Moderation of Rhetoric (Not Action) in the Hindu Nationalist Movement

Samuel J. Parker

11330755

Sjparker@crimson.ua.edu

The Hindu National movement has changed from an initially fascist rhetoric to a more anti-secular, pro-business rhetoric. While the rhetoric has moderated over time, the core ideology of

the movement has remained the same as shown through the history of the movement, and in particular three distinct moments. The core ideology or “Hindutva” has a fascist thread that runs

through its history, and continues to cause harm to India and its minorities.

Parker 2

The Hindu National movement has changed from an initially fascist rhetoric to a more

anti-secular, pro-business rhetoric. While the rhetoric has moderated over time, the core ideology

of the movement has remained the same as shown through the history of the movement, and in

particular three distinct moments. The core ideology or “Hindutva” has a fascist thread that runs

through its history, and continues to cause harm to India and its minorities. 2014 saw the

resurgence of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in India. In this paper I will show how the Hindu

Nationalist movement, specifically the: Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Jana Sangh

(BJS), and the BJP, moderates their rhetoric from their original fascist message in order to gain

electoral success. By Hindu Nationalist I mean, groups that want India to be the national

homeland for the Hindu people. I will argue that while the rhetoric has moderated, the core

ideology and actions of Hindu Nationalist governments does not, creating ethno-religious

tensions in the region. For the purpose of this paper I will examine distinct moments in the

history of the Hindu Nationalist movement demonstrating how they shifted their language, but

once in power legislate and govern from their ideological roots.

The first case is the RSS study trips to Fascist Europe during the 1930’s and 1940’s, and

the message the early leaders of were sending home. Multiple trips were made by multiple

leaders, and they took home some strategies and tactics that aided in their electoral support. The

early leaders of the Hindu Nationalist movement were pro-fascist and set their organizations up

as such, from the rhetoric to the paramilitary.

The second case is a 2011 Sir Mark Tully interview with L.K. Advani. The interview

focuses on the demolition of the Babri Masjid. Advani makes the claim that the destruction was

Parker 3

purely secular, despite the heavy religious rhetoric used when talking about its demolition. The

fact that Advani even uses the term secular is interesting, and I will examine his

conceptualization of secularism and majoratarianism. Advani, the same man who dressed as

Rama and called for the destruction of a mosque, claims not to be particularly religious himself. I

will examine how he positioned himself post-spectacle in a respected news journal, and compare

that to the destruction of the Mosque. In the interview, Advani takes issue with the language

currently used by the RSS and BJP. He hopes that the Hindutva can be changed to Bharatiya a

word that means something closer to Indian-like.

The third case I will analyze is Modi’s Madison Square Garden speech, in which he

moderates his rhetoric from previous remarks during his tenure as the Chief Minister of Gujarat.

Modi barely mentions Hinduism in the speech and there are clear reasons why. The moderation

of his rhetoric was a move to aid his party’s future electoral success and to mesh the state and

religion. A look at Modi’s speech, in the context of the history of the BJP, highlights points

about Fascism, and the national network of Hindutva activists that got him elected.

Before moving forward with the RSS trips to fascist Europe, it is important to explain

how the history of the Hindu Nationalist movement, and the different parts and components that

make it what it is. Beginning with the Saraswati and the Hindu Mahasabha, I will give an

explanation of the Hindu Nationalist movement in order to give context to my argument.

The Hindu Mahasabha is the ideological parent to the RSS, BJS, and BJP. It was created

in 1914 during the independence movement as a Hindu answer to Muslim independence groups

in British India (Hansen). The group is one of the earliest Hindu Nationalist groups and was one

of the first to advocate for India to be for Hindus. The Hindu Mahasabha leader Savarkar came

Parker 4

up with the term Hindutva which means “Hinduness” (Jaffrelot). Hindutva is now synonymous

with Hindu Nationalism and is also rooted deeply in fascism. Early on the Hindu Mahasabha

believed that India should be a state for Hindus, a national homeland of a people, this

conceptualization of India ran into issues because already the land that became India had a large

minority Muslim population.

In order to create a state for Hindus, Hindu Nationalists began to homogenize Hinduism

in order to make people easier to mobilize. The use of religion and nationalism helped

Nationalists create an identity that they could use to make the case for a Hindu state; this along

with a communal violence became a recipe for disaster for the religious minorities in the region.

Before the time of the Hindu Mahasabha was a Hindu reformer named Dayananda Saraswati

who set out to homogenize Hinduism, he grew obsessed with the Vedas and their Sanskrit

scripts. He expressed his dislike for other religions and founded the Arya Samaj an organization

based in a Nationalist ideology (Jaffrelot). In the process of homogenizing Hinduism, Saraswati

appropriated traits from Western religions. Dayananda was attempting to create a sense of ethnic

pride for the people living in the region (Jaffrelot). Hindu Nationalism drew from Sanskrit texts

and glorified the Vedic period as a golden era that they aim to return to. The Hindu Mahasabha

that drew from Dayananda’s work then applied it to Hindu Nationalism (Jaffrelot 19). This is one

of the first times you see a uniquely Hindu Nationalist group. The Hindu Mahasabha leadership

was aware that a consolidation needed to happen in order to compete with other religions, so

they structured Brahman Hinduism around western traits (Jaffrelot 25). Hindu Nationalist growth

began initially in the North which even today is still a strong hold of Hindu Nationalist

sentiment.

Parker 5

The Vedas are consider the oldest scripture in Hinduism and are an important factor in

the Hindu National movement. They come from the “Vedic Golden Age” which many

nationalists saw as the height of Indian civilization (C.R.). They teach love and respect for the

motherland (C.R.). The Vedas were written in Sanskrit, which is why nationalist frequently talk

about a Sanskritized culture.

Hindutva is a movement that pushes away from the secularism promoted by Nehru, and

the protection of minority rights. Important to the electoral success of the BJP is their

conceptualization of a Nation, the independence movement created an Independent State, but

partition left the state looking for an Identity. Nehru conceptualized India as a pan-religious,

liberal, secular, democracy with strong protection of minority rights, but as with every leader

there are their critics (Bright 1945).

The movement’s ideology solidified in the 1920’s as a response to the Khilifat

movement, which was a mobilization of Muslims in the British India against British rule

(Jaffrelot). Muslims in India were quicker to organize, one reason for that is because they had a

religious community that reached further than just South Asia. The Khilifat movement was a

Pan-Islamic movement which gave the RSS the room to make claims that the Muslims had

outside interest (Jaffrelot).

In 1925 K.B. Hedgewar founded the RSS a Hindu Nationalist organization

(Jaffrelot). The organization was militant in nature, and focused on recruiting young men. The

ideology of the RSS was based in fascism. The RSS grew all over north of India starting

different chapters. Religiosity is the most important factor to being a member of the RSS.

Parker 6

Additionally one had to be abstinent and hold the god Rama in the highest regard (Jaffrelot).

Rama is the central character in the Hindu epic The Ramayana. Rama is a warlike character who

pushes back against evil intruders in his land. Rama was critical to the movement; he was a

masculine, stoic, and warlike character in the Ramayana. The importance of Ram and the

Ramayana to the RSS cannot be understated. Most of the RSS facilities were attached to temples

Rama temples (Hansen).

After Hedgewar came Golwalker the next supreme leader of the RSS. Golwalker created

a cult of personality around himself, and an ideology based on Hindus being a superior people.

Golwalker believed that the Muslims living in the British Raj were a lesser people, and that

Hindus should return to their rightful place as rulers of the territory. The fascist ideologies

perpetuated by Golwalker included painting Muslims as non-native and outsiders.

Partition

Hindu Nationalism has long played a role in India and has existed in various different

groups, the three most important to this paper being the RSS, BJS, and the BJP. Early on Hindu

Nationalists worked to homogenize Hinduism, this has aided their cause by having everyone

believe one interpretation of religion thus unifying the people and making them easier to

mobilize. Religion plays a central role in how the Hindu Nationalist movement was able to gain

so much momentum and later electoral success. The RSS is the oldest of the three and has its

roots in fascism a political ideology that has the ability to quickly mobilize people into militancy

and threatens ethno-religious peace in the region.

The legislative effects of electing those who follow the Hindutva ideology are dangerous

for minority rights, and liberal democratic principles. Hindutva has amassed a large following

Parker 7

complete with a national network of activists who argue and fight for the movement. The

networks of organizations that follow Hindutva are all across India, and the popularity of their

fascist and Hindu first message has struck a chord with many Indians, despite the RSS’s

Brahman origins (Hansen). A fascist message tied to a national network is dangerous in a region

that has faced much ethno-religious turmoil.

Unfortunately the national spectacle created by Hindu Nationalists is what can push

tensions into full blown riots. Spectacles like the Destruction of the Babri Masjid in 1992 have

rallied Hindu Nationalists, and have helped the electoral success of political parties of the same

ideology. Despite the BJP’s rhetorical shift from Hindutva, the actual actions of the members

remain rooted in their past.

Unlike Hitler’s firmly controlled Nazis, the RSS was not without issues of self-

governance, there was a constant concern within the group and to the politicians that relied on

the national network that the RSS would split. Fractures would happen over regional differences

and jostling for control. Out of fear of a fracturing within the RSS, those who relied on its

network became beholden to its power. The RSS leveraged their power in order to force the

political parties associated with it further to the right. Golwalker’s fascists tendencies coupled

with a formidable national network turned an extremist group into a political powerhouse. In

pushing groups further to the right the RSS demonstrates their power. A shift in rhetoric was not

possible in the early movement, but as time went on the RSS loses some of their power to control

rhetoric.

I briefly touched on the homogenization of Hinduism, and how it was made of use by

Hindu Nationalists. Hinduism was never a codified religion and was largely practiced differently

Parker 8

from place to place or from caste to caste. The extreme localization of religion made it difficult

to unify a people under a common cause, because Hindus in India all had different means of

practice. One man who C. Rajagopalachari (C.R.) was another, in his translation of the

Ramayana he made deliberate choices in words and story to help play into nationalism

(Rajagopalachari). To create a nation there needs to be a common understanding of where the

people come from (Hutchinson). C.R. would take multiple translations and mesh them together

to make the text read as pro Indian.

Many separate political and theological actors helped create a new vision of Hinduism,

one with more defined practices and dogma, which played better to a unified Indian state. This

new positioning of Hinduism found itself useful for the Hindutva ideology, because it was more

codified and easier to mobilize people. The more people believing the same thing the easier it is

to mobilize piety. By mobilizing piety I mean the ability to mobilize a particular religious

community behind a given political movement, in this case the movement is Hindu Nationalism.

Golwalker utilized the homogenization of Hinduism to grow and strengthen the RSS. Being able

to mobilize people around religion made it easier to use incendiary rhetoric and have it

accomplish national goals.

In the 1930’s fascism was in full swing in Europe, and the RSS was interested. Many

members, including leadership, traveled to Europe for study trips in order to learn about fascist

governance. “It was in 1931 that Moonje met Mussolini and he described the meeting in his

diary. He also indicated the Italian system of indoctrinating youth. It is that system which was

adopted in the RSS and continues to do so to this day (Anwar)”. Moonje, a leader in the Hindu

Mahasabha, (the ideological parent to the RSS) learned and brought back fascist techniques in

recruitment and training. “It is true that the literature of the RSS indicates that it was Dr.

Parker 9

Hedgewar who was the builder of the RSS structure, but it is also true that Moonje was the

source of inspiration… for the RSS ideological growth (Anwar)”.

The RSS leadership not only condoned fascism by visiting fascist Europe but planned to

adopt some of their techniques for use in India, including the creation of paramilitary

organizations, recruitment of boys, and a culture of violence. Coupled with the homogenization

of the Hindu religion the RSS was now in a perfect situation to gather support and create a

national network. Fascist organizations have frequently gone after male youths in order to garner

support and power for their movement. Like the fascist movements of Europe the RSS started

local and focused on a disenchanted middle class looking for someone to blame.

The term “threatening others” is used frequently to describe Muslim people in India who

were being scapegoated by the RSS. Having someone to blame was an easy way to mobilize

people and garner support. In turn this created fear that once again the Hindus would be

dominated by another group. People in fear are easier to mobilize for political goals, making this

an especially useful tool for the RSS. Interestingly this scapegoating tool is taken directly from

fascism in practice. The RSS and Hindu Mahasabha borrowed from European fascist tactics, in

order to create a Hindu style fascism.

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was one of the presidents of the Hindu Mahasabha and the

first person to coin the term Hindutva. Savarkar was a staunch adversary of the “Quit India”

movement, a movement that was a means to independence through economic disassociation.

Savarkar believed in a violent means to independence. According to the International Business

Times and Marzia Casolari in the 1930’s during Savarkar made no secret of his admiration of

Hitler and his style of fascism (Ghosh). Savarkar commended Hitler on his conceptualization of

Parker 10

a state as being for one group of an historic people in the majority. It was in 1938 that Savarkar

gave a speech critical of Jawaharlal Nehru’s condemnation of Hitler, stating “The very fact that

Germany or Italy has so wonderfully recovered and grown so powerful as never before at the

touch of Nazi or Fascist magical wand is enough to prove that those political “isms” were the

most congenial tonics their health demanded” (Casolari). The man who created the term

Hindutva believed that Hindu style fascism could be the “magical wand” that could cure a

society of its woes. By 1940 Savarkar saw what Hitler had turned Germany into and backed

away from his initial praise of the man, but kept the core tenets of fascism with him. Savarkar

still believed in an internal threat that manifested itself as all Abrahamic religions in India, this is

where he differs from Golwalker who believed that all other religions not “native” to India must

be allegiant to a Hindu state.

Like Savarkar, Golwalker also had his fascist tendencies and was impressed with

European style fascism. Where Golwalker differs with Hitler’s style of fascism is that he

believed all the people in the India must adopt the Hindi language and Hindu culture (Jaffrelot).

Language plays an important role in creating and conceptualizing a nation (Anderson). European

style fascism already had the advantage of having nationalism and a common (for the most part)

language, for India this was a completely new concept. The fact that Golwalker wanted cross-

national use of the Hindi language means he understood Nationalism ,and how language and

information are means to controlling society. Golwalker was more interested in cultural

dominance of the Hindus and the Hindi language than he was with the physical suppression of

minorities. This isn’t to say that Golwalker wasn’t militant, he was, but rather his preferred

means of control was to have other religious groups be subservient.

Parker 11

The Hindu religion was central to Golwalker’s vision for independence and the state that

would form after. He believed the people (of what would become India) needed to practice the

same religion, and have the same language in order to be a cohesive state. This ideology

followed the RSS through independence and into modern day India.

Shortly after India was granted independence, Partition took place. India separated into

two states Pakistan, and India. The separation, though wanted by many RSS member, was a

disaster as people moved based on religion across the country. The pain was massive and incited

more ethno-religious tension.

After partition, a member of the Hindu Mahasabha, Sodse assassinated Gandhi, inciting

violence and outraging Indians across the country. The assassination of Gandhi has been seen as

a black eye on Hindu Nationalism ever since. Many members of the RSS and Hindu Mahasabha

were arrested and faced trial. (Hansen) This started a trend of alienation from the rest of society.

The groups were banned but needed a new face, thus the BJS was born.

During the time of the BJS, Hindu Nationalist groups were being suppressed; many of

the RSS members went into hiding and were unable to play politics on a national level (Hansen).

Being forced underground prevented the BJS and the RSS from creating spectacle to gather

national attention to their cause, although at more local levels the RSS was successful in keeping

their national network running. The local cadres of RSS were able to keep what they had already

created while bringing affiliate groups into the fold seeping into every aspect of society. The

national network would eventually lead to the future electoral success of the BJP. The BJS was

never able to legislate any of their Hindu Nationalist agenda, but was a step in the right direction

for the RSS to legitimize themselves and their ideology.

Parker 12

Once the BJP was formed many former members of the BJS jumped ship to make the

BJP the new face of Hindutva in politics. Early on the BJP was wary of coming out to strongly as

the party of Hindu Nationalism, and much preferred to be the right of center socio-economic

option to the Congress party. The BJP saw the only way to legitimize themselves was to become

secular party (Bajpai 174). This upset the RSS who wanted the party to behave as BJS had done

years prior as the political arm of the RSS. The BJP remained firm in their resolve to dilute the

Hindu Nationalist message and faced criticism from the RSS and other Hindutva related groups.

As much as the BJP initially wanted to be secular they had no means of mobilizing voters

and communities without the help of the grass roots network, already in place by Hindu

Nationalist groups (Hansen). Following the anti-Sikh riots of the 1980’s, the BJP rediscovered its

core ideology (Hansen). They would go on to become an alternative to Congress but a Hindu

Nationalist one as opposed to a secular one. Although the BJP returned to its ideological roots to

this day it still has branding issues. Wanting to be taken as a serious national player the BJP

frequently moderates rhetoric on a national scale, while still relying on the national network of

Hindu Nationalist activists who mobilize people on the local level.

No more clearly is the BJPs reliance on local activists for mobilization then the Rama

Yatra in which the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the RSS mobilized over 100,000 people

and destroyed the Babri Masjid. The VHP is another Hindu National organization, aiming to

preserve and consolidate Hindu culture. The organizing behind the destruction of the Babri

Masjid is the VHP’s main claim to fame. That kind of mobilization is not possible without a

massive grass-roots organization (Hansen).

Parker 13

The BJP has now found themselves in an interesting position where they have to

balance a moderation of rhetoric while keeping the grass-roots activists happy. Moderation of

rhetoric makes the party seem accessible to the common voter, creating national appeal, while

still governing with Hindutva in mind. When the BJP decided it wanted to still be the party of

Hindu Nationalists it realized that it needed a rallying cry, a spectacle that represented the

thoughts and feelings of the collective Hindu nationalist. What the BJP found was the Babri

Masjid.

In order to mobilize people to their cause the RSS and BJP relied heavily on spectacle. A

prime example of spectacle was the movement to, and the consequent destruction of the Babri

Masjid in Ayodha. The Babri Masjid has been a place of Hindu Muslim tensions since the late

forties. According to certain Hindu mythology the god Rama was born in Ayodha, and some

believe he was born where the Masjid was built. The temple was built by Mughal invaders in the

1500’s and was used by strictly Muslims until the 1800s, when British Colonial government

officials granted Hindus access in order to cool ethno-religious tensions. Until the 1940s the

temple was used by both Muslims and Hindus, until a Hindu group began placing idols of Rama

in the temple. Both groups began taking legal action to claim the temple for themselves, shortly

after the temple gates were locked by colonial authorities.

It wasn’t until the 1980s that the temple was reopened due to the work of the BJP. The

BJP won the support of local Hindus by making the temple available for worship. This is at the

same time when the BJP began campaigning for a temple dedicated to Rama. The call to have a

special temple built for Rama gave national awareness to the BJP like never before, they now

had their issue and were going to use it. This example of the BJP using spectacle and religious

symbols in order to mobilize voters and people lead to the destruction of the temple. In 1990 the

Parker 14

BJP leader L.K. Advani began his “Rama Yatra” a movement to destroy the temple. Advani’s

Rama Yatra exacerbated tensions and led to communal riots in cities across the country. In 1992

the tensions reached a fever pitch when the RSS, BJP, and other Hindu Nationalist groups led a

rally of more than 100,000 people (Jaffrelot). The mob stormed and then destroyed the mosque,

leading to more ethno-religious violence. This mass demonstration shows the mobilizing power

of religion. The political voices behind the demonstration found a national spotlight to discuss

their Hindu Nationalist agenda. This spectacle showed the political might behind the ideology

and how recently India has struggle with ethno-religious peace.

Spectacle and riots have a very real impact on elections. Major Riots before an election

leads to polarization and interparty competition (Brass 239). Many who would not initially vote

for Hindu Nationalist parties turn to them out of polarization. As the divide becomes fiercer so

does the rhetoric; this is why you see more interparty competition. BJP incumbents who seem

soft on Muslims will be voted out by more extreme members of their own party. The moderation

of the rhetoric does not come until after the election, unless the politician is running on a national

stage, in which case their rhetoric is frequently moderated in the hopes of broad appeal.

Nearly 20 years after the destruction of the Babri Masjid, the leader of the Rama Yatra,

L.K. Advani, discussed his role in an interview with Sir Mark Tully. Advani referred to the

Rama Yatra movement as secular and majoritarian. This is the same Advani that dressed as

Rama and drove in a religious parade to the temple to call for its destruction. There are clear

issues with how Advani positions himself, and the shifting of the rhetoric in general.

For now let’s examine the context in which Advani is giving the interview, the year is

2011 and INC has been in power since 2004 when the BJP led coalition fell (Sahgal). The

Parker 15

economy is the main concern of the voting population, and Hindutva is not mobilizing people the

way it did in years passed. According to the International Monetary Fund “GDP growth slowed

to 6.3% in 2011” the lowest it had been in 9 years (Sinha). During the years of the BJP lead

coalition government, Advani was the Minister of Home Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister (at

the height of his power). Since the collapse of his government he remained a top leader in the

BJP but not likely to be in a position of major governing power. This gives him the ability to

critique the movement from outside a position of actual governance while still leaving him the

credibility of a BJP leader. Advani is clear in this interview that he is trying to shift the Hindu

Nationalist movement away from Hindutva and he does that by arguing the majoratarianism is

secularism. Advani makes the argument that whatever most people vote for is secular. Because it

was more popular to destroy Babri Masjid they did the right thing, even if minority rights took a

hit.

His decision to call the move secular is a clear shift towards an ideological center, this

goes hand in hand with the Oxford Handbook on Fascism’s idea of fascism and how fascists

change rhetoric in order to gain more electoral success. The BJP wants to appear to be above

creating tension and conflict, despite reaping electoral benefit from it. The RSS and other activist

organization can create moments of tension and conflict, while the BJP can claim to not be

responsible. The move to call the Rama Yatra secular does two things, first it positions the BJP

as a modern political party above sensationalism, second it positioned the Rama Yatra as the will

of the people rather than the will of Hindus. Essentially what Advani is saying is that an action is

secular if it is supported by the majority of people.

A lot of the work Advani does in the interview with Mark Tully revolves around the

Congress part. He is concerned with Congress’s ideas about democracy or Secularism. When

Parker 16

asked about Congress’s conception of Secularism Advani responded “That is pandering to the

minorities, particularly the Muslims to create a vote bank, telling them they are in danger from

the Hindu majority. This has created what I have called pseudo-secularism, which has nothing to

do with traditional Indian secularism” (Tully). He says “Indian Secularism” in this piece

meaning that he believes that secularism is not a finite concept, merely a broad idea with

different flavors and varieties. Advani’s Indian secularism and western secularism are at odds

with each other, according to Advani Indian secularism is what the majority of people actually

want.

The idea that Advani is advocating for is majoratarianism, he believes that if something is

the will of the people it is by nature democratic and secular. According to Advani the Rama

Yatra was a secular movement because it was wanted by the “majority” of people, despite the

fact that it was religiously motivated. Advani is demonstrating a disregard for minority rights

which is dangerous for a liberal democracy and ethno-religious peace. Given the nature of

Hinduism it would be impossible to separate therefore all secularism must mean something

closer to majoratarianism (Bhargava). Advani is again placing the BJP as an alternative to

Congress; Advani argues that Congress is at the will of minority religions, while the BJP is doing

what the vast majority of Indians want. Advani’s majoritarian definition of secularism is

different from the Nehruvian definition in which the government should be removed from the

religious spheres of society (Khilnani).

Advani’s positioning of the Rama Yatra as secular was an interesting move. Advani

described in the interview how Hindutva was outdated and should be moved away from (Tully).

Hindutva, the term that has defined the Hindu National movement and has been the ideological

core of the RSS and BJP. Advani is choosing to position the party as pro-Indian not just pro-

Parker 17

Hindu, interesting because the way in which he frames India is a state defined by Hindu culture.

In 2011 in India the INC was in control and the BJP was repositioning itself as a party for all

people with a focus on economic growth. Moving away from the term Hindutva may look like a

slight to the party’s base on its face, but was actually a means to gain more democratic success

with the same core ideology. The same core ideology being anti-secular, Hindu first, and

militant.

In the interview Advani wants to distance the party from the term Hindutva but early on

in the interview he defends it. When asked about the BJP’s Hindutva agenda Advani responded

“But the point is that Hindutva is not the name of a religion. It is more a way of life in India

which can be regarded as Indian culture” (Tully). Cultural dominance was part of the RSS’s

initial ideology; this was borrowed in part by fascism. Advani is less concerned with religion and

more concerned with how it can be used to further political goals. A society that has the same

culture is an easier one to manage. Equating Hindutva with Indian culture is saying that Indian

culture is Hindu culture. They are related but they are not the same. Hindu culture is part of

Indian culture but Advani wants it to dominate.

Gaining more national support required a dilution of the Hindu Nationalist rhetoric, but

the core beliefs remained the same. Some would argue that this is the moderating force of

democracy, but the only moderating happening is of rhetoric. The fascist thread that starts with

the beginning of the movement has been carried throughout and is only being positioned to gain

power. Fascist tendencies in governance were seen under the last BJP led coalition government,

it is possible though that the coalition moderated governance slightly.

Parker 18

So how do we know that this shift in rhetoric is just that and not a shift in governance?

We understand that fascists or groups with fascist tendencies or ideologies tend to do whatever

they can to get elected and gather mass appeal. Also we have to take a look at the BJP’s

governance from 1998-2004, during the BJP’s last led government the size of the military was

increased and in defiance towards the West, Vajpayee continued with nuclear weapons test. The

BJP led government increased the militarization of India with nuclear weapons tests, while

divesting in state run programs to the delight of the economic elites. Divestment in state

sponsored industry is a marque of fascism because it puts more money into the hands of

economic elites that have a vested interest in the class system.

During the BJP led government the Prime Minister Vajpayee moderated his rhetoric but

continued with the Hindutva ideology no time more clearly than when he enacted the Prevention

of Terrorism Act (POTA). POTA was notoriously misused as a tool to crackdown on political

opponents and political dissent. Many critical of POTA believed that it violated Muslims in

India’s civil liberties and basic humanitarian rights. POTA was one of the most controversial

bills passed during the tenure of Vajpayee the first ever BJP Prime Minister. One of the biggest

controversies to happen during Vajpayee’s tenure was the 2002 Gujarat Riots, which implicated

an up and coming BJP leader by the name of Narendra Modi. The Vajpayee government was

accused of not responding fast enough to the communal riots in Gujarat that killed 790 Muslims

and 254 Hindus (Sinha). Both rhetoric and spectacle played an important part in election of the

first BJP government, Advani understands that and wants to win back broader appeal by

changing the tenor of the Hindu Nationalist movement.

Advani decision to moderate his rhetoric is clearly an attempt to gain broader national

appeal for the Hindu Nationalist movement. As shown by the previous BJP led government,

Parker 19

moderating the rhetoric does not translate into moderate legislation. The heightening of military

tensions in the region and the crack down on civil liberties of minorities and political opponents

represents a clear fascist threat to ethno-religious peace in the region. Vajpayee was considered a

pragmatic leader by many, but the ideology his party represented consistently found itself into

legislation and action. Vajpayee had moderate rhetoric, which gave him the broad appeal to the

masses, while his ministers like Advani could say whatever they wanted in order to keep the RSS

and Hindu Nationalist activists’ content.

Narendra Modi was the Chief Minister of Gujarat during the communal riots of 2002, but

before he was even on the national stage he was a member of the RSS. Modi joined the Hindu

Nationalist movement in the 1970’s, and quickly rose through the hierarchy of the organization;

he even started a student’s chapter of the RSS (Sinha). Most leaders in the BJP are, or were, in

the RSS. Having access to the RSS’s network of activists gave him a leg up in his future political

career. It was in 1987 that he joined the BJP, and was shortly given a position in the Gujarat

branch of the party (Sinha). Modi’s political career took off with the help of his RSS

connections; he was a direct tie from the RSS to the BJP. Now as I have said before the BJP is

frequently beholden to the RSS, but tries to position itself as a more mainstream political party.

Being a member of both groups, Modi was an ideal politician representing Hindutva.

By 2001 Modi was elected Chief Minister of Gujarat (Sinha) where he basked in the

political limelight. However 2002 proved to be a difficult year for Modi. In February 2002 a train

carrying Hindu pilgrims caught on fire killing 58, and sparking outrage. Many believed that

Muslims were behind the attack, and rallying around that idea riots began. During this time

many say that Modi was condoning the violence, something he vehemently denies. After the

communal riots ended 790 Muslims were dead (Sinha). The international community was

Parker 20

outraged and many within India called for an investigation. Modi had an internal examiner, who

happened to be a member of the BJP, look at the case and find that he was not at fault. Modi’s

political career was not killed by the Gujarat Riots; if anything it raised his national prominence.

The events in Gujarat shocked the international community; Modi’s role in the riots got

him banned from the United States. Modi still won reelection and actually gained more

popularity in Gujarat. Modi constantly tried to push anti-Muslim laws. He tried to limit the

number of Madrassas in Gujarat. Modi said in a 2002 speech “We started thinking about

madrasas in Gujarat. When we express concern over madrasas, they call us communal. Why?

The Communist government in West Bengal applies laws in madrasas, curbs their activities, and

it is still secular”? (Modi 2002) Modi understood that he would be seen as anti-Muslim so he

brings up the communist government of West-Bengal, the difference is West-Bengal limits the

number of all religious buildings not just Madrassas.

Throughout his career in Gujarat he was an avid self-promoter always taking full credit

for the economic growth under his rule. As his popularity rose the national party took notice, and

they realized that they needed him more than he needed them. This led the BJP to involve Modi

in national politics, despite his politically toxic role in the 2002 communal riots. Modi became

known nationally as a pragmatic leader and able administrator, despite all earlier evidence to the

contrary.

The more of a national figure Modi became, the more his rhetoric was moderated. Again

this is not to say he is moderating his ideology. There is the argument that Modi’s moderation is

the moderating hand of democracy, but his legislating and administration dismiss that.

Parker 21

Modi’s rise culminated with him becoming the face of the BJP’s 2014 campaign. On the

campaign Modi moderated his rhetoric, and tried to focus on corruption and the economy.

Inevitably questions came up about his RSS past and the Gujarat Riots, but he was quick to

dismiss them as unrelated to the campaign. The language was shifted towards the center, but

Modi and the BJP have a history of fascist tendencies, including curbing dissent and suppressing

minorities. Reminiscent of the Advani 2011 interview Modi positioned himself as a man of the

majority. Concerned with getting elected Modi was quick to distance himself from any BJP

politicians who came out as overtly anti-Muslim.

Running for Prime Minister, Modi tried to appeal to Indian national sentiment often

referring to Gandhi in his speeches. It was strange to see someone formerly part of a militant

Hindu group quote the non-violent Gandhi so often, but the BJP seem to do it all the time. The

BJP is trying to distance themselves from the assignation of Gandhi, perpetrated by the Hindu

Mahasabha. Modi was trying to find Indian national symbols that he could use as a tool to

support his campaign. This is a usual technique for politicians but a strange detour for a former

RSS member. The shift away from Hindutva style rhetoric is the same shift Advani made, but

now it’s winning the BJP elections. This past year the BJP became the largest party in the Lok

Sabha, and Modi became the Prime Minister of India. The Hindu Nationalists had their man in

office.

Modi is now the Prime Minister of India, so what does that mean for ethno-religious

peace in India? Just like under Vajpayee you will begin to see an erosion of rights minorities.

Already we have seen continued cross border violence with India’s neighbors Pakistan and

China. As with all governments with fascist tendencies, descent will be treated more harshly.

One of the major differences between the Vajpayee government and Modi government is that

Parker 22

under Modi the government won right out so it won’t have to rely on shaky coalitions. Coalitions

frequently have a moderating effect on governments as to not sway too far in one direction. With

the BJP in complete control there will be more of an ability to legislate a pro Hindu Nationalist

agenda.

The corrosion of minority rights will likely continue under the Modi government, based

on his tenure in Gujarat and the former BJP led government. Tensions in the region will be made

worse with ongoing security threats from Pakistan, and Pakistani linked terror organizations.

Modi has come out as strong against terrorism and he will likely follow Vajpayee’s example on

dealings with it. The RSS gave Modi a network of support, and the work of Hindu Nationalists

before him created a homogenization of Hinduism that was easier to mobilize. Violence will

continue in India and it will be at the cost of everyone. Just because Modi shifted his rhetoric one

should not expect a change in ideology.

No more apparent is a shift in rhetoric than Modi’s 2014 Madison Square Garden speech.

With a massive light show, live dancers, and entertainers Modi’s first American visit as Prime

Minister was quite the spectacle. He gave a nearly an hour and a half speech on pushing India

into the future. Throughout the speech he kept referring to the people of India as brothers and

sisters. Not once did Modi mention religion despite the fact that during his entire trip in America

he was on a religious fast. Religion was not mentioned during the speech only promises of an

India to come. Modi, “We should aim that by 2022, there should be not even a single person in

India who does not have a house of his own…”(Modi), is a far Rhetorical shift from the

HinduNationalism was a huge part of the speech as he spoke of the great Indian past and what

will soon be a great Indian future. He appealed to the diaspora community in the crowd to return

to India, offering visas for those who wish to make the return (Modi). The appeal to Indians in

Parker 23

the diaspora was a large part of his speech; it will be interesting to see how easy it is for Muslims

of Indian origin to get visas under the BJP government.

Modi’s Madison Square Garden rhetoric was promoting a future greatness, drawn from a

glorious past. In talking about the great and storied past, Modi is referring to the Veda, what

some would argue is the height of Hindu civilization. This call to a great past is similar to the

rhetoric that spurred the Hindu Nationalist movement, and led to communal violence. According

to Paul Brass in The Production of Hindu-Muslim Violence in Contemporary India “[t]o revivify

India and build a great, new, modern nation-state, it is necessary to revive the true ideals of the

past” (Brass 35). The future in the case of Hindu Nationalists relies on the past. According to

them there was a perfect time for Hinduism and to make a return Hindu culture must dominate.

The domination of Hindu culture comes at the expense of minorities in India. Modi’s speech is

looking forward, drawing not only from the glorious past, but also from RSS and Right Wing

Hindu Nationalist ideology.

India was the focus of the speech, specifically how he would move it forward with the

help of the diaspora community. Modi has created a cult of personality around him, and is a

fantastic orator. He swept the crowd off their feet with his nationalist sentiment and call to return

home. Modi, in this speech is further moderating his rhetoric to appeal to an international

audience, one that would be far less receptive to his brand of Hindu Nationalism.

The only hint of Modi’s RSS roots came from when he discussed the Vedas and a return

to glory Modi spoke briefly about the great culture India came from “We are a young nation with

an old culture and thus have lot of potential”(Modi). Focusing heavily on the future with little

references to the past Modi seems to have moved beyond the fray of typical electoral politics for

Parker 24

this speech. He spoke frequently about how people around the world celebrated his election, and

although he is correct it seems as if he is positioning himself as the savior of India.

Outside of Madison Square Garden there were protests, people still remember the Gujarat

riots and his role in them, but on the inside there was just an ecstatic crowd and an international

politician. Modi discussed little of his actually policy goals as this speech was just to whip

people into a nationalist, and interestingly secular, frenzy. Now that Modi has the support of the

international community he can govern at home without the same level of international pressure

about the communal riots.

Modi’s speech in Madison Square Garden bought him excellent press, but how long until

ethno-religious tensions in India hit a snare. India is at an interesting point in its history, with the

BJP in complete control, and the question is whether the BJP will legislate ideologically. Given

the history of the BJP, and Hindu Nationalist network that made it a viable political party, I

would argue; yes, the BJP will legislate ideologically. The party was brought into this world by

Hindu Nationalists, they create religious division, spectacle ensues, and the BJP gains power.

Modi has become a professional at creating spectacle, and with a homogenized Hinduism behind

him he has the ability to mobilize piety and remain in power.

The idealized past that the Hindu Nationalist movement created is being returned to. A

new Vedic age in which Hindu and Sanskrit culture dominate. Tensions in the region will

continue to heighten, and India will become increasingly more militaristic with the BJP in power.

The direction India is moving is not away from the BJP and its fascist roots, but towards it. Just

like under Vajpayee the minority’s rights will erode and political dissent will be quieted.

Parker 25

The direction India is moving has its roots in the Hindu Nationalist movement, beginning

with the RSS’s admiration of and learning trips with European fascists. The RSS’s relationship

with fascist Europe is a distinct moment in the Hindu Nationalist movement, where one can

finally understand their intentions and how they behave. The fascists in Europe also gave

inspiration for the RSS’s national network of activists and cadres.

There is a fascist thread that has followed the RSS, and the political parties associated

with it, noticeably in the 2011 Advani interview. Advani explains his shift in Rhetoric and his

movement away from Hindutva. The way in which he pushes majoratarianism as the true way of

Democracy has hints of fascism in it. The disrespect of minority rights for the gain of the

majority has been part of the movement all along; Advani just makes it sound more democratic.

Advani positioned the destruction of the Babri Masjid, a sensationalist Hindu Nationalist action,

as the will of the people.

The Hindu Nationalists have the ability to mobilize people, and then shift their rhetoric to

avoid being called out for their role in inciting ethno-religious violence. There seems to be a

pattern in the Hindu Nationalist movement where the national network of activists creates an

issue, spectacle ensues, people are mobilized, and then the BJP moderates their rhetoric after the

damage is done. This move gives the BJP electoral success and then they can back away from

the violent actions claim to not condone them. Now that the BJP is in power they can back away

from anti-Muslim and Hindu Nationalist. Modi’s Madison Square Garden speech demonstrated

his move away from Hindu Nationalist rhetoric. He spoke largely of India as a whole a clear

posturing towards the international audience. Modi will continue to keep his rhetoric distant from

Hindutva, but will legislate in accordance with it.

Parker 26

The speech in Madison Square Garden demonstrated a nationalist agenda with no

reference to the religion that aided his rise to power. The moments I look at show a complete

change in rhetoric. The RSS began with a fascist Hindu Nationalist rhetoric. In the Advani

interview there was a visible shift in rhetoric, accompanied by his explanation as to why the

rhetoric should be shift. At Madison Square Garden where the Modi speech took place there was

no reference to the Hindu Nationalist past, only looking to India’s future. Given the ideological

base of the BJP, and Modi, the India of the future is likely to run into some ethno-religious

tensions that threaten to destabilize Indian and the region. Modi is already proving the shift to

only be rhetorical with his executive use of powers. According to Foreign Policy Magazine “the

Indian government’s — currently led by the Bharatiya Janata Party and its leader Prime Minister

Narendra Modi — frequent use of emergency ordinances to pass legislation not cleared in

Parliament”(Khan).

The Hindu Nationalists have made gains in a myriad of ways, they worked to

homogenize Hinduism making people easier to mobilize, they have created a national network of

activists, and they easily create spectacle leading to tension between religious groups further

mobilizing people. The RSS which has always had a voice on the periphery has finally moved to

center stage. Early on the thinkers and leaders who molded this movement changed and

interpreted Hinduism into something they could use as a tool. Whether or not the decision was

conscious it had a clear impact on how Indian politics would play out for the next hundred years.

With the formation of Hindu Nationalist groups a network for a Hindu homeland sprung from far

right leaders.

The RSS, who studied fascism in Europe quickly grew and set up militant organizations

across the country. They forced themselves to be heard by creating and exacerbating ethno-

Parker 27

religious tensions across the country. Fierce anti-Muslim rhetoric gained them larger support and

national awareness. Communal riots seemed to follow the group every spectacle they created.

The violence forced people to take sides and identify more strongly with their religion. The more

Semitic Hinduism created by the early members of the Hindu National movement made people

easier to rile up and mobilize. Mobilized Hindu’s worrying about the “threatening other” went to

the ballots and voted for the BJP.

Now that the BJP is in power they have the ability to legislate against the “threatening

others”. The BJP cannot however make laws explicitly against Muslims now that their leader is

on an international stage. Modi will have to keep his rhetoric moderate and make his anti-Secular

legislation look like it is for the benefit of society, possibly for security reasons. Legislation

harmful to Muslims in India will only make the tensions that already exist worse. India has a

history of riots, and the election of Modi is not going to stop them. It was Modi who was Chief

Minister during the Gujarat Riots, and stood idly by as citizens were killed. The only way Modi

would stop anti-Muslim riots now is if it became a threat to his power or the electoral success of

the BJP.

Modi has politically overcome the Gujarat Riots and become Prime Minister. It will be

interesting to see how Modi handles future communal violence with the entire world watching.

Likely it will become more difficult to moderate his rhetoric, while keeping the support of the

RSS and the Hindu Nationalist activists who got him elected. As tensions increase in India and

the region likely one will see rights slip away and communal violence increase.

The rise of the Hindu Nationalist movement was brought about by the national frame

work they were able to build. Through years of the Hindu religion being homogenized the Hindu

Parker 28

Nationalist Movement found it easier to mobilize people to its causes. Spectacle played in

important role in getting being riled up and angry, this lead to success at the ballot box for the

BJS and later the BJP. The election of the BJP was brought about by the activists who were able

to mobilize voters. Despite a shifting rhetoric once the BJP gained power they continued to

legislate their Hindutva agenda. Under the first BJP led government minority rights took a hit

and political dissidents were quieted. Prime Minister Vajpayee also increased military tensions in

the region with the testing of nuclear weapons. The BJP in office leads to tensions within India

and the region. In this past election the BJP won enough seats to not have to form a coalition.

The Hindu Nationalist movement has its roots in fascism which will further escalate violence in

India. There has been a clear moderation of Rhetoric from the early days of the Hindu National

movement, unfortunately when Hindu Nationalists get into power the rhetoric may be

moderated, but the actions are not.

Parker 29

Works Cited

1. Anderson, Benedict R. O'G. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of

Nationalism. London: Verso, 1991. Print.

2. Anwar, Tariq. "The Videshi Roots of Hindutva." The Videshi Roots of Hindutva. Rev. Democracy,

Apr. 2001. Web. 11 Oct. 2014.

3. Bajpai, Rochana. Debating Difference. New Delhi: Oxford UP, 2011. Print.

4. Bhargava, Rajeev. Secularism and Its Critics. Delhi: Oxford UP, 1998. Print.

5. Bosworth, R. J. B. The Oxford Handbook of Fascism. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2010. Print.

6. Bright, Jagat Important Speeches of Jawaharlal Nehru.. The Indian Printing Works. Lahore.

November 1945

7. Casolari, Marzia. Hindutva’s Foreign Tie-up in the 1930s. Moskva: Russ. Jazyk,

1983. Http://www.sacw.net/DC/CommunalismCollection/ArticlesArchive/casolari.pdf. Economic

and Political Weekly, 22 Jan. 2000. Web.

8. Ghosh, Palash. "Hindu Nationalist's Historical Links to Nazism and Fascism." International

Business Times. International Business Times, 6 Mar. 2012. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.

9. Hansen, Thomas B. The Saffron Wave. New Delhi: Oxford UP, 1999. Print.

Parker 30

10. Hutchinson, John, and Anthony D. Smith. Nationalism. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1994. Print.

11. Jaffrelot, Christophe. The Hindu Nationalist Movement and Indian Politics: 1925 to the 1990s:

Strategies of Identity-building, Implantation and Mobilisation (with Special Reference to Central

India). London: Hurst, 1996. Print.

12. Khan, Jameel. "THE SOUTH ASIA CHANNEL IMF Projects Indian Growth to Outpace China’s;

Drone Strike in Pakistan; Afghan Cabinet Picks Presented To Wolsei Jirga." Foreignpolicy.com.

Foreign Policy Magazine, 20 Jan. 2015. Web. 20 Jan. 2015.

13. Khilnani, Sunil, Vikram Raghavan, and Arun K. Thiruvengadam. "7-8." Comparative

Constitutionalism in South Asia. New Delhi, India: Oxford UP, 2013. N. pag. Print.

14. Modi, Narendra. Narendra Modi at Madison Square Gardens. Madison Square Gardens, New York

City. 11 Nov. 2014. Speech. Transcript of speech:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ModiMSG/43725506.cms

15. Modi, Narendra. Narendra Modi in Becharaji. Gujarat, Becharaji. 9 Sept. 2002. Speech. Transcript

of speech:

http://www.outlookindia.com/article/Should-We-Run-Relief-Camps-Open-Child-Producing-

Centres/217398

16. Rajagopalachari, C., and Valmiki. Ramayana. Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1968. Print.

17. Sahgal, Priya. "1990-L.K. Advani's Rath Yatra: Chariot of Fire." India Today. India Today, 24 Dec.

2009. Web. 06 Nov. 2014.

Parker 31

18. Sinha, SHREEYA, and Mark Suppe. "Timeline of the Riots in Modi’s Gujarat."The New York

Times. The New York Times, 05 Apr. 2014. Web. 23 Jan. 2015.

19. Tully, Mark, Sir. "The Rama Temple Movement Was Secular: Advani." Firstpost.com. First Post,

13 Nov. 2011. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.