Introduction
Hindutva, the ideological cornerstone of India's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its parent organization, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), advocates for a homogenized Hindu identity to consolidate cultural and political power. This framework, however, obscures India’s complex social hierarchies, particularly caste oppression. To dissect Hindutva’s mechanisms, this article employs three theoretical lenses: Pierre Bourdieu’s symbolic violence, B.R. Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste, and Michel Foucault’s biopolitics. Together, these theories reveal how Hindutva perpetuates caste hegemony through narrative manipulation, ideological inversion, and institutional control.
1. Bourdieu’s Symbolic Violence: Anti-Muslim Narratives and the Erasure of Caste
Conceptualizing Symbolic Violence:
Pierre Bourdieu’s notion of symbolic violence describes how dominant
groups impose their cultural norms as universal, legitimizing hierarchies
through subtle coercion. This violence operates not through physical force but
via institutions like media, education, and religion, naturalizing inequality. Symbolic
violence is a form of violence that is not physical but rather subtle and
pervasive, operating through the internalization of social norms and
hierarchies. It is the process by which individuals unwittingly accept and
reinforce the power structures that shape their social reality.
Hindutva’s Narrative Machinery
Hindutva mobilizes anti-Muslim rhetoric to forge a unified Hindu identity,
positioning Muslims as the "Other." This narrative diverts attention
from caste oppression, a pillar of Brahminical hegemony. By framing Muslims as
existential threats (e.g., "love jihad," cow vigilantism), Hindutva
obscures caste-based violence and economic disparities. For instance, Dalit
lynching incidents are often sidelined in media dominated by upper-caste
narratives, while anti-Muslim violence garners sensational coverage,
reinforcing Hindu unity.
Case Study: Cow Vigilantism and Caste Silence
The Cow vigilantism exemplifies symbolic violence. Cow vigilantism in India manifests
symbolic violence whereby Hindutava forces and their Media fills the masses
with pride and impunity around Cow vigilantism. The state and media amplify
cow-vigilantism, portraying it as a matter of national pride, while
caste-related terror remains largely invisible in mainstream discourse. Also,
consequent lynchings of Muslims accused of cow slaughter are given major
attention by opposition parties, while caste-based atrocities—such as the
routine violence against Dalits—are systematically ignored or downplayed.
This selective visibility serves as a mechanism of symbolic violence. By centering cow vigilantism, dominant groups reinforce a hierarchy where religious identity overshadows caste oppression. The normalization of this discourse ensures that caste atrocities are not seen as urgent or systemic, allowing status quo to persist and Hindu consolidation to accrue.
The rhetoric of Hindu pride thus masks caste exploitation, ensuring upper-caste dominance remains unchallenged.
2. Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste: The BJP-RSS’s Ideological Inversion
Ambedkar’s Radical Vision
In Annihilation of Caste, B.R. Ambedkar critiqued Hinduism’s caste
structure as incompatible with democracy. He advocated dismantling caste
through intermarriage, shared dining, and rejecting religious orthodoxy. His
vision demanded structural, not symbolic, change.
Co-opting Ambedkar, Sustaining Caste
The BJP-RSS appropriates Ambedkar’s iconography while undermining his
principles. Despite erecting his statues and celebrating his Constitution, they
oppose his critiques of Hinduism & hollow out protections provided in
constitution. The RSS’s Hindutva promotes varna (caste roles) as
"organic division of labour" and introduces “Samrasta” or “Harmony”
between castes contradicting Ambedkar’s call for caste annihilation. RSS/BJP
policies enrich the uppar castes and pauperizes the SC/STs/OBCs. Reservations
are attacked while EWS quota is provided. For example, BJP leaders
ritualistically invoke Ambedkar yet sidestep demands for land redistribution or
anti-caste discrimination laws.
The Dalit-Muslim False Binary
Hindutva co-opts Dalits by positioning them against Muslims, offering token
representation (e.g., Dalit BJP MPs) without addressing systemic inequities.
This divide-and-rule tactic inverts Ambedkar’s solidarity with all oppressed
groups, including Muslims, whom he saw as fellow victims of Brahminism.
3. Foucault’s Biopolitics: Caste, Reservations, and Census Politics
Biopower and Population Control
Michel Foucault’s concept of biopolitics explores how modern states
exercise power over populations by regulating life itself. Unlike traditional
forms of governance that focus on laws and discipline, biopolitics operates
through mechanisms like healthcare, surveillance, and demographic control to
shape and manage human existence. Foucault argues that in contemporary
societies, power is no longer just about punishing individuals but about
optimizing life—ensuring health, productivity, and reproduction in ways that
serve political and economic interests.
In short Foucault’s biopolitics examines how states regulate populations through institutional mechanisms. In India, biopower manifests in caste management via reservations (affirmative action) and census categorization.
Reservation Sub-Categorization: Dividing the
Marginalized
The BJP’s push to sub-categorize Scheduled Castes (SCs) into "Dalit"
and "Mahadalit" fragments solidarity. Divisions are created using Politics of
“Backward” and “Most Backward class” By privileging certain sub-castes, the
state creates hierarchies within oppression, diluting resistance. Similarly,
the 10% Economically Weaker Section (EWS) quota for upper castes diverts
resources from SC/ST/OBC communities, entrenching caste privilege under a
facade of merit.
Census Manipulation: Denial of Caste Census Data
The refusal to conduct a caste census—despite demands—obscures the material
realities of caste. Without data, policies remain blind to intersectional
oppression (e.g., caste-gender violence). This epistemic erasure sustains
Brahminical hegemony, as Hindutva equates Hindu identity with caste neutrality.
Census Manipulation: Fear Mongering using Growth Rate
of Muslim:
Foucault’s concept of biopolitics can be observed in the way the Bharatiya
Janata Party (BJP) frames the discourse around Muslim population growth in
India. The party has repeatedly highlighted demographic shifts, often
portraying the rise in the Muslim population as a threat to national identity
and stability. This rhetoric aligns with biopolitical strategies that seek to
manage populations not just through direct policies but through the shaping of
public perception and fear.
By emphasizing Muslim population growth, BJP invoke concerns about demographic imbalance, implicitly linking it to issues of national security and economic disparity. This framing allows the state to justify policies that regulate citizenship, surveillance, and access to resources, reinforcing a biopolitical order where certain communities are marked as subjects of heightened scrutiny. While census data shows that the decadal growth rate for Muslims has been declining over the past three decades, the selective amplification of demographic concerns serves as a tool of governance—shaping public sentiment and legitimizing exclusionary policies.
This epistemic erasure sustains Brahminical hegemony, as Hindutva equates Hindu identity with caste neutrality.
Conclusion
Bourdieu, Ambedkar, and Foucault collectively unmask Hindutva’s project.
Symbolic violence distracts from caste via anti-Muslim fearmongering;
Ambedkar’s emancipatory legacy is inverted to sustain hierarchy; and
biopolitical tools fracture marginalized groups.
No comments:
Post a Comment