The story of India’s political transformation in the twenty-first century is inseparable from the rise of Hindutva. Hindutva was once a marginal ideological force and became a central pillar of the country's governance and public life. It not only influences electoral outcomes but also shapes the very essence of national identity. Its ascent signifies more than a political shift; it means reimagining India from a secular, pluralistic republic to a Hindu-first nation that defines its past, present, and future in religious and civilizational terms. In this transformation, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its ideological parent, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), have played the role of both architect and executor, gradually but surely remaking India’s institutional and cultural DNA.
The term Hindutva, loosely translated as 'Hinduness,' was first coined by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in the 1920s. It was not merely a religious doctrine but a cultural and political identity. For Savarkar and his contemporaries in the early Hindu nationalist movement, being Hindu was about faith and race, territory, and a shared heritage rooted in the Indian subcontinent. This perspective starkly contrasted the pluralistic ethos that had guided the Indian National Congress under leaders like Gandhi and Nehru. They had envisioned a secular democracy where religion was a matter of private belief and the state remained neutral. Hindutva proponents, however, saw this vision as inadequate and even perilous in a land they believed belonged to its Hindu majority. For much of the twentieth century, Hindutva remained on the political fringes, championed by the RSS through its network of shakhas and affiliated groups, but far from the centers of power. This changed in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when the BJP, formed as the political arm of the RSS, began to mobilize mass support through emotionally charged religious campaigns like the Ram Janmabhoomi movement.
The demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992 by Hindu kar sevaks, activists convinced that a temple marking the birthplace of Lord Ram had once stood on the same site, marked a turning point. It was a moment of rupture and realignment. The event galvanized Hindu nationalist sentiment, polarized the country along religious lines, and signaled that Hindutva was no longer an abstract theory; it had become a political force capable of reshaping the nation’s physical and ideological landscape. Though the BJP lost power in subsequent years, the momentum it had unleashed did not dissipate. Instead, it laid the foundation for a broader cultural project that would find full expression under the leadership of Narendra Modi.
When Modi, a former RSS pracharak (campaigner), assumed office as Prime Minister in 2014, Hindutva gained a powerful political vehicle and a leader capable of transforming the ideological movement into mainstream governance. Modi’s brand of leadership, assertive, populist, and deeply rooted in Hindu identity, aligned perfectly with the aspirations of the Sangh Parivar, the family of Hindu nationalist organizations. Unlike previous BJP leaders who attempted to balance
Hindutva rhetoric with the demands of coalition politics, Modi commanded a parliamentary majority that allowed him to pursue an unapologetically majoritarian agenda. His government’s decisions have reflected this confidence. The abrogation of Article 370, which granted special status to the Muslim-majority region of Jammu and Kashmir, was framed as a legal move and a correction of historical wrongs. The Citizenship Amendment Act passed in 2019, offered a fast track to Indian citizenship for non-Muslim refugees from neighboring countries, drawing criticism for its exclusionary logic and for undermining the secular promise of the Indian Constitution.
These legislative actions were not isolated. They formed part of a broader ideological project to redefine India’s national identity along civilizational lines. In this project, Hindutva is not just a belief but a lens through which the nation’s past, present, and future are to be interpreted. This ideological orientation has begun to reshape Indian institutions subtly and profoundly. School textbooks have been revised to emphasize Hindu contributions to science and civilization while minimizing or erasing the role of Muslim and colonial histories. Government officials speak increasingly in religious idioms, with references to Indian gods, epics, and mythological symbols becoming common in political speeches. Once confined to private spaces or local communities, public rituals are now carried out with state sponsorship and media coverage, often blurring the line between governance and worship.
While these developments have found enthusiastic support among large segments of the population, particularly among upper-caste Hindus and urban middle classes, they have also raised deep concerns among those who fear the erosion of India’s pluralistic fabric. For religious minorities, particularly Muslims and Christians, the rise of Hindutva has been accompanied by a growing sense of vulnerability. Reports of mob lynchings, vigilante attacks in the name of cow protection, and police inaction or complicity have increased in recent years. Laws targeting interfaith marriages and religious conversions have been passed in multiple states, often with the justification of protecting Hindu women or countering alleged plots to alter India’s demographic balance. While presented as administrative or cultural reforms, these measures carry the unmistakable message that India’s secular compact is being renegotiated.
Opposition parties have struggled to formulate a coherent response to this ideological shift. The Congress Party, once the standard-bearer of Indian secularism, has at times attempted to adopt a softer version of Hindu identity politics, visiting temples and invoking religious symbols in an effort to win back Hindu voters without alienating minorities. However, these moves have failed mainly to counter the BJP’s narrative, which positions itself as the authentic voice of the Hindu nation. Regional parties have had more success in resisting the BJP’s expansion, particularly in states like West Bengal and Tamil Nadu, where linguistic and cultural identities remain strong. Yet even these strongholds are not immune to the broader ideological currents reshaping Indian politics.
What makes the rise of Hindutva particularly significant is not simply that a right-wing party has won electoral victories or enacted conservative policies. It is that a once-contested ideology has become normalized across vast swaths of the political spectrum, media, and public imagination. The boundaries of acceptable discourse have shifted.
Questioning Hindutva is often equated with questioning India itself. Critics are branded anti-national or traitors. Journalists and activists who speak out face legal harassment, online abuse, or worse. Universities, once bastions of dissent and critical thinking, are under pressure to conform. The space for ideological pluralism is narrowing, not through overt censorship alone but through creating a cultural atmosphere in which dissent is treated with suspicion.
Yet even amid this transformation, India remains a profoundly complex and contested society. Its democratic institutions, though strained, are not hollow. Its electorate is vast and diverse, and despite the BJP’s dominance, it continues to produce moments of resistance, protest, and alternative visions. The farmers’ movement, which forced the government to repeal controversial agricultural laws, demonstrated that mass mobilization is still possible. Grassroots campaigns, regional movements, and student protests show that the story of Indian democracy is far from over.
The question that now looms is whether India will continue down the path of majoritarian nationalism or a new political and cultural synthesis can emerge, acknowledging the country’s Hindu heritage without erasing the richness of its pluralistic traditions. The future of Hindutva in India is not just a matter of political ideology. It is a question about the soul of the nation, about who belongs and who decides, and what kind of country India will be in the decades to come.
Add comment
Comments