The rise of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) marks a transformative era in India, characterized by a fundamental shift away from its founding secular principles towards Hindu majoritarian nationalism, often termed Hindutva. This ideological pivot has not only reshaped India’s domestic politics but also resonates with a global resurgence of nationalist, populist movements that equate national identity with religious or ethnic majority status. Critics argue that this majoritarianism is actively dismantling India’s inclusive democracy, fostering what some describe as an ecosystem of hate that suppresses dissent and marginalizes minority groups.
Central to this transformation is the redefinition of Indian identity, which now increasingly sidelines Muslims and Christians who do not share the Hindu punyabhoomi (holy land). This political exclusion has translated into concrete actions, including the passage of discriminatory laws and the tacit encouragement of vigilante violence, such as cow vigilantism and aggressive campaigns against interfaith relationships. Analysts have noted the emergence of an ethnic democracy, where the constitutional rights of minorities are systematically diminished, often drawing parallels to historical mechanisms of disenfranchisement. While the archaic caste system technically relates to social hierarchy within Hinduism, the new political dynamic intertwines the hegemony of upper-caste interests with the broader Hindu nationalist project, magnifying systemic discrimination.
The current ideological project represents a fundamental pivot away from the ethical and philosophical foundation of the Indian independence movement, particularly the vision championed by Mahatma Gandhi. The struggle against British colonialism was not merely about replacing foreign rule with Indian administration; it was about establishing Swaraj (self-rule), which Gandhi defined not just as political freedom, but as self-restraint, moral liberation, and justice for every individual. Central to this vision was Communal Harmony and a composite nationalism that actively sought to unite Hindus, Muslims, and all other communities. Gandhi’s ideal of secularism was rooted in Sarva Dharma Sambhava (equal respect for all religions), creating an inclusive civilizational identity where difference was a strength.
In stark contrast, the contemporary emphasis on Hindutva-based nationalism is fundamentally exclusionary and power-centric. Where Gandhi preached Satyagraha (non-violent insistence on truth) to oppose injustice, the new majoritarian doctrine is often characterized as a muscular nationalism, which employs aggressive state measures and tacitly encourages vigilante action against minorities. The founding fathers of the Indian Republic and the national movement championed a democratic, civil-libertarian, and secular state committed to social justice. The current project replaces this pluralistic constitutional commitment with a demand for cultural and religious conformity, effectively diminishing minority citizenship and representing, for many critics, a direct ideological break from the nation's democratic birthright.
The global context for India's shift is highlighted by the BJP's deepening ideological and strategic alignment with right-wing, majoritarian regimes elsewhere, most prominently Israel. This perceived affinity stems from a shared political worldview that casts both nations as perpetually embattled democracies facing a common threat, often framed as Islamic terrorism. This ideological overlap has fostered a significant military and technological partnership, with both regimes championing robust, border-centric nationalist projects. The comparison is drawn not just in foreign policy, but in the domestic implementation of firm, security-focused measures that critics label as potentially authoritarian.
Domestically, the suppression of democratic norms is starkly visible in the systematic attacks on freedom of speech and expression. The government has been accused of weaponizing vague and draconian laws, such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), to jail activists, journalists, and academics who voice critical opinions. Organizations monitoring civil society have noted an alarming assault on civic freedoms, citing raids on NGOs and the deliberate targeting of independent media, thereby establishing a climate of fear where dissent is equated with anti-national activity. This concerted effort to silence critical voices cements the perception that India's diverse, pluralistic ethos is being forcibly replaced by a singular, intolerant majoritarian doctrine.