Listen to this article:

Recently, Professor Partha S. Ghosh penned an insightful article in The Wire, examining the roots of Hindu nationalism in the political aspirations of the 19th-century Bhadralok. One must, however, exercise caution before conflating Hindutva as an ideology with a broader and more generic form of Hindu communalism rooted in Bengal.

Critiques of Hindutva often understate its visible caste and regional roots, thereby allowing it to be framed as a broader Hindu movement than it actually is. This has helped reinforce the claims that Hindutva is an ideology and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) as an organisation that represents the interests of all Hindus. 

Hindu communalism and Hindutva: A necessary distinction

Hindu communalism has historically been a heterogeneous phenomenon, shaped by regional, social, and economic contexts. Hindutva, by contrast, represents a specific ideological formation, emerging from early 20th-century Maharashtra and rooted in the political anxieties and aspirations of particular caste and regional networks.

Understanding this distinction is critical. Without it, Hindutva is misrepresented as a natural or inevitable expression of all Hindu societies, rather than a historically contingent project that achieved caste dominance through organisation, narrative control, and political consolidation.

Hindu communalism did not originate as a unified national ideology. It developed through distinct regional strands, each shaped by its own socio-political conditions.

Bengal: Bhadralok communalism

In Bengal, communal mobilisation was closely tied to the political interests and social anxieties of the minuscule but highly educated Bhadralok elite. Operating in a demographic context where Muslims and marginalized Hindu caste groups formed a majority, segments of this elite deployed communal narratives as instruments of political consolidation. It served to counter the influence of the Muslim landed and professional classes, while simultaneously containing the political aspirations of Namasudras and other marginalized caste groups.

These narratives often appropriated histories from regions like Punjab and Rajasthan, reinterpreting Sikh and Rajput pasts within a broader Hindu nationalist framework. However, as it often functioned in the form of bureaucratic and clerical lobbies, it still lacked........

© The Wire