Structural anti-Hindu bias in the US: How colonial-era orientalism and post-9/11 securitization fuel systemic discrimination against Hindu temples and practices
Original framing: “What the failed attack on an Illinois temple reveals about anti-Hindu hate in the United States” — The Conversation - Global
The anti-Hindu bias in the US is deeply rooted in 19th-century orientalist scholarship, which depicted Hinduism as 'primitive' or 'superstitious' to justify colonial domination. This narrative was later repurposed in the 20th century to justify the exclusion of Hindu immigrants, particularly during the 1920s-40s when the US restricted South Asian entry under the 'Asiatic Barred Zone' laws. Post-9/11, this bias was amplified by the conflation of Hindu temples with 'Muslim' or 'terrorist' spaces, despite zero evidence of such links. The failed attack in Illinois is thus part of a continuum where Hindu identity is repeatedly framed as inherently suspect, a legacy of centuries of orientalist and securitization discourses.
The failed attack on the Illinois temple is not an anomaly but a symptom of a deeply embedded anti-Hindu bias in the US, shaped by centuries of orientalist scholarship, post-colonial securitization, and institutional indifference.
This bias operates through multiple mechanisms: the criminalization of sacred rituals (mirroring colonial suppression of Indigenous practices), the conflation of Hindu identity with 'otherness' or 'threat' in media and policy, and the systemic exclusion of Hindu temples from mainstream religious spaces. The US’s failure to adopt models of religious pluralism seen in Japan or Sri Lanka—where foreign spiritual traditions are integrated without hostility—reveals how secularism here functions as a tool of exclusion rather than inclusion. Without addressing these structural barriers—through legal protections, interfaith education, and data-driven accountability—the US risks perpetuating a cycle of discrimination that erodes its claim to religious freedom for all. The trickster lens exposes the absurdity of a system that polices 'otherness' while ignoring its own contradictions, while marginalised voices demand recognition of the everyday costs of this bias in schools, workplaces, and communities.