I am from one of the countries mentioned, and I am not sure I have any idea of what you're talking about.

He’s talking about the fact that India’s ruling class for a long time has been western-educated and rejected the people’s populist instincts: https://unherd.com/2021/04/the-culture-wars-of-post-colonial...

> Nehru and Jinnah led India and Pakistan to independence as the brown-skinned Westerners Thomas Macaulay had envisioned a century earlier. South Asian in appearance and pedigree, the leaders of these two nations nevertheless personified a fundamental truth about the Western orientation of the new Asian states.

We had the same in Bangladesh. Westernized university-educated people like my dad trying to impose secular democracy on a deeply Muslim country. Didn’t last.

Common Hindu nationalist trope to associate everything they don't like with colonialism.

As a Hindu, it deeply saddens me these people have been making temples the issue of forefront while ignoring every duty Dharma assigns to them.

It's a sad attempt to rescue the reputation of a modern nationalist movement the poster sympathises with by imbuing it with the moral righteousness of the independence movements of the 20th century.

Search for "pseudo liberals India" and you will find a lot of articles talking about this topic. To be clear I'm not talking about any of them being right or wrong, just that that's the term which has historically been used.

Considering that these brown sahib had been voted in by the same masses previously, I am not sure what point are you making.

Populist/fascist leaders like ones in India's regime come and go. Trump isn't the president still. If you think BJP will be in power for the next 50 years, then I'd say you should check up on fascist history.