THE INVENTION OF HINDUSTAN: V.D. SAVARKAR, SUBHAS CHANDRA BOSE, M.S. GOLWALKAR, AND THE MODERNIZATION OF HINDU NATIONALIST LANGAUGE ____________________________________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Fullerton ____________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in History ____________________________________ By Christopher Chacon Thesis Committee Approval: Professor Robert McLain, Chair Professor Jasamin Rostam-Kolayi, Department of History Professor James Santucci, Department of Comparative Religion Summer, 2016 ABSTRACT In this thesis I argue that Hindu nationalist terminology, particularly the concepts of Hindutva, Samyavada, and national identity, modernized amid currents of globalization and neocolonialism in the early twentieth-century. In the theoretical section, I examine how systems of knowledge and power in India were directly and indirectly affected by the globalization of western modernity. In the primary source analysis section, I discuss three prominent Hindu nationalists and their ideas in support of the argument made in the theoretical section. Veer Vinayak Damodar Savarkar (1883-1966), the philosopher of Hindutva, represented the ethno-nationalistic component to Hindu nationalism and looked to cultural motifs in order to unify the “true” people of India. Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose (1897-1945), the militant hero who formed the Indian National Army and outright opposed the British, contributed the aggressive discourse of nationalist rhetoric. Sarsanghchalak Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar (1906-1973), the supreme leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), utilized Hindu nationalist rhetoric in order to mesmerize post-independence Indians and lay the foundation for the future of the RSS. Although these individuals represented a current within Indian nationalist history, their lives and literature influenced the language of Hindu nationalism. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................. iv THE INVENTION OF HINDUSTAN: V.D. SAVARKAR, SUBHAS CHANDRA BOSE, M.S. GOLWALKAR, AND THE MODERNIZATION OF HINDU NATIONALIST LANGAUGE ...................................................................................... 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 Theoretical Approach .................................................................................... 3 Sources and Methodology ............................................................................. 5 Modernity and the Other ................................................................................ 7 Progress .......................................................................................................... 9 The West and the World ................................................................................ 11 Power and Knowledge ................................................................................... 14 Public and Private Space ................................................................................ 18 Resistance, Reform, and Hybridization ......................................................... 19 V.D. Savarkar and the Language of Hindutva ...................................................... 24 Netaji Bose and the Battle Against Colonialism .................................................. 31 M.S. Golwalkar and the Hindu Extreme ............................................................... 38 Language, the Body, and Fascism in Hindu Nationalism ..................................... 41 RSS Post-Independence ........................................................................................ 45 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 46 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 48 iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To start, I would like to thank Professors Robert McLain, Jasamin Rostam- Kolayi, and my Hinduism “acharya” James Santucci for their dedication to my ambitious thesis over the past several years. I have had the pleasure of taking numerous courses and spending countless office hours with each of you. With the completion of this thesis, you are finally free from my academic clutches. I would also like to thank supportive faculty I encountered throughout my seven years at California State University, Fullerton. Professors Robey Callahan and Barbra Erickson from the Department of Anthropology, Professors M. Zakyi Ibrahim, Paul Levesque, and Bradley Starr from the Department of Comparative Religion, Professors Daniel McClure, Nancy Fitch, Steven Jobbitt, and Maged Mikhail, from the Department of History, and all of those faculty members I have had the pleasure of meeting, working with, and learning various languages from, you all have my sincerest thanks. Of course, my family and friends deserve substantial gratitude in the acknowledgements section. Without their love and support, I would not have been successful. To my mother Josie, my godfather Ben, my godmother Rita, and my dear Aneri, you all have my deepest love and thanks. And to those who have departed, you will always be with me. I drive the train once again. iv 1 Introduction When considering la longue durée of Indian history, the metanarrative of continuity seemingly permeates every level of society. From the earliest settlements on the banks of the Indus River to the dense metropolises scattered throughout the continent, the land and its people prosper on a balance of a cultural legacy and economic development.1 The Mughal Empire under Aurangzeb created, for the most part, the shape of modern India.2 By the British era, Indians considered political stabilization and the integration of railways and telecommunication as progress towards their own nation.3 In the early twentieth-century, calls for an independent India reached its zenith. Pluralists such as Mohandas Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru believed modern India’s strength depended on incorporating the voices of all Indians as they stood on the precipice of the postcolonial age. Ethnocentric nationalists such as Veer Vinayak Damodar Savarkar (1883-1966), Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose (1897-1945), and Sarsanghchalak Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar (1906-1973) held that a strong Hindu nation was the only way to guarantee India’s security against the Muslim other and the 1 Sanjay Chaturvedi, “Representing Post-colonial India: Inclusive/Exclusive Geopolitical Imaginations,” in Geopolitical Traditions: A Century of Geopolitical Thought, eds. David Atkinson and Klaus Dodds (London: Routledge, 2000), 213. The term Āryāvarta provides an excellent illustration of proto-India. This term refers to northern and central India from the Hīmālaya to Vindhya Mountain Range and is mentioned in Manu, Vasiṣṭha and Baudhāyana Dharma-sūtras as well as in later works, such as the Rājataraṅgiṇi and Abhidhānacintāmaṇi. 2 Stanley Wolpert, A New History of India, eighth edition (New York, Oxford University Press, 2009), 64, 161. 3 The term nation refers to the modern construction of a society based on its communicative integration, sociopolitical structure, and cultural identity. Although the term nation can apply to a number of societies throughout history, this author considers the modern nation-state as the subject for this study. This allows the author to recognize India’s millennia-old cultural systems while presenting an argument for a modern Indian nation based on hybridization with the west and modernization of nationalist language. 2 British imperialism.4 Savarkar, the philosopher of Hindutva, wrote glorified histories of India and its millennia-old cultural traditions.5 Bose envisaged a surge of militaristic patriotism and ethnic pride as the key to a fully independent homeland.6 Golwalkar, the supreme leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), racialized Indian politics during the last years of British rule and earliest years post-independence in order to balkanize Hindus and Muslims and guarantee Hindu hegemony in India.7 These three individuals represented a current within Indian nationalist history that influenced both twentieth-century politics and the modernization of Hindu nationalist language. In this thesis, I argue that Hindu nationalist terminology, particularly the concepts of Hindutva, Samyavada, and national identity, modernized amid currents of globalization and neocolonialism in the early twentieth-century.8 The literature on Indian nationalism and its prominent figures, such as Gandhi and Nehru, encompasses volumes of monographs produced since the decades following independence. The sheer number of administrative characters, geographic regions, and economic interests involved in the birth of Indian nationhood can turn any historical project into an effectively Sisyphean endeavor. Therefore, this thesis attempts to address 4 These individuals have honorific titles before their names that refer to their position as leader of their respective organizations. 5 A.G. Nooran, Savarkar and Hindutva: The Godse Connection (New Delhi: LeftWord Books, 2002), 1. When addressing the philosophy and adherents of Hindutva, the author will refrain from italicizing the term. When referring