Of Nationalism, Jingoism, Othering, and Belongingness

 The article was published on countercurrents.org on 12 June 2025

https://countercurrents.org/2025/06/of-nationalism-jingoism-othering-and-belongingness/

It explored the concept of nationalism in India, highlighting its historical trajectory and the troubling ways it has been manipulated in contemporary politics. I critique the rigid, exclusionary form of nationalism that has emerged, particularly under the influence of neoliberal and authoritarian ideologies, leading to the marginalization of various groups. Here's a breakdown of the key points:

1. Historical Context of Nationalism

• Nationalism in India, like in other parts of the world, began as a means to unite people against colonialism and imperialism. It was initially shaped during the 19th and 20th centuries, often drawing from shared language, culture, and history.

• However, there have been two strands of Indian nationalism: a progressive, inclusive vision based on constitutional morality and democratic values, and a reactionary, exclusionary version that glorifies a mythic past and is rooted in religious identity.

2. Weaponization of Nationalism

• The piece argues that nationalism, traditionally a unifying force, has been weaponized by those in power. It has been used to suppress dissent, undermine civil liberties, and consolidate power, often at the expense of minorities.

• In India, nationalism has increasingly merged with religious identity (especially Hindutva), neoliberalism, and authoritarianism, leading to an aggressive form of nationalism that prioritizes the interests of the dominant groups.

3. Nationalism vs. Belongingness

• Nationalism is often equated with belongingness, but this article emphasizes that belonging is a multi-dimensional concept shaped by caste, class, race, gender, and nation. Thus, belongingness is not a one-size-fits-all idea and must be inclusive of all these intersecting identities.

• The rise of pseudo-nationalism (rooted in exclusion and rigidity) has made it harder for diverse groups to feel included in the national fabric.

4. Impact on Women

• Nationalism has had particularly detrimental effects on women, especially during Partition. Women were often seen as the embodiment of national honor—their bodies became battlegrounds for territorial claims and communal violence. The recovery of abducted women was framed as a matter of national prestige rather than addressing the trauma and agency of the women themselves.

5. Critique of Nationalism by Intellectuals

• Key figures like Rabindranath Tagore, Dr. Ambedkar, and MN Roy critiqued nationalism for its moral perversion and its potential to undermine individual freedoms. Tagore warned that nationalism could numb moral consciousness and promote collective egoism, while Ambedkar argued that nationalism in a deeply hierarchical society like India, marked by caste and religious divides, was incompatible with true national unity.

6. Contemporary Nationalism and Jingoism

• In today's India, nationalism has evolved into jingoism—an aggressive, hyper-patriotic sentiment. This version of nationalism often equates criticism of the state with disloyalty or treason, leading to a polarized society where dissent is silenced, and minorities are marginalized.

• Nationalism has become synonymous with militarism and emotional spectacle, with symbols like the national flag or the army being used to demand unquestioning loyalty rather than promoting civic responsibility or inclusiveness.

• 7. Role of the State and Society

• The article critiques how the state and political movements (like the BJP) have co-opted nationalism to serve their own agendas, particularly through the promotion of a masculinist version of nationalism.

• Scholars have noted the intersection of Hindutva, neoliberalism, and authoritarianism, which has further entrenched exclusionary nationalism, focusing on narrow, majoritarian views of identity that fail to include India's pluralistic society.

• 8. Gendered Aspects of Nationalism

• Nationalism is not a neutral force but inherently gendered, prioritizing male experiences and values in the dominant narrative. National identity often draws from masculinized ideals like valor, sacrifice, and authority, positioning men as central to history and citizenship while relegating women to symbolic or supportive roles.

• Political theorists like Carol Pateman and Cynthia Enloe argue that nationalism often marginalizes women by assigning them symbolic roles (e.g., "mother of the nation") while overlooking their political agency and intellectual contributions.

• Challenging this masculinized nationalism is crucial to developing an inclusive national identity that recognizes the diverse experiences shaping the nation.

• 9. Nationalism and Rising Populism

• There's a growing convergence of nationalism and populism, with right-wing populists using nationalist rhetoric to rally support through fears of immigration, globalism, and cultural dilution.

• Leaders in countries like the USA, Brazil, and Hungary exploit nationalism to justify policies that curtail freedoms, suppress opposition, and consolidate power, often undermining democratic institutions

• The rise of religious nationalism has fueled division, xenophobia, and the erosion of human rights, with nationalist ideologies manipulating people's fears to create an "us vs. them" mentality.

• 10. Phony Nationalism and Othering

• Phony nationalism refers to superficial patriotism that manipulates national pride for political control, using exclusion, fear, and spectacle to stifle democratic values and social cohesion.

• • The concept of "Othering" comes into play here—where individuals or groups deemed "different" or "outsiders" are stigmatized, excluded, or oppressed based on race, ideology, gender, or religion.

  • This form of nationalism breeds division, obscuring India's rich pluralism and making the national identity narrower, exclusionary, and increasingly majoritarian.

  11. Nationalism and Global Inequality

  • In the wake of global crises like economic downturns, mass migration, and the COVID-19 pandemic, nationalism has widened global inequalities. Countries increasingly prioritize domestic interests over international cooperation, weakening global solidarity.

  • For instance, vaccine nationalism during the pandemic left poorer nations with inadequate supplies, deepening disparities in health and economic outcomes.

  • Nationalist policies often exacerbate economic inequality, restrict migration, and fuel xenophobic or protectionist policies, which only strengthen global hierarchies and reinforce inequalities both within and between countries.

  12. Nationalism and War

  • Ethnic nationalism or ultranationalism often promotes the belief in the superiority of one nation, which can rationalize conquest, colonialism, or ethnic cleansing.

  • Nationalism plays a significant role in wars and secessionist movements, often justifying the use of force in the name of national unity, honor, or restoration of national greatness.

  • This fuels internal and external conflicts, creating a climate of fear and division where national security is prioritized over diplomacy and human rights.

  13. Globalization, Neoliberalism, and Nationalism

  • Forces like globalization, neoliberalism, and digitalization have reshaped nationalism by fostering interconnectedness and eroding traditional national boundaries.

  • While globalization and digitalization have enhanced global integration, they have also exacerbated economic disparities within nations, contributing to the rise of economic nationalism.

  • Economic nationalism seeks to reclaim economic sovereignty and resist global capitalism’s adverse effects, but it often reinforces exclusionary politics and undermines democratic ideals. This can be seen in both the USA and India, where economic nationalism has been used to foster polarization and social division.

  14. Oligarchy and Nationalism

  • Rising economic inequality has empowered a small elite to accumulate disproportionate wealth and political influence, often exploiting nationalist sentiment to protect their interests.

  • In many cases, nationalist rhetoric is used to suppress dissent, distract from structural injustices, and consolidate power in the hands of the elite. This undermines democratic institutions and fuels a system where the elite thrive at the expense of the broader population.

  15. Rethinking Belongingness

  • Belongingness is redefined as more than just membership in a nation-state. It means being accepted, valued, and integrated into a community, with the agency to participate and influence the structures that define society.

  • True belonging goes beyond national identity and must consider how intersectional factors—such as caste, class, race, gender, and religion—shape individuals' experiences of inclusion or exclusion.

  • In the age of polarization, identity politics, and rising nationalism, fostering genuine inclusion requires expanding the concept of belongingness to embrace diverse experiences and create inclusive communities.

  16. The Redundancy of Nationalism in the 21st Century

  • The article argues that nationalism, in its exclusionary, jingoistic forms, is inadequate to address the challenges of the 21st century, like climate change, migration, and rising inequalities. The regressive focus on national identity obstructs global solidarity, hindering progress on issues that require international cooperation.

  • In contrast, alternatives like targeted universalism, cosmopolitan belonging, and globalism emphasize human dignity, freedom, and justice beyond borders. These frameworks allow us to move beyond toxic polarization and build cohesive societies grounded in social justice.

  Conclusion

  The article critiques the traditional notion of nationalism in India and how it has been manipulated to serve political interests, particularly in the age of neoliberalism and authoritarianism. It warns that contemporary nationalism, particularly in India, has taken a dark turn toward jingoism and exclusion, and advocates for a return to the inclusive, progressive ideals that originally shaped the national movement. It advocates for an inclusive, globally connected vision of belongingness that transcends national borders and majoritarian ideologies. It imagines a future grounded in progressive universal values—such as human rights, sustainability, and diversity—is necessary to reflect the aspirations of a pluralistic society and India’s role in the global community. It stresses the importance of embracing a more inclusive, democratic, and global vision of belongingness that can truly unite people, rather than dividing them based on rigid, exclusionary national identities

Remembering the Founding Mothers of the Indian Constitution

March 8, 2025

In my article that appeared here https://janataweekly.org/remembering-the-founding-mothers-of-the-indian-constitution/, I wrote about the Indian women who played a key role in pre-colonial times, contributing immensely to the freedom struggle and shaping the Indian Constitution. 

The pioneer women paved the way for democracy, and it is because of their efforts that Indian women today enjoy equal citizenship rights. They serve as a role model for future generations. Their legacy continues to inspire generations of women to engage with the state and assert their citizenship rights. 

Decades later, the impact of their work is visible. Then, 15 women participated in drafting the Constitution; today, 1.4 million women serve as panchayat leaders. While more women must be joining the top-level decision-making bodies, including the Parliament, the Supreme Court, the High Courts, and the Legislative Assemblies, it is important to celebrate the role of the Founding Mothers. 

As the world celebrates Women's History Month, India could take a moment to recognize the contribution of its Founding Mothers, who advocated for lasting changes. 

As early as 1939, women's collective, in their report of the Sub-Committee on Women's Role in Planned Economy, reimagined the Indian woman as a complete, self-sufficient, and pro-active citizen. 

This report noted, 

"We do not wish to turn a woman into a cheap imitation of a man or to render her useless for the great tasks of motherhood and nation-building. But in demanding equal status and opportunity, we desire to achieve for women the possibility of development under favourable circumstances of education and opportunity, and while doing so, urge upon the State its responsibility towards women in this respect."

Based on this report, the Indian Women's Charter on Rights and Duties was prepared, which highlighted that educated and capable men and women, enjoying their rights to freedom and equality, could contribute to societal progress. 

The outcome of their struggles was a radical step towards liberation. The writing of the Constitution refuted the colonial logic of natives being incapable of self-rule. 

The Founding Mothers significantly shaped the Preamble, advocating for equality, liberty, justice, democracy, and secularism, besides affirmative actions for the marginalized. 

Despite facing numerous challenges, they championed the rights of women in a male-dominated society. 

Their legacy continues to inspire future generations. 

Single Mothers, Patriarchy and Citizenship in India: Rethinking Lone Motherhood through the Lens of Socio-legal and Policy Framework

 

This book is available at Amazon https://amzn.in/d/f9kOOR0 

It is about single mothers and their citizenship rights in a patriarchal society. 

It states that though motherhood is a powerful virtue; however, in a patriarchal society, it is construed narrowly to uphold the heteronormative family norms which prioritize men over women. 

This traditional masculine framework overlooks the diverse family forms and alienates female-headed households. Rather, families headed by lone mothers are labelled as broken, pathological, and degenerative, overlooking the fact that for ages, single mothers have challenged the traditional notion of the heterosexual family. 

Despite constitutional guarantees of equality and justice, the state and society alienate single mothers, deny them visibility, and absolve themselves of the responsibilities of protecting their citizenship rights.

 Nevertheless, for ages, single mothers, despite all hardships, have been defying patriarchal norms and are bringing up their children solely, with little support available from their families, society, or the state. Rather, they are challenging the dominant and hegemonic `male breadwinner and the provider’ model. 

This work examines the active and empowered notion of maternalism, or feminist and emancipatory mothering. It demonstrates how lone mothers are redefining and reshaping socio-cultural norms to pave the social transformation through their maternal activism. 

With the increase in the number of female-headed households, this work recommends the need for an alternative approach to disrupt the dominant themes of victimhood, poverty, destitution, and neglect by deploying the axis of intersectionality. 

It suggests that the state needs to evolve a comprehensive empowerment framework to specifically recognize the entitlements of single mothers as citizens and take steps to advance their citizenship rights.

 

How the Malimath Committee Denied Women Their Rights?

Section 498A IPC was inserted in the Indian Penal Code in 1983 and provides to protect women from cruelty in their matrimonial homes. The Malimath Committee Report (2003), twenty years after the enactment of Section 498A, noted,

“In a less tolerant, impulsive woman may lodge an FIR even on a trivial act. The result is that the husband and his family may be immediately arrested and there may be a suspension or loss of job. The offence alleged being non-bailable, innocent persons languish in custody. There may be a claim for maintenance adding fuel to the fire if the husband cannot pay. She may change her mind and get into the mood to forget and forgive. The husband may realize the mistakes committed and come forward to turn a new leaf for a loving and cordial relationship. The woman may like to seek reconciliation. But this may not be possible due to the legal obstacles. Even if she wishes to make amends by withdrawing the complaint, she cannot do so as the offence is non-compoundable. The doors for returning to family life stand closed. She is thus left at the mercy of her natal family…This section, therefore, helps neither the wife nor the husband. The offence is non-bailable and non-compoundable making an innocent person undergo stigmatization and hardship. Heartless provisions that make the offence non-bailable and non-compoundable operate against reconciliations. It is, therefore, necessary to make this offence (a) bailable and (b) compoundable to give a chance to the spouses to come together” (p. 191).

 

The Committee, while making such observations, expressed its apprehensions about the ability of the criminal justice system to provide justice. However, the committee has failed to recognize that

First, cruelty under 498A is listed as a cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable crime and has to be dealt with accordingly. The criminal justice system, while dealing with each case, is expected to take abundant precautions in ascertaining the guilt of the accused person; therefore, to suggest that this offence be diluted implies distrusting the judiciary and labelling the trial courts as inefficient to effectively adjudicate the culpability of the parties.

Second, the context of the relationship between the perpetrator and the victim does not make domestic violence a lesser crime. Rather, the severity of the crime is adverse in situations where the batterer is in the position to exert financial, emotional, and social control over the victim because of the relationship, and the victim is financially dependent on the perpetrator.

Third, salvaging a violent marriage is not a viable option when a man is abusive, as he destroys the family through his violent actions. Families cannot be built on the edifice of bruised and battered bodies or scarred minds.

Fourth, the bitterness in a relationship already starts once a wife is being abused; therefore, suggestions should have focused on altering the men’s violent behaviour.

Fifth, the policemen are not overzealous in arresting the accused. Rather, studies have shown that women undergo hassles in filing the FIR. Also, at every step of the trial, mediation is enforced vehemently to compel women to reconcile.

Sixth, making the offence compoundable will not serve the purpose, as neither will it deter the perpetrator nor will it help to salvage the relationship. Experiences show that violence escalates in situations when women are pushed back into abusive situations without the guarantee of safety.

Last, the committee has failed to raise concerns relating to provisions of shelter homes, medical, or legal aid, or other facilities for the battered women, as its only apprehension was to save the family. This indicates its biased approach.

Despite its pitfalls, this erroneous approach sets precedents, is being repeated multiple times, and has major implications for diluting the procedures and provisions relating to criminal law. Over the years, the state has followed the recommendations blindly without testing the validity of claims or referring to the existing research to suggest changes. 

For more details, please see my book

Domestic Violence Law in India: Myth and Misogyny (2021), Routledge