I cannot be the only one to have noticed that Hindutvawadis are ugly. This is a serious allegation, and I make it responsibly.

J'accuse — as that French fellow said about those other misguided nationalists.

I don't mean ugly in behaviour. That is to say, not in the "ugly mob provokes Sardesai into throwing punch" sense (hope Sardesai's fist connected with soft Hindutvawadi jaw). Being brave in a mob comes naturally to them, and so, no, this is not about ideology or temperament. I mean bad looking, unsightly.

I've no real problem with the Hindutva ideology, with which I have always sympathized. And I'm not above a bit of prejudice myself. Who among us can claim to be truly liberal? Not I.

But for the crime of being ugly, what forgiveness? Now this sort of thing is not debated in our society because media is politically correct. However, as a writer I cannot look away. I must approach this difficult subject in that spirit of inquiry which informs all the writing in the Sunday Times of India.

It will be said that my argument is skin-deep, but I challenge that. It extends to under the dermis and into those folds of fat that characterizes the right, and I'll come to that presently.

The truth is they've never been good-looking.As a student I noticed handsome SP Mookerjee on BJP posters. Seduced, I purchased his book, 'Leaves From A Diary'. The writing was pedestrian (Page 109: "What is the aim of this life? Wallowing in luxury and pleasure? Certainly not! We are here only in transit and will have to move on" etc). This was acceptable since Hindutva is about passion, not intellect. What disappointed was the cover, sporting Mookerjee's chubby face. What happened to that patrician I was promised on the poster? This wasn't the Hindutva I had signed up for. The scales fell from my eyes, as Wodehouse might say.

Let us turn from geriatric to bariatric. Question: Why are so many Hindutvawallahs forced to do this belt-tightening? Nitin Gadkari did it, so did Vinod Tawde, Devendra Phadnavis and Mangal Prabhat Lodha (according to a September 14, 2011, TOI report).And now the finance minister. Before his bariatric surgery, Arun Jaitley weighed 117 kilos. I noticed his vast persona when he took a break delivering the budget, perhaps because even speaking was exhausting.

He kept muttering something about "physical deficit", but I'm sorry to report there was none I could spot, only abundance. He raised taxes on cigarettes, cola and sugar, saying these were damaging. I'm astonished he lectured us about what not to put in our mouths. If he had controlled himself, we'd have ministers whose BMI index didn't compete with the Sensex.

Of course, it's not as if they're all like this. The Prime Minister radiates health (a report on April 8 quoted his tailor revealing the great man's figure -41 inches around the waist). And he's strikingly handsome, yes. But then he's a Gujarati male. We mustn't credit to his personal account the advantages accruing to all the community.

Anyway, so, no, they're not all like this, but most of them are.

Across its ranks, Hindutva fields a phalanx of rotund, moon-faced figures. Uma, Amit, Sushma, Smriti, Anandiben. Faces to launch a thousand Chandrayaans.

Meanwhile on the other side, lefties are mostly thin. I present the Karats, both he and she, and bird-like Jyoti Basu. All good-looking. It is true Sitaram Yechury's barber takes a chisel to that hair instead of scissors, but there's something aesthetically pleasing even about him.

The Congress leadership may not be bright or honest or, truth be told, even competent. But one thing we cannot accuse the Gandhis of is ugliness. They are a singularly striking looking family, like those other dynasts, Bollywood's Kapoors.

I now come to a painful subject, that of my comrades. Hindutva's media knights win few awards for original thinking. That I have never denied. It requires little to think up a recurring argument that goes: "Muslims! Dynasty! Corruption... Muslims!" That is fine. But why are they all so ugly? I try hard to listen to what they're saying but the hideousness is too distracting. The Spectator columnist Taki Theodoracopulos has long accused all journalists of being ugly. My data indicates it's only a certain type.

What puzzles me is this. Conservatism originates with the aristocracy, which is usually good-looking. So what went wrong here in India? Could it be some mutation? And will it affect their future? Friends studying natural selection tell me that it has ever been thus: those unequipped to face modernity and change, clinging on to ancient prejudices, fade away. But I hope Hindutva remains with us, if only for the variety. And, having read this, they shouldn't worry themselves too much about what to do.

It does not really matter because, as Churchill observed, you will still be ugly in the morning.