Majoritarianism: Narendra Modi
When a parliamentary majority is projected as a
civilisational mandate and victory in elections is transmuted into a divine sanction,
democracy which is rule by consent is smothered by majoritarianism which is
rule by dominance.
In the political imagination of
contemporary India, Narendra Modi has, with remarkable strategic clarity,
fashioned an image which transcends that of a democratic leader and edges
towards a civilisational
redeemer. Through carefully curated symbolism such as temple
inaugurations, invocations of a wounded historical past, and the language of
cultural resurgence, Modi has successfully projected himself more as a restorer
of Hindu pride than as a head of government.
Hindutva, the ideology that gives
Modi his moorings, frames political victories as moments of historical
correction. In the narrative ecosystem of Hindutva, policy decisions acquire
the aura of moral restitution. The result is a power shift that is not so
subtle anymore. Leadership becomes sanctified, criticism appears sacrilegious,
and the leader’s persona fuses with the destiny of the majority community.
Faith in governance is recast as faith in a person. Slogans such as Modi ka Guarantee
reinforce that faith.
Citizenship acquires gradations in
such atmospherics. As George Orwell would say, all citizens are equal but some
citizens are more equal. Belonging is no longer experienced purely as a matter
of legal status, but as something filtered through cultural proximity to the
dominant identity. If you don’t align yourself by faith or symbolism or public
conformity with the majority ethos, then your loyalty is tested in myriad ways
and your rights become conditional.
In such a climate, shaped by strong
majoritarian currents, institutions
like the media and the judiciary that are meant to function as
independent checks drift into a compliant relationship with power. Instead of
interrogating authority with the rigour expected in a democracy, these
institutions now echo dominant narratives or selectively amplify them, reinforcing
rather than challenging the prevailing consensus.
The minority communities become obvious victims. They
are positioned as the ‘other.’ When policies and public rhetoric are repeatedly
framed around identity and difference, a climate of suspicion and exclusion
will be the outcome. What may start as isolated statements or targeted measures
gradually acquires the force of pattern and stereotypes. The Muslims and
Christians in India now require constant validation through loyalty tests or
explanations. Over time, this process of ‘othering’ gets normalised. Then
exclusion no longer shocks anyone’s conscience. On the contrary, it gets
embedded in language, policy, and perception.
Dissent is suspect in such an
ambience and can invite disproportionate consequences. Disagreement becomes a
matter of risk rather than right. Alongside this, the social media amplifies
hostility. Trolling, vilification, public shaming… The combined effect of all
of these is not always overt oppression, but something more insidious: a
gradual internalisation of limits. People begin to measure their words, soften
their opinions, or avoid certain topics altogether. Self-censorship takes root.
Minds get perverted.
The most glaring paradox probably is that
majoritarianism thrives within democracy, not outside it. It uses democratic
legitimacy to gradually narrow democratic space. Electoral victories, popular
mandates, and the language of representation provide it with unquestionable
legitimacy.
This legitimacy often extends beyond
governance into moral
authority, where the will of the majority begins to overshadow the
rights of minorities and the autonomy of institutions. Democracy continues to
function; but for the majority community. Since that majority is enormous – 80%
– the democracy looks normal, though it is extremely sick.
PS. This post is a part of Blogchatter A2Z Challenge 2026
Previous Posts in this series
Tomorrow: Negative Capability – John
Keats
I am not surprised that Maliekal loved it as he would definitely follow More's path if placed in a similar position. He will definitely break rather than bend. You are no different.
ReplyDeleteHowever I wonder if such a dilemma exists at all in the mind of the Indian politicians or the media men. Arnab Goswami, the cheerleader of the Godi media, was once a Modi baiter. I don't think there was even a pinprick from his conscience when he switched loyalty to the new incumbent on the Delhi throne. As Advani famously observed about the journos of the emergency era, 'When asked to bend, they crawled." Things are worse now. Loyalty without conscience (chamchagiri to put it in raw Hindi) has long been hailed as a virtue in India and a time tested path to success.
I was surprised by the omission of a reference to Cardinal Thomas Wolsey, his immediate predecessor.
Wolsey, a prototype of the modern day snollygoster, had ascended to the coveted position of Chancellor by treading a Faustian path. Ironically both met with the same fate. Even after selling his conscience, Wolsey couldn't deliver the goods to the king as the Pope wouldn't play ball.
The last words uttered by them highlight the rewards of a clear conscience. While More light-heartedly says that he dies God's servant first, Wolsey's parting words to Cromwell are full of pathos: 'Had I served my God as diligently as I have served my king, He wouldn't have given me over in my grey hairs." More was in such a good mood that when his head was placed on the block, he asked the executioner to stop and then moved his long grey beard out of the way of the axe joking that it hadn't offended the king. Yes, you are right. Loyalty detached from conscience is slavery. Following the dictates of your conscience lets you die a free man even if you have no tangible benefits to show for it.
These are just a few random thoughts on your blog. It's always a delight to read whatever you write because of the careful choice of words and the effortless flow of thoughts.
It's well-crafted as Maliekal succinctly puts it.
This was meant for the previous post, I understand.
DeleteThe author's comment is poignant.
DeleteAnd this seems to be going on everywhere. Deep sigh.
ReplyDeleteI was just telling my wife yesterday about the sad fate of the world now with too many countries having leaders who aren't leaders at all but "snollygosters" to use a new word I learnt from the comment above.
DeleteUSA has also got a similar leader in the form of Trump. I feel, the trouble lies with the people who choose their leaders. Our present leader knew how to gain power and knows how to use it after gaining it. The biggest use of power to him is to do the things which ensure its retention. Once grabbed, the power should not slip out of hands is his motto. The institutions including the press and the judiciary have been made subservient either by purchasing the servility of the people sitting in them or by frightening them if they are not ready to be sold. This does not serve even the interests of the majority community.
ReplyDelete"This does not serve even the interests of the majority community." But the majority don't understand that. Populism is the chief reason, I'd say. In fact I'm writing a post on populism too and then Modi will aplear again in this series.
DeleteEvery dog has its day. And every empire... Every dictator. If Hungary's Election results are any indication. Before that of Brazil. Power is seemingly brute and absolute. Civilizational redeemers are passing clouds. Let us build up a People's Movement, for a Second Republic.
ReplyDeleteTrue, Brazil and Hungary have their lessons for us. The return of robust democracy. As The Hindu editorial wrote yesterday, "Voters worldwide are tiring of the hard-right, antipluralistic, anti-immigrant and xenophobic rhetoric..."
DeleteHari Om
ReplyDeleteMighty and Meaningful Musings on the Matter of the Majority rule. I like how you drew out the insidious nature, the subtlety, of compliance by lack of Movement in questioning the flow of 'democracy'... YAM xx
Though I'm not a religious believer, I too get a taste of Majoritarianism once in a while since my name is Christian.
Delete