Various Faces of Hindu Internationalists
Do you know that Hindu nationalists are not a monolith. Check out all the hues and colours of Hindu nationalism.
Media often portrays Hindu nationalists as a lunatic fringe bent on creating a theocratic state. However, there is more than what meets the eye. Hindu nationalists are not a monolith. There are different shades among them – which is usually not caught by the lens of the media that is so much obsessed with the west.
Hindu nationalism is chiefly an intellectual movement that aims at removing the vestiges of colonialism, Islam, Communism and Christianity from the Hindu mind. The mission intent of conservative Hindu nationalists is to establish Hindu Rashtra. However, in the age of globalisation, most of the Hindus believe in nothing short of a Hindu world. This, many believe, is possible through an assertive international Hindu lobby. Hindu internationalism–an extension of Hindu nationalism — is an ideology that is catching on.
Different Shades: Over the years, Hindu nationalists have branched into several hues and shades. They have also been influenced by the ideologies of their adversaries besides having their own indigenous ideals. The Hindu nationalists who are influenced by their adversaries in an attempt to overcome them can be broadly framed into four categories (1) Jehadi Hindu nationalists (2) Left Hindu nationalists (3) Evangelical Hindu nationalists (4) Corporate Hindu nationalists.
(1) Jehadi Hindu nationalists: They are those who are influenced by Islam and insist that the Muslims be paid back in their own jehadi coin.
The best known among this school of thought is Sadhvi Ritambara. There are several others who endorse this school of thought but are unwilling to come out in the open for the fear of being branded as fundamentalist. On the question of Indian Muslims, the fiery Sadhvi had remarked in one of her speeches that Indian Muslims have only two places left for them – Pakistan or Qabristan (Pakistan or the graveyard). She further quoted the Koran to say that the holy book directs the true Muslims to wage an all-out war against the Kafirs and that Hindus have no choice but to retaliate in the same manner and even more effectively. The logic is that Hindus should also turn jehadi to counter Islamic jehad. Her words have translated into reality. The normally docile Gujarati Hindus turned Islamic in response to the burning down of the S-6 Sabaramati Express train in Godhra by Muslim extremists.
This is what Rajeev Srinivasan, a columnist from Rediff.com had to say: Let us remember what happened: A group of 59 Hindu pilgrims returning from Ayodhya, mostly women and children, were burned alive in a railway coach when the train was stopped in a Mohammedan area. Commonsense suggests, given that a large crowd of Mohammedans had gathered at 7 am in an area that had seen widespread infiltration by extremists, that there was some malice aforethought and it is likely that the Mohammedans in fact set the train on fire. Nobody else had the motive or the means. Torching 59 women and children, most sane people would concede is extreme provocation. Consider what the Americans did hen there was similar grave provocation against them, and 3,000 of them were killed on 9/11. I said then that they didn’t riot because they knew the State would take revenge for them (unlike in India). The American military invaded Iraq, and have killed some 500,000 Mohammedans so far, in addition to destroying large parts of Iraq. This, in addition to the estimated 500,000 Iraqi children – an entire generation – killed, because of punishing American embargos. The kill ratio: 500,000 to 3,000 – Sevneteen to one.”
At the ground level, there are numerous Hindu activists who claim that they are tired of pacifist methods adopted by Hindu leaders and it is high time that the Hindus turned Islamic in response. However, the mainstream Hindu nationalists, especially leaders do not endorse this line.
(2) Left Hindu nationalists: They are those who are influenced by the left, have leftist traits in them like atheism, activism, revolution and fighting fro the underdogs. However they also happen to espouse the cause of Hindu Rashtra.
To a certain extent, Veer Savarkar falls in this category. He was an atheist and advocated revolutionary changes in Hindu society like making it casteless and non-vegetarian. Most of the time he was the underdog as he had to contend with the mighty British empire first and the massive Congress party later. Most of his suggestions were so radical that it was unacceptable to the normally conservative Hindu society at large. The Hindu Mahasabha (the party that he led) had received a major blow during his time as Shyama Prasad Mookherjee had resigned following assertions that Savarkar’s Hindutva was out of touch with Hindu society, which allows only for gradual changes.
Another Hindu nationalist who can be framed into this category was BMS leader Dattopant Thengadi. He spent time with Communist trade unions to study their pattern. He later conceived Bharathiya Mazdoor Sangh – which became the world’s largest trade union – beating the Communists at their own game. However, he continued his tirade against globalisation even when the NDA was in power – which many believed was the result of his long association with the left school of thought.
(3) Evangelical Hindu nationalists: They are those who favour the spread of Hinduism through service and pacifist methods. There are many Hindu missionaries who have emulated the Christian model, though not with as much ferocity and success. Srila Prabhupad of ISKCON, Mahesh Yogi, Sri Sri Ravishankar are popular while the most popular tele-evangelist today happens to be Baba Ramdev. The only son of God theory holds good as most of these Gurus have a messiah mentality and their organizations have the trapping of cults.
(4) Corporate Hindu nationalists: They are those who favour the corporate mode of development. They are supporters of globalisation and also happen to be supporters of the Hindu cause. Most of the second generation BJP leaders today, including Narendra Modi, Arun Jaitley and Arun Shourie fall in this category. However, this school of thought does not find much favour with the mainstream Hindu nationalists, though they are considered indispensable. The Hindus are equally suspicious of US intentions. The saffron idealogue S Gurumurthy – in his column- had claimed that the Federal Reserve – which prints the US dollars – was an enigma wrapped in mystery. His contention was that a clique which the world hardly knows is manipulating the global economy and the Federal Reserve – which is accused of overprinting the US dollar – now needs a global watch. After all, the US economy is now hit by recession.
The Original Hindu nationalists: It must be mentioned that all the above-mentioned categories are largely a reaction and a way of counteracting the ill-effects of the alien ideologies. The original Hindu Nationalists are very much tuned to the spiritual culture of Bharatvarsh and are in no way affected by either Islam or Christianity, or Marx and Macualay. The original Hindu nationalists are indigenous
Indigenous Hindu nationalists: They are the ones who advocate the return to the roots. Organic farming, natural lifestyle, yogic discipline, holistic living, decentralization, rural reforms and eco-sensitivity are high on their agenda. They are the Hindu nationalists at their pristine best. However, the only problem is to translate their vision into reality, given the high degree of urbanization, pollution and corporatisation during the day. Most of the Hindu nationalists of yore belong to this category. The best known among them was M S Golwalkar, better known as Guruji in nationalist circles. He was more interested in matters spiritual until his Guru directed him to go back to where he belonged.
Not a monolith: Besides Hindu nationalists are not a monolith as suggested by a section of the media. There are several instances of differences. Savarkar – the founding father of modern Hindu nationalism – had little faith in RSS. Ashok Singhal of the VHP and L K Advani of the BJP had differences on the issue of Ram Temple. More famous is the spat between Dattopant Thengadi and A B Vajpayee on issues of globalisation. There were differences of opinions on the positioning of the Hindu ideology between Sitaram Goel – the founder of Voice of India – and H V Sheshadri – the RSS idealogue. VHP’s Pravin Togadia had accused Narendra Modi of not doing enough for the Hindu society.
Deepak Kamat is Editor in Chief of 'AseemaA', Journal for National Resurgence. Email: deepakastrologer@gmail.com
Fascist Trends in Indian Media
February 12th, 2008 at 12:30 am
Deepak,
Namaskar
Hi there Bro! This is from your old friend “tAo”. You know who. Just stopping by to say hello and I am quite impressed and interested by your new blog. You’re off to a good start. I’ll come back again later to check it out some more. And some day I will get around to putting up my own blog too. Anyway, I’d like to make contact with you via private e-mail, but I don’t have your address. So just send me quick note via my general yahoo.com e-mail which is swamianami@… and I will then send you my other more private personal e-mail.
– Om Shanti –
February 12th, 2008 at 3:08 am
Pretty interesting blog Deepak…
Given the nature of Hinduism, I am skeptical if it is possible to have Jehadi Hindu nationalists. Whatever happened in Gujarat reflects the normal herd mentality. People in slum killing other people in other slums after being misguided by politicians. It’s happening in India for ages. Don’t you think so?
Hindu nationalism itself seems impossible to me as it is hard to define Hinduism..you are either Brahman or yadav or bania or punjabi or gujarati to name a few and hindu later
Anyway Congratulations for the new blog. Keep writing. Its good to read people who write with an open mind without defined dogmas.
February 13th, 2008 at 4:04 am
Good write up. Good that you have brought out different faces of hindutva. Do this RSS people also fall under evangelical hindutva? what do you feel about it? or they are jehadi hindus?
February 13th, 2008 at 4:20 am
Those in the RSS are a mix. There is nothing called as a RSS mind. RSS only believes in organising Hindu society.
February 14th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Dear Deepak Kamat Ji,
I really appreciate the work that you are doing. I would like to suggest that you register your own domain name i.e. saffronthinktank.com or hindunationalism.com and promote your website and upcoming book through that means. It will only cost $7/year.
Blogspot is a great beginning and moving on to your own domain name will give you more freedom in designing and working on your blog.
Also, you should consider publishing your book through lulu.com as well. This will allow you to sell your books through popular websites like amazon.com for only $100-150 worldwide.
I could help you facilitate all of that for free. Let me know if you are interested sanjeevjain1975@gmail.com
February 15th, 2008 at 3:53 am
Sanjeev,
Since this work of mine is not commercial, I would say that anybody is free to pick up anything that I have written. I would be happy that if my “book” will be read far and wide. Even you (or for that matter anybody) can copy anything on this blog and use it for your site. Of course, if you are interested, you may go ahead and register the domain name. THe rest will be taken care of as time goes. I am only 33-year old. I still have a long innings in the movement.
Right now I am busy more in intellectual pursuits. However, you may initiate any action as you deem fit in your wisdom. I will download the entire book on the web as and when I a finish it.
September 18th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
deepakji, namaste. Keep up the good work sir!
September 20th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Namaste Deepak,
I really appreciate what you are doing on this blog. I believe that truth about our religion has been hidden from many within our own religion. That’s the reason they get easily brainwashed by even people with brain size of a pea.
I wonder why every other religion which believes in conversion,converting or in numbers game as Allama Iqbal once quoted “Democracy is a number game where heads are counted and not weighed” continue to mock at our culture. It is as if morons can outweigh intellectuals in democracy provided they are greater than numbers. That’s why UPA is in power and would remain in power.
September 21st, 2008 at 4:33 am
Among the first indigenous movement that supported Hindu cause even prior to Savarkar is undoubtedly Aryasamaj founded by Swami dayanand and which stood for total transformation of Hindu society based on Vedic ethos. It was the first organization that opened the door of Hindu society to Non-Hindus and it was a first Vedic Missionary movement.It fought for swarajya and restored the full rights to all Hindus in the matters of religion.
September 21st, 2008 at 11:09 am
Dear Deepak
Namaskar. Your ideas are good. Do you think Indians are doing a wrong thing by following the classifications set by British (Christians) by calling themselves as Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists etc. To my mind, nationalists like you should talk of all Indian (Bharatiy) spiritual traditions. Because the moment you accept British classification, you are excluding Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists from the discourse. The truth is all have been equally tormented by the Islamic and christian immoralities. All need to put up a collective fight not just in this part of the world, but for the sake of the humanity itself. Otherwise these two ideologies are set to enslave and keep humanity to a basal level.
September 21st, 2008 at 12:53 pm
@ Sampuran,
A Hindu is a person of Indian origin who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew. I hope that is clear.
October 11th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Hindu can be anyone who follows Hindu way of life. He dont have to be Indian. This helps is spreading of the God. Unlike Brahmins who kept temple activities themselves alienated other castes, it must be open. This helps uniting Hindus, particularly south indians.
March 26th, 2009 at 3:43 am
Hindu is a civilizational description. It describes the civilization of Hind or India (which is what our western neighbors – the Persians and the Greeks – called us), thus “Hindu” or “Indoi”.
Now Hindus have many religions that guided their spiritual life. Collectively, these are known as Sanatan Dharma. The various streams or religions in them are vedic, bauddha, jaina, sikhi etc.
So when you say Hindu, you are not excluding anyone. On the contrary, you are being as inclusive as possible by referring to people not at the level of their religion, but at the level of their shared civilization from which these religions spring forth.
By this definition, an Indian muslim is also a HIndu IF he choses to identify with this civilization. If not, well then you can’t force him.
The big picture is that we are one civilization. We are not 100 separate entities with no collective identity. On the contrary, we are one collective entity, with 100 individual streams.
March 26th, 2009 at 8:57 am
Deepak Kamat>>Right now I am busy more in intellectual pursuits.>>
Huh!! Intellectual pursuit.. Need to check websters.
>>>>. I will download the entire book on the web as and when I a finish it.>>>
Its not download.. Its UPLOAD..
March 26th, 2009 at 9:00 am
::Its not download.. Its UPLOAD..
So did your horse drink near the water? After Jesme’s rejection even your horse won’t
February 28th, 2010 at 4:27 am
“A Hindu is a person of Indian origin ”
Sorry Deepak but lets get out of that ‘nationalist’ mindset that many Hindus are trapped in.And its no wonder the Hindutva movement is in total confusion because its still stuck in 1920s/30s European nationalism as a political model.. .Hindu Dharma is not confined to any the borders of India or region or caste or gender or sect but its universal in essence .So Hindus can be of any race or country anywhere around the world..The Hindutva movement needs to redefine itself as not some ‘nationalist or political movement but a spiritual one aligned with dharma where not only has it solutions for India but the whole world and where politics is only one platform to express that.
February 28th, 2010 at 9:45 am
@ Arjun,
That is the definition in a traditional sense.
But I disagree with it.
For me, a Hindu is a person who follows his own faith or no-faith without troubling others.
Live & Let-Live is the basic of Hinduism.
February 28th, 2010 at 4:52 pm
@deepak, traditonal sense ? correct me if im wrong but are you refering to the booklet ‘hindutva’ by veer savavakar ? because if you are then that was written during british colonial rule so naturally it would be written in more nationalistic way but that doesnt really apply to now. Now Hindus are living all around the world and there are many non hindus also converting to Hinduism..Hindu philosophy is becoming popular in the west ect so now we need to cater for global hindu Dharma which the present hindutuva movement has failed because it lacks ideology or lacks the Hindu vision.Lets not forget Hinduism is not static like the abrahamic monothiest so called religions but an evolving spirituality so its open to new ideas and meanings as along the essence is dharmic..So interpretations written during the time of the british dont always mean its suitable now..
February 28th, 2010 at 9:43 pm
@ Arjun,
I am not just referring to savarkar but to the whole lot of traditional Hindu reformers.
Yes, I do agree with you. Hinduism has a broad connotation today.
But Hindutva is not necessarily spiritual. Even atheism is a part of Hinduism. It is also a perspectivel.
February 28th, 2010 at 11:19 pm
@Deepak, Can you point out the other Hindu traditional reformers?
Anyway Hindutva is spiritual from a spiritual Hindu perspective.Now if athiests dont believe its spirtitual then thats ok as long as they follow the principles and values based on Dharma but overall for the majority of Hindus who do believe in some form of divinity then Hindutva should not be seperated from its spiritual roots which itself go back to the Gita and even beyond.
February 28th, 2010 at 11:39 pm
@Deepak, Also I’m confused with your Jehadi Hindu nationalists definition of Hindus who fight back or take to some form of violence ..So according to your definition do great Hindu warriors like Shivaji or lachit barphukan or krishnadevaraya or even the gods themselves like Lord Krishna or Lord Rama fall under the Jehadi Hindu nationalists category ?
March 1st, 2010 at 10:07 am
@ Arjun,
No, I am not referring to Hindu warriors as Jehadi Hindu nationalists.
I am referring to the rioters who used Islamic techniques to get even (remember Godhra). Hindus went Islamic in response to Godhra. I am not judging the morality of the situation. It is just a label for the sake of classification.
March 1st, 2010 at 1:20 pm
Deepak, Personally I cant see anything jehadi in Hindus getting angry and then causing riots especially when their people have been murdered like they were on that train.
Its then a negative label which can be stretched to include Hindu warriors if people want to..Just like the Indian media does when it uses negative lables to define anything Hindu ’saffron terror’ or ‘Hindu taliban’ or ‘right wing’ or ‘hindu nazis’ ect ect to scare off other Hindus from being associated with Hinduism and thats the technique thats applied everyday through the media or academia.