Read on Twitter
I have not, will not, & will almost certainly never refer to Sri Preston Kulkarni as some things he has been called: "Fascist," "Nazi," "RSS stooge," etc.
Kulkarni, by my reckoning, was a politically ambitious & opportunistic want-to-be politician who lacked scruples. https://twitter.com/niftyalpha/status/1324428530906640384
Kulkarni, by my reckoning, was a politically ambitious & opportunistic want-to-be politician who lacked scruples. https://twitter.com/niftyalpha/status/1324428530906640384
By all the evidence, Kulkarni's campaign was launched by leaders of RSS in America.
But I don't think that means he perceived it as "RSS is floating my campaign." I think he failed to consider the motivations — and backgrounds — of his donors.
But I don't think that means he perceived it as "RSS is floating my campaign." I think he failed to consider the motivations — and backgrounds — of his donors.
I also think that Kulkarni's acceptance of initial massive funding by RSS in America made him susceptible — as it does with most politicians — to giving precedence to their interests and advice. Did they probably advice him to cheer on the Nazi-inspired RSS? No.
What they may have done was to whisper in his ear advice to straddle the fence when it came to discussing foreign policy — his sole area of expertise — and pursue a "big tent" coalition-building approach that just happened to heavily include RSS in America.
They may have advised him to — when it became necessary to touch on issues like Kashmir or the Delhi Pogrom — speak on the issues in a way that left out the details, refrained from identifying culprits, and was so fuzzy he could please everybody without taking a stand.
When he finally was pressed on the issue of his backing from RSS in America and presented with the facts about who his major financiers are, he couldn't deny it. So he was left with no option but to 1) deny personal affiliation with RSS & 2) eventually deny knowledge of RSS.
Being backed by RSS in America didn't make Kulkarni their "stooge." It made him compromised when it came to his potential foreign policy stance towards India, which is ruled by a de facto RSS regime.
For politicians, money talks. They're accountable to their donors. If they do something — or don't do something — that their donors don't/do want, the money stops. They face losing re-election.
Thus, for me, the issue has always been one of questioning how a candidate for US Congress can be expected to maintain a principled — rather than financially influenced — position on foreign policy towards India's RSS/BJP while being financed by RSS/BJP members/campaigners.
All that said, I don't feel sorry for Kulkarni.
I do sincerely wish the best for him as a human.
But I shed no tears for someone who grasps for political power and fails to gain it.
I do sincerely wish the best for him as a human.
But I shed no tears for someone who grasps for political power and fails to gain it.
And, last word, I don't consider it my place to tell people — especially those speaking against a fascist movement like RSS — how to speak, but aside from thinking, as expressed, that it's inaccurate to call Kulkarni by such epithets, I also think it's not helpful to the cause.
However, the passion — and over-the-top hyperbole — of people who do say such things is beyond understandable. RSS murders, slaughters, massacres, seeks to eradicate people groups in India. Men, women, and children. Outbursts of fury, though undesirable, are comprehensible.
Just my perspective as an outsider looking in — the path to victory against fascists lies in calm, emotionally-controlled opposition.
