When the Supreme Court Judge D. Y. Chandrachud referred to the need of speaking truth to Power, he seemed to manifest a sense of urgency. He emphasized that it is a public duty, a collective responsibility. A democracy cannot survive without it. Every citizen must contribute to the cause of truth; so must every institution; so must the media. When diverse voices are given equal chance to be heard, what approximates truth has a better chance to emerge, and a consensus can more easily be reached. That is how a democracy functions. But if a few voices are consistently favoured and others systematically suppressed, democracy gets warped. 

Christophe Jaffrelot in his “Modi’s India” (Princeton University Press, 2021) speaks of many liberal democracies of late turning ‘guided democracies’, ‘illiberal democracies’, ‘authoritarian democracies’ (Jaffrelot 1). He has chosen to describe India as an “ethnic democracy” like Israel, a phrase Sammy Smooha uses for a nation-state whose Ethnic Majority OWNS the country, ignoring minorities. In Israel, the Jewish identity defines everything: calendar, history, heroes, flag, emblem, anthem, names, ceremonies… as though others don’t exist. In fact, it is a hidden form of ethnocide. Modi’s India is fast moving in that direction. The difference in India is merely this: the State withdraws, and vigilante groups dictate how minorities should show themselves Indian: accommodating to the Hindu ethos, social order, moral code, orthopraxy (Ibid 155-56). 

Upper Caste Counter-revolution

The present militancy is seen as a reaction of the Upper Castes to the Mandal Commission recommendations that V.P. Singh decided to implement in 1990, ensuring 27% reservations for the OBCs. With the new found prosperity of the Green Revolution and Reservations, the OBCs from the Hindi belt suddenly emerged a force, winning 45% of the Lok Sabha seats through Janata Dal (Ibid 4). Upper castes were flabbergasted for a while with this “Shudra revolution”; but then they launched a Counter-revolution with redoubled determination (Ibid 24). L. K. Advani’s Ayodhya zeal and Rath Yatra were all about drawing the OBCs and Dalits away from jobs-and-political competition to the glamour of Hindu identity, common pride, and united strength: shared Hindu fervour to replace divided caste competition.

They looked to V.D. Savarkar’s formula of ‘ethnic nationalism’ and to M.S. Golwalkar’s national identity that excluded the minorities, who could remain “claiming nothing…not even citizen’s rights”.  But the upper caste self-assertion found the best support from K.B. Hedgewar’s RSS that insisted on sturdy physical and ideological training and trusted in Brahmin guidance (Ibid 13-14). B.S. Moonje, went further; he believed in “organized violence” in imitation of the Muslims and “virile vigilance”. He even urged eating meat to gain strength (Ibid 15). We see several contradictions all through: Savarkar’s secularism, Advani’s Ram Temple fervour, Moonje’s violence and non-vegetarianism. These in turn differ greatly from Vivekananda, Aurobindo, Gandhi, Tagore and others who sought to define their culture, community and civilization. 

The Upper Caste theoreticians liked best Deendayal Upadhyaya’s “Integral Humanism” in a ‘self-born’ society where caste order is a must to preserve harmony. It has to be “hierarchical” to ensure ‘organic unity’. Thus, Brahminical concerns are safeguarded (Ibid 23).

Polarized Indian Society 

While Advani grew more moderate in his Hindutva fervour as Home Minister, the world changed with the fall of the Twin Towers and George Bush’s war on terror. It had an immediate impact on the Indian situation. The Red Fort bomb blast was only a prelude to those of 2006 in suburban Mumbai and 2008 in two luxury hotels. The Ayodhya campaigns radicalized the Muslim students (SIMI) which claimed four different attacks (Ibid 76-78). Many Muslim plots on Modi’s life were alleged, the accused often losing life or being imprisoned, with little evidence (Ibid 61-62). Consequently, in the 2012 Gujarat elections, Modi did not field a single Muslim (Ibid 64). India was gradually falling apart.

At this stage, the unique skill of Modi consisted in bringing together the ANGER and FEAR of  1) declining Upper Castes unable  to compete with newly emerging OBCs, 2) frustrated OBCs with degrees but no jobs after the brief period of boom, 3) ambitious Dalit youth to whom all things were promised by all parties with little real opening…and pitting this ANGER against a common “enemy” (Muslims) and those who protected them (Congress and the English-speaking elite) (Ibid 80, 107-08). Congress was considered an ENEMY, not a competitor. The phrase English-speaking elite here included liberal journalists, modern thinkers, social activists, and international public opinion. Modi knew how to keep motivating his support base: “neo-middle class” and the semi-urban classes (vernacular upstarts in general) that felt marginalized by the English-speaking snobs (Ibid 67).

Dalit youth longing for recognition, organized from 1984 as Bajrang Dal, showed their readiness to take on this common enemy: the English-speaking critics of vernacular-speaking leaders, including Modi.  The Bajrang Dal, in addition, was entrusted with the mission of keeping alive “low-intensity riots”… steady, low-key communal tension (Ibid 80). They had to keep the pot boiling, upholding majoritarianism, delegitimizing secularism. Such “educated unemployed” were the key actors  in riots like in Mau 2005 and Gorakhpur 2007, until such a situation of trouble-making became the “new normal” (Ibid 82). 

Thus, the Bajrang Dal emerged as the “Proletariat” (Subramanian Swamy) within the Sangh Parivar, to do the “dirty work”, and act as their shock troops (Ibid 84). Vinay Katiyar, their first leader boasted, “Might is the only law I understand”. The Babri Masjid fell to Bajrang Dal in 1992 which was followed by many killings (Ibid 85). In this way, these “angry young men” that Modi encouraged found recognition in the Hindutva household. They gained self-esteem proving themselves a “militant defence” force for Hindutva cause (Ibid 87). 

Modi’s Image, Creation of “Foreign” Technology

Modi as Prime Minister would be giving lectures on self-reliance, atma nirbhar, even though the 182-metre Statue of Unity in Gujarat, representing Sardar Vallabhbai Patel, was made in China. Similarly, while claiming to be the ‘son of the soil’ and a humble chaiwala, Modi won the election only by making use of the most expensive and sophisticated “foreign” technology and exploiting the services of “foreign”-returned technicians. Rajdeep Sardesai says, 2,500 people handled hundred and twenty-five 3D projector units (Ibid 95). K. N. Govindacharya described elections as a “battle of images”, not debate on policies (Ibid 96). 

Modi’s helpers used “TV, print, radio, hoardings, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, WhatsApp, DTH,” cable TV services. People like Arvind Gupta were Silicon Valley-trained professionals who used the services of 1.3 million volunteers. Gupta called it “carpet-bombing” through tweets! Modi was described as “Initiator, Innovator, Implementor” (or a mere propagandist?) who guaranteed “acchhe din”. The 2014 campaign cost the BJP $1 billion (Ibid 98-100). Chowkidar image for boasts, cash for elections!! Competing even with Obama!!
In addition, the RSS went house-to-house, and Amit Shah organized “booth committees” hiring the services of “specialized polling firms”. His strategy of giving tickets to non-Jatavs and non-Yadav SCs, who felt forgotten, paid dividends (Ibid 102-03). Majoritarianism won over Bahujanism (Ibid 105). All these groups had come to consider themselves as victims, like Modi after the 2002 pogroms in Gujarat, of English-speaking critics. The more they attacked him, the more their loyalty grew, built on blind admiration. It was a battle of Grand Illusion.  In fact, Modi said in UP in 2017, election is a war, and I am the commander (Ibid 111). 

“Saintly Politics”

If the elections were an exercise in deception, Modi’s early projects as Prime Minister too stand out, not for their social benefit but self-respect creation… which meant much to the poor. His Swachh Bharat was one such. While 66.42 lakh households in urban India and 934 lakh rural units were given toilets, many of them were not used nor functioning (Ibid 118). Similarly, Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana gave the poor dignity, but too little actual benefit (Ibid 120); gas cylinder gave a sense of pride to women, but most of them could not afford to refill them (Ibid 124). As a populist, Modi speaks for the people, but his subsequent action shows that he cares for them least. In his Mann Ki Baat he asks for suggestions. Adopting a fatherlike tone, he invites collective introspection, and seeks to build a relationship with the listener offering hope (Ibid 112-15). But nothing follows.

In a “sanctimonious” vein, Modi explains how demonetization was a measure to chastise the rich, apologizing for the marginal inconvenience it caused to others (Ibid 126-28). This is what W.H. Morris-Jones calls “saintly politics” of evasion (Ibid 129). In reality, farmers had no money to buy seeds for the season, many small enterprises went bankrupt. According to Deendayal Upadhyaya, this is matter of no concern; in the self-regulating system of Hindu civilization, the poor must help themselves. In fact, many pro-poor programmes were cancelled (Ibid 131). The MGNREGA was one of the first victims, rural dwellers suffered (Ibid132-4). The only beneficiary seems to have been Anil Ambani who took over crop insurance against natural disasters (Ibid 134). Funds for Dalit education were reduced, five million Dalit students affected. Shockingly, 10% of economically weak Upper Castes have been offered assistance. According to income calculation, 99% of upper castes can be beneficiaries (Ibid 137-38). 

Modi has abolished wealth tax, and increased indirect taxes which weigh heavy on the poor. India has one of the highest tax rates for fuel (Ibid 144). Centre’s education spending has come down (Ibid 146). The corporate tax has been lowered, with no favours to peasants (Ibid 145). Modi government protects industrialists who borrowed millions, destabilizing the banking system. So, Gautam Adani has kept on taking loans despite having a debt of 840 billion rupees. Meantime, loans are refused to farmers and medium-sized enterprises. Many SMEs have gone bust (Ibid 146-47). Crony capitalism has developed into “wholesale collusion”. A 2018 Oxfam report shows how 10% of the Indian population has gathered 77.4% national wealth, 58% in the hands of 1%. In 2017 alone Mukesh Ambani increased his wealth by 67% according to Forbes India (Ibid 143). 

Construction of Hindu Rashtra

While what is done for the poor is merely symbolic, what has been launched for Hindu Rashtra is solid, well planned, farsighted, widely owned. In this short article we will not be able to go into the details of what Christophe Jaffrelot presents in his 639-page volume on Modi’s India. He shows in his most detailed study how every aspect of public life and private thinking is being brought under Hindutva regimentation. We will merely rush through a few headlines to gauge the breadth of the strategies envisioned.

The various ministries have begun to hold regular consultations with the RSS (Ibid 167). Governorship is mostly passing into the hands of RSS men. The RSS Chief, Mohan Bhagwat, is ready to act as ‘Raj guru’ to the nation (Ibid 169). A re-writing of Indian history has begun glorifying the Hindu period. It would seem India has ceased exist since those days; Akbar, for example, is reduced to three lines (Ibid 170). Over 1,334 changes have been introduced to NCERT textbooks (Ibid 172). The technological height that India had reached in ancient times is exaggerated, Modi presenting the image of Ganesh as an example of ancient plastic surgery (Ibid 174). Those who spoke out strongly against obscurantism have been eliminated like Narendra Dabholkar, Govind Pansare, M.M. Kalburgi and Gauri Lankesh (Ibid 175, 241-247). Sangh Parivar men control universities through appointed authorities and student unions (Ibid 176). NGOs have been immobilized through new FCRA rules (Ibid 183-86). 

Missionaries are criticized for conversion, but feared for what they do to conscientize and empower the poor (Ibid 190-91). There are many instances of physical attack (Ibid 191-93). Campaigns have been launched against love jihad, land jihad, cow protection; drive for Ghar Wapsi (Ibid 195-210). Violence-prone Senas and Vahinis receive official protection (Ibid 222-230, 233). Everything is handed over to the “people’s angry reaction” (Ibid 232) and digital vigilantism (Ibid 236). De facto, ETHNIC DEMOCRACY has taken over India (Ibid 249). According to Steven Lavitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, democracies die when they “endorse violence” (Ibid 253). Lakhimpur Kheri is the last instance.

“Not Being Heard is No Reason for Silence” 

Christophe Jaffrelot has spoken. His words carry weight. Others must add their views while looking ahead. “Not being heard is no reason for silence” (Victor Hugo). What we are asking for is not a chaotic expression of irresponsible statements that clash purposelessly. What we encourage is intelligent interactions among responsible citizens, institutions, and media, that take history forward. Will Modiji prove to the world that India is the “Mother of all Democracies” as he claimed before UNGA? Amit Shah hails him as a world ‘icon’ of democracy.

When such deceptions are perceived at depth, the truth grows brighter and turns into a double-edged sword. Will there be a reaction within the Hindutva fold itself for being led blindfolded? For being “used” and discarded like Uma Bharti, Pragya Thakur. Will the Hindutva “Proletariat” shed their ‘illusions’ and make their voice heard? Let it be clear, a slippery grip on money and power can be used to tempt and enslave before being dumped. Will leadership jealousies, opportunism, and petty self-interests, yield their negative fruits in due course? Will Regionalism revive? Will Ethnic assertion survive for long? 

Who controls devotion? RSS. Who controls promotion? BJP. Who controls cash-accumulation? Crony capitalists. Will people be happy if cash accumulates in Gujarat and cost is evenly distributed over the rest of the country? We tremble to think! Let Truth appear. Let it reveal its power!