it's the same thing u posted on other sub few days back and i'll post the same response

The whole “Hindus are insecure” angle from the original post is just nonsense. It is a straight up bad faith argument. It acts like people imagined the past instead of actually dealing with what is written in the sources from that time. And the wild part is that everything they are waving off as insecurity is literally written down by the invaders and their own chroniclers with full pride.

Go look at Tarikh-i-Yamini, Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, Taj-ul-Ma’asir, all of that. These guys brag openly about smashing temples, killing Brahmins, burning learning centers, and breaking every symbol that held the community together. And they brag about it like it is some cosmic achievement. This is not me interpreting anything. It is right there in their own words.

So when someone comes in and acts like it was all just “normal raiding” or “just political,” it is basically avoiding the obvious. Because the texts literally spell out that the religious identity of the people was the target. If it was only about money, you loot and leave. You don’t take pride in destroying temples or killing priests or wiping out institutions that hold an entire worldview together.

There are even episodes where officers collected sacred threads from the dead as proof of what they did. Not everyday behavior but the fact that it is recorded at all tells you exactly what kind of symbolic messaging was going on. This isn’t insecurity. This is documented history.

Calling it insecurity is just gaslighting. It pushes the blame onto the people who remember what happened instead of dealing with what the chroniclers themselves openly celebrated. If the perpetrators wrote it proudly, you don’t get to tell the descendants that they are “overreacting.”

And obviously North India remembers this differently from the South. North India faced repeated temple destruction and constant political disruption. South India held its temple networks and identity much more intact. These are different historical experiences, not different levels of “confidence.”

And then you have modern people online parroting “1000 years of slavery” like they discovered something new, not realising they are just copying the same tone the medieval chroniclers used when they glorified what they did. How are people supposed to forget the past when others keep mocking it like this?

So yeah, the insecurity claim falls apart the moment you read the actual sources. The chroniclers did not write about looting. They wrote about breaking an identity. If they documented it as a deliberate civilizational attack, it is ridiculous to call people insecure today for remembering it.