November 27, 2024

How Indian Politics is different from the Western Politics?

The Polymath Team

Throughout history, there has been a propensity to interpret the world through a singular lens – ‘The Western Worldview– and limited efforts are made to challenge or alter this perspective. The West generally attempts to categorize the global events based on benchmarks designed by them, entrenched in their history, culture, politics, and socio-economic background, and they vehemently propagate and seek to impose their worldview. This limited outlook promotes development of a parochial view, and fosters establishment of misguided perspectives, which eventually gets reinforced into an ideology, that falls short of depicting the true picture. Similarly, the west has divided the modern world politics into a simplistic binary of left and right. This has translated into a skewed understanding of the complex, wider, and intertwined divisions present in India – rooted in its historical underpinnings, cultural diversity, imperialism, religious fundamentalism, and socio-political integration.

The terms ‘left’ and ‘right’ originated during the French Revolution in 1789. In the French National Assembly, those who supported the revolutionary changes and were in favor of more egalitarian policies sat on the left side of the assembly, while those who supported the monarchy, traditions, and maintaining of the status quo sat on the right. These seating arrangements led to the terms ‘left-wing’ and ‘right-wing’ being associated with progressive and conservative ideologies, respectively. What started as a mere seating arrangement, later in the early twentieth century, began to be linked to specific political ideologies to represent citizens’ political beliefs. And, this characterization is further extended to classify all political parties, around world, into the binary of left and right.

Europe’s left-wing parties focus on promoting social equality, advocating for worker welfare, wealth redistribution, and deeper European Union integration. The parties following right-wing ideology have gained prominence in response to increased immigration. They emphasize on preserving national culture and identity, viewing immigration as a threat to social cohesion and existing demography. For example, Germany saw an influx of over a million refugees in 2015 alone, leading to a noticeable shift in its demography. Similarly, countries like Sweden, which historically had a relatively homogenous population, have seen significant demographic changes, with nearly 20% of its residents now being foreign-born. These parties prioritize on maintaining national sovereignty and conserving traditional values, which often necessitates their opposition to integrate with the European Union. In the United States, the political divide between the left and right is similar to that in Europe. The left-wing Democratic Party focuses on universal healthcare, higher minimum wages, LGBTQ+ rights, comprehensive immigration reform, free speech and expression, and greater government intervention to provide citizen welfare. On the other hand, the right-wing Republican Party promotes deregulation, strict immigration policies, gun rights, and opposition to abortion. Latin America, is culturally different and they have also witnessed an anti-colonial struggle, which provides a basis of their left-right divide. The pertaining issues are the same, however immigration and change of demography is not a looming challenge in Latin America. Corruption, misuse of power, and rising unemployment are major concerns for them.

In India, the delineation between Left and Right political ideologies are often ambiguous. During British colonial rule, the Indian National Congress (INC), founded in 1885, emerged as a platform for Indians to engage constructively in negotiations with the British authorities, thereby setting the stage for the pursuit of constitutional reforms. What started as a platform to collectively voice against the British eventually evolved into a so-called Left-wing political party in India. However, the political landscape of India was never purely about economic or social policies; it was also deeply intertwined with the questions of identity and religion. Indian history is marked by relentless invasions driven by its wealth and strategic significance. From the early incursions of Persians and Greeks to the Islamic invasions from the 8th century, waves of brutality and cultural upheaval have shaken and affected the subcontinent. From Mahmud of Ghazni’s destruction and sacking of Somnath Temple multiple times, to Muhammad Ghori’s massacre in Banaras, to widespread slaughter and forced conversions during Delhi Sultanate, followed by Aurangzeb’s oppressive reign, which involved temple destruction and re-imposition of jizya tax, has brought in wide-scale socio-cultural disruptions, which had a profound impact on the state as well as the citizens. These historical fault-lines, shaped by centuries of conflict, were later manipulated by the British to serve their strategic needs and as a means to establish and strengthen their control over India. They employed a policy of appeasement, deliberately exacerbating communal tensions between Hindus and Muslims to weaken any unified resistance against their colonial dominance. To further their separatist and radical interests, All India Muslim league was formed in 1906. The British accepted their demand for separate electorate in 1909, which allowed different religious communities to vote for their representatives separately. In response to the growing assertion of Muslims, the Hindu Mahasabha originated within the INC in 1915. It was initially a platform for promoting Hindu interests within the broader nationalist struggle. However, due to ideological differences, particularly on over-accommodation of minority interests, particularly those of Muslims, after their continued resistance and suspicion against Hindus, led to its emergence as a separate so-called right-wing organization outside the INC. They aimed to safeguard the rights of Hindus in the political, social, and economic spheres, particularly in the face of rising communal tensions, and to preserve and promote the Hindu identity and culture.

The Khilafat Movement, which started in the early 1920s with INC support under Mahatma Gandhi, aimed to protect the Ottoman Caliphate, further complicated the political scenario. While it was aimed to foster Hindu-Muslim unity against British rule, it also led to unintended consequences. In Kerala’s Malabar region, the 1921 Rebellion saw Mopilah Muslims violently targeting Hindus, culminating in the massacre at Tirurangadi, where hundreds of Hindus were mercilessly slaughtered for refusing to convert to Islam. The Mopilahs targeted these temples not only to destroy places of worship but also to break the spirit of the Hindu community. The famous Thirunavaya Temple was attacked, its idols desecrated, and the sacred space turned into a site of bloodshed. However, some political groups, primarily INC, rebranded the Mopilahs as freedom fighters, distorting the events, and overshadowing the suffering of Hindus. The INC’s silence and inaction is portrayed as a betrayal of the Hindus in Malabar, who were left to fend for themselves in the face of such barbarity. This period underscored the fragile communal balance in India and sowed seeds of mistrust that would later contribute to the horrors of partition during Independence.

The rise of India’s so called right-wing can be traced back to the profound anxieties and threats that emerged in the aftermath of the 1947 partition. The brutal division of the country, characterized by widespread massacres and an unprecedented mass displacement, left an indelible scar on the national consciousness, giving rise to a pervasive sense of insecurity and mistrust. This collective trauma, exacerbated by subsequent events like the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits in the 1990s, forceful conversions of Hindus in the north-eastern states, catalyzed the emergence of right-wing ideologies. These ideologies sought to fortify a more assertive national identity, and safeguard the interests of those who felt marginalized or threatened by the socio-political changes that followed the partition. The Western right-wing’s rise over the last two decades has been largely driven by apprehensions regarding heightened migration from the Middle East and the consequent demographic transformations. In contrast, the factors that led to the emergence of the Indian right-wing are rooted in a vastly different context which stems from historical predicaments, rendering any direct comparison with the West inappropriate.

Western democracies, particularly those in Europe and North America, have evolved in relatively homogeneous societies where ideological divides tend to follow a clear left-right dichotomy. The left often advocates for more government intervention and social welfare, while the right tends to emphasize free markets, individualism, and conservatism. Classifications such as ‘extreme right wing,’ ‘fascism,’ and ‘autocracy’ are often used by parts of the western left against the Indian right-wing political leaders, as a rhetorical tool to shape public opinions. These terms are used to influence political discourse by setting a skewed narrative about the so-called Indian right-wing political leader, Modi, and his policies at the global level. Modi’s policies do not fit in the conventional western dichotomy of left-right, and entails elements from both sides of the spectrum while addressing India’s unique socio-political milieu.

In India, the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) champions a vision of cultural nationalism and development. Modi’s vision of India involves a blend of traditional values with rapid modernization, promoting a sense of pride in India’s ancient civilization while striving for economic self-reliance through programs like ‘Make in India’ and ‘Digital India.’ The social initiatives like Jal Jeevan Mission to provide potable tap water to every rural household, the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana to provide affordable housing for the marginalized sections, the Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao yojana to focus on educating and protecting the girl child, align with left-leaning values of social justice which intend to promote welfare in the society. This emphasis on socio-economic development does not align with either the conservative or liberal categories in Western politics. The Indian so-called right wing, in fact, could be seen as centrist on the global stage—seeking to navigate between the pressures of globalization and the preservation of cultural heritage.

While the left-wing movements, particularly in Western countries, often emphasize on intersectional identities such as race, gender, and sexuality within a broader progressive agenda, the Indian left tends to focus on identity politics based on caste and ethnic divisions to consolidate its base. This approach reinforces these divisions, contradicting the Marxist ideal of dissolving identities in favor of class unity. Rather than promoting a unified class struggle, the Indian left has often used caste-based identities to gain political leverage, especially in rural areas, further entrenching caste differences in the political landscape. Moreover, the far-left in India, particularly movements like Naxalism, represents a distinctly Indian phenomenon, and is rooted in the Maoist-inspired insurgency against the state. These groups rely on violent resistance often funded or supported by international entities with vested interests in destabilizing the region. In states like Bengal and Kerala, which are represented by leftist Communist parties, has historically resorted to political violence to assert its dominance. This political violence has become part of the Indian left’s strategy to maintain influence, a feature not prominent in the global left-wing movements. During their tenure in power, they have exhibited inconsistency in addressing basic issues of poverty and inequality, which ostensibly form the cornerstone of their ideological framework. Although Indian leftists may rhetorically and intellectually align themselves with the global leftist ideologies, but their commitment to adopting the corresponding economic models appears insignificant.

Hence, when the Western media criticizes Modi’s government through a narrow ideological lens, they risk missing the broader narrative. India’s efforts to balance its development aspirations with social harmony, uplift marginalized groups, and assert its role on the global stage reflect a dynamic and evolving political culture. Misinterpreting these efforts as merely right-wing populism diminishes the complexity of India’s socio-political landscape. India’s political challenges and successes must be evaluated within its unique historical and cultural context. While constructive criticism is always valuable, Western media should refrain from imposing their own political frameworks and consider the multifaceted realities of a nation that defies easy classification. Only then can global observers will fully appreciate India’s journey and aspirations.

Leave a Reply