Comprehensive Report: The Decline of Political Discourse in India (December 2020

Executive Summary

Over the past five years (December 2020 to December 2025), the landscape of Indian political discourse has witnessed a discernible shift toward increasingly aggressive, polarizing, and often derogatory rhetoric. As electoral battles have grown more intense—spanning state assembly elections, the highly charged 2024 Lok Sabha general elections, and the ongoing 2025 state campaigns—politicians across the ideological spectrum have frequently crossed the lines of parliamentary decorum and civic respect.

This comprehensive compilation examines notable derogatory speeches and remarks made by Indian politicians, including Prime Ministers, Chief Ministers, Members of Parliament (MPs), Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs), and official party spokespersons. Based on publicly reported incidents, this report categorizes these remarks chronologically and thematically, highlighting the context, the exact nature of the offense, and the subsequent institutional or public fallout. The data reveals a troubling normalization of misogyny, communal hate speech, regional stereotyping, and xenophobia in the pursuit of electoral dominance.

Part 1: The Context of Political Discourse in India (2020-2025)

To understand the volume and severity of derogatory remarks over the last half-decade, one must analyze the structural changes in Indian political campaigning. The era of traditional stump speeches has been entirely subsumed by the “viral clip” ecosystem. Political IT cells, 24/7 television news debates, and algorithmic amplification on platforms like X (formerly Twitter), YouTube, and Instagram reward outrage. Politicians are acutely aware that a nuanced policy debate rarely trends, whereas a sharp, personal, or controversial attack guarantees wall-to-wall media coverage for at least a 48-hour news cycle.

Furthermore, the threshold for what constitutes acceptable speech has been lowered. While the Election Commission of India (ECI) enforces a Model Code of Conduct (MCC) during election periods, and the newly implemented Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)—which replaced the Indian Penal Code (IPC)—contains strict provisions against outraging modesty, hate speech, and defamation, enforcement remains notoriously asymmetrical. Apologies, when issued, are often tactical rather than genuine, and long-term political consequences for offenders are exceedingly rare. In many cases, controversial figures are rewarded with heightened popularity among their core voter base, proving that inflammatory rhetoric is often not a gaffe, but a calculated political strategy.

Part 2: Chronological Compilation of Derogatory Remarks

2021: The West Bengal Campaign and Gendered Taunts

Narendra Modi (BJP, Prime Minister)

The Incident: During the high-stakes 2021 West Bengal Legislative Assembly elections, Prime Minister Narendra Modi repeatedly targeted Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee (head of the Trinamool Congress) using the phrase “Didi o Didi” (Sister, oh Sister) during multiple massive public rallies.
The Context: The BJP was attempting to unseat the two-term incumbent TMC government. Modi’s delivery of the phrase involved a drawn-out, theatrical intonation.
The Fallout: The TMC and various women’s rights activists vehemently condemned the remark. TMC MP Mahua Moitra and other leaders described the tone as sexist, condescending, and reminiscent of “rock-er chhele” (street-side catcalling). A group of women in Kolkata even filed a police complaint, arguing that the Prime Minister’s language was aggravating the culture of eve-teasing. Despite the widespread debate on the gendered nature of political taunts, the BJP defended it as standard political theater. The TMC ultimately won the election by a landslide, utilizing the “Banglar Nijer Meye” (Bengal’s own daughter) campaign to counter the perceived disrespect.

2022: Religious Flashpoints and Regional Stereotyping

Nupur Sharma (BJP, Then-National Spokesperson)

The Incident: In May 2022, during a televised debate on the Times Now network regarding the Gyanvapi mosque dispute in Varanasi, Nupur Sharma made highly derogatory and inflammatory remarks regarding the Islamic Prophet Muhammad and his wife Aisha [1].
The Context: The debate was highly charged, with Sharma claiming she was responding in kind to insults directed at the Hindu deity Shiva.
The Fallout: A video snippet of her remarks, amplified by fact-checkers and journalists, went viral globally. The incident triggered massive protests across India, some of which turned violent, resulting in loss of life and property. More significantly, it caused a severe diplomatic crisis for the Indian government. Over a dozen Muslim-majority nations, including Qatar, Kuwait, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, summoned Indian envoys to issue official condemnations. The Supreme Court of India later delivered a scathing oral reprimand, stating she had a “loose tongue” and was “single-handedly responsible for what is happening in the country.” The BJP suspended her from the party.

Naveen Kumar Jindal (BJP, Then-Delhi Media Head)

The Incident: On June 1, 2022, compounding the crisis initiated by Nupur Sharma, Naveen Kumar Jindal posted tweets containing similar derogatory references to Prophet Muhammad [2].
The Context: Jindal’s tweets amplified the ongoing sectarian tension and provided further ammunition to international critics of India’s domestic minority policies.
The Fallout: As the diplomatic pressure from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) mounted, the BJP swiftly expelled Jindal from the party. He later deleted the tweet and claimed he did not intend to demean any faith, though the damage to communal harmony and international relations had already been done.

K. Ponmudy (DMK, Tamil Nadu Higher Education Minister)

The Incident: Speaking at a university convocation event in 2022, K. Ponmudy sparked a regionalism controversy while pushing back against the Union government’s perceived imposition of Hindi. He mocked Hindi-speaking individuals by stereotyping them based on menial occupations, most notably asking who sells “pani puri” in the state [3].
The Context: The linguistic divide between North and South India is a perennial political flashpoint. The DMK has historically built its political capital on anti-Hindi agitation and safeguarding Tamil identity.
The Fallout: The remarks drew heavy criticism for their blatant regional bias and classist undertones. Critics argued that while fighting linguistic imposition is a valid political stance, reducing millions of North Indian migrants to derogatory caricatures was unbecoming of a state minister.

2023: The Sanatana Dharma Controversy

Udhayanidhi Stalin (DMK, Minister for Youth Welfare and Sports Development / Deputy CM)

The Incident: On September 2, 2023, while addressing an event titled the ‘Sanatana Abolition Conference’ in Chennai, Udhayanidhi Stalin stated: “Some things cannot be opposed, they must be eradicated. We cannot oppose dengue, mosquitoes, malaria, or corona; we have to eradicate them. In the same way, we have to eradicate Sanatana [Dharma].”
The Context: The DMK, rooted in the Dravidian movement led by Periyar, has historically critiqued Brahmanical hegemony and the caste system, which they associate with Sanatana Dharma.
The Fallout: The comments ignited a massive national firestorm. The BJP and right-wing organizations accused him of calling for the “genocide” of 80% of India’s population. Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Prime Minister Modi seized upon the remarks to attack the broader INDIA opposition bloc. Despite the intense backlash and multiple FIRs filed across different states, Udhayanidhi refused to apologize, maintaining he was speaking against caste-based discrimination, not inciting violence. However, in early 2026, the Madras High Court formally ruled that his comments amounted to hate speech, stating that equating a faith to diseases showed an alarming lack of understanding and was deeply divisive.

2024: The General Election Rhetoric and Celebrity Targeting

Rahul Gandhi (Congress, MP and Leader of Opposition)

The Incident: During the 2024 Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra and subsequent election rallies, Rahul Gandhi repeatedly invoked Bollywood actress Aishwarya Rai Bachchan to critique the Ram Mandir Pran Pratishtha (consecration) ceremony. He claimed that the event was reserved for billionaires and celebrities, stating, “Aishwarya will be seen dancing & Bachchan saab will do a Balle Balle,” while ignoring the poor, Dalits, and OBCs. Opponents and proxy campaigners later weaponized this narrative, utilizing terms like “nachaniya” (street dancer) in political theater to summarize his stance.
The Context: Gandhi was attempting to frame the BJP government as elitist and anti-poor. However, Aishwarya Rai had not actually attended the Ayodhya ceremony.
The Fallout: The repeated, unprompted targeting of a female celebrity who was entirely disconnected from the event drew widespread condemnation. Critics, including BJP leaders like Smriti Irani and Yogi Adityanath, called the remarks sexist, obsessive, and indicative of a lack of political vision. It highlighted how politicians often use the entertainment industry as a punching bag to score populist points.

Supriya Shrinate (Congress, National Spokesperson)

The Incident: In March 2024, after the BJP fielded Bollywood actress Kangana Ranaut as its Lok Sabha candidate from Mandi (Himachal Pradesh), a post appeared on Supriya Shrinate’s official Instagram account featuring a scantily clad photo of Ranaut with the caption: “Mandi mein kya rate chal raha hai” (What is the going rate in the market/Mandi?).
The Context: The pun heavily relied on the dual meaning of “Mandi” (the constituency name, and the Hindi word for market, often used pejoratively to refer to a flesh trade market or brothel).
The Fallout: The sexist slur caused immediate outrage. The National Commission for Women (NCW) urged the Election Commission to take stringent action. Shrinate swiftly deleted the post and claimed that someone with access to her social media accounts had uploaded it without her knowledge. Ranaut responded with a dignified statement about the respect owed to all women regardless of their profession. The ECI formally reprimanded Shrinate for violating the Model Code of Conduct.

Narendra Modi (BJP, Prime Minister)

The Incident: During the final phases of the 2024 Lok Sabha election campaign, while addressing a rally in Patliputra, Bihar, PM Modi accused the opposition INDIA bloc of doing “mujra” for their vote bank [4].
The Context: “Mujra” is a traditional dance form performed by courtesans, but in modern colloquial Hindi, it is heavily loaded with pejorative, classist, and implicitly sexist undertones when used to imply submissive pandering. Modi was accusing the opposition of appeasing the Muslim community to secure votes.
The Fallout: The opposition expressed profound shock, stating that the language degraded the dignity of the Prime Minister’s office. Congress leaders remarked that the terminology reflected desperation. The remark was later referenced in parliamentary discussions as an example of the deteriorating standard of prime ministerial discourse.

Arvind Sawant (Shiv Sena-UBT, MP)

The Incident: Ahead of the November 2024 Maharashtra Assembly elections, after BJP leader Shaina NC defected to the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena faction to contest the Mumbadevi seat, Arvind Sawant referred to her as “imported maal” (imported goods/item).
The Context: The term “maal” is a highly offensive, objectifying street slang used to describe women as commodities or sexual objects.
The Fallout: Shaina NC immediately filed an FIR against Sawant at the Nagpada Police Station under BNS Sections 79 (insulting the modesty of a woman) and 356(2) (defamation). The remark caused a major embarrassment for the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) coalition. Faced with severe backlash from women’s commissions and political rivals, Sawant issued a public apology, claiming his words were distorted but expressing regret if sentiments were hurt.

Himanta Biswa Sarma (BJP, Assam Chief Minister)

The Incident: Throughout 2024, CM Sarma made multiple aggressive speeches targeting Islamic educational institutions (madrasas). He boasted about closing down hundreds of madrasas in Assam and publicly declared his intention to shut down all of them, frequently conflating the institutions with fundamentalism and anti-national activities [5].
The Context: Sarma has cultivated a hardline Hindutva image. His rhetoric is often aimed at consolidating the Hindu vote bank in the demographic complexities of the Northeast.
The Fallout: Human rights organizations, Muslim advocacy groups, and UN special rapporteurs raised concerns over the remarks, classifying them as targeted hate speech designed to marginalize and intimidate a specific religious minority. Despite the international and domestic concern, Sarma faced no institutional pushback within India.

T. Raja Singh (BJP, Telangana MLA)

The Incident: T. Raja Singh, a habitual offender regarding communal rhetoric, delivered multiple speeches in 2024 containing derogatory references to Islam and the Prophet Muhammad [6].
The Context: Operating primarily in the communally sensitive zones of Hyderabad and surrounding areas, Singh uses inflammatory rhetoric as his primary political tool.
The Fallout: His speeches routinely incited local protests and resulted in numerous FIRs. However, civil society groups repeatedly pointed out a pattern of impunity, noting that authorities rarely took immediate or preventative action, allowing the cycle of hate speech and polarization to continue unabated.

Anitha R. Radhakrishnan (DMK, Tamil Nadu Minister)

The Incident: In early 2024, during a public address, Minister Radhakrishnan used an unparliamentary and highly derogatory Tamil slang word directed at Prime Minister Narendra Modi [7].
The Context: The DMK and BJP were engaged in a fierce battle of narratives over central fund allocations and state autonomy.
The Fallout: The BJP’s state unit filed police complaints and shared the video widely, demanding the minister’s resignation. The incident highlighted the breakdown of basic respect between federal and state leadership.

2025: Legislative Decorum Failures and Local Incidents

Siddaramaiah (Congress, Karnataka Chief Minister)

The Incident: During a heated debate regarding fiscal federalism and tax devolution in 2024-2025, CM Siddaramaiah addressed Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in the singular, disrespectful form of Kannada.
The Context: In Indian languages, addressing an elder or a dignitary in the singular form (tu/tum equivalents instead of aap equivalents) is a deliberate mark of disrespect.
The Fallout: The BJP strongly objected to the breach of legislative etiquette, viewing it as not just political arrogance but also deeply disrespectful to a female colleague holding a high constitutional office. The incident sparked a wider debate about the eroding standards of parliamentary and legislative conduct.

Sanjay Nishad (BJP/NISHAD Party, Uttar Pradesh Cabinet Minister)

The Incident: In 2025, Minister Sanjay Nishad made lewd gestures and verbally insulting comments regarding the attire of women, specifically claiming that “earlier, girls didn’t wear clothes.”
The Context: The remarks were made in a bizarre attempt to comment on modernization and cultural shifts, but devolved into crass objectification.
The Fallout: Despite public outrage over a cabinet minister using such language, there was no reported official inquiry, and Nishad did not issue a formal apology, reflecting the impunity often enjoyed by regional satraps essential to coalition arithmetic.

K. Ponmudy (DMK, Former Deputy General Secretary)

The Incident: Continuing his track record of controversial statements, Ponmudy made vulgar and derogatory remarks targeting women and specific societal sects during a public speech in 2025.
The Context: Made during a local gathering, the speech relied on crude local idioms that crossed the line into outright vulgarity.
The Fallout: Facing immense pressure from civil society and a reprimand from his party’s high command—who were trying to project a progressive image—Ponmudy was forced to issue a public apology to quell the backlash.

Renu Chaudhary (BJP, Delhi Councillor)

The Incident: In a viral video from early 2025, Renu Chaudhary was seen verbally abusing an African football coach at a local park in Delhi, issuing a xenophobic ultimatum: “Learn Hindi within one month or leave India.”
The Context: The incident highlighted the intersection of aggressive linguistic nationalism and latent racism against African expatriates in Indian metros.
The Fallout: The outburst was widely condemned on social media as a reflection of growing intolerance and xenophobia. It underscored how national-level rhetoric emphasizing linguistic purity trickles down to embolden local politicians to engage in street-level harassment.

Bihar Assembly Incidents (RJD and Congress)

The Incident: Throughout the 2025 Bihar Assembly sessions, multiple MLAs from the opposition RJD and Congress repeatedly used vulgar language and personal insults directed at Chief Minister Nitish Kumar.
The Context: Nitish Kumar’s frequent party-hopping (switching alliances between the RJD and the BJP) had bred deep resentment. The assembly sessions frequently devolved into shouting matches devoid of policy discussion.
The Fallout: The culture of disrespect reached a boiling point, prompting PM Modi to reference the deteriorating decorum in his election campaign speeches in Bihar, framing the opposition as “jungle raj” elements incapable of basic civility.

Recurring and Spanning (2020-2025): The Persistent Sexist Playbook

Several politicians across the spectrum relied on a deeply entrenched, bipartisan playbook of sexism over this five-year period.

The “Smooth Cheeks” Trope

Lalu Prasad Yadav (RJD): Continuing a crude legacy that he arguably popularized in the 1990s, Yadav and his proxies continued to make passing remarks about building Bihar’s roads to be “as smooth as Hema Malini’s cheeks.”
Ramesh Bidhuri (BJP, MP): Demonstrating that this misogyny crosses party lines, Bidhuri adapted the insult by claiming roads in Kalkaji would be made “as smooth as Vadra’s cheeks,” aiming a sexist and homophobic jab at Priyanka Gandhi Vadra’s husband, Robert Vadra.

The “Dancer/Worthless” Slurs

Sanjay Raut (Shiv Sena-UBT, MP): During a bitter feud with Kangana Ranaut over the governance of Mumbai, Raut referred to her as a “haramkhor” (a highly derogatory term implying someone is a lazy, worthless parasite or scoundrel) on national television. He later poorly defended it by claiming it meant “naughty” in his local dialect.
Chandrashekhar Azad (Azad Samaj Party, MP): In a clash of ideologies, Azad resorted to abusing right-wing activist Kajal Hindustani by labeling her a “prostitute,” entirely side-stepping any intellectual debate in favor of attempting to destroy a woman’s character.

Part 3: Categorical Analysis of the Rhetoric

By analyzing the data from 2020 to 2025, several clear themes emerge regarding the nature of derogatory political speech in India:

1. Misogyny and the Objectification of Women

The most prevalent form of derogatory speech is sexism. Whether it is the Prime Minister catcalling a Chief Minister (“Didi o Didi”), an MP calling a candidate “imported maal”, a spokesperson asking for a woman’s “rate”, or leaders reducing actresses to their physical features (cheeks) or their dancing (“mujra”, “nachaniya”), the political ecosystem is exceptionally hostile to women. Women in politics or the public eye are rarely attacked on their policy acumen; they are attacked on their character, their bodies, and their morality.

2. Communal Polarization and Hate Speech

The second most dominant theme is religious dog-whistling and outright communal hate speech. Remarks by Nupur Sharma, T. Raja Singh, and Himanta Biswa Sarma highlight a strategy where marginalizing the Muslim minority is used as a tool for majority vote consolidation. Conversely, Udhayanidhi Stalin’s remarks on Sanatana Dharma show how anti-caste rhetoric can easily slip into language that is interpreted as hateful and genocidal toward the majority community.

3. Regionalism, Language, and Xenophobia

As the economic disparity between the North and South of India widens, linguistic and regional chauvinism has become a potent weapon. K. Ponmudy’s “panipuri” comments and Renu Chaudhary’s anti-African, pro-Hindi outburst demonstrate how local leaders weaponize identity politics to create an “us vs. them” narrative, stereotyping migrants and foreigners to mask local governance failures.

Part 4: Institutional Responses and Accountability

The last five years have exposed the fragility of the institutions meant to police political discourse.

The Election Commission of India (ECI): While the ECI issues notices and occasional campaign bans (usually for 24 to 48 hours), these are largely viewed as slaps on the wrist. By the time a notice is served, the derogatory remark has already achieved its intended viral impact.
The Judiciary: Courts have occasionally stepped in with powerful observations. The Supreme Court’s dressing down of Nupur Sharma and the Madras High Court’s ruling on Udhayanidhi Stalin are prime examples. However, the judicial process is slow, and FIRs are often used as tools for political harassment rather than genuine pursuit of justice.
Internal Party Disciplinary Actions: Parties rarely act out of a moral obligation. Suspensions (like those of Nupur Sharma or Naveen Jindal) usually occur only when there is severe international pressure or a risk to the party’s broader electoral calculus. In most cases, the party either defends the offender, claims their account was hacked (as with Supriya Shrinate), or silently ignores the issue (as with Sanjay Nishad).

Conclusion

The period from December 2020 to December 2025 has seen a marked degradation in the quality of public discourse among Indian elected representatives. The compilation of these events—spanning all major political parties including the BJP, Congress, DMK, Shiv Sena, and RJD—proves that no single ideology holds a monopoly on vitriol. The normalization of sexist, communal, and regional slurs reflects a political culture that prioritizes virality and vote-bank polarization over statesmanship. Until the electorate begins to exact a heavy political price for such behavior at the ballot box, or institutional guardrails are enforced uniformly, this inflammatory rhetoric will continue to be a staple of Indian democracy.