Hindu Nationalism’s Debt to Colonialism
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) marks its centenary this month, prompting a deeper examination of its origins and ideological underpinnings. While much has been documented about the RSS’s fascist inspirations drawn from pre-war Europe—especially under its ideologue M.S. Golwalkar, who infamously admired Nazi Germany for its ethnic purification—less attention has been paid to its indebtedness to British colonialism. The RSS and broader Hindu nationalism have significantly adopted the colonial-era narrative that framed India’s history primarily through the lens of Hindu-Muslim conflict, a perspective crafted to serve colonial interests.
British colonial historiography shaped a portrayal of Indian history dominated by religious delineations, which has persisted in Indian academia and popular culture. This article investigates how this Western framing of Indian history continues to influence contemporary Hindu nationalist discourses, fostering majoritarian mobilization that perpetuates fear and division.
VD Savarkar, a key figure in Hindu nationalism, posited that India’s unique identity, centered on Hindutva or “Hinduness,” is threatened by the existence of non-Hindus, particularly Muslims. Savarkar characterized Muslims as organized and aggressive, claiming they could outmaneuver Hindus, whom he deemed divided and effete due to their caste system. These foundational ideas continue to inform Hindu nationalists’ politics and strategies.
The narrative constructed by Hindu nationalist thinkers largely mirrors the colonial histories designed to justify British rule. This history writing can be traced back to the early colonial period, starting with influential figures such as Alexander Dow, who published History of Hindustan in 1768. This was followed by William Jones, a Supreme Court judge in Calcutta, whose work established a chronology of Indian history that glorified a pre-Muslim “Golden Age” of Hindu superiority. James Mill’s History of British India further entrenched the idea of a tripartite division of history: ancient, native India versus “foreign” Muslim rule, culminating in a narrative that viewed Muslims solely as despots.
Modern historians, such as Manan Asif, critique these constructs, highlighting their foundational arguments about the chronology and nature of Indian civilization. The colonial portrayal depicted Muslims as foreign invaders, whose historical presence was justified only through oppression, with terms like “forced conversion” used to reinforce perceptions of their alienation from the Hindu majority.
After the failed 1857 uprising, colonial narratives intensified their Islamophobic sentiments. Alfred Lyall, an ICS officer, articulated fears surrounding the supposed aggressiveness of Muslims, which reinforced justifications for colonial rule as a means of protecting Hindus from a perceived tyranny.
The colonial narrative permeated the consciousness of Indians who were educated under British influence, internalizing a binary worldview that contributed to the ideology of partition in 1947. Anti-colonial leaders from both Hindu and Muslim communities absorbed this narrative, seeing division as an inescapable destiny.
Recent scholarship has begun to reassess the archives and texts utilized by colonial historians. Notably, the 17th-century historian Mohammad Firishta’s Tarikh-i-Firishta offers a richer, intertwined history of India, drawing from both Hindu and Muslim traditions and challenging the partitioned historiography imposed by colonial rule. Similarly, Sayyid Ahmad Khan’s Asar us Sanadid presents an account of Delhi that emphasizes shared histories and practices rather than communal divisions.
The erasure of this interconnected history serves as the foundation for a bifurcated narrative that contemporary Hindu nationalists have exploited. Leaders like former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee have echoed colonial sentiments that frame Muslims as threats to Hindu safety, drawing on ideas of a “thousand-year conflict” to justify majoritarian dominance.
The colonial legacy continues to wield significant influence in shaping contemporary Indian political discourse. This narrative not only facilitated British rule but also affects India’s post-Independence trajectory. Scholars advocate for decolonizing history as a conversation imperative to address these enduring biases. As historical narratives continue to be rewritten, the urgency of fostering a more nuanced understanding of India’s past becomes increasingly crucial.
Sajjad Hassan is a human rights researcher and practitioner.
Tags: Hindu nationalism, colonialism, Indian history, nationalism in India, cultural identity
Hashtags: #Hindu #nationalisms #debt #colonialism
