Understanding the Growth of European Style Nationalism in India

The pages of Indian Express newspaper are carrying a very thoughtful and in-depth discussion on the rise and dominance of Hindu Nationalism in India by outstanding social scientists, such as Yogendra Yadav, Suhas Palshikar and  Akeel Bilgrami, who are disturbed that the present notion of Indian Nationalism is European style nationalism. We understand this as Hindutva politics or Hindu Nationalism. What is common to their contributions is that they sound to be conceding that Hindu Nationalism is the Nationalism prevalent today.

While there is no doubt that Hindu Nationalism is very assertive and dominant, Indian Nationalism is still very much there in the imagination of a large section of Indian society. Percentage-wise, the vote share of the Hindu nationalist party (Bharatiya Janata Party or BJP) in the 2024 elections was 36.5% and even with this there are a lot of allegations about rigging and manipulation of the results.

Still the concern of these social scientists is worth giving a serious thought. Hindu nationalism has been entrenching itself not only through electoral politics but also through its infiltration in various organs of State, its control over media and a big section of social media.

Yadav lays “the fault for the rise of the offending nationalism in India today at the doorstep of what he thinks of as a secularized, internationalist, modernist ethos that was cultivated
in post-Independence India, which eschewed all nationalism, thereby creating a “nationalism” vacuum that is now filled by the Hindutva conception of the nation.”

Palshikar “closes the argument by tracing this nationalism to elements within the national movement more than a century earlier.”

Bilgrami, to begin with, appreciates the Indian ethos by stating that “For centuries, Indian society has been characterised by an unselfconscious pluralism of religions and cultures. Today’s European-style nationalism, by contrast, manufactures division and calls it unity. Commenting on Palshikar’s views on its roots during freedom struggle, Bilgrami says, “No doubt there were antecedents to such attitudes during the freedom struggle but they were marginalized by the dominance of Gandhi and Nehru and though this certainly left unresolved
questions, these do not amount to the roots of current Hindutva nationalism.”

There are some more points that need to be taken into account while understanding the situation in India and the rising threat of Hindu nationalism. While in Europe, the sovereignty passed on from monarchs/kings to the modern centralised state. The rise of such States had to deal with divergent groups in the society, which led to the concept of secularism.

In India, we had a colonial State, which usurped the sovereignty of most of the kings. This colonial State had to give way to the Indian State after Independence. This Indian State had its guidelines in the Indian Constitution, which was “inclusive without othering” (Yadav’s phrase).

India did walk this path and theoretically this is still the path of Indian Nationalism. Hindu Nationalism is drawing a bigger line, which in a way is narrow, European style, but unlike Europe where language, religion and culture were the root of division and nationalism (mainly language), in India it was only religion that was the foundation of Hindu and Muslim Nationalism, also called communalism.

With the introduction of modern industries, education, means of transport and communication, roots of Indian nationalism started emerging. The supporting aspects of this nationalism were the social movements breaking the shackles of hierarchy. Movements led by Narayan Meghaji Lokhande, Com. Singaravelu organised the workers. Jyotiba Phule, Savitribai Phule, B R Ambedkar and Periyar struggled for social equality, an important ingredient of Indian Nationalism. Gandhi and Nehru contributed to the leading of people’s movement against colonial rule, which was not only aimed at changing the sovereignty from British to Indian elected representatives, but also meant to be totally inclusive.

Right with the development of this Indian Nationalism; the feudal elements laid the foundation of trends that culminated in the formation of Muslim and Hindu nationalism. These trends articulated that religion is the basis of nationalism. They got support from the Rajas, Nawabs (kings) and elite sections, which occupied a place on the higher pedestal of prevailing but declining social structure. Their rise in due course led to Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha, and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh or RSS. This did help the British to pursue the policy of ‘divide and rule’ and later to the partition of India.

Hindu Nationalism had already become a force to reckon with and the European style Nationalism of Germany and Italy was its role model. The training of swayamsevaks (volunteers) and pracharaks (propagandists) spread their message far and wide through word of mouth. Immediately after India got Independence, Hindu Nationalism’s strength was clear. It’s (ex) pracharak Nathuram Godse pumped three bullets into the chest of the leader of anti-colonial movement, the biggest advocate of Indian Nationalism, Mahatma Gandhi.

The RSS was not the only vehicle of Hindu Nationalism. There was the Hindu Mahasabha, and some elements of Hindu Nationalism also entered the Indian National Congress. Nehru had realised this threat to Indian Nationalism but could not weed it out due to many reasons, the major one being the persistence of landlordism in the country. This was reflected in the heightened religiosity in society.

Hindu nationalism obviously stood for status quo of caste and gender relationships. Its appeal to certain sections of society became clear when a Bill for cow slaughter was demanded and thousands of Sadhus gathered in Parliament. In the 1980s, its influence started becoming obvious, when the response to yatras and religiosity started going through the roof. On the pretext of the Shah Bano case, the appeasement bogey worked and the Ram Mandir campaign opened the floodgates for the rise of Hindu Nationalism.

The vocal articulation of Indian Nationalism has been muted for some decades. The Right-wing wants to present Nationalism itself as Hindu Nationalism.

Is there a hope for Indian Nationalism becoming the main one today? Yes, there is. We saw a glimpse of this during the past few years. The ‘Bharat Jodo Yatra’ and ‘Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra’ have shown that the space that was undermined by the assertion of European style Hindu Nationalism can be retrieved. The articulation of issues of dalits, women, adivasis, workers and minorities along with the movements for their demands can be the foundation.

The appeal of our Constitution is very deep among the people. These twin movements, along with reaching the values of Indian Constitution far and wide will be the two legs on which Indian Nationalism can be retrieved from the ground in times to come.

The writer is a human rights defender and a former professor at the Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay. The views are personal.