GLOBALISATION AND HINDUTVA - SATISH DESHPANDE
GLOBALISATION AND HINDUTVA - SATISH DESHPANDE
GLOBALISATION AND HINDUTVA - SATISH DESHPANDE
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Economic and Political Weekly
In its attempt to understand the spatial strategies of hindutva, this essay tries to answer questions such as: What kinds of
places has hindutva successfully transformed into heterotopias ? What specific strategies have enabled this success ? What kinds
of contestation and struggle are these spatial ideologies involved in? How do these idteologies overcome the refractory nature
of the materials they deal with? How can one begin to think of defensive and offensive counterstrategies?
ONEcan hardly dispute the factthat 'hindutva' aspects of the nation - the imagined com- weapon in a broader social struggle for
is among the most important sources of social munity considered as a nation-space - and the hegemony. Similarly, it is now recognised
change at work in India today. In this essay, ways in which social groupings with that social space is not merely an arena in
I make a prelimiinary attempt to explore the hegemonic almbitions attempt to reshape and which power relations 'happen', but also one
spatial aspects of this would-be hegemonic approp)riate this space. of the means with which power is sought to
ideology by identifying the different ways in T heorists of nationalism have long be exercised. This is what gives meaning to
which it seeks to redefine the nation-space, rccognised that a claim to an identifiable the notion of spatial strategies.
rearticulate the link between an imagined territory is a necessary, though not a suffi- A spatial strategy not only unfolds in space,
community and its territorial domain. cient, condition for the emergence of a strong it is also often about space - its appropriation,
The argument can be summarised in four sense of nation-ness. And though it has also deployment or control. Such strategies are
basic propositiotis: (I) Considered as an been known that such a physical territory also among those designed to support and maintain
ideological project, hindutva has an identi- functions at a meta-physical level as a col- relations of powerorof resistance. Considered
fiable spatial dimension in the form of a as ideologies, spatial strategies can be seen
lective representation, it is only recently that
strategy designed to retashion the social space the full implicatibns of these insights have as articulating the physical-material and
of the Indian nation; (2) Historically, hindutva become visible. This is in large measure due mental-imaginative aspects of social space.
has attempted mainly toessentialisethenation- to "the reassertion of space in critical social In short, successful spatial strategies are able
space by re-sacralising it thereby stressing its theory" through the claim that space is not to link, in a durable and ideologically credible
irreducible and exclusive affinity for Hindus 'natural' but socially produced.' way, abstract (imagined) spaces to concrete
alone: (3) The contemporary spatial strategies Thus, contemporary social theory reminds (physical) places.
ot hindutva may be said to be based on three us that nations inhabit a space that is simul-
SPATIAL STRATEGIES AND
specific ideological constructs (or hetero- taneously abstract (imagined, mental) and
IDEOLOGICAL SUBJECTS
topias), namely. the site, the locality, and the concrete (physical, geographical). These
route; (4) These strategies partly comple- contrary aspects ol the nation-space can be In one of his unpublished lectures, Michel
ment and partly conitraidict other contem- linked because ol their common existence in, Foucault offered some suggestive comments
porary ideologies (niotably. that of 'globalis- and only in, the social realm. However, it is which, despite being fragmentary and
ation'), so that the overall outcome of their only when this potential for linkage is realised inadequate, may be a useful starting point for
complex interactionis is difficult to determine. through active social practices and processes theorising the ideological practices that link
The theoretical context for these proposit- that the nation-space can take shape. Nations abstract spaces to concrete places in politically
ions is summarised in Section 1. after which are emergent phenomena; they become vis- productive ways.' Foucault took as his point
they will be briefly elaborated in the following iblc only when an ideological terrain and an of departure the assertion that we live not in
sections along with some preliminaty evidence. identifiable territory can be cross-mapped a 'homogeneous and empty space' but, on the
onto each other to produce a sense of nation- contrary, "inside a set of relations that deline-
ness shared by large numbers in society. ates sites which are irreducible to one another"
Nation, Space, and Nation-Space in Even after it has been successfully produced, [Foucault 1986:23]. In the processofjustifying
Contemporary Social Theory the sense of nation-ness remains vulnerable this assertion, he identified two kinds of sites
to history and must be continually nurtured, that are crucial: 'utopias' and 'heterotopias'.
Perhaps it is only by coincidence that recent
partly through efforts to ensure that ideology Utopias are "sites with no place" or
social theory has simultancously rediscov- and geography do not get out of synch. "fundamentally unreal spaces" (1986:24).
ered the concepts of 'space' and 'nation'. However, contemporary social theory also They are, in terms of the previous di-scussion,
Even so, this seeins to offer richi theoretical
tells us that both space and nation are abstract spaces with no immediateornecessary
possibilities, especially because the mainner
implicated in power relations. The production reterence to any concrete place. They may
aind the conltext in which these concepts ot a sense of nation-ness clearly involves
have represent "society itself in a perfected form"
been revived are particularly conducive ideological
for and material contests. In acolonial orelse "society turned upside down", but their
cross cultivation. Contemporary social theory context, this includes both the dimension of relationship to concrete, physical places is
hals begun to reconsider both space and nation nationalism as anti-imperialism, as well as the indeterminate - they point to no particular
in ways which attempt to transcend (or at more complex internal contestations among place, or to all possible places without any
least to sidestep) the traditional dichotomy different possible nationalisms, each with its discrimination. In short, utopias are
between the material and the mental. More- own equations vis-a-vis various regions, universalised, abstract spaces that are not
over, questions of power and domination haveclasses or ethnic groups within the proto- marked as referring to any particular place.
come to be highlighted in both contexts. The nation. The idea of the nation can thus be Heterotopias, on the other hand, are "real
way is thus cleared tor exploring the spatial suitably inflected to facilitate its use as- a places - places that do exist", that can be