2047 And Beyond: Can India’s Democracy Withstand Hindutva? – OpEd
India’s path toward 2047, the centenary of its independence, reveals a troubling paradox. Once celebrated for its pluralism and diversity, India is now grappling with an ideological shift that threatens to unravel its inclusive foundation.
Since 2014, under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the rise of Hindutva ideology, an ideology that blends Hindu identity with Indian nationalism, has reshaped India’s domestic and international reputation, challenging the very principles on which the country was founded. If this trend continues, India could face a perilous future marked by fragmentation, deepening social divides, and international condemnation.
The evolution of Hindutva from a fringe ideology to a political force is at the heart of India’s transformation. Under Modi’s leadership, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has promoted a vision of India as a Hindu nation, alienating minority communities and redefining national identity. This shift is meticulously documented in The Atlantic (2022), which observes how Hindu nationalism, now a political mainstream, has embedded itself into India’s state machinery, influencing policies that many argue discriminate against religious minorities, particularly Muslims. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC) are two such policies. The CAA, for example, fast-tracks citizenship for non-Muslim refugees from neighboring countries, signaling a shift toward an exclusionary identity framework (Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 2023).
Global human rights organizations have responded with growing alarm. In its 2023 report, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) labeled India as a “Country of Particular Concern,” citing escalating religious discrimination and state-sponsored persecution against minorities. Genocide Watch has issued similar warnings, raising the alarm over what it sees as a gradual but consistent progression toward large-scale violence against Muslims (Genocide Watch, 2024). These warnings stem from documented incidents of hate speech, physical violence, and intimidation against minority communities, which have become disturbingly common under the BJP’s rule. According to the USCIRF report, Hindu nationalist groups have grown emboldened, often acting with impunity, as government policies increasingly reflect Hindu nationalist rhetoric.
The implications of this ideological shift extend beyond religious discrimination. India’s position on international indices underscores the domestic cost of eroding democratic freedoms. India now ranks 104th out of 179 countries on the Liberal Democracy Index, reflecting a decline in political rights, judicial independence, and freedom of speech. These trends are mirrored in the 2024 Fragile States Index, where India has fallen to 75th place, categorizing it as a state in the “Warning” zone. The Digital India laws, introduced under the pretext of regulating digital content, have exacerbated the situation by suppressing dissenting voices. By early 2024, over 130 violations of free speech were recorded, highlighting the government’s efforts to control the narrative. The World Economic Forum even identified misinformation—propelled by the BJP’s IT cell—as one of India’s top risks, indicating that state-sponsored propaganda has permeated social media, distorting public perception and stifling critical voices (LA Times, April 18, 2024).
This state-controlled narrative aligns with theories of hegemonic power consolidation, which explain how nationalist regimes often attempt to construct a homogeneous identity by marginalizing dissent and diversity. This phenomenon, examined in Georgetown’s Politics of Identity and State-Building (2023), aligns with India’s current trajectory. Hindutva, as an ideology, envisions a Hindu-majoritarian state that consolidates power through cultural homogenization and exclusionary nationalism. By championing this narrative, the BJP positions itself as the “protector” of Hindu identity, fostering a climate where minority groups are increasingly sidelined. This shift not only risks alienating substantial portions of India’s population but also undermines the foundations of a pluralistic society, potentially leading to long-term social instability.
The international community has not remained silent. Scholars, activists, and human rights organizations are actively calling for interventions to prevent what they view as a looming crisis. A February 2022 summit, India on the Brink: Preventing Genocide, organized by a coalition of global civil rights organizations, underscored the need for international attention to India’s human rights situation. Participants, including former UN officials and global human rights advocates, called for urgent measures to prevent further human rights abuses and warned of the risk of violence if the current trends persist (London Story, 2024). Dr. Gregory Stanton, president of Genocide Watch, has publicly stated that the international community has a “moral obligation” to act preemptively, citing India as an example where early indicators of widespread violence are visible but remain largely unaddressed.
The BJP’s response to such criticisms has been to double down on its narrative. By casting dissent as “anti-national” and framing critics as enemies of the state, the government has managed to stifle significant opposition. This tactic of labeling dissenting voices as “anti-Indian” not only deflects legitimate criticism but also undermines democratic principles, as individuals and institutions hesitate to speak out. Furthermore, the digital space—a crucial platform for discourse—has become a battleground where voices of opposition are censored or attacked. The rise of BJP-affiliated social media cells has exacerbated the spread of propaganda, leaving independent media in a precarious position and restricting public access to unbiased information.
India’s current trajectory is unsustainable if it hopes to maintain its democratic fabric and its foundational principle of secularism. The consolidation of power under a singular nationalist ideology risks unraveling the diverse social fabric that has been the bedrock of Indian society. While proponents of Hindutva argue that this identity-centric approach strengthens India, the reality suggests that it alienates significant populations, deepens social divisions, and could lead to instability. If India does not address these concerns, it risks reaching its centenary in 2047 as a fragmented and polarized nation rather than as a unified, democratic powerhouse.
This article was originally published on https://www.eurasiareview.com/07112024-2047-and-beyond-can-indias-democracy-withstand-hindutva-oped/
