M. Nageshwar Rao, IPS(Ret)
The mantra of "Nation First" has become a rallying cry in contemporary Indian politics, fervently championed by the RSS, its political arm, the BJP and their affiliates—collectively known as the Sangh Parivar. Proponents of this ideology frame it as the ultimate expression of loyalty, unity, and strength — an unassailable virtue that transcends all other considerations. Yet, beneath this veneer of nobility lies a troubling reality: "Nation First" is a dubious and perilous doctrine, steeped in historical distortions and ideological subterfuge. Far from safeguarding Sanatana Dharma, also known as Hindutva, it threatens its very soul, undermining the moral clarity that has long guided Hindu society. This ideology, masquerading as Rashtriyata or Rashtravad, is not a natural outgrowth of India’s spiritual heritage but a Westphalian import, repackaged to fetishise the nation-state over the pluralistic, cosmic ethos of Sanatana Dharma. This article contends that the Sangh Parivar’s "Nation First" agenda represents a pseudo-Hindutva that subverts Sanatana Dharma, while its byproduct—patriotism—serves as a moral eraser, absolving grave missteps under the pretext of national devotion. By citing specific anti-Hindu policies of the BJP government, we expose how this doctrine betrays the very tradition it claims to uphold.
Caveat:
Hindutva, a term coined by Chandranath Basu in 1892 for his eponymous book, embodies the essence of Sanatana Dharma, and serves as its new indigenous name. Following Basu’s vision, we reject the term "Hinduism," a British-coined fusion of Sanskrit and English, and embrace Hindutva instead. We also disavow the later misuse of Hindutva by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, who erroneously applied it to his politico-nationalistic ideology in 1923. Accordingly, we use Hindutva as a synonym for Sanatana Dharma, as originally envisioned and defined by Chandranath Basu.
The Westphalian Roots of "Nation First"
To understand the origins of "Nation First," one must travel back to 17th-century Europe and the Peace of Westphalia (1648), which birthed the modern territorial nation-state system. Ending decades of strife, this treaty enshrined territorial sovereignty, defining identity and allegiance by political boundaries rather than cultural or spiritual fluidity. A secular, utilitarian construct, it was tailored to stabilise a war-torn Europe. This is in contrast to the expansive worldview of Hindutva, which prioritises dharma—the cosmic order—over earthly delineations. In India, this foreign framework took root under British colonial rule, which fused diverse kingdoms, languages, and traditions into a single administrative unit. Some 19th century Bengali writers infused this territorial statist framework of colonial India by deifying it as Bharat Mata (Mother India), a deity-like figure symbolising the nation. Post-independence, the RSS—a pseudo-Hindutva nationalist organisation founded in 1925— fetishised upon this Westphalian nationalism along with Bharata Mata. This appropriation was a stroke of ideological genius, yet it bore scant resemblance to Hindutva’s decentralised essence. The Rig Veda and Upanishads extol universal truths and myriad paths to the divine, not the worship or fetishisation of a bordered landmass. The Sangh Parivar’s Rashtriyata thus owes its lineage to European statism, not the organic religious philosophy of Hindutva it purports to embody—a distortion that sets the stage for its anti-Hindu ramifications.
Pseudo-Hindutva of the Sangh Parivar
The RSS-BJP’s fixation on "Nation First" betrays a calculated agenda: the replacement of Sanatana Dharma with a statist ideology masquerading as Hindutva. True Hindutva, coined as a new native synonym for the old religion Sanatana Dharma, by Chandra Nath Basu in 1892 and later politicised by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in 1923, was for cultural and civilisational identity rooted in the lived traditions of Hindus—not a slavish devotion to the state. Yet, the Sangh Parivar’s version—here termed #PseudoHindutva—elevates the state above all else, including the very religion it claims to protect. This shift has grown stark since the Sangh Parivar’s ascent to power under Narendra Modi in 2014, with policies that erode Hindu autonomy under the guise of national unity where the state has increasingly become the arbiter of Hindu identity. Consider the Sangh Parivar’s tacit endorsement of the secular state’s control over temples, while leaving mosques and churches largely untouched. Despite campaign promises to liberate temples, the BJP refuses to free them, perpetuating the subjugation of Hindu religious institutions to the state—a clear violation of both Hindutva’s decentralised ethos and the principles of secularism. Equally telling is the BJP’s complete lack of concern about addressing constitutional inequality by granting Hindus equal rights comparable to those given to Muslims and Christians under Articles 25 to 30 of the Constitution. Such policies reveal the Sangh Parivar’s #PseudoHindutva: a statist creed that prioritises control over the organic pluralism of Hindutva, contradicting its claim to protect Hindu identity.
Patriotism as a Moral Absolution
From "Nation First" emerges a patriotism that the RSS-BJP has weaponised to rally the masses. Yet, this sentiment recalls Samuel Johnson’s 1775 admonition that patriotism is "the last refuge of a scoundrel"—not a dismissal of love for one’s land, but a warning against its misuse to cloak misdeeds. Ralph Barton Perry, a 20th-century philosopher, elaborated that patriotism’s peril lies in its power to "obliterate moral distinctions altogether." In BJP-ruled India, this obliteration is palpable. The 2016 demonetisation policy, which invalidated 86% of circulating currency overnight, devastated small traders and artisans—mostly Hindus—yet was peddled as a patriotic sacrifice for a "cashless nation." The economic fallout, including widespread job losses and business closures, was brushed aside with appeals to national duty, absolving the state of accountability. Similarly, the BJP’s aggressive economic policies and extortive indirect taxes, such as GST, favor corporate interests at the expense of the lower and middle classes and their livelihoods, yet dissent is stifled with cries of "anti-nationalism." The unprecedented devastation of nature and the environment under the guise of “vikas” strikes at the heart of Hindutva, which holds nature in reverence. Opposition to this is often met with vilification and derogatory labels. Patriotism here becomes a moral sleight of hand, excusing policies that harm Hindu communities while draping the state in virtuous garb. The Sangh Parivar’s rhetoric thus transforms national fervor into a tool of redemption, eroding the ethical moorings of Hindutva.
Erosion of Hindutva (Sanatana Dharma)’s Essence
The greatest casualty of “Nation First” is Sanatana Dharma (Hindutva) itself. Religion transcends geography. In stark contrast, the RSS-BJP’s brand of nationalism—exemplified by Mohan Bhagwat’s call for Hindus to set aside devotion to Devi-Devatas for 50 years in favour of Rashtriyata (nationalism), embodied by Bharat Mata—demands unwavering loyalty to the state. This shift reframes a secular national symbol as divine, subordinating the Hindu religion to a constructed political ideal. Far from aligning with Hindutva, this inversion represents its antithesis, elevating a state-centric identity above the overarching Hindu religious identity, so that the eternal is eclipsed by the temporal. By conflating Hindutva with Rashtriyata, the RSS-BJP seeks to reduce it to a political tool, which may be termed pseudo-Hindutva, much as Indian left-liberals have turned secularism into pseudo-secularism.
A Dangerous Precedent
The past eleven years offer a grim preview of "Nation First" unchecked. For instance, economic distress, as seen in the 2016 demonetisation debacle that crippled small businesses, was sold as a patriotic sacrifice. The 2020 farm laws, repealed in 2021 after mass agitation, favoured corporate agri-business over smallholders, many of whom uphold traditional Hindu agrarian practices tied to dharma. Meanwhile, extortive taxation and a plummeting rupee have eroded real incomes, disproportionately affecting Hindu artisans and shopkeepers—custodians of cultural continuity—while the state touts these as "nation-building" sacrifices. Any criticism of “hisab chukta” and unprecedented divisive casteist politics pitting Hindu communities against each other are hooted down by name-calling. This trajectory betrays Sanatana Dharma (Hindutva)’s democratic ethos, a natural expression of its pluralism. A nation that equates dissent with disloyalty cannot preserve its moral or cultural integrity. "Nation First" does not reinvigorate Hindus in their civilisational ethos; it deracinates and divides them, setting a precedent that imperils India’s Hindu heritage.
The Ceasefire Betrayal: Sacrificing Dharma
On 7 May 2025, India launched Operation Sindoor to avenge the horrific April 22, 2025, #PahalgamTerroristAttack, where Islamic terrorists killed 25 Hindu men after singling them out for their faith. The operation showcased India’s military strength, but Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the RSS-BJP accepted a U.S.-imposed #ceasefire with Pakistan on the fourth day, without Pakistan promising to stop terrorism or apologise for the killings. This decision turned a potential victory into a hollow gesture, denying justice to the Hindu victims and reviving the Kashmir issue globally, emboldening Pakistan’s aggression.
The "Nation First" doctrine places the state above the moral principles which demand righteousness (dharma) and accountability. By accepting U.S. mediation—against India’s long-standing policy of rejecting third-party involvement in India-Pakistan disputes—Modi’s government weakened India’s sovereignty and let Pakistan escape responsibility. This move re-hyphenated India and Pakistan in global discussions, undermining India’s independent stance. When critics demanded justice for the Pahalgam victims, the Sangh Parivar labeled them “anti-national,” a tactic to hide failures, as philosopher Ralph Barton Perry warned. Perry noted that patriotism can erase moral clarity, and here, the BJP’s patriotic rhetoric framed the U.S.-imposed ceasefire as a national triumph while ignoring the suffering of Hindu border communities. By choosing short-term benefits, like pleasing the U.S., over justice for Hindus, the ceasefire mirrors other "Nation First" betrayals, like temple control or harmful economic policies. By sacrificing moral resolve, the Sangh Parivar proves their nationalism is a shackle, not a shield.
Conclusion
"Nation First" is a seductive but hollow ideology, a Westphalian relic dressed in saffron or tricolour. The RSS-BJP wield it to fetishise the state, erode Hindutva (Sanatana Dharma)’s core, and absolve anti-Hindu policies under patriotism’s banner. From perpetuating constitutional inequality to endorsement of secular control of temples to distressing economic policies to “hisab chukta” caste conflagration, their actions reveal a pseudo-Hindutva that betrays the very tradition it claims to champion. As Johnson and Perry warned, such fervor is the refuge of scoundrels, obliterating the very distinctions that define a just society. For India to reclaim its soul, it must reject this pseudo-Hindutva and embrace a vision rooted in dharma—not borders, not flags, but the timeless pursuit of truth in Hindutva (Sanatana Dharma). Only then can it honour its past and forge a future true to its eternal way.
Comments
Post a Comment