.

In addition, the inclusive nationalism associated with the anti-colonial struggle was in any case undermined by the process of capitalist development that took place in the country after independence, but this factor, which we will discuss below, does not affect the conceptual difference between these two types of Nazis. -onalism.In the post-independence period, when the political part of the agenda, namely universal adult suffrage, formal equality before the law, the separation of the state from religion (at least in the sense of a state without religion) and the granting of a number of basic rights , was carried out and enshrined in the Constitution, there were no changes for the better in other areas of life. The most striking example is land reform. Of course, some very large landowners, as well as those landowners who did not want to go over to the capitalist method of farming, had to give up their land, which was then distributed among the richer part of the peasantry, but as such, the concentration of land in the hands of the owners does not change -las. In other words, the share of land owned by, say, 15% of large landowners has not decreased, but the composition of these 15% has changed somewhat. And this change contributed to the development of capitalism in Indian agriculture, which was a mixture of landlord and peasant capitalism.The fact that capitalism, with its inherent inequality, would undermine political equality, reflected in the concept of "citizenship" and enshrined in the Constitution, was hardly in doubt. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, the architect of the Constitution, in his concluding remarks to the Constituent Assembly drew attention to the possibility of such a course of events. But the political leadership believed that, under the post-independence dirigiste economic regime, the control and regulation imposed on private capital would allow the country to gain two benefits: enlist the support of the private sector for economic development and keep within reasonable limits the inequality generated by as a result of such a move.This, of course, was a utopia, and the growing income inequality was already a strong enough motive for the then Prime Minister Jawa Harlal Nehru to establish the Mahalanobis Committee in 1960 to study the problem. However, even those restrictions that were introduced to reduce inequality during the dirigiste regime were lifted during the neo-liberal policies after 1991. The transition to a neo-liberal economy meant that the "natural tendencies" of capitalism - the initial accumulation of capital at the expense of small producers and peasant farming, the rampant commercialization of all sectors (including, inter alia, the privatization of services such as education and health care) was in full swing, and neither existing nor any restrictions ceased to operate.Consequences of the influence of Hindu nationalism on the development of Indian politicsThe striving for neoliberalism entailed a shift, even in official statements, from the inclusive nationalism proclaimed earlier to the traditional exalted bourgeois nationalism. This was evidenced by the apotheosis of the growth of the gross domestic product, regardless of what the living conditions of the working population were. This dichotomy is inherent in both mercantilism and classical political economy. The general refrain that India should become an "economic superpower" was also repeated, and almost every issue came to be seen in the light of that goal. Indeed, the chief minister of the previous BJP United Progressive Alliance government once even stated that "corruption" in the economy must be fought because it prevents India from becoming an "economic superpower"!If it is still possible to understand the rise of bourgeois nationalism out of the inclusive nationalism of the anti-colonial era as the big bourgeoisie became more and more globalized and the gap between the bourgeoisie and other classes widened sharply due to the destruction of the anti-imperialist bloc, then the question still arises: why does bourgeois nationalism emerge at all if the bourgeoisie itself becomes globalized? If the rise of the bourgeoisie beyond nationalism seems to be the hallmark of advanced capitalist countries in the age of globalized capital, then why should a country like ours glorify bourgeois nationalism? But this is exactly what we see today and what the Hindutva advocates, who put the “nation” as a metaphysical concept above the people, advocate. Why does this process arise not in opposition to globalization, but within the very forces that support globalization?The answer lies in the difference between the prevailing situation in advanced capitalist countries and those like India. There are at least three reasons for this: firstly, the relative size of the labor force in India (this term includes open unemployment, casual work, precarious work, underemployment and hidden unemployment) is much larger than in advanced countries, which makes the tension between democratic institutions based on universal adult suffrage, on the one hand, and the continued deterioration of the situation of huge masses of people, on the other, much higher. Secondly, when the economy is booming, the labor market does not create the kind of tension that would increase the bargaining power of workers; as a result, the share of economic surplus in the volume of production is growing rapidly, which only sharply increases inequality in society [5]. This situation is observed to a much greater extent not in the developed capitalist countries, but in countries such as India, since such a rapid growth in the economies of the developed capitalist countries did not occur. Third, the effects of neoliberal policies are much more profound in countries like India, due to the pressure of primitive capital accumulation on the vast mass of small producers, both in terms of cash flow (by compressing their incomes) and in terms of assets (by dispossessing them at bargain prices).Because of this difference, political support for the neoliberal regime within democratic institutions is in much greater danger in countries such as India than in advanced capitalist countries (although a similar threat exists there too, and it is exacerbated during a crisis such as the current one). - to him). However, neoliberalism has its own "natural" ways to deal with this problem [6]. Below we will consider one such method.As the adoption of political decisions objectionable to international financial capital threatens the economy with an outflow of capital in the whirlwind of globalized financial flows, most political institutions, which do not have the will to abandon the global financial flows that are an integral part of the globalization process, continue to spend more or less less the same policy, namely the one demanded of them by globalized capital. In other words, even if one political institution is replaced by another in the election process, economic policy will remain more or less the same. This trend is further reinforced by the fact that the country's financial bureaucracy, usually recruited from the World Bank, the IMF and other similar institutions, also remains unchanged even with a change of government.But for the corporate-financial oligarchy, this way of separating neoliberalism from democratic politics, which actually amounts to the winding down of democratic politics, may not always be sufficient. Therefore, it is looking for other additional ways to ensure the continuation of the country's slavery in relation to neoliberal capitalism and does everything to protect itself from the democratic demands of the people.The need for other means becomes especially strong when the neo-liberal regime faces an economic crisis, which is happening now under the influence of the world capitalist crisis. Here we must keep in mind an important asymmetry: economic inequality, which increases during periods of high growth, does not decrease during periods of crisis. Similarly, the initial accumulation of capital at the expense of small producers occurs during a period of high growth, during a crisis it does not decrease; on the contrary, it only increases. Similarly, if employment does not increase during a period of high growth rates, which leads to an increase in the relative size of labor reserves, this factor does not decrease at all, but only intensifies during a crisis. Moreover, even the urban upper middle class, who were the beneficiaries of neo-liberalism, become frustrated and uneasy when employment opportunities even in sectors such as information technology services begin to dwindle in the face of the crisis.The support of Hindutva supporters who sow division among the people, mobilize them on the basis of religious-communal fascist propaganda and adhere to the neo-liberal agenda, becomes important for the corporate-financial oligarchy, especially in times of crisis. A corporate fascist alliance comes into play that vigorously propagates an ideology of glorifying nationalism, an ideology that places the "nation" as a metaphysical entity over the people, demanding "sacrifices" from them, including democratic rights, in the name of the "nation". (When the current BJP finance minister, Arun Jaitley, says that "freedom of expression cannot be secured at the expense of the nation," he is effectively demanding that people "sacrifice" their freedom of expression, which is their fundamental right, for the metaphysical notion of "nation ").Such an ideology of glorifying nationalism undoubtedly meets the interests of the corporate-financial oligarchy. Since the metaphysical concept of "nation" must be supported by high rates of growth in gross domestic product, and this, of course, requires an increase in "confidence" on the part of corporate capitalists, both domestic and foreign, it follows that " nationalism” demands concessions for corporate capital. In other words, this logic implies that in order to strengthen the “nation”, the capitalists must become richer (as suggested by the “Made in India” campaign of the current government, formed by the BJP party, which rolls out the red carpet for foreign multinational corporations). Thus, the corporate financial oligarchy very successfully turns the situation in its favor: instead of feeling threatened by democratic institutions during a crisis, it actually legitimizes its hegemony, receives even more privileges, and even demands “victims” in the form of democratic institutions. the rights of the people in the name of the "nation".Such an interpretation of "nationalism" is in the interests of the fascist elements, Hindutva supporters. Their entire policy is based on the concept of a "Hindu state". But in Hinduism, unlike the Semitic religions, there is neither "Book" nor "church". Indeed, according to the historian Romila Thapar, foreign authors use the expression "Hindu groups of religions", and not the single name "Hinduism" [7]. Thus, "Hindu state" means not just a theocratic state, but an authoritarian state where a small and arbitrarily chosen group, acting on behalf of the Hindu community, determines state policy. This is why the inclusive nationalism of the anti-colonial struggle is anathema to the Hindutva, and for this reason, not surprisingly, they did not participate in the anti-colonial struggle. By rejecting inclusive nationalism and promoting an exalted metaphysical nationalism that puts the “nation” above the people, a narrow circle of those who speak on behalf of the “nation” above democratic institutions, thus becomes an integral part of the agenda of the Hindutva movement.There is another factor to be noted here. The caste system, as the historian Suvira Jaiswal argued, is central to institutionalized Hinduism and, consequently, to the ideas and plans of Hindutva supporters [8]. Inclusive nationalism, with its egalitarian focus, was associated with dramatic changes in the socio-political life of the country, so dramatic that it would not be an exaggeration to call them "the long Indian revolution." The fact that those who have survived millennia of institutionalized inequality and caste oppression are now constitutionally equal citizens of the republic is no small achievement. Nor is it that a region like the state of Kerala, which witnessed not only the “untouchables” but even the “invisibles” at the beginning of the 20th century, is now applauded by the whole world for its human development indices, which necessarily suggest a certain degree of egalitarianism.Hindutva supporters advocate a "counter-revolution" against this "long revolution". Their goal is the rejection of inclusive nationalism, the rejection of the democratic vision of the "brotherhood of equal citizens", the reformatting of society in such a way as to re-establish the old hierarchies. Propaganda of glorifying nationalism serves their purpose.In short, both corporations and Hindutva adherents have a common interest in the hard promotion of an exalted nationalism that puts "the nation" over the "people." The "nationalism" preached by the current BJP-controlled government is not the inclusive nationalism of the anti-colonial struggle (although the government duplicitously maintains the prestige of inclusive nationalism in the minds of the people by pretending to identify with it). In fact, the government rejects inclusive nationalism. The "nationalism" that the current government is preaching is an ideological weapon in the hands of the corporate-fascist alliance to insulate the neoliberal regime, and therefore the hegemony of the corporate-financial oligarchy, from any challenge that democratic institutions may pose by weakening these institutions. The furious propaganda of such "nationalism" is connected with the changes taking place in the very nature of the state, when the neo-liberal state is consolidated, turning into an authoritarian one, not by declaring a "state of emergency" or mobilizing troops, etc., but by mobilizing heaps of -ki Hindu extremists and fascist stormtroopers.The spread of the ideology of glorifying nationalism, according to which the “nation” is above the people, and what is included in the concept of “national” is determined by a narrow circle of Hindutva supporters united around the ruling party, leads to the fact that criticism of the ruling government begins to be characterized as "anti-national", and the goal is to eradicate critical thinking in those institutions that are the leading intellectual centers of the country.Under the neoliberal order, the persecution of thought is carried out through the process of commoditization of education. In schools where education is sold as a commodity, those who buy education use it as an investment in themselves as a commodity. Since the commodity does not have a use value for the seller, but is a pure exchange value, i.e. the disposal of a certain amount of money, then the one who buys the services of an educational institution is only interested in the question of how much money he can get on the market when he himself becomes a commodity. In this commoditized world, such education is valued, which is presented in the form of a “capsule”, a neatly packaged product.At the same time, any education that seeks to raise sensitive questions, that stimulates the student to think, is met with disapproval in society. Thus, the commoditization of education is a disastrous process for intellectual activity.In state educational institutions, where the destructive effect of commoditization is not yet felt, intellectual practice makes students think. These institutions educate a large number of students from socially and economically disadvantaged groups due to their affirmative action policies as well as affordable tuition fees. On the part of these groups of students, the tendency to raise the main issues of exclusion, oppression and exploitation is much stronger than on the part of those who come from more privileged sections of the population (although the presence of the first group also increases the social sensitivity of the second in these educational institutions ). Therefore, some state educational institutions have become leading intellectual centers, spaces of intense intellectual and political activity of students and platforms for their creative and original self-expression. The persecution of thought, initiated by the supporters of the Hindutva, is directed precisely at these very institutions.It is not random. It illustrates the hostility of these elements towards free-thinking, which they perceive as an obstacle to their project of weakening democracy in the name of glorifying nationalism.Hindutva followers would have no problem with these institutions if they simply churned out, as so many private educational institutions do, unthinking and socially insensitive people who are solely concerned with becoming a commodity. This is what is meant when they say that students should just "study" and not "politics". (Some ministers of the Joint Cabinet of Ministers actually voiced this demand). But at the heart of politics is the provision of alternative opinions to society about society itself. Since students are part of a society that is constantly engaged in mental activity and, accordingly, generating, presenting and discussing alternative points of view on society, the requirement not to engage in politics actually boils down to the fact that they must renounce free thought. In other words, their “learning” should not be about thinking, but about doing what those who are in the process of transforming themselves into a commodity do: swallow “knowledge” like capsules during training hours and mindlessly repeating them during exam sessions, or at best acquiring some skills but not thinking.Attacks on the leading educational institutions of the country, so that they are guaranteed to cease to be platforms for the manifestation of freedom of thought, continue in accordance with a certain scenario. Firstly, RSS adherents who have not distinguished themselves in any way in the disciplines taught in said institution are appointed by the BJP-led government to run this institution, and their only "mandate" is to rid the institution of "anti-national", t i.e. thinking elements. (The most egregious example of this is the Pune Film and Television Institute, where students even went on a lengthy strike to oppose the appointment of a director who had no knowledge of film issues). Secondly, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad Students' Union, the student wing of the RCC, which previously functioned more or less like other student organizations, albeit with a right leaning, is now turning into a "watchful" group that denounces the so-called " anti-national” activities on campuses run by RCC-appointed individuals. Thirdly, disciplinary measures are taken against students accused of such activities, and in some cases, as at Jawaharlal Nehru University, accusations of "anti-government activities" are brought under the old colonial law (in in complete violation of the Supreme Court's principles on what constitutes "anti-government activity"). In such cases, students are placed in jail for varying lengths of time, and even when they are released on bail, they still go through courtroom procedures and are subject to disciplinary action by the school authorities. Fourth, corporate media outlets make a fuss about such cases of "anti-nationalism" in order to defame the teachers and students of these institutions. Fifthly, the fascist groups, allegedly "irritated" by all this "anti-nationalism", are set against the students of these institutions, threatening with reprisals.The purpose of this whole project is to force the students of weltanschauung (German - worldview) Hindutva supporters (which is in the interests of corporate capital), terrorizing and punishing all those who oppose it, that is, all those who stubbornly continue to think. "Anti-nationalism" is identified with non-conformity towards this weltanschauung, which was fully confirmed in the statement of the Minister for Human Resources Development, who, as evidence of the university's harboring of "anti-national" elements, referred to the festival in honor of the demon king Mahishasura, who was killed, according to Indian mythology, the Goddess Dur-ga, which was arranged by some students of Jawaharlal Nehru University!Such persecution of thought is extremely dangerous for a number of reasons. First of all, since no society can exist without thinking people, any society that rejects thought actually parasitizes on other people's ideas. Such a society, in essence, is ready to accept the ideology of another society, in particular, the advanced capitalist countries. At the same time, capsules called “knowledge”, which students swallow when they are asked only to “study” and not to engage in “politics”, must necessarily be produced abroad, in developed capitalist countries.However, intellectual hegemony is the forerunner of other forms of hegemony, just as the struggle against intellectual hegemony is a condition for the struggle against other forms of hegemony. That is why the current persecution of thought is preparing the ground for the establishment of hegemony by the advanced capitalist countries, not only in the intellectual but also in other spheres of life.Such a persecution of thought, which threatens to undermine the independence of the nation, is justified in the most absurd way in the name of "nationalism", but there is nothing surprising in this. The exalted "nationalism", as we have already seen, finds support from the corporate-financial oligarchy, which is integrated with international financial capital and, therefore, is an accomplice of imperialism in the fight against any threat to such capital.Secondly, and this is quite obvious, the persecution of thought not only undermines anti-imperialism and promotes parasitism on imperialist ideas, but also helps to suppress all progressive social changes. The famous saying of Karl Marx says: “The worst architect differs from the best bee from the very beginning in that, before building a cell from wax, he has already built it in his head.” The same is true for any progressive social change that requires, first of all, the conceptual transcendence of the current situation, the creation in the head of an alternative, more humane, society, which can then be strived to be translated into reality. The persecution of thought prevents the creation of such a conceptual transcendence.But those who derive satisfaction from this fact, and therefore persecute in the hope of achieving such a denouement, live in a world of illusions. Turning the clock back in relation to any of the social and political changes that have taken place in India; attempts at social counter-revolution with terror against those who dream of a better society; the use of legislation on "anti-government activities" against those who speak of social injustice - all this will not be able to lead to social equilibrium, to a state of peace, so necessary for society.If thoughtful and productive progressive social change is destroyed by such measures, then resistance against the existing unjust order will take on unproductive and violent forms. This, in turn, will be used by the ruling party to justify further encroachments on freedom of expression, further persecution of thought, further repression by the state apparatus and fascist groups, and further narrowing of democracy. It is a dangerous dialectic, without end and without progressive potential, which will only push India to join the ranks of the so-called "failed states" that litter the Third World landscape. Thus, the main task is to free the country from the influence of this dialectic by resisting the persecution of thought and democratic institutions undertaken by Hindutva supporters in the name of glorifying "nationalism".Students of major state educational institutions all over the country are rising up against Hindutva supporters. But it is obvious that only student activity is not enough. The Left should take the lead in fighting back against Hindutva attacks. To do this, they will have to mobilize large sections of the population: the progressive and liberal intelligentsia, which opposes the persecution of thought; numerous social groups and civil society organizations that oppose the strangulation of freedom of speech and the unleashing of "social counter-revolution"; as well as political parties that are ready to defend democratic institutions.It is obvious that the Left cannot insist that all the forces that they can mobilize against the persecution of thought, against the intellectual and social regression imposed by the supporters of the Hindutva in the name of "nationalism", must necessarily subscribe to leftist ideas. This would lead to a weakening of the struggle against the hegemony of the Hindutva supporters, which would be a tragedy for the people of the country and, consequently, for the left movement itself. In other words, the fact that the Left represents the most consistent force in defense of democracy and anti-imperialist, inclusive nationalism should not be taken as representing the only such force at all times. This is contrary to the interests of the people and, consequently, the interests of the left movement itself.ConclusionIn conclusion, it is necessary to note not only the fact of the existence of two Hindutva ideologies, but also the polarity of both concepts, the criterion of which is the attitude towards the religion of Hinduism. This divided duality must be taken into account when analyzing events in modern India and evaluating the activities of political parties and their leaders. For example, the fact that the Prime Minister of India Atal Bihari Vajpayee was included in the memorandumThe intentions of the new government of the paragraph on "genuine secularism" can be considered in the framework of the Hindutva in two ways. Of course, as a representative of the BJP - the brainchild of the Sangh Family - Vajpayee clearly "backed off." On the other hand, the thesis of “genuine secularism” corresponds to the ideological principles of “pure” Hindutva, therefore, it is necessary to carefully evaluate the real ideological predilections of the Indian prime minister, taking into account all factors and the further course of events.Why did the Hindutva, so strikingly different in its ideological attitudes from the political values ​​preached by previous governments led by the Indian National Congress, have had such an insignificant impact on India's foreign policy?The answer lies in the peculiarities of the Indian political system. As in other democracies, there are too many restrictions in the Indian political system that prevent the ruling BJP from broadcasting the Hindutva ideology to the international arena.First, despite Modi's ties to the RCC, an organization that guards Hindu values, the BJP's political platform is still more moderate. After all, the BJP is not aimed at defending the Hindu way of life, but at creating a broad electoral platform that would allow the party to successfully compete for power in federal elections. Therefore, the BJP is far from being guided by Hindutva principles in all matters, although it actively promotes them during the election campaign as an integral part of its image.Secondly, in addition to federal elections, the BJP needs to achieve convincing results in state elections, many of which are less receptive to Hindu values, and in which the victory of the nationalists without building coalitions with regional political parties is simply impossible.Thirdly, on the fundamental issues of territorial disputes with Pakistan and China, a change in political course seemsextremely unlikely, regardless of the ideological platform of the government in Delhi. The contradictions in these conflicts are so deep that the political will of one party is not enough to resolve them.List of referencesAcharya Amitav, Buzan Barry. Non-Western International Relations Theories. Perspectives on and beyond Asia. Routledge, 2010. P. 92-116.Ideology and politics of modern Hindu communapism: Scientific-analyst. review. M., 1984. S. 40.Jaiswal, S. Caste, Ideology and Context // Social Scientist. - 1997. - Vol. 25, no. 5-6.Mezentseva O.V. The role of Hinduism in the ideological struggle of modern India. M., 1985. S. 11 - 12.Gangly Samit. Nationalism and the Foreign Policy of India’s Bharatiya Janata Party // Transatlantic Academy - 2014-2015 Papers series, No. 2. June 2015 - http://www.transatlanticacademy.org/sites/default/files/publications/Ganguly_HinduNational HinduismForeignPolicy_Jun15_web.pdfNoorani, A.G. RSS and Gandhi's Murder // Frontline. - 2016. - October 14. For a general discussion of RCC, see Mukherji, A. et al. RSS, School Texts and the Murder of Mahat-ma Gandhi: The Hindu Communal Project. - Delhi, 2008.Sangh: Unique And Evergreen. - R.S.S.: Widening Horizons // www rss.org (24.03.99)Sudheer Birodkar What is Hindutva? // www.hindutva.net (15.03.04)Keynes's argument in this context is set out in Keynes, J.M. A Treatise on Money, Vol. II: The Applied Theory of Money, Chapter 30; this book was reprinted as Vol. VI of Collected Writings of John Maynard Keynes. - London and Cambridge, 1979.For a discussion of the views of Adam Smith and David Ricardo on these and related issues, see Dobb, M. Theories of Value and Distribution Since Adam Smith. - Cam-bridge, 1973.My Hindutva Face Will Be an Asset in Foreign Affairs // The Indian Express. April 23, 2014 - http://indianexpress.com/article/india/politics/myhindutva-face-will-be-an-asset-in-foreign-affairs/An extract from Hilferding's book Das Finanzkapital was translated into English by Paul Sweezy and published under the title "The Ideology of Finance Capital" as an appendix to his own book: Sweezy, P.M. The Theory of Capitalist Devel-opment. - London, 1946.The concept of economic surplus, although based on Marx's idea of ​​surplus value, was developed and used effectively by Baran, P.A., Sweezy P.M. Monopoly Capital. - New York, 1966.Patnaik, P. Neo-liberalism and Democracy // Economic and Political Weekly. - 2014. - Vol .49, No. fifteen.Thapar, R. Syndicated Hinduism. - New Delhi, 2010. Also her words: “Hinduism is a mosaic of belief systems; some are related and some are not." See: Thapar, R. Slogans Don't Make for Nationalism or Anti-nationalism // The Indian Ex-press. - 2016. - July 29.