In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

A round the time anti-Jewish Christian theologians were seeking a ChristianlegitimationforracismandNazism(asdescribedbySusannahHeschelin Tikkun’sMarch/April2009issue),thelongprocessofracializingHinduism,militarizing Hindus, and Hinduizing India had already matured. On March 19, 1931, MussolinimetwithDr.B.S.MoonjeatthePalazzioVenezia,theFascistheadquarters inItaly. Moonje was there to study the applicability of the fascist youth organizations, Balilla and AvanguardistiforHindus.Hewasnoordinaryvisitor,beingthementorofDr.K.B.Hedgewar, who was the first sarsanghchalak (supreme leader) of the Hindu supremacist organization RashtriyaSwayamsevakSangh(RSS,theNationalVolunteerCorpsfoundedin1925).Throughthe 1920s, the RSS had generated a public fascination with fascism in western India. In his diary Moonje wrote: “The idea of fascism vividly brings out the conception of unity amongst people.... India and particularly Hindu India need some such institution for the military regeneration of the Hindus.... Our institution of Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh of Nagpur under Dr. Hedgewar is of thiskind,thoughquiteindependentlyconceived.” Hedgewar’ssuccessor,M.S.Golwalkar(knownpopularlyas“Guruji”),madetheRSSvisioneven moreexplicitin1939:“TokeepupthepurityoftheRaceanditsculture,Germanyshockedtheworld byherpurgingthecountryoftheSemiticraces—theJews.Raceprideatitshighesthasbeenmanifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan [atermforIndiathatliterallymeansthe“placeofHindus”]tolearnandprofitby.”Lessthan tenyearslater,NathuramGodse,aHindumilitantwithcloseconnectionstotheRSS,wouldassassinate Mahatma Gandhi. Godse also had close ties to the Hindu Mahasbaha (Hindu Convention), an organization that inhabited the same ideological field as the RSS), and was a close confidant of V.D. Savarkar, the future leader of the Hindu Mahasabha and chief theoretical inspiration for the RSScreditedwiththenotionofIndiaastheexclusivelandofHindus. ThebloodonthehandsoftheRSS,however,didnotpreventitsvisionfromtakingfirmrootinindependent India. By 1948, the RSS had already dealt a severe blow to the idea of a plural secular IndiaespousedbyJawaharlalNehruandthehumanistHinduismespousedbyGandhibysuccessfully ensuring that the Jewish Question became the Muslim Question for many Hindus in India. Over the next fifty years, the RSS enjoyed tremendous growth, with an estimated 700,000 to 900,000menandboysattendingitsdailymilitarydrillsin2004.Simultaneously,itspawnedanintricatenetworkofpoliticalandculturalorganizationscollectivelyknownastheSanghParivar (CollectiveFamily )inIndiaandabroad.TheSanghorganizationsadvancedtheirmajorpoliticalvisionand philosophy,Hindutva.Theterm,coinedin1923bySavarkar,literallymeans“Hindu-ness,”butinrealitycombinestheprejudiceofHindusupremacywiththepolicyoffascismbyfusingnationalism ,racial purity,religiousexclusivism,andmilitarism. MembersofalltheminorityreligionsinIndia,aswellassecularistsandprogressivesofallhues,are doubtlessdeeplytroubledbytheabovehistoryandvaliantlyopposetheSangh.Butthesegroupsareseverelylimitedintermsofthescale ,ideologicalcohesion,andorganizationalcapabilitiesneededtosystematically oppose the Sangh or Hindutva. Nor can they rely much on the Indian state, whose secularismhassufferedlong-termattritionduetoresoluteattacksbytheSangh,andduetothefactthat many state functionaries in India are members of the Sangh. Finally, the millions of Hindus who historicallystruggledagainstthehierarchiesandoppressionsofcastewithinHinduismhavealsofailedto systematicallychallengethefascismofHindutva.Alltheaboveforces’abilitytoresistHindutvaandthe SanghisseverelylimitedbyHindutva’srapidconsolidationovertheterrainsof“Hinduism”and“Hindu identity”—aconsolidationthatironicallyowesmuchtoofficialpoliciesofmulticulturalism. 58 T I K K U N W W W. T I K K U N . O R G S E P T E M B E R / O C T O B E R 2 0 0 9 Top:HamidRoja,aMuslim boywhoreceivedburnsover 75percentofhisbodyin Hindu-Muslimriots,recuperatesatacivilhospitalin Ahmedabad,Gujarat, March4,2002. Bottom:Four-year-old MuslimAtulAzad, foreground ,shockedbytheriots thatburnedtheirsmallhut, is seen in a temporary shelterwithhisfamilyin AhmedabadonMarch4, 2002. SearchingforaProgressiveHindu/ism: BattlingMussolini’sHindus,Hindutva,andHubris by Balmurli Natrajan TOP: AP PHOTO/MANISH SWARUP, BOTTOM: AP PHOTO/SIDDHARTH DARSHAN KUMAR Balmurli Natrajan teaches anthropology at William Paterson University of New Jersey and is active in the Campaign to Stop Funding Hate (www.stopfundinghate.org). Religion_1.qxd:Politics rev. 8/11/09 12:22 PM Page 58 MisusingMulticulturalismtoMarginalizeDissent Over time—in India, the United States, and the United Kingdom—Hindutva has successfullyarrogatedHinduismtoitself,makingtheSanghappearasthechiefvotaryofHindusand “protector”ofHinduinstitutions,practices,and“heritage.”Itisnowcommonplacefor Sangh organizations to lead any public and legal discourse around “negative representations” of the Hindu community in textbooks, print media, films, and popular culture. This has happened at least in part due to the Sangh’s strategic and cynical uses of the policy of “multiculturalism .”Sincethe1970s,varioussocietieshaveinstitutedofficialandsemi-officialpolicies ofmulticulturalism,aimedprimarilyasbulwarksagainstracism,bigotry,andethnocentrism. Multiculturalism today structures public debates of justice, civility, and management of “difference” and “identity.” However, the dominant form of multiculturalism paradoxically gives rise to stereotyped notions of discrete, exclusive, and different “heritages” for every “ethnic ,” “racial,” or “national” group. When combined with the notion of “cultural rights,” this ensures the axiomatic status of the fuzzy notions of “insider” and “outsider” (with respect to religionsandcultures)suchthat“outsiders”aredeemedaslessvalidcommentatorsandcritics than “insiders.” While some of this bias has existed throughout human history, multiculturalism has made these boundaries sharper and less easy to traverse. Hindutva’s hold over Hinduism is difficult to loosen since multiculturalism becomes Hindutva’s unintentional handmaidenbypoliticallyrecognizingthelatter’sclaimsofbeingHinduism’s“authenticinsider ”andofficialrepresentationalvoice.ThisiswhytherealpowertoresistHindutvamustcome primarilyfromwithinthe“Hinducommunity.” Multiculturalism is, of course, not to blame for this state of affairs. Hindutva has risen largelyduetothefactthatprogressiveandsecularHindushave,forallpracticalpurposes,exitedintellectually ,physically,andinpartsociologicallyfromthespaceofa“Hinducommunity.” Inadifferenterabutamarkedlysimilarcontextofrisingchauvinism,HannahArendtnotedinJewish Writings how “Jews who wanted ‘culture’ left...

pdf

Share