Rising Indophobia and Hinduphobia in America: What is Going On?

On October 11, 2026, police near Chicago successfully thwarted an attempted mass shooting at a Hindu temple in Aurora, Illinois. As per the prosecutors, the suspect had about 300 rounds. It could have become one of the bloodiest hate crimes in US history. Thankfully, a coworker-informant helped prevent it. Police say the suspect self-identifies as a "sociopathic White supremacist Neo-Nazi" and the manifesto allegedly called Indians, Jews, and Black people "subhumans." Court records also show the suspect is likely transgender and receives treatment for ADHD, depression, and anxiety, as well as hormone injections. The full picture of the suspect and the charges are still emerging but one thing is clear: the suspect wanted to kill Indians and the target was a Hindu temple, during Navratri no less.

First off: huge relief that no one was hurt and the police/FBI acted quickly. Gratitude also to the coworker who spoke up. Sheer luck also played a big role as the rifle jammed. And solidarity with the temple community, who are likely shaken by this event. This one hits close to home because I've been to this very temple a couple of of times back when I was a grad student at UW–Madison. But Aurora did NOT happen in a vacuum. Just two weeks earlier, a Hindu temple in Ohio was vandalized. The 4chan slur "pajeet" is now ubiquitous on X, where NCRI counted 24,000+ anti-Indian posts in 2025. Nearly half of Indian-Americans report a hate act in recent years. Offline, armed white supremacists rallied in Frisco, Texas against an alleged "Indian invasion". A Senate candidate called a Hanuman statue a "false statue of a false Hindu God". Yet, many still live in denial over such vile Indophobia and/or Hinduphobia. What exactly is going on in the USA?

As always, my disclaimer: I do not support any specific political party or socio-politico-economic ideology, be it in America or in India. I identify as a freethinker. To me nothing is beyond the reach of critical inquiry. Based on such inquiry, I support the doctrine of universal human rights (e.g., see this ode I wrote) and democratic constitutional rule of law rooted in logic, reason, civility, and kindness. I also reject kraterocracy and Social Darwinism as ultimately inimical to humanity.

While parts of this post may seem shocking or offensive to some, I encourage you to read with an open mind, not spew hatred. I always welcome differing opinions and other earnest worldviews. And I do not shy away from "controversial" opinions rooted in full truths, e.g., see this and this for my prior analyses of America's sociopolitical life; likewise this and this for India's; and this for bridging the two. It is in that spirit of building bridges that I write this post too.

My Vantage Point. And Who Is This For?

I write this as a US citizen, of Indian origin and Hindu background, and an ex-citizen of India. So, this topic is not of just academic interest to me. I have a real stake in an America where citizens are equal regardless of ancestry or faith but also one in which tough policy tradeoffs are weighed in the open. I write this for my fellow Indian-Americans who want to make sense of why this growing hostility now, my fellow Americans of all backgrounds who may be surprised by this new hatred against a so-called "model minority", and Indians wondering what is happening with the diaspora. I expect the partisan media, whether liberal or conservative, to parrot their usual politically-aligned talking points. So, read on if you are interested in an objective non-partisan take from someone who follows both American and Indian sociopolitcal affairs.

Let me be crystal clear: I condemn hate crimes of every kind, by anyone, against anyone. Free speech and open civil debate on all policy issues, in good faith and with kindness, have always been my ethos. This is NOT apologia for hate crimes nor a blame game but an honest introspection of the sadly growing gulf between American and Indian societies. This is NOT victim blaming either but an attempt to analyze uncomfortable and inconvenient full truths. Even my 2024 post that made the rational case for Trump/Republicans was on policy (de)merits and transparent tradeoff calculations. Of course, many of these issues predate Trump by years, if not decades. So, to blame only President Trump for this hatred is to live in denial. Ironically, my 2024 post had called out the rising Indophobia/Hinduphobia from both the left and the right and yet, here I am writing about it again.

My core thesis: the ongoing rise of Indophobia/Hinduphobia in America is rooted in legitimate policy grievances mixing with age-old prejudices.

Such policy grievances deserve open debate, not reflexive "racist!" or "xenophobe!" ad hominems to shut down debate. I spell out 8 issues, in no particular order, and not necessarily exhaustive. For each, I separate legitimate grievances from where they turn into vile hatreds.

Issue 1: H-1B Visa Abuse

Indians received about 71% of H-1B visas in 2024. Naturally this is a major lightning rod for anti-Indian sentiment in the USA.

What is legitimate. The purpose of H-1B was to help US companies bring in talented high-skilled foreign workers to fill legitimate gaps in the US labor market. Alas, it has been subject to rampant abuse by many Indian outsourcing firms--egged on by some of their US employers--but also some US software firms. Many US universities have also cynically exploited foreign MS students as "cash cows" despite the growing labor market pressure in the US. All this undercuts both the wages of citizens and the very integrity of legal migration pathways. This issue is well-documented:

• Infosys: paid $34 million in 2013 to settle allegations of misusing visitor visas.
• Cognizant: a 2024 federal jury found it intentionally discriminated against 2,000+ non-Indian employees, benching them while less qualified Indian staff took their roles. It denies this and is appealing.
• TCS: the EEOC is investigating complaints from older non-South Asian Americans laid off while Indian H-1B staff were kept. TCS calls them meritless.
• Disney and Southern California Edison: in 2015, US workers had to train their cheaper outsourced H-1B replacements, supplied in Disney's case by Cognizant and HCL.

Big Tech is not exempt. On October 8, 2026, Vice-President Vance temporarily barred Microsoft from sponsoring H-1B workers for green cards, saying it laid off 6000 Americans while hiring 6300 H-1Bs. Microsoft calls its visa filings unrelated. Anger among the US public over such visa abuse is to be expected. Imagine how much outrage there'd be in India if, say, Reliance fired 6000 Indians while hiring, say, 6300 Bangladeshis instead!

Where it turns ugly. About 70% of high-engagement anti-Indian posts in mid-2025 were "job stealer" and expulsion rhetoric. Around Diwali 2025, the slurs went straight for Hindu deities, though the visa has nothing to do with religion. Frisco heard hours of baseless H-1B "fraud" claims against its Indian/Indian-American residents. Another sad fact is that most Indian H-1B workers play by the rules, yet they are unfairly made to wait for decades for a green card while almost all other nationalities need to wait only a few years. The US should fix the system’s abusers, not punish the honest ones.

The fix is ruthless policy correction in the US national interest: higher wage floors, wage-weighted selection with reasonable merit-based exemptions (e.g., for startups, higher ed, rural hospitals), and a crackdown on outsourcing body shops. How much foreign labor to allow in one's job market is every nation's sovereign right, period. In fact, things are far harsher than the US in many other rich nations, e.g., Singapore restricts work permits by nationality, a form of legalized discrimination, while the rich Arab nations of the Persian Gulf have far more inhumane treatment of legal migrant workers.

Issue 2: Illegal Migration from India

In my 2024 post, I had strongly criticized the "open borders" illegal migration mess in the USA and how it fed human trafficking gangs. While much of it was due to the disastrous votebank appeasement policies of Democrats aimed at Hispanic/Latino identitarians, many Indians also took advantage of the mess, as did many other nationalities. Pew estimated 725,000 illegal migrants from India as of 2021, the third-largest group after Mexico and El Salvador. Of course, many Indian illegal migrants are also visa overstays. In 2022, a Gujarati family literally froze to death trying to cross illegally from Canada. After Trump's return to power, the US began military deportation flights to India, not just Latin American nations.

What is legitimate. Reversing illegal migration, ending the abuse of so-called "asylum" policies, and strong border control are sovereign rights of any nation, not bigotry. Again, India itself deports illegal Bangladeshi migrants en masse! Japan and the Gulf Arab states also deport illegal migrants routinely, as do many rich European nations. India must cooperate fully with the USA on both preventing such illegal migrant trafficking and facilitate repatriation of Indian illegal migrants.

Where it turns ugly. Alas, the "open borders" mess that many Indians took advantage of has in part caused a backlash on ethnic/national origin basis against legally migrated Indian-Americans too. After an August 2025 Florida truck crash involving an illegal Indian Sikh migrant driver, abuse poured onto Sikhs and/or ethnic Indians generally. A since-deleted DHS post told a Sikh man to "get off our roads". When a turban becomes a stand-in for illegal behavior, citizens who happen to share that religion and/or ethnicity end up paying for it too.

Again, the fix is ruthless policy correction, some of which the Trump administration has been pursuing already. Mass deportation of illegal migrants must continue no matter their ethnoracial, religious, or national origin backgrounds. New legal pathways for temporary blue-collar legal migrant labor must be explored in conjunction to avoid disadvantaging American agriculture and hospitality sectors, if employers can prove such labor is unavailable domestically even with fair market wages and benefits.

Issue 3: The Transnational Scam Industry in India

For millions of Americans, especially the elderly, their most direct contact with "India" nowadays is sadly a scam call made by extortion gangs in India. This is a major factor in the souring of American attitudes toward Indians at large, while the backlash affects Indian-Americans too.

What is legitimate. Tech support scams cost Americans about $2.1 billion a year, per the FBI. Microsoft researchers traced 85% of those they studied to India. Three India-based call centers impersonating Social Security were tied to nearly $49 million in losses. India's response has been too little, too late. CBI raids under "Operation Chakra," like one on a $40 million Amritsar ring, mostly follow US tips. In one Noida case the CBI counted about $8.5 million in losses; the FBI counted $48.7 million. Delhi must take strict proactive action against such organized scam/crime mafia, not just token raids when Washington complains.

Where it turns ugly. Psychologists call it the availability heuristic: a vivid, repeated experience shapes one's picture of a group more than statistics do. Memes now depict Indians as unwashed call-center scammers. Of course, it ignores the fact that Indian-Americans and Indian nationals in the USA are often the victims of such scams themselves. In fact, I myself have gotten such scam calls in the US--all by men with heavy Indian accents--thrice so far! Blaming a whole nationality, ethnic group, and/or religious group for the actions of some criminal gangs is a form of collective punishment.

Issue 4: Demographic and Class Anxieties

This one needs more careful unpacking. Demographic anxieties arise in almost any nation, and the US is no exception. Frisco, Texas is the poster child for this. Its Asian/Asian-American population went from about 2% in 2000 to nearly 30%, much of it Indian-American. Temples and a mosque followed, and so did the backlash: a viral Costco video framed as H-1B-driven "Great Replacement". A similar issue over innocuous spectators of a UT-Austin football game. To that, add class anxieties: Indian-Americans are one of the highest earning ethnic groups in the US and are now highly visible in top positions in tech, healthcare, academia, and even politics--across both parties. Such new-found visibility can trigger resentment among some US-born citizens even within their own ideological group, e.g., "Did any of y'all vote for this Indian to run America?"

But the facts speak for themselves: Indian-Americans are less than 2% of the US population but represent over 8% of US physicians (many serving rural areas), have cofounded 96 unicorn startups (more than any other immigrant group) that together employ 10s of 1000s of Americans of all stripes, represent 15%-20% of faculty (my first-hand count) at top-20 computing departments educating 100s of 1000s of Americans over the decades, and have won 4 Nobels, 2 Fields Medals, and 1 Turing Award so far. They have also flown for NASA, from Kalpana Chawla, who gave her life on Columbia, to Sunita Williams and Raja Chari. Few nations competing for skilled legal migrants would call this record a "problem."

That said, some Indian-American politicians do inadvertently fan these flames of anxiety. For instance, weighing in on the H-1B controversy, Vivek Ramaswamy alleged some American "mediocrity"--a claim that is both inaccurate and condescending. It led to a new wave of anti-Indian backlash. Nevertheless, I note two facts here. First, an NCRI analysis found that 61% of online engagements on the posts of a "Groyper" leader came from bot farms abroad. That still leaves a big number domestically though. Second, Vivek is still the Republican gubernatorial candidate in Ohio warmly endorsed by President Trump himself.

What is legitimate. Anxiety over demographic change is one of social psychology's most robust findings. I too have written about this before, complete with Trolley problem-based thought experiments. White-Americans have been repeatedly lectured about a coming "majority-minority" shift. For some this can trigger a perceived status threat due to in-group vs. out-group dynamics. This is nothing unique to Whites; other ethnoracial groups react similarly. And nor is this unique to America. Japan seldom grants citizenship to non-ethnic Japanese; biracial Japanese are still stigmatized. The Gulf Arab states almost never grant citizenship to foreigners. Malaysia's Bumiputera system (from the Sanskrit term for "son of the soil") discriminates against Indian-Malaysians and Chinese-Malaysians. Even rich Singapore literally fixes ethnoracial proportions of its population, allegedly for "social stability/harmony" purposes! And let us take India itself. Many Hindus openly worry about their declining population share even as the Muslim share rises. Tamil leaders, in response to Tamil Nadu's declining fertility, openly advocate absurd natalism! So, it is a double standard to lecture only Whites and/or Americans over such demographic anxieties. To be sure, I am not advocating for ethnoracial quotas in US migration policies, but I will defend the right of my fellow US citizens to advocate for it if they desire--as long as it is via scrupulously constitutional legal means.

Likewise, class anxieties arise in part because most legal migrants hail from educated middle- or upper-class (income group) families abroad. How is it fair to expect, say, the son of a poor coal miner in West Virginia, or a poor single mother in California, to compete with the children of rich foreign parents? As a comparison point, India's and China's higher ed institutions do not admit anywhere near as many foreign nationals. The policy fix is clear: limit the number of foreign student admissions carefully to avoid disadvantaging domestic students without damaging American academia's leading role in nurturing global excellence. And boost financial aid, not loans, for US citizen students. After all, higher ed/academia is one of the only domains where Socialism with guardrails has consistently worked better than pure Capitalism.

Where it turns ugly. My red line is citizenship. Who to admit into a nation is fair game for policy debates by its citizens. But once someone is legally naturalized as a citizen, they are equal citizens (with two exceptions: eligibility to be President/VP and denaturalization if fraud is proven). The Supreme Court also upheld birthright citizenship yet again. Unless the Constitution is amended on this issue via Article V, these red lines are absolute. Remember Singapore? Their ethnoracial quotas apply even to its citizens, including on housing rights! That should remain anathema in the USA. Likewise, anxiety about declining share of the population of any group never justifies hate crimes, whether it is in America against Indians/Hindus or Hispanics, or in India against Muslims or Christians.

Issue 5: US-India Trade War

In August 2025, President Trump hit Indian goods with tariffs of up to 50%, half of it as a penalty for buying Russian oil. That month, anti-Indian hate on X jumped nearly fivefold. This is part of his signature tariffs-based trade war approach to geopolitics and certainly not unique to India.

What is legitimate. India runs a big trade surplus with the US and imposes high tariffs to protect many of its own sectors. America's frustration is fair, and tariffs are one legitimate, if blunt, tool to fight such trade wars. Its farmers are also increasinly squeezed between growing costs domestically, sporadic labor supply, saturated established markets, and fierce competition abroad for new markets. It is rational for America to protect its agriculture sector for food security purposes, just as it is rational for India too. Two governments bargaining hard to defend their own national interests is normal in geopolitics.

Where it turns ugly. Alas, this sentiment of "India is ripping us off!" sometimes turns into "Indian-Americans are a fifth column!" Neither Indian-Americans nor the Indian nationals who work in the US determine New Delhi's tariffs--that is up to the voters of India. Sadly, diasporas and/or ethnoreligiously connected people often face the brunt of hatreds due to foreign nations' policies. Many Japanese-Americans and German-Americans were stripped of their liberty during World War II. Arab-Americans were targeted after the 9/11 terrorist attacks by foreign Arabs. Chinese-Americans faced hate crimes over COVID-19 virus origins in China, where even Chinese citizens face persecution by the CCP.

Issue 6: India's Non-Alignment Posture

This is more intellectual than down-to-Earth. After two decades of careful bipartisan courting, Americans naturally expected India to be more of an ally against the Russia-China-Iran-North Korea Axis. Yet, India maintains strong Russian arms ties, keeps buying discounted Russian oil, keeps courting China via BRICS and SCO, and maintains close ties with the Iranian Islamofascist regime that massacres its own children. But India still desires more visas for its citizens to work in the USA to get more remittance money. Naturally, these double games cause irritation in America, including amusing histrionics like a jilted lover. :)

What is legitimate. Again, both sides are acting rationally. India's non-alignment posture, rebranded as "multi-alignment" or "strategic autonomy" nowadays, has been consistent for decades, across both INC-led and BJP-led governments. Russia/USSR has been a far more consistent friend of India's than America, including at the UN Security Council. Besides, America's bankrolling of Pakistan as a client state, despite its Osama drama and chumminess with China, show the naivete and duplicity of Washington's policies. Even "middle powers" such as Canada and the Gulf Arab states are now hedging and courting China too, vindicating India's stance. Nevertheless, America pushing back on all this is also rational given its interest in maintaining Pax Americana. All of India, China, and the USA are "greedy" in their own national interest--welcome to Realpolitik 101.

Where it turns ugly. Again, Indian-Americans and Indian nationals working in the USA do NOT determine India's oil purchases or great power relations. Geopolitics must NOT become a cover for ethnoracial or religious prejudice. All that said, I do not see this issue as major factor at the ground level, but it is likely contributing to more anti-India sentiment among the national leadership and the political elites and manifesting in their speeches.

Issue 7: White Nationalism and Christian Nationalism

These two phenomena overlap but they are not the same. White nationalism says America belongs to Whites foremost and that it should perhaps become a White ethnostate. Christian nationalism says it belongs to Christians foremost and that it should perhaps become an officially Christian state instead of secular. They intersect as White-Christian nationalism, but each has a subset that dislikes said intersection, reducing their internal cohesion. For instance, some Neo-Nazis, a subset of White nationalists, dislike Christianity. Likewise, many Christian nationalists abhor anti-Black racism or are Black themselves! Nevertheless, both groups have extremist subsets that target Indians/Hindus on ethnoracial and/or religious basis. To be clear: only a minority of Whites (resp. Christians) in the USA support White (resp. Christian) nationalism. The vast majority of US citizens support its Constitution that guarantees equality for all its citizens no matter their ethnicity/race or religion.

Nevertheless, the pattern is consistent. The giant Hanuman statue in Sugar Land, Texas draws repeated Hinduphobic protests, and a MAGA activist posted it as "proof" of an alleged Indian "invasion". In Frisco, Texas, an activist claimed that Hindus and Muslims were "teaming up" to allegedly "wipe out" Christians. Some Christian residents also opposed a Hindu temple, a Jain temple, and a mosque that had all cleared zoning already.

What is legitimate. All Americans are free to believe their own faith is the "only true faith"; this is part of what religious freedom protects. Evangelism by civilians is also protected speech under the First Amendment. But all that applies to all non-Christian groups and non-religious groups just as much as for Christian groups as per the First Amendment. Nevertheless, desiring one's societal fabric to be infused with the traditions one prefers is not a bigoted stance per se. Even in India, many Hindus--and many non-Hindus--prefer India's societal fabric to be rooted in Dharmic and/or Gandhian traditions, as I have written about before. But the US Constitution confers no "special rights" on Christianity. And ironically, one of Christianity's oldest denominations itself still faces prejudice! As for White nationalism, an ethnostate is infeasible without ethnic cleansing. Perhaps Neo-Nazis are willing to commit mass murder to that end but I am sure the overwhelming majority of Americans reject that idea.

Where it turns ugly. Framing Hindu religions as "idolatry" and Hindu temples as "invasion" to rationalize hate crimes is Anti-American, period. It mirrors Islamists attacking Hindu temples in Pakistan/Bangladesh and some Hindutva extremists in India smearing all mosques as "foreign intrusions" even where there are no religious land disputes. That said, one positive fact is that Frisco approved all three houses of worship and elected a mayor who ran on unity. I also commend Hindu politicians such as Vivek for courageously educating Christian nationalism-inclined voters on the importance of American secularism.

Issue 8: Yes, Racism and Xenophobia Too

The age-old bias of seeing Indian-Americans--and all Asian-Americans--as "perpetual foreigners" sadly still exists in the USA. White mobs attacked Indian workers in Bellingham, Washington in 1907. In 1923, the then Supreme Court ruled that Indians are not "White" and so, they could not become citizens. In 1987, the hate group Dotbusters terrorized Jersey City and Navroze Mody was beaten to death. Implicit-association studies find that while many Americans still equate "American" with "White," that percentage has thankfully been reducing drastically this century.

The above said, Hindu-Americans should not lose perspective or the bigger pictue on racism/xenophobia in the USA. In 2025, America had an estimated 14,085 murders and at least 407 mass shootings, nearly all without bias motives. The baseline rate of gun-related violence is just that high. Police reported 10,881 hate crime incidents, under 1% of violent crime. And if we sort the targeted groups by the rate this is what we get:

Target group	FBI-reported incidents, 2025	Approx. US population	Approx. rate per 100,000
Sikhs	177	0.6 million	30
Jews	1,528	7.5 million	20
LGBTQ people	2,016 (sexual orientation plus gender identity)	23 million adults	9
Black Americans	about 2,800 to 3,300 (tallies differ by dataset)	45 million	7
Muslims	205	3.5 million	6
Asian Americans (all)	339	24 million	1.4
Hindus	28 (up from 25)	2.7 million	1

All incident counts in this table are official FBI figures, as cited by the linked groups. The mass-shooting count is from the Gun Violence Archive, a nonprofit tracker, since the US government keeps no single official count of mass shootings. Population figures and rates are my rough estimates for scale, not FBI numbers.

On a per-capita basis, Hindus have faced far fewer reported hate crimes than Jews or Sikhs. Unfortunately, the FBI does not track anti-Indian bias (national origin basis), but I reckon most Sikhs and some Muslims are also Indian-American. That said, such statistics do not capture hate-fueled verbal abuse on social media or at townhalls, or plots like Aurora that were thwarted. For instance, X (formerly Twitter) is now a cesspool of Indophobic/Hinduphobic vitriol, in part due to its "rage farming" monetization policies. Indian/Hindu-Americans must also stand in solidarity more often with these other groups when they face hate crimes, e.g., like I posted over the recent San Diego mosque attack.

Notwithstanding the above, is imprudent to cry "racism!" or "xenophobia!" on every policy debate over immigration, privileges for foreign national workers, trade wars, or domestic demographic anxieties. Psychologists call this concept creep--overuse of such weighty terms in mundane debates will only devalue them, akin to the parable of the boy who cried wolf. Shut out of the mainstream, legitimate grievances--even if voiced or framed carelessly--will only move to fringe people like Fuentes. Case in point: when Denmark's center-left government took immigration concerns seriously, their far right parties lost ground.

While it is true that Trump's rhetorical style has likely made more people willing to voice racist/xenophobic views, it must not become an excuse for silencing differing earnest worldviews--both false positives and false negatives matter. What matters more on the ground is preventing hate crimes and actually racist/xenophobic policies that violate America's Constitution. Elected leaders such as Trump and Vance should also publicly condemn such high-profile hate crimes, not look the other way. They do speak out over mass shootings such as the recent tragedy in Oregon or when the Second Lady was attacked by far right trolls.

It is also high time Indian/Hindu-Americans stopped giving a free pass to liberals and the far left too. California's SB 403 (vetoed) struck many Hindu-Americans as needlessly singling them out when ancestry-based discrimination, a superset of casteism (e.g., this famous case), is already illegal. Some liberal academics often lie by omission and abuse academic freedom to pursue partisan agendas when critiquing Hindutva nationalism that sometimes devolves to Hinduphobia. I had already called out the liberal media's Hinduphobic smear campaigns over the Ayodhya temple in my 2024 post. All this is similar to how criticism of Israel's policies often devolves into Antisemitism among liberals and the far left.

Concluding Remarks

So what is going on with the rise of Indophobia/Hinduphobia in America? Real grievances over visa policies and abuse, illegal migration, transnational scams, trade policies, geopolitics, and demographic and class anxieties that were left to fester; mixed with age-old racism and/or xenophobia; seized upon by hate-peddling social media influencers, rage profiteers, bot farms, White and/or Christian nationalists, some politicians (on both the right and the left), and biased for-profit media; aimed at an "easy" target group that still lacks mechanisms to fight back in an organized manner. But while the causes are varied, the mechanisms and effects of hate are not unique to Indian/Hindu-Americans nor are they limited to the USA.

All nations must do better to prevent and combat hate crimes against all groups, India included. For instance, India still does not track hate crimes against LGB people, while the USA still does not track them by national origin. Collecting on-the-ground data transparently is a good start. Strong anti-hate crime laws, enforced scrupulously, are also necessary. And public awareness, vigilance, and will to take action to defend innocent people--like the coworker who prevented a tragedy in Aurora--is key too. I hope all Americans--and Indians--can work toward fairer and more just policies for all, to the extent possible. And when there are contentious or even intractable differences of opinion on major policy matters, we must settle them the way all free civilized societies do: free and fair ballots under constitutional limits enforced by an independent Judiciary within the nation; and mutually fair and creative compromises between nations.

On a personal note, America is my adopted home to which I have sworn an oath of loyalty. India is my birth home where most of my extended family still lives. I have written before about the surprisingly deep similarities (and obvious differences) between these two nations who can be natural friends. After all, India's Constitution owes a lot to America's, including the all-important phrase: "equal protection of the laws" for all persons, coincidentally the 14th Amendment mapped to Article 14. Watching this now-widening gulf between these two nations feels like watching divorcing parents bicker. American nativists openly spouting hatreds against ethnic Indians and/or Hindus in the US; anti-American sentiment rising again in India. This is not irreversible, for a strong US-India relationship is in both nations' long-term interests, as long as it is fair and mutually beneficial. I hope both can find their way back to that ideal.

And finally, for my fellow Indian-Americans, I do have some calls to action. Report all hate incidents to the police; a crime that is never filed never counts. Stand in solidarity with all groups that face hate crimes, including Jews, LGBTQ+ people, Blacks, Muslims, etc. Indian/Hindu-Americans also need to learn from Jewish-Americans, who have long fought hatred from parts of both the right and the left. They have built strong institutions such as the ADL to track Antisemitic hate, train law enforcement, and work with lawmakers across both parties. Indian/Hindu-Americans need a similarly well-organized non-partisan non-profit that can speak forcefully for followers of all Indian/Hindu religions and all Indian-origin peoples in America. I also urge Indian-Americans to vote thoughtfully, run for office if they can, and stop being so partisan--a situation I criticized in my 2024 post too. A community that ties itself to just one party will be taken for granted by that party and ignored by others. But one that cultivates productive relationships across ideological divides can at least get heard by all when the need arises.

As always, comments, rebuttals, and discussions are welcome, especially on any blind spots I had. But please do not spew hatred and leave ad hominems at the door.

The Rational Case for Trump/Republicans in 2024

So, I finally became a naturalized US citizen in 2023. Yay! :) And now in 2024 I face literally the worst top 2 choices in generations, between two ailing and polarizing gerontocrats. Boo! X( I now get why so many Americans do not vote. A corrupt duopoly's stranglehold has been stifling ideological diversity, fanning political polarization, and feeding government dysfunction. Sigh.

Anyway, as part of my duty as an informed voter, I set about objectively analyzing the major issues I care about and the positions/projected futures of the country under both main contenders. Consider this a sequel to my previous in-depth analysis: "The Great American Identity Crisis". My headline takeaway is that there is a strong rational case to support Trump in 2024, despite all of his bagagge! I may or may not vote for Trump in the end, but it is increasingly clear Biden won't cut it. While this may sound shocking to some, I encourage you to read this with an open mind, not spew hatred. I always welcome differing opinions and other earnest worldviews. And I certainly do not shy away from "controversial" opinions rooted in full truths, e.g., see this or this for some of my prior analyses of America's sociopolitical life.

NB: I do not support any specific political party or ideology. I do not identify as a Trumpian, Republican, Democrat, liberal, conservative, libertarian, woke progressive, nationalist, globalist, socialist, capitalist, fascist, Nazi, Marxist, Commie, or whatever other socio-politico-economic labels people use. I prefer the label freethinker. To me nothing is beyond the reach of critical inquiry. Based on such inquiry, I support the doctrine of universal human rights (e.g., see this ode I wrote) and democratic constitutional rule of law rooted in logic, reason, civility, and kindness. I also reject kraterocracy and Social Darwinism as ultimately inimical to humanity.

Reasons in Favor of Trump

I see several major reasons in favor of Trump, some as a "negative vote" against the policies of Biden/Democrats/liberals (used interchangeably). This is not an exhaustive list, of course. My major reasons are: "open borders" illegal migration mess; meritocratic reform of legal migration; "war on women" by radical gender ideologues; Biden's age and mental acuity; the useless war in Ukraine; and Anti-Asian discrimination, Indophobia, and Hinduphobia. Let us dive into each.


1. "Open Borders" Illegal Migration Mess

This is the biggest issue. Biden-Harris have shown themselves to be utterly incompetent at protecting the southern border and ending the mass influx of illegal migrants, which some have dubbed an "invasion." Most liberals fail to see the obscene violation of the rule of law this represents and continue to live in denial with euphemisms such as "undocumented" migrants. Even worse, many lump illegal and legal migrants into one "migrants" bin, clearly showing the law matters little to them. This is a form of racist votebank politics to appease their Hispanic/Latino votebanks, which is unfair to the millions of legal migrants who scrupulously respect the rule of law, including many Latinos/Hispanics themselves. No wonder then that this alleged votebank itself is fracturing, with Trump gaining support among Latino/Hispanic citizens who care about the rule of law too. Likewise, the imbalance caused in the blue-collar labor market is most likely to hurt poor citizens, many of whom are Black. So, I won't be surprised if Trump gains more support among Black voters too. Finally, the "open borders" mess is boosting cruel human trafficking gangs, not just in Latin America, but also in Asia and Africa.

I find it ludicruous that Democrats care so much about other nations' borders (e.g., Ukraine) but fail to protect our own! Even the recent so-called bipartisan bill is a sorry excuse for Biden to shore up his image rather than solving the mess properly. Next I will rebut some common rationalizations I see among Democrats.

• First, many lie to themselves that most illegal migrants are "refugees" or "asylum" cases. In reality, the vast majority are blue-collar and/or low-skilled economic migrants, not refugees. Common sense says that even refugees must be duly vetted in their source nation (or a transit nation) first, just like legal migrants. There should be no asylum processing at the border. In fact, this collapse of the legal vetting systems hurts most those who need genuine refuge, e.g., LGBTQ+ people fleeing genuine persection by Christian extremists in Central America.
• Second, many believe they are practicing "compassion" toward people fleeing poverty or violence. In reality, it is a form of White Savior Complex and a smokescreen for a power grab because the logical conclusion of such unhinged "compassionism" ideology is allowing 2+ billion poor people from Africa and Asia too! An old Tamil proverb comes to mind: "When consumed in excess, even the elixir becomes a poison." A variant of this misguided ideology imagines that Latin American illegal migrants deserve "special rights" as a form of "atonement" for the long history of anti-democratic and imperial/colonial interference by the USA in Latin America, a form of White Guilt Complex. Again, that too is the same smokescreen because the USA interfered in the same way in many parts of Asia and Africa too. And since such compassionism ideology is applied only to Latinos/Hispanics and not Africans and Asians, it is clear-cut racist/xenophobic discrimination on the basis of ethnicity/race and/or national origin, egregious violations of federal Civil Rights laws and/or the Constitution's 14th Amendment.
• Third, many liberals assert the USA is a "nation of immigrants" in which many past arrivals were also illegal (and some groups were indeed villified) and so it is okay to have "newcomers" who are illegal too. First off, that phrase is a racist half-truth. Native Americans--a founding group of the USA--are literally not immigrants by definition. And most Black Americans are not "immigrants" either but descendents of enslaved peoples shipped from Africa against their will. Even setting accuracy aside, that phrase is outdated and rooted in globalism and a false equivalence to the "open borders" policies within the EU. But since the creation of the UN, sovereign nations are at the heart of international law and order--it is the United "Nations" after all, not a one-world government. Open borders illegal migration is a grotesque violation of American national sovereignty.
• Fourth, some Democrats now openly admit their sinister reason that is the only one with logical coherence even if it is anti-national: a mass gerrymandering-style subversion of the federal census to gain on seat allocation and of the electorate itself via eventual legalization of, and/or new births by, illegal migrants to boost their votebanks. Some actually view this as a counter-attack to Republicans gerrymandering many state legislatures. In reality, Democrats too engage in gerrymandering, but this apparent Democrat "masterplan" to convert illegal migrants into voters is unconstitutional and even suicidal for the nation. No wonder the "Great Replacement Theory" has gained currency. While I reject its "replacement" claim, there is indeed a "Great Disempowerment" of all legitimate citizens, not just White ones. It is no longer a White nationalist conspiracy theory but an actual practice by liberals in violation of the civic nationalism that underpins America's rule of law.
  
  

Trump's policies are more likely to end and reverse this disaster. Military-backed border enforcement is an urgent need. To maximize deterrence and ensure rule of law, most illegal migrants must be deported to their home nations, at least those who entered this century, in line with how most other nations around the world, including in Europe and Asia, handle illegal migration. As for those who were here for over a quarter century, I think it is reasonable to consider a one-time pardon and lifetime permanent residency--but no path to citizenship--as long as they did not break any other law and they prove their economic independence. Citizenship should be revoked for those born in the US to illegal migrant parents--their citizenship is illegitimate--but it can be replaced with lifetime permanent residency. New temporary visa categories must be created for blue-collar workers given the high demand in the agriculture and hospitality industries. Such visas should be open to all nationalities equally without "special rights" for Latin Americans and all employers must offer proper wages, benefits, and prove they could not find citizens to fill those jobs. All those who got deported must be banned from such visas for a significant period, perhaps a decade. Such temporary renewable visas are the norm in most other developed economies that rely on cheaper foreign labor, e.g., South/Southeast Asian laborers in the rich Arab nations of the Persian Gulf or Filipino nurses in Japan.

Overall, it is clear to me that illegal migration and the current "open borders" disaster wrought by Democrat policies is an existential threat to the very integrity, sovereignty, and unity of the USA. I hope more independents, moderate Democrats, and other voters see the gravity of this existential threat. If we apply Sinclair's assessment, Democrats lack the incentives to solve this mess properly due to their racist votebank appeasement policies. In contrast, Trump and his new team seem to have the clear-eyed vision and the spine to course-correct. In fact, allowing Republicans to solve this mess over the next maybe 12 years may even help Democrats retain their coveted Latino/Hispanic identitarian votebanks. In this sense, a Trump win in 2024 could paradoxically benefit both parties in the long run, while also preserving national integrity.


2. Meritocratic Reform of Legal Migration

Legal migration has always been critical to the US economy and it remains so for many industries, especially software, engineering, and medicine. Alas, Democrats refuse to reform legal migration unless illegal migration is also bundled even though the two are disjoint issues. I have seen the negative consequences of their foolish policies firsthand: highly meritorious graduate students from India and China, burdened with long wait times for green cards, end up leaving the USA or face the high stress of uncertainty for years. The H-1B visa is an unmitigated disaster due to its lottery approach that puts high-skilled graduates and low-cost expatriate IT workers from abroad in the same bucket with no merit basis. I am flabbergasted at how much "intellectual wealth" the USA is squandering this way. Of course, as with any other nation, it is prudent to maintain a high bar and have caps on legal migration to avoid disadvantaging US-born legitimate citizens--and I say this as a legal migrant who became a naturalized citizen myself.

I do see some reasons for this intransigence by the Democrats though. They are dominated by bourgeois liberals who seek to keep competition lower for their preferred white-collar jobs even as they like to use cheap illegal migrants for blue-collar jobs they do not want, throwing low-income US citizens under the bus. Unsurprisingly, that is part of why so many blue-collar and/or rural Whites ditched the Democrats and turned to Trump, as Michael Moore predicted. In reaction, I have heard some urban elitist liberals use Anti-White racist epithets such as this and this to dismiss such rural and/or blue-collar Whites just because they voted for Trump! The above said, as an ex-citizen of India myself, I do see some benefits in some such meritorious students returning to their home nations as a form of reverse brain drain to boost their economies. It is not all bad to spread some intellectual wealth around the world, especially when many such US-trained graduates can help spread the American work ethic and "Brand America" abroad.

Overall, it is clear to me that the Republicans' push for points-based meritocratic legal migration reform is urgently needed for the benefit of the US economy. Most of our competitor nations for high-skilled white-collar workers in the democratic world (e.g., Canada and the UK) already have such a rational system. And in an era when competition with China is intensifying on technological innovation, e.g., in AI and clean energy tech, Democrats are holding US companies--and America's full economic potential--hostage due to their self-defeating racist votebank appeasement politics.


3. "War on Women" by Radical Gender Ideologues

As an out gay man myself, I have done a lot of work to help LGBTQ+ students and the wider community, including advocating for inclusivity for transgender people. Alas, the trans rights movement has been hijacked by radical gender ideologues who are waging a new "war on women" to erase sex-based rights. Both women's rights and trans rights matter but radical trans extremists keep peddling misogynistic erasure of cisgender women by duplicitously conflating sex and gender. Indeed, the term "woman" has multiple meanings, both sex-based and gender-based (and also "wife of man" etymologically!), but the near-universal English usage of "woman" hitherto meant cisgender woman, i.e., by both sex and gender. It is a half-truth and a lie by omission to say "transwomen are women"--the full truth is "transwomen are women by gender and men/male by sex." Forcing a blanket entry of transwomen into all women's spaces (even female prisons and rape crisis centers!) without carefully considering if they are gender-based, sex-based, or both is not a form of "inclusion" at all but outright bigotry against ciswomen. Lumping ciswomen and transwomen--different groups biologically and socially--into one group is unequivocally misogynistic just as lumping Blacks and Native Americans into one group because they are both "coloreds" (POC in liberal euphemism) is unequivocally racist.

Alas, many liberals--ironically in patriarchal style--keep bullying courageous women such as J. K. Rowling (a survivor of sexual assault by a man!) who sounded the alarm. Worse, UPenn actively muzzled and bullied Paula Scanlan, a whistleblower who spoke out on the unfairness of forcing Lia Thomas into women's swimming. It is ironical that Republicans are the ones standing up now for scientific truth, fairness, and safety of women's sports, while Democrats blithely double down on yet another form of votebank politics--to appease LGBTQ+ extremists. Apart from trampling on women's rights, these radical gender ideologues also peddle a mass medicalization of children, egged on by profiteering doctors/hospitals with weak checks, even though there is a dearth of scientific research on the long-term effects of irreversible chemical or surgical interventions at such ages. Thankfully, the medical community is now speaking out more on these risks. And more female sports bodies are starting to realize the need to prioritize fairness and safety, e.g., see this thoughtful decision on swimming, instead of an unhinged "inclusionism" ideology.

Analogous to how (regular) Muslims faced a backlash due to the nonsense peddled by some Islamist extremists, (regular) LGBTQ+ people, including (regular) trans people, now face a backlash due to the nonsense peddled by cultish "Transism" extremists. LGBTQ+ groups need to do a lot of introspection, e.g., see groups such as Gays Against Groomers starting to push back. I hope LGBTQ+ rights groups purge themselves of such misogynistic (and sometimes even homophobic!) Transist extremists lest they implode into oblivion. As a matter of fact, I have stopped donating to both Human Rights Campaign and ACLU due to their failure to navigate this issue prudently. I encourage others to do so too until such groups course-correct.

Overall, it is clear to me that Trump and his team will deliver a strong defense of women's sports and women's spaces in general, while pushing back against unhinged radical gender ideologues and the extremist cult of Transism (analogous to Islamism). In contrast, Democrats lazily keep beating a dead horse on the issue of abortion rights--now a state-level issue, not a federal issue--instead of stemming this rapid erasure of women's rights, again due to their votebank politics.


4. Biden's Age and Mental Acuity

It is clear from Biden's many recent speeches that his mental acuity is diminishing and sometimes, his physical ability too. So, I see it as a form of "elder abuse" to put an 81 year old man through the most stressful job in the world again. Moreover, the life expectancy of non-Hispanic White males in the US is only 74 years. I have not seen convincing evidence that Kamala Harris has the acumen or leadership heft to take up the mantle if Biden dies in office. On the contrary, her VP tenure is generally considered dysfunctional. When the world is in uncharted waters with the Russia-China-Iran-North Korea authoritarian axis (RCIN Axis, for short) ramping up their destabilizing violent actions in unexpected ways, it is yet another existential threat on national security and international peace grounds for the USA to re-elect a frail near-death leader. This tally of key movers and shakers on the world stage sorted by their age confirms how precarious the outlook is for the USA:

• Saudi Arabia's Salman: 38
• UK's Sunak: 43
• France's Macron: 46
• Canada's Trudeau: 52
• Australia's Albanese: 61
• Iran's Raisi: 63
• Germany's Scholz: 65
• Japans' Kishida: 66
• Turkey's Erdogan: 70
• China's Jinping: 70
• Russia's Putin: 71
• India's Modi: 73
• Israel's Netanyahu: 74
• USA's Biden: 81 (!!)

Of course, Trump is no spring chicken at 77 years old. But when both are near the far end of the spectrum, the ~4 years gap matters. The wild card is we do not yet know who Trump's VP will be. I hope he does not pick a Sarah Palin-style novice. Regardless, Trump did manage to instill cautious anxiety, if not outright fear, into America's adversaries in his first term. The incompetence of Biden/Democrats against the RCIN Axis is clear for all to see: Iran-proxy Islamist terrorist groups ramping up their violence in the Middle East, Russia expanding its puppet footprint in the African Sahel, and China amping up threats against Taiwan and some ASEAN nations. The world has objectively gotten more dangerous since Biden took office, in large part due to his administration's diplomatic failures. It is not entirely clear if Trump can (at least partly) reinstate Pax Americana but it is clear that more of Biden means even more international dangers.


5. The Useless War in Ukraine

After the collapse of the USSR, the newly independent Ukraine signed a major treaty in 1997 agreeing "not to use its territory to harm the security" of Russia and vice versa. Unfortunately, due to a misguided desire to emulate a few other ex-Commie Eastern European nations (which did not have such treaties AFAIK) that joined both the EU and NATO, Ukraine backstabbed Russia and started cozying up to NATO over the last two decades. If Ukraine joins NATO, it will come under our nuclear umbrella due to Article 5 and NATO could install nukes on Ukrainian soil, 550 miles from Moscow. There is a precedent for how reckless that is--the Cuban Missile Crisis. To get Cuba to stop housing Soviet nukes so close to mainland America, the USA imposed an illegal naval blockade of another sovereign nation and effectively threatened a global nuclear holocaust! Thus, it is natural that Putin reacted negatively to Ukraine's backstabbing and reversed his previously warming relationships with both the US and the EU. As such, it adds little to NATO because the Baltics (in NATO already) offer the same benefit, although the Russia-Ukraine border is far larger. All that is at the root of Putin's invasion and annexation of Crimea, interference in the 2016 US elections to help defeat Clinton, and ultimately the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian war.

Instead of a diplomatic resolution in which the interests of all parties--Ukraine, Russia, EU, and NATO--are prudently balanced, e.g., Ukraine joining the EU for economic prosperity but not NATO, they let it devolve into war. I am shocked by how many people in the US are blithe about sleepwalking into World War 3 with the triply nuclear-armed RCIN Axis over an irrelevant (for Americans) war in a random interior part of Eurasia that most cannot even locate on a map. I think this is largely due to the greed and stranglehold of the military-industrial-Congress complex in the USA, but also Ukraine's (and EU's) naivete and duplicity, as well as the calculatively murderous ethos of Putin. I find it sad that a delusional Zelensky is sacrificing so many innocent people of Ukraine to a useless doomed war for some (faux) "glory" sake.

In contrast, Putin has masterfully pivoted Russia's fossil fuel markets away from dependency on the EU and toward his main ally China and neutral nations in the developing world with fast-growing energy needs that cannot afford the now-costlier Middle Eastern fossil fuels due to the EU's purchasing pivot (e.g., India). Essentially, Russia is profiting from this war even as the EU and US are pouring money down the drain, i.e., Putin is killing two birds with one stone! And the hyperbolic claims of "Putin will invade Poland/Baltics if Ukraine falls!" are delusional because Putin knows that entails a global nuclear holocaust due to Article 5. He may be genocidal but he is not suicidal. If the USA really thought Putin would risk that, it'd already be going all out to prevent all Russian fossil fuel sales, including to India. The lack of that is proof enough that NATO is just using Ukraine as a proxy war pawn to weaken Russia militarily and likely also for war profiteering by the military-industrial-Congress complex, which happens again and again.

Ironically, Democrats are the warmongers now, while most Republicans want to end the war. Just like the 2003 Iraq War was rooted in lies (by commission), this war is also rooted in lies, albeit by omission. Many liberals also engage in disingenuous ad hominem smear campaigns to bully those who speak the full truths by branding them "Putin's puppets!", repeating the history of how the (eventually vindicated) Iraq War critics were also bullied! I can understand why some (Eastern) Europeans are being irrational due to their emotionally charged (fear, anger, etc.) history with Russian regimes--although I reject Putin's claims of "Russophobia"--but it is sad to see irrational war hysteria among so many Americans rooted in short-sighted double standards.

Overall, Trump is better placed than Democrats to broker a reasonable Russia-Ukraine-NATO detente to end the senseless violence. Ukraine must not join NATO but accept a neutral status, with NATO and Russia undergirding its security via a tripartite treaty. It can remain sovereign and join the EU eventually. There are precedents, e.g., see Germany's and Japan's pacifist setups imposed and undergirded by the USA after World War 2. Ukraine will likely pay a price for its backstabbing of Russia by ceding Crimea and Donbas, which Russia has annexed. There are precedents for that too, e.g., both USA and Europe ignored China's illegal invasion+annexation of Tibet in the 1950s. As for NATO itself, only Trump had the spine to call out the ungrateful rich European nations of NATO for bleeding America dry and not paying enough for their defense, a stance I too voiced before. Europeans must wake up and smell the coffee--they must raise their defense budget percentages to parity with the USA to strengthen NATO.


6. Anti-Asian Discrimination, Indophobia, and Hinduphobia

As an academic myself, I am a strong supporter of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies to help people from historically marginalized groups, e.g., see this or the DEI contributions list in my CV. Alas, after the full facts of the Harvard case were disclosed, I was dismayed to see the scale of Anti-Asian American (AsAm) discrimination, ostensibly in the name of DEI, and how many DEI advocates rationalized racist or sexist discrimination in part due to their political ideology. As I predicted in my previous post, the Supreme Court struck down such forms of "affirmative action" as unconstitutional. All that has made me more skeptical of the real intentions behind some of these "DEI" initiatives. Proposition 16 also failed among CA voters, ironically especially in Hispanic/Latino-dominated counties, mainly for the same reason despite heavy propaganda by the Democrats, the UC System, and many civil rights groups (ACLU, ADL, NAACP, etc.). In fact, in large part due to far left forces infiltrating campuses to hijack/abuse DEI goals, public trust in US academia has fallen rapidly, an existential threat for its future.

I have also heard firsthand from many Indian American parents about how their kids--with perfect academic records and stellar holistic resumes--were denied admissions to top-tier universities even though they admitted many seemingly weaker students. US academia's college admissions approach is totally broken and likely corrupt due to the sheer lack of transparency, lack of oversight by faculty self-governance processes, and likely partisan political interference. Instead of pursuing prudent and transparent reforms on how to achieve DEI goals without violating the Constitution or Civil Rights laws, some liberals engage in racist rhetoric against AsAms, e.g., see this and this! Of course, Trump and Republicans/conservatives have their own racist rhetoric issues against Asians and/or AsAms, e.g., over the COVID-19 pandemic or the Baltimore ship-bridge crash. But at least they consistently advocate for constitutional, fair, and transparent systems for admissions and combating partisan political bias in US academia.

Related to the above is the uptick in Indophobia and/or Hinduphobia I see in the liberal media (e.g., CNN, NYTimes, etc.). It takes many forms: lies by omission, half-truths, and smear campaigns against Hindus as a group and/or India's rule of law. A key recent example is over the historic Ram temple in Ayodhya, which they maliciously oversimplify as: "Hindooo mob razed mosque! Temple built! Islamophobia! Secularism dead!" The full truth includes: that area's deep indigenous religio-cultural significance, the facts uncovered by the ASI, the numerous anti-Hindu/Jain/Buddhist/Sikh crimes against humanity by the Mughal Empire and other Islamo-Supremacist imperial/colonial powers in India's past (including destroying many key Hindu/Jain/Buddhist temples) in partial analogy with what White-Christo-Supremacist imperial/colonial powers did in the Americas, the long-drawn out Supreme Court case on Ayodhya, and their surprisingly decisive unanimous verdict in favor of the Hindu clergy after carefully weighing all evidence. I do not expect lazy/biased liberal media in the US/Europe to be well-versed in the complex history of the Indian subcontinent, but they should at least desist from brazen Hinduphobic lies by omission and one-sided partisan bullshit. I suspect all this is due to a combination of the Muslim votebank appeasement politics of liberals, British Empire-style racist "divide-and-rule" tactics to destabilize India again, and/or liberal media firms being turned into "useful idiots" again by Marxist-Islamist elements, who are often both Antisemitic and Hinduphobic.

Such biased partisan agendas also became clearer in how they cover(ed) the CAA, the Election Commission's decisions, or ongoing corruption cases against opposition politicians--all dubbed "democratic backsliding," a liberal conspiracy theory devoid of hard evidence. To flip such specious claims, one could also assert that the Biden/Democrat regime is "politically persecuting" Trump with tenuous cases, while their liberal media chums are lying to the people on the scale of the southern border crisis, the illegal migration mess, or the full facts of the Russo-Ukrainian war. Not to the mention the lack of a federal Election Commission in the US to ensure ballot integrity! Due to such obscene partisan biases and gaslighting in US "news" media--liberal or conservative--I primarily rely on Reuters and BBC (both non-American!) for real news on US politics. I do also occasionally read CNN and Breitbart to get the partisan extremes' views.

Overall, it is clear to me that Republicans will ensure US academia stops discriminating against AsAms (or any other ethnoracial group), while Democrats live in denial due to their racist votebank appeasement policies. The US needs honest conversations on amending the Constitution and Civil Rights laws to recognize and institute prudent policies to uplift American descendents of slavery, indigeneous tribes, and poor people of all stripes, e.g., more programs to boost K-12 schools and perhaps also transparent, time-bound, and income-capped quotas in higher education, Congress, and the federal government akin to India's impactful quota system. As for AsAms, including Indian Americans, they lack a "home" in either party. So, I find it bizarrely self-defeating that many AsAm groups, especially Indian Americans, lean so heavily Democrat. I hope they learn from Vietnamese Americans to rebalance their ideological preferences instead of blindly offering their kids' futures as a sacrificial lamb to an ideological deity that is surreptitiously malevolent toward them. American followers of Indian/Hindu religions must also get more organized in combating Hinduphobia by learning from how the ADL combats Antisemitism by both the right and the left. The recent resolution against Hinduphobia in Georgia is a good start. It must be replicated in all states and awareness must be spread in general society.

As a note on India specifically, the US-India relationship is critical for both nations' futures, especially given the ascendancy of the RCIN Axis. I am not saying that just because I have family in India--even many astute geopolitical analysts agree with it. Post-Cold War history shows that Republicans have forged stronger relationships with India no matter who is in power there, e.g., the historic nuclear deal was inked by Bush Jr. with an INC-led government. If the BJP-led government wins power again in June 2024, which is likely as per my recent analysis, the "bad blood" between Democrats/liberals and BJP will damage the US-India relationship and its long-term potential to the detriment of both nations at this historic juncture.

Non-Issues and Bitter Pills to Swallow

Voters weigh all sorts of issues that matter to them. So, for completeness sake I will list some more issues that I thought through and concluded as being minor or non-issues for me, or intermediate issues (neither major nor minor) that are bitter pills to swallow. I am okay with swallowing these pills, some with tenable rationalizations, because the existential threats I outlined above matter more. These lists below are not general assertions--other voters may reweigh these factors differently based on their personal situation.

Non-Issues / Minor Issues For Me:

• Abortion rights. As I already noted, this is now a state-level issue, not a federal one, certainly not for the Presidency. Besides, Trump also opposes a federal ban. At the state level, I support protecting reasonable abortion rights, which CA already has. I do, however, also see the merits of the arguments of anti-abortion/pro-life activists. As I have noted before, we need more innovation in assistive reproductive technologies such as artificial wombs and fetal offloading to avoid "forced pregnancies."


• White Christian nationalism. This issue divides the conservative wing of Republicans from the libertarian one. Many of the former want to turn the USA into a White Christian ethnostate, or at least a Christian-supremacist state. They are free to advocate for it. They may get more limelight under Trump but their ideas do not have mass appeal to change the Constitution. America's separation of powers is robust.


• Inflation, taxation, economy. My personal economic status is unlikely to improve or fray dramatically under either party.


• Crime and homelessness in cities. San Diego seems to be doing okay, despite literally being on the southern border. I do not fully get why the situation seems so much worse in other big cities like SF, NYC, LA, and Chicago. In any case, this is a city/county level issue, not a federal one.


• Possible reduction in federal budget for higher education. Trump did try to drastically cut funding for storied federal research agencies like NSF and NIH before, although Congress prudently overruled it. I expect the bipartisan Congressional support for scientific, technological, and medical research to continue.



• Election denialism. Both the big parties have engaged in this from time to time, even at their leadership level. Nothing new here.


• Alleged "threat" to "democracy." This is much ado about little. Let me unpack it. The term "democracy" is not even in the US Constitution, unlike, say, India's Constitution. Instead, as I have noted before, the Founding Fathers set up the USA as a federal republic with quasi-democracy and decentralization of power via a highly non-linear system of checks and balances. It has never been a cut-and-dried "rule by majority will" at the federal level nor even at many states' levels. America's constitutional rule of law with such careful separation of powers is more robust than many liberals fear. As for democratic practice at the state level, both parties practice gerrymandering, abusing their corrupt duopolistic status.
  
  As for the "but the national numbers!" argument, it is duplicitous and self-serving because liberals started gaining more voters primarily only in "blue" states with growing populations and especially among urban young voters enamored by their pseudo-socialist policies. If they genuinely cared about the "rule by majority will" principle they'd have created a federal Election Commission long ago. Ironically, even when their political opponents win majorities fair and square, e.g, as in India, I see liberals crying (faux) "majoritarianism!" or (conspiratorial) "democratic backsliding!", and when they have majority but not power, e.g., as in some US states, they cry "minority rule!" Basically, it is pretty clear that liberals only care about having power, no matter majority or minority, just like almost every other ideological partisan group. Overall, Democrats must grasp federalism and the US Constitution better instead of peddling an imagined "democracism" ideology as another smokescreen.


• Vendetta politics. It is likely that under a second Trump administration, their Democrat opponents will face more cases. It will not be that different than what is happening now under Biden anyway. America's rule of law and separation of powers are robust.


• Debasement of politics. Trump's undiplomatic langauge and rabble-rousing rhetoric will bring politics back down into the gutter, even if it is entertaining. This might be the only thing I'd miss about Biden, who brought back civility, kindness, and grace to the office. But this is a minor issue for me because, well, politics is not my profession.


• USA's image abroad. A second Trump term will hurt America's image in some nations that engage in hypocritical virtue signalling (e.g., in the EU). Meh. Besides, the USA now under Biden is already a laughing stock in many parts of the world for their failure to protect their own borders and end the illegal migration mess.


• Israel-Gaza war. Their violence cycle goes on and on matter who is in power in the USA, as I have noted before. Nothing new here.


• Trade war with China. Thankfully the Democrats saw the wisdom of this signature impactful policy by Trump to keep continuing it.

Bitter Pills to Swallow For Me:

• Human-caused climate change and mass species extinction. Republicans/conservatives need to wake up and smell the coffee on how this is also an existential threat for not just the USA (including its economy, food security, water security, etc.) but for the whole planet. It is also cruel (and "un-Christian" for those who care about it) to live in denial over how human-caused climate change is causing a new ongoing mass species extinction, as well as disproportionately hurting the world's poorest peoples. I do commend the successful Republican push to help the USA achieve fossil fuel energy independence over the last few decades to avoid being taken hostage again by Middle Eastern dictators. But the sun is setting on the era of fossil fuels. Republicans need to amp up innovative market-driven solutions for carbon capture and also empower American companies to pioneer affordable clean tech manufacturing that we can sell to the whole world insead of letting China take the cake (again). All the above said, I see this existential threat as less urgent for the USA than the other ones I outlined above.


• Rollback of some trans rights. Sadly, transphobia is still common among conservatives but not among libertarians, thus representing a wedge issue among Republicans. There will likely be some overreach in the name of defending women's rights that trample on the civil rights of trans individuals. The trans community has a lot of grassroots work to do to educate people of all backgrounds to roll back transphobia bottom up, not just rely on top-down measures. They can learn a lot from how gays and lesbians did so to roll back homophobia over the last 3-4 decades. The grinding work of winning hearts and minds is the best insurance for trans rights, not simply yelling (faux) "transphobe!" repeatedly. I also think federalism will play a bigger role in how this is handled, akin to abortion rights.



• Inaction on gun violence control. There might still be some bipartisan movement on this like in 2022 but I suspect it will get more stalled going forward, in part due to the partisan polarization. I'd like to see more restrictions on military-style weapons among civilians, tougher rules for problematic individuals, actual funding and progress on the much-touted "mental health programs" to help prevent "lone wolf" attacks, and innovations in security systems/protocols to better protect schools from mass shooters. Once again, it is cruel (and "un-Christian") to keep ignoring the mass murders of innocent school children, minority groups (e.g., Black churches), and other civilians by violent terrorists or deranged individuals.


• Violence by rightwing extremists. This one is my biggest short-term worry because the first Trump term emboldened rightwing extremists, e.g., see the violence in Charlottsville. Trump famously dithered over condemning Neo-Nazis. I just hope the FBI, police departments, etc. are competent and vigilant enough to keep such violent threats at bay, unlike their historic failure over the Jan 6 attack. Trump's hands are not clean over that unprecedented attack and his role is condemnable.
  
  The above said, when the evidence was tallied, it seems Trump did not directly ask the crowd to attack the Capitol but spoke in terms of metaphors, lending him plausible deniability under the First Amendment. I am not sure if it was an "insurrection" but it was a violent riot. So, the individuals in the sheep-like crowd who rioted that day must be held accountable, and the law is taking its own course. But to quote MLK Jr., "A riot is the language of the unheard." I can now see that many of them rioted in part due to fears that Congress was ignoring some of the existential threats to the USA that I described above. Nevertheless, I hope Republicans/conservatives are smart enough to not be swayed by Trump's rabble-rousing to engage in violent anarchy again but instead scrupulously adhere to lawful means of criticism and protest.


• Trump's legal cases. I have taken a cursory look at the many pending cases. My read is none of them are likely to go beyond a reasonable doubt and be a showstopper for him serving as President again. The hush money case seems more like petty "persecution" based on activities that are common among sleazy politicians, media types, etc. But the Georgia case seems more serious and could lead to novel constitutional conundrums, although it helps them that rightwingers have the upper hand now at the Supreme Court. Either way, I think it is fine for the law to take its own course. It is sad to see the pitiful nadir that US democracy has fallen to when even such a candidate as Trump seems actually better placed on many major policy matters--and thus more popular in most polls--than someone as decorated as Biden!

Concluding Remarks

As I noted at the end of this recent post, the bar for earning my vote is high. Indeed, the last time (and first time) I voted, back in India in 2009, none of India's political parties met my bar. Fast forward 15 years, I will now cast my vote for the US Presidency. Trump is mostly a garish, thuggish, sleazy, loudmouthed, bullshitting, opportunistic, unkind, and perhaps criminal political bully. And yet, he is likely to get my vote due to all the reasons I outlined above. I am not alone, of course, as more people realize that the usual "devil vs. deep sea" apathy could be actively harmful for the nation's future this time around. Unlike MAGA types, I get no joy in pondering voting for Trump--on the contrary, I feel a bit sad about it--but Republicans failed to nominate a more prudent alternative, while Biden/Democrats/liberals have dug too deep a grave for the nation due their dishonesty, delusional hubris, and incompetence on existential policy issues.

I might still change my mind if the above existential threats recede by Nov 2024, but it seems unlikely. My vote will anyway matter little given how CA is "deep blue" and a winner-take-all state for the electoral college. But I hope my above discussion helps more folks in other states, especially in swing states, grasp the gravity of how 2024 is a turning point election for America's future in an increasingly uncertain and dangerous multi-polar world. I encourage all US citizens to think carefully about their vote instead of apathy or partisan groupthink. Please feel free to comment with your thoughts on any of the above opinions and/or your own policy preference calculus. I always welcome open and frank discussions as long as they are civil!

EDIT on May 3: Addendum Commentary

Thanks to everyone who read the post and weighed in with their own opinions, thoughts, and pointers! These discussions happend over on Twitter. I got 3 new inputs that I had not thought (much) about before that could change some of the above calculations.

• Abortion rights. It appears this may not actually be a "dead horse" yet at the federal/Presidency level. There is a non-trivial chance that if Trump wins again, one or both of the two oldest and most unreasonable (IMO) ultra-conservative justices on the Supreme Court--Thomas and Alito--could strategically "retire" to enable Trump to nominate much younger but also unreasonably ultra-conservative justices to replace them. I had missed this possibility and its implications. The shameless politicization of the Supreme Court by both parties saddens me, but it is an unfortunate reality the US is stuck with, as I have noted before, and so it is part of the calculus. There is a chance the court could wash its hands off of cruel no-exception abortion bans in some "deep red" states that violate women's rights on emergency medical care, e.g., see this ongoing case. Although I suspect Roberts and Barrett--and perhaps also Kavanaugh--are unlikely to let cruel state-level total bans stand, this risk is non-zero given their past track records. Likewise, endless predictably partisan divisions at the court are likely to keep damaging the credibility of both the court and eventually the Constitution itself, yet another existential risk that could set the USA on a path to a second civil war.


• Possible end to legal migration. Although Trump and most Republicans repeatedly emphasize the need for points-based meritocratic reform of legal migration and its importance for the US economy, there is an ultra-nativist subset among conservatives, especially MAGA types, who want to end legal migration altogether. I had missed this possibility because Trump may rope in someone like Steve Bannon again. Such a policy will almost surely damage both the short-term and long-term interests of the US economy and raise the burden on all taxpayers. It will also eventually diminish America's technological and military advantages against China and the RCIN Axis more broadly. I highly doubt that the many powerful business lobbies in DC will let such a policy come to pass, but the risk of such harakiri is non-zero.


• RFK Jr. I had taken only a cursory look at RFK Jr. before and dismissed him due to his bizarre anti-vaxx rhetoric. But his campaign has been gaining momentum and attracting voters away from both Trump and Biden! I had missed the possibility of his viability as a "dark horse" in the 2024 race. I plan to take a closer look at his policies and perspectives. He has a very tall mountain to climb to defeat not one but both of the billion-dollar party machineries. And given the existential risks I outlined above if Biden were to get re-elected without changing course on those policies, I suspect many voters will change their minds closer to the actual election date.