Ethnonationalist populism in India?

In social and political psychology, and many other social sciences, Indian prime minister Narendra Modi is typically placed in the same category as the likes of Trump, Bolsonaro, and Orbán – as a populist leader with demagogic and authoritarian politics signifying a global shift towards the right. 

What is often missed from this narrative is the historical context of the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) and the underpinning ideology that guides the political party and its leadership. The success of the Hindu nationalist movement in securing and maintaining political power to further realise its vision of nationhood can arguably be attributed to its shrewd modus operandi in political spheres, which ultimately serves a historically embedded and broad ethnonationalist agenda. 

Here, we will consider what sets Modi's appeal apart from other leaders – as leader of the largest political party in the world's largest democracy, and the only populist leader re-elected after completing a full term in office (with a strong chance of a second re-election in 2024; see Schroeder, 2020).

Historical context

The story dates to the pre-independence era of India, when most parties involved sought to formulate the ideological foundations and constitutional forms upon which an independent Indian nation-state could be built. 

While the Indian National Congress (INC) and the All-India Muslim League (AIML) dominated the political landscape, significant factions of the Hindu nationalist movement entirely rejected the idea of democracy, viewing it as a Western import undermining ancient Hindu values and giving peoples without legitimacy – enemies, even – a voice in shaping the future of the subcontinent.

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the sociocultural organisation underpinning the BJP, never originally intended to capture state power as it believed that sociocultural reform was beyond political institutions (see Jaffrelot, 1996; Kanungo, 2003). 

The priority was always to reform Hindus and Hindu culture from the bottom up to consolidate a strong Hindu nation – a strategy that remains a priority for the Hindu nationalist movement. The RSS only initiated, or blessed, its first political wing some 30 years after it was founded, after internal pressures calling for political representation to ensure ideological congruence between the cultural and political institutions of the nation. 

To this day, the RSS continues to appoint people from its inner ranks to the higher ranks of its political operation, with leaders of the BJP answering to the RSS (Kanungo, 2019; Noorani, 2000).  

Enter Modi

For those familiar with the BJP's traditional upper-caste and middle-class base and limited electoral success before 2014, Modi may have appeared as an odd choice for a leader. His background is not upper-caste and middle-class. However, his background as one of 'the people' – a representative of lower-caste and lower-class Indians – helped position him as a challenger of the "elite," both within the party and nation (Plagemann & Destradi, 2019).

While adherence to the RSS-defined Hindutva ideology remains a fundamental element of the BJP's and Modi's politics, their policies have arguably evolved to provide a viable alternative to deep rooted Nehruvian secularism, the socialist ideology of post-independent India ascribed to Jawaharlal Nehru and the INC, while accommodating the demands of statecraft in national and international arenas (see Blom Hansen & Roy, 2003; Chatterji, Blom Hansen & Jaffrelot, 2019; Hariss, 2016; McGuire & Copeland, 2007). 

India is a difficult nation to govern, with its history, expanse and diversity. It would arguably be impossible to gain traction without rhetoric and policies aimed at addressing development, social justice, and national security.

As a result, Modi's populist leadership does not have a perfect fit with either right-wing or left-wing populism. Yet, it would be problematic to ascribe a populist ideology to the BJP and Modi, as their political operations reflect a deep commitment to Hindu nationalism, representing a sociocultural end (McDonnell & Cabrera, 2019). 

Hindutva functions as a hegemony-seeking ideology with a pedagogical mission aimed towards minorities (Natrajan, 2022). Therefore, a reasonably stringently defined and operationalised vision of Hindu nationhood lies at the core of the BJP's and Modi's leadership, while populist politics of development, social justice, and national security form the periphery.  

A parallel

The case of Modi and Hindu nationalism in India can serve as a parallel for other political contexts where populist ideologies prevail. Populist ideologies may indeed be truly thin in some contexts, but in others, they may serve as a veil for broad latent ideologies and agendas. Therefore, the key is not only to understand the mechanisms of populist politics, but also the latent ideologies and agendas that they serve, whether religious, cultural, or economic, and whether they serve the many or the few. 

In this sense, it is important for social and political psychologists to examine the hegemonic intent of populist leadership and how such intent shapes the construction and negotiation of political discourse, beliefs, and action across various contexts.

Sammyh S. Khan, Örebro University, Sweden

Yashpal A. Jogdand, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, India.

References

Blom Hansen, T. & Roy, S. (2023). Saffron republic: Hindu nationalism and state power in India. Cambridge University Press. 
Chatterji, A. P., Blom Hansen, T., & Jaffrelot, C. (2019). Majoritarian state: How Hindu nationalism is changing India. Harper Collins. 
Harris J. (2015). Hindu nationalism in action: The Bharatiya Janata Party and Indian politics. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 38(4), 712–771.
Hogg, M.A. & Gøtzsche-Astrup, O. (2021). Self-uncertainty and populism: Why we endorse populist ideologies, identify with populist groups, and support populist leaders. In J. P. Forgas, W. D. Crano, & K. Fiedler (Eds.), The psychology of populism: The tribal challenge to liberal democracy (pp. 197–218). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Jaffrelot, C. (1996). The Hindu nationalist movement and Indian politics: 1925 to the 1990s. Hurst Publishers.
Kanungo, P. (2019). Sangh and sarkar: The RSS power centre shifts from Nagpur to New Delhi. In A.P. Chatterji, T. Blom Hansen & C. Jaffrelot (Eds.), Majoritarian state: How Hindu nationalism is changing India. Oxford University Press.
McDonnell, D. & Cabrera, L. (2019). The right-wing populism of India's Bharatiya Janata Party (and why comparativists should care). Democratization, 26(3), 484-501.  
McGuire, J. & Copland, I (2007). Hindu nationalism and governance. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Natrajan, B. (2022). Racialization and ethnicization: Hindutva hegemony and caste. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 45(2), 298-318.
Noorani, A.G. (2000). The RSS and the BJP: A division of labour. New Delhi: LeftWord Books.
Plagemann, J., & Destradi, S. (2019). Populism and foreign policy: The case of India. Foreign Policy Analysis, 15(2), 283-301.
Schroeder, R. (2020). The dangerous myth of populism as a thin ideology. Populism, 3(1), 13-28.