The Reluctant Fundamentalist

2014 has been the most anticipated elections this country has ever seen not only in terms of the growing electorate but also because alternative political narratives are promoting an alternative discourse. Narendra Modi’s anointment as BJP’s Prime Ministerial nominee catapults to the national scene the Hindutva poster boy who is seen by his critics as a “polarising” and “divisive” figure after the 2002 Gujarat riots. With ideological moderation and political pragmatism, his campaign rhetoric has defied ideological templates. Isn’t it the tyranny of discourse that once an RSS pracharak has become the face of secular India? His deliberate attempts to underplay the Sangh Parivar’s well-known repertoire of Hindutva has amassed high commendations from the middle class voters and propelled them to vote for this change.

Known for playing the communal card under the secular cloak, Narendra Modi in a bid to increase his pan Indian appeal, surprisingly refrained from crediting “saffron nationalism” or “Hindutva” in his speeches as BJP’s prime ministerial candidate. Hindutva presents BJP’s concept of nationhood. The BJP is a highly ideologised political entity with the RSS ( Rashtriya Samaj Sevak Dal)  as its ideological mentor. Having said that, it is rather surprising that the BJP’s 2014 election manifesto has only a page dedicated to volatile issues coloured by identity politics such as Ram janmbhoomi and Ram Sethu. These issues represent the papering of serious contradictions, given the fact that the BJP traces its origin to the volatile Sangh Parivar. On Ayodhya the BJP takes care to mention that it would explore possibilities of facilitating the construction of the Ram temple within the framework of the Constitution. Ram Sethu and the Sethusamudram project are now issues of cultural heritage and not of religious faith. While the Ganga is described as a symbol of faith in India, the project for the purification of its waters is also justified by pointing to its importance for agriculture, fodder production and drinking water supply. The protection of the cow, another core Hindutva agenda item, is now seen in the context of the contribution of cattle to agriculture, and socio-economic and cultural life. There is no mention of secularism, but the manifesto commits the BJP to the preservation of the “rich culture and heritage” of India’s minority communities. The manifesto thus is an attempt to appeal not only to the core Hindutva supporters but also to the larger populace.

The BJP’s projection of utopia has largely been successful primarily due to the ‘Anything but congress momentum’. Our national political stage has become a compelling soap opera, but let us not confuse the contempt for the Congress as approval for the BJP.  Despite initial fears of polarisation on communal lines this election campaign has so far been secular with developmental issues trumping mandir-mazjid issues. This election is more about personalities rather than issues. With the saffron brigade all set to assume power in Delhi, we might need to introspect that aren’t the Hindu communalists are masquerading as nationalists? But Narendra Modi has an interesting prelude to offer in this metamorphosis from a Hindutva revivalist to a reluctant fundamentalist. In UP and Bihar he questioned the Hajj quota lying vacant while drawing parallelism from Gujarat where Hajj quota is generally oversubscribed.  This reference was largely unexpected from a Hindu nationalist. But the man himself seems to be in a state of dilemma on whether to adopt the imbibed principles of Hindutva for the national narrative or fight the election on the basis of governance.

A civilisation is greater than the sum of its individual values and an election is bigger, more poignant than the sum of its candidates. But the larger than life portrayal of Modi seems to defy this mighty rhetoric. The cult of the Gujarat CM is being assiduously cultivated, maybe at the cost of BJP. This election is being projected as a fight between Modi and political parties that oppose him. The BJP is almost an afterthought. Given the changing focus of the BJP to governance, their marriage of convenience from the Sangh Parivar seems to be on a downfall. As the BJP declines as a party, as the older generation of visionaries disappears, a party in crisis produces a caricature of itself called Narendra Modi. BJP is suffering from political poverty cannot produce more than a mediocre leadership. Mr. Modi seems a solution of an RSS desperate for power rather than a BJP rethinking the possibilities of politics. Nagpur has fettered India for decades to come.

No doubt that Namo is distancing himself from the conventional politics of the Bhartiya Janta Party and bringing in his own version of Hindutva 2.0, a particular variant of neoliberalism that dovetails religious nationalism with economic progress. But Mr. Modi’s Neanderthal model of development in the age of sustainable and human development shows that Mr. Modi is an anachronism, dusted up and presented as technocratic model of development. It will not take long to prove that the Gujarat model of development and the Gujarat model of violence are part of one picture.

And as the BJP says that India is at the cusp of “democracy, demography and demand” and we need to do justice to our nation by attuning all three. This is a time when we cannot afford to let subjectivity camouflage objectivity. This is the time where we have to choose between the past and the future, between an old idea of India and a new one.