requires a long term research project by whosoever takes it up. Important to avoid "quick" works that we already have too many of. Each such book is a milestone that must be supported by our community in various ways. Otherwise, you are not nurturing the hard working type of person we badly need on our side.
- Let us have a Hindu Writers Guild. These would be folks who may not necessarily be writing book-length research works (yet), but who commit to write 5-10 articles/blogs annually as part of their team work. Every few months we would pick an important issue or topic of relevance, and the members of the guild would each write in their own name and voice to contribute to it. Besides posting these on mainstream media outlets to the extent possible, these would also get compiled on a special site we would maintain with a professional web management team. Look at the big stories we faced in 2015. How little coordinated writing there was. Contrast this with the way the leftists put out a tsunami of media presence in each case. We have random individuals while they have experienced organizations. We must learn from them in this regard.
- Develop a formal consensus on the minimum set of positions we share in order to be members. In other words, what is the common set of ideological positions required ti be an "insider"? I find that too often we base our evaluation on someone's personality and being "a nice person", rather than on a substantial position. (For instance, 2 years back a major book whose ideological positions would fail my core requirements, was promoted across India by a prestigious Hindu body. They had not done due diligence. When I pointed out the serious issues, it created animosity towards me, and hence they continue to avoid me. Our movement is too much a matter of being in the good books of gatekeepers. This should change to ideological alignment and not personal relations.)