The double-sidedness of Hindutva: Inside the BJP’s think tanks

ABSTRACT

This article examines the BJP’s attempt to build centres of elite, traditional intellectuals by bringing together a variety of stakeholders in government and civil society. While dismantling advisory committees and attacking universities and established research institutions, the BJP has sought to build think tanks to give its political ideology a footprint in already established policy networks. Some scholars have characterized the BJP’s think tanks as institutions of ‘soft Hindutva’, that is, organizations that avoid overt association with the BJP and Hindu nationalist linkages but pursue a diffuse Hindutva agenda nevertheless. Through a study of the BJP’s two most prominent think tanks, I examine how such organizations build an alternative sense of respectable intellectual legitimacy, consolidate Hindutva networks across political, administrative, and military fields, and build a ‘mimetic’ Hindutva intellectual culture. The think tanks negotiate a fine balance between projecting a ‘respectable’ religious conservatism along with an aggressive Hindu majoritarianism. My findings demonstrate how manifestations of Hindutva can be both explicitly political and anti-political at the same time: advocating for political interventionism while eschewing politics and forging an apolitical route towards cultural transformation.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. E. Anderson, ‘“Neo-Hindutva”: the Asia House MF Husain campaign and the mainstreaming of Hindu nationalist rhetoric in Britain’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, 23/1 (2015), pp. 45–66.

2. M. A. Peters, ‘Anti-intellectualism is a virus’, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 51/4 (2019), pp. 357–63.

3. P. Chacko, ‘The Right Turn in India: Authoritarianism, Populism and Neoliberalisation’, Journal of Contemporary Asia, 48/4 (2018), pp. 541–65.

4. N. Hebbar, ‘At mid-term, Modi’s BJP on cusp of change’, The Hindu (2017).

5. S. Palshikar, ‘Politics in the Times of Hegemony’, Seminar, 725 (2020).

6. D. S. Reddy, ‘What is neo- about neo-Hindutva?’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, 26/4 (2018), pp. 483–90.

7. Anderson, ‘“Neo-Hindutva”: Asia House’, op. cit., Ref. 1.

8. Anderson, ibid.

9. E. Anderson and A. Longkumer, ‘“Neo-Hindutva”: evolving forms, spaces, and expressions of Hindu nationalism’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, 26/4 (2018), pp. 371–77; Reddy, op. cit., Ref. 6.

10. Reddy, ibid., p. 490.

11. CI Mission Statement.

12. A. Gudavarthy, India After Modi: Populism and the Right (London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2018).

13. P. Chatterjee, The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993).

14. Triple talaq refers to a practice within Sunni Muslim communities that allows Muslim men to divorce and abandon their wives by saying or writing the word ‘talaq’ three times. Those who campaigned to criminalize this practice on the Hindu right did so under the guise of protecting Muslim women from being abandoned by their husbands without any accountability. While there is some validity to this argument, women’s groups have also argued that criminalizing this practice rather than invalidating it could prevent husbands from paying post-divorce dues, leaving their wives and children without financial security and at risk to vengeful family members (J. Jones, ‘Will criminalising triple talaq help India’s muslim women?’, QZ (2019)). Instead of assuring post-divorce security, the Hindu right’s focus on criminalizing triple talaq primarily targets Muslim communities and reinforces the rhetoric of Muslim women as victims to regressive Muslim men. These debates are part of a larger contention within Indian legal rights between instituting a Uniform Civil Code instead of allowing religion-specific Personal Laws.

15. Article 370 of the Constitution, instituted by Prime Minister Nehru, India’s first prime minister, gave special status to the region of Muslim-dominated Kashmir to retain some level of autonomy, its own constitution, flag, and right to amend its own laws. By dismantling Article 370, the BJP government has laid stake to Kashmir as Indian territory, ostensibly to ‘bring development’ to the region (BBC News, ‘What happened in Kashmir and why it matters’ (2019)). Yet, in most ways, this move has led to increased military occupation, state shutdowns, curfews, and violence by the Indian state.

16. Palshikar, ‘Politics in the Times of Hegemony’, op. cit., Ref. 5.

17. For a detailed account of Modi’s varying election promises on the campaign trail in 2014, see C. Jaffrelot, ‘The Modi-centric BJP 2014 election campaign: new techniques and old tactics’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, 23/2 (2015), pp. 151–66.

18. M. Dainton, ‘Explaining Theories of Persuasion’, in M. Dainton and E.D. Zelley (Eds) Applying communication theory for professional life: a practical introduction (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005).

19. S. Hall, ‘The great moving right show’, Marxism Today, 23/1 (1979), pp. 14–20.

20. For more analyses of different mobilizations of Hindutva, see I. Therwath, ‘Cyber-hindutva: Hindu nationalism, the diaspora and the Web’, Social sciences information. Information sur les sciences sociales, 51/4 (2012), pp. 551–77; V. Bénéï and C. J. Fuller, ‘Teaching nationalism in Maharashtra schools’, in V. Bénéï and C. J. Fuller (Eds) The Everyday State and Society in Modern India (London, UK: Hurst & Co., 2001), p. 240; M. Bhattacharjee, ‘Seva, hindutva, and the politics of post-earthquake relief and reconstruction in rural Kutch’, Asian Ethnology, 75/1 (2016), p. 75; T. B. Hansen, Wages of Violence: Naming and Identity in Postcolonial Bombay (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2018); T. B. Hansen, The Saffron Wave: Democracy and Hindu Nationalism in Modern India (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999); C. Jaffrelot, ‘Hindu Nationalism: Strategic Syncretism in Ideology Building’, Economic and Political Weekly, 28/12/13 (1993), pp. 517–24; D. S. Reddy, Religious Identity and Political Destiny: Hindutva in the Culture of Ethnicism (Lanham, MD: Rowman Altamira, 2006); D. Reddy, ‘Hindutva as Praxis’, Religion Compass, 5/8 (2011), pp. 412–26.

21. C. Jaffrelot, ‘Hindu Nationalism and the (Not So Easy) Art of Being Outraged: The Ram Setu Controversy’, South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal, 2 (2008).

22. Reddy, Religious Identity and Political Destiny, op. cit., Ref. 20.

23. See E. Humphrys, ‘Anti-politics, the early Marx and Gramsci’s “integral state”’, Thesis Eleven, 147/1 (2018), pp. 29–44; Hansen, Wages of Violence, op. cit., Ref. 20; J. Ferguson, The Anti-politics Machine: ‘development,’ Depoliticization, and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1994).

24. E. Swyngedouw, ‘Apocalypse Forever?’, Theory, Culture & Society, 27/2–3 (2010), pp. 213–32.

25. P. van der Veer, ‘Global breathing: Religious utopias in India and China’, Anthropological Theory, 7/3 (2007), pp. 315–28.

26. M. Candea, ‘Making a Space for the Non-Political in the Anthropology of Politics’, Current anthropology, 52/3 (2011), pp. 309–34.

27. Bhattacharjee, ‘Seva, hindutva, and the politics of post-earthquake relief’, op. cit., Ref. 20.

28. T. B. Hansen, ‘The political theology of violence in contemporary India’, South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal, 2 (2008).

29. Reddy, ‘What is neo- about neo-Hindutva?’, op. cit., Ref. 6.

30. W. Brown, Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2015).

31. Ferguson, The Anti-politics Machine, op. cit., Ref. 23.

32. N. Postero and E. Elinoff, ‘Introduction: A return to politics’, Anthropological Theory, 19/1 (2019), pp. 3–28.

33. A. Vanaik, The Rise of Hindu Authoritarianism: Secular Claims, Communal Realities (London: Verso, 2017).

34. See L. T. Flåten, ‘Spreading Hindutva through education: Still a priority for the BJP?’, India Review, 16:4 (2017), pp. 377-400; S. Palshikar, ‘The BJP and Hindu Nationalism: Centrist Politics and Majoritarian Impulses’, South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, 38/4 (2015), pp. 719–35; Reddy, ‘What is neo- about neo-Hindutva?’, op. cit., Ref. 6; E. Anderson and C. Jaffrelot, ‘Hindu nationalism and the “saffronisation of the public sphere”: an interview with Christophe Jaffrelot’, Con temporary Southeast Asia, 26/4 (2018), pp. 468–82.

35. Reddy, ‘Hindutva as Praxis’, op. cit., Ref. 20.

36. N. Fairclough, Language and Power (Harlow: Longman, 2001).

37. B. Hodge, ‘Ideology, Identity, Interaction: Contradictions and Challenges for Critical Discourse Analysis’, Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines, 5/2 (2012).

38. S. Hall, ‘Encoding/decoding’, Media and cultural studies: Keyworks, 16676 (2001).

39. Anderson and Longkumer, ‘“Neo-Hindutva”: evolving forms’, op. cit., Ref. 9.

40. Reddy, ‘What is neo- about neo-Hindutva?’, op. cit., Ref. 6.

41. The Pondy Lit Fest, ‘The Pondy Lit Fest 2019’, https://pondylitfest.com/media.php (accessed 20.9.20).

42. V. Lal, ‘The Politics of History on the Internet: Cyber-Diasporic Hinduism and the North American Hindu Diaspora’, Diaspora: A Journal of Transnational Studies, 8/2 (1999), pp. 137–72.

43. A. Sajjanhar, ‘The New Experts: Populism, Technocracy and Politics of Expertise in Contemporary India’, Journal of Contemporary Asia, DOI: 10.1080/00472336.2021.1934889

44. D. Forgacs (Ed.), The Gramsci Reader (New York: NYU Press, 2000); A. Gramsci, The Gramsci Reader: Selected Writings, 1916-1935 (New York: NYU Press, 2000).

45. Humphrys, ‘Anti-politics’, op. cit., Ref. 23.

46. Q. Hoare and G. Nowell-Smith, Selections from Prison Notebooks (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 2005), p. 10.

47. W. E. Griffith, ‘Communist propaganda’, Propaganda and communication in world history, 2 (1979), pp. 234–41.

48. T. A. Van Dijk, ‘Ideology and discourse analysis’, Journal of Political Ideologies, 11/2 (2006), pp. 115–40, 131.

49. L. Irani, Chasing Innovation Making Entrepreneurial Citizens in Modern India (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019).

50. S. Udupa, ‘Gaali cultures: The politics of abusive exchange on social media’, New Media & Society, 20/4 (2018), pp. 1506–22.

51. R. Desai, ‘Second-hand dealers in ideas: think-tanks and Thatcherite hegemony’, New Left Review (1994), pp. 27–27.

52. P. Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse? (London: Zed Books, 1986), p. 38.

53. The Pondy Lit Fest, op. cit., Ref. 41.

54. Pew Research Center, Indians Data on Asian Americans (2017), https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/fact-sheet/asian-americans-indians-in-the-u-s/ (accessed 20.9.2020).

55. C. Jaffrelot (Ed.), Hindu Nationalism – A Reader (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007); A. Bhatt, M. Murty, and P. Ramamurthy, ‘Hegemonic developments: the new Indian middle class, gendered subalterns, and diasporic returnees in the event of neoliberalism’, Signs, 36/1 (2010), pp. 127–52; Therwath, ‘Cyber-hindutva’, op. cit., Ref. 20; J. M. Falcone, ‘Putting the “Fun’ in Fundamentalism: Religious Nationalism and the Split Self at Hindutva Summer Camps in the United States’, Ethos, 40/2 (2012), pp. 164–95.

56. V. Bald, M. Chatterji, S. Reddy, and M. Vimalassery, The Sun Never Sets: South Asian Migrants in an Age of U.S. Power (New York: NYU Press, 2013).

57. R. Malhotra, Being Different: An Different Challenge To Western Universalism (New Delhi: HarperCollins Publishers India, 2013).

58. Humphrys, ‘Anti-politics’,op. cit., Ref. 23.

59. Palshikar, ‘Politics in the Times of Hegemony’, op. cit., Ref. 5.

60. L. Tribe, ‘Policy Science: Analysis or Ideology?’, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 2/1 (1972), pp. 66-110.

61. Van Dijk, ‘Ideology and discourse analysis’, op. cit., Ref. 48, p. 132.

62. Hodge, ‘Ideology, Identity, Interaction’, op. cit., Ref. 37.

63. Anderson, ‘“Neo-Hindutva”: Asia House’, op. cit., Ref. 1.

64. Reddy, ‘What is neo- about neo-Hindutva?’, op. cit., Ref. 6.