If by Dehat we mean rural in a location-sense, a group of people who live in villages then obviously I am not anti-Dehat nor are the @JungIndien @sirfaditya folks I am sure. @svembu has shown wonderfully, for example, you can run the world’s biggest companies, in large parts at least, from villages. Rurban becomes a continuum - a game of infra and sustainable living. I am anti-Dehat, though, in the Ambedkarite sense. The idea that there could be a community veto of who you love, where you study, what your occupation is and so on. That mindset could be in cities too. Little girls being covered head to toe is unfortunately a not uncommon sight in Indian cities. I don’t think there is any need to clarify this, just like post-religious or anti-socialism need not be or modernity itself. But nonetheless it is useful. The point is not to sneer at hillybillies, the way the newly converted Romans sneered at “pagans” - very much a play on the rural polytheists being apparently boorish simpletons. For me Dehat simply means the Khap and its related apparatus. It is a reminder that our civilisation failed to have our own state in large parts for centuries and hence defensively reflexively went into this shell. Being anti-Dehat is breaking that shell, unapologetically.