Religious Politics and Secular States: Egypt, India, and the United States

4 The Rise and Decline of Indian Secularism

chapter four The Rise and Decline of Indian Secularism The resurgence of Hindu nationalism was a defining feature of Indian politics in the 1990s. Although the ideas and organizations associated with the trend have roots in the early twentieth century, they were politically marginalized for much of the post-Independence period. Even in the 1980s, the political party that represented Hindu communalism, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), was peripheral, capable of winning only two seats in the 1984 parliamentary elections . Yet, by 1991, the BJP was the second-largest party in the country, and by 1998 it was leading the ruling coalition. Perhaps more important, the ideology of Hindu nationalism, or Hindutva (literally “Hinduness”), had become part of the ideological mainstream. Such a dramatic reversal of fortune was puzzling. What had happened in the intervening years that allowed for the reemergence of a set of ideas and organizations that had not held much sway among the Indian population for many years? How, in short, does one explain the dramatic resurgence of religious politics in India? The precipitous rise of Hindu nationalism and the communalization of Indian politics can be explained in large measure by the changing attitude of state leaders toward the secular ideals of the Nehru period.1 In the years imme- 116 Religious Politics and Secular States diately following independence, the Indian government, led by its first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, promoted a secular vision of modernity. The government ’s support for secular norms and identities was premised on a belief that an inclusive understanding of the nation was necessary for integrating India’s diverse ethnic and religious groups into a common political framework. A secular vision of nationalism was thus institutionalized in India’s first constitution. This commitment to a nonsectarian social order, however, was not universally shared. Even within the ruling Congress Party, there were those who believed that national identity was more properly defined in religious terms. This reflected the desire among Hindu nationalists to create a Hindu Rashtra (a Hindudominated political order or Hindu state) and to place control of state power exclusively in the hands of the Hindu majority. The struggle to define the nation has remained a central feature of Indian politics over the past six decades. At issue is whether the national community ought to be defined inclusively—with membership extended to all members of the population—or whether full membership should be reserved for those of the dominant community. In other words, should the nation be defined along religious or secular lines? Nehru and his supporters were concerned about the conflict and division that would result from marginalizing minority populations. Particularly in the aftermath of Partition, which separated Pakistan from India in 1947, the politicization of religion was discouraged, particularly any form that might fan the flames of sectarian violence. The early Congress Party leadership subsequently campaigned against efforts to institutionalize preferential status for the majority population or otherwise to link civil status to religious identity. This commitment to an inclusive social order faded, however, with Nehru’s death in 1964, especially after the Emergency period (1975–77). During this latter era, Congress Party leaders abandoned Nehru’s secular vision and sought to coopt the rhetoric and symbols of Hindu nationalism for their own purposes. Unlike Nehru, Indira Gandhi and her son, Rajiv—Nehru’s daughter and grandson—appealed to the religious sentiments of the majority population and portrayed the Congress Party as the one true and able defender of the Hindu nation. Although the Congress Party leadership’s embrace of an exclusive religious politics was driven by electoral considerations, it also reflected a more fundamental transformation. Along with the abandonment of a secular vision of Indian nationalism, Congress Party leaders also relinquished earlier commitments to social justice, minorities, and the poor. The religious politics of the Indira and The Rise and Decline of Indian Secularism 117 Rajiv Gandhi era, in short, was part of a new strategy to mobilize support along communal, instead of class, lines. Although this majoritarian strategy worked for the Congress Party in the short term—most spectacularly in the party’s 1984 electoral landslide—it had dire consequences in later years. By overturning the Nehruvian consensus, the Congress leaders helped to disembed the secular norms that had governed Indian public life for most of the post-Independence era. This contributed greatly to the communalization of local governments and police forces and to an...