I will say an excellent article, mate. But I believe its kind of extremely hard (if not impossible) to stoke Hindu nationalism.
Reasons -
- The biggest reason is the soft-timid nature of Hinduism itself. Children raised in Hindu-families lack such religious fire to unify and establish a common identity. The polymorphic nature of Hindusim is to blame. E.g., Main gods and worship procedures are vastly different in a Tamilian Hindu family and Eastern Uttar Pradesh Hindu family.
You couldn't be more wrong than that. Hindus raised in the plains are raised as timid gandhians while those raised in the harsh Himalayan surroundings are much clearer in the philosophy of life. Much of the nonsense that you guys tolerate in the plains in the name of 'secularism' will not be tolerated even in Sikkim, let alone in Nepal which is much more aggressive and culturally conservative.
The same thing was true for Tamil Hindus for a long time, before the disease of Dravida extremism took over their minds and quelled any Hindu pride. You'd be surprised to see Hindu nationalist associations in southern India are doing a much better job than VHP and RSS and with a fraction of their resources.
Worshipping methods may have regional differences but Hindus still frequent all temples irrespective of the architecture. Doesn't make a difference.
-
If you are able to stoke pro-Hindu sentiments, it has to be directed towards something/someone. For BJP it was openly anti-national and anti-Hindu congress. Does the same apply to the Communist Party of Nepal? I don't see them opposing/discriminating/alienating Hindus of Nepal.
NCP is viciously anti-Hindu. Don't be fooled by the garlands and the red tilaks their politicians have. It is more about "cultural appropriation" to them rather than having any spiritual sentiments. Remember, it was the Communists that forcefully diluted Nepal's Hindu status. Common Nepalis resent this even if they may not admit it openly in front of Indians.
-
Nepali people strongly identify themselves as different from mainland Indians (or mainland Hindus). Mainly because of their Tibetian features, which somehow absolute moron of Indian citizens discriminate against (then again whom we don't
) which sowed strong-anti India sentiments in them. Don't believe me? Go to Reddit/twitter and search Nepali watchman jokes/memes. I mean what these poor Nepalis has ever done to us that we ridicule them for? Trash society
No. That is not the main reason.
There was a time when Nepal wanted to join India as a state just like Bhutan did. The problem is that today's Nepal has seen a spineless Hindu-majority India that has no locus standi of its own. I am talking about both the pre-Modi era and the first term of NaMo. Nepalis are poor but take cultural pride to a very high level. That means going desi in every sense of the word is important. They speak and communicate in Nepali, proudly display Dharmic cultural customs in the public and claim that identity proudly. Meanwhile, Indians of the pre-Modi era, from big cities were busy trying to emulate Americans while running away from their cultural identities.
Nepalis despise this spineless behaviour. As a nation, they feel that they will lose the desi-ness in their culture if they joined India.
Nepal was also never conquered as a colony in true sense. The British, the Muslims Turkics, the Mughals, all failed to capture this region; historically, Nepal (and the Mahajanapadas) consider themselves to be fiercely proud of this independence. They would have happily joined India had India's Hindus not been so culturally spineless in allowing Christian missionaries and an aggressive Muslim minority to dictate cultural iconography and terms.
And then, as you say, there is this ridiculous racism that is prevalent in places like Delhi/NCR against Nepalis; even Indian nepalis from my state. Though personally speaking, there were times I was confused as a Nepali myself but was never discriminated against.
Chinese/east Asian cultural power has overwhelmingly polarized our while north-eastern states as well as Nepal and Bhutan. It's pretty common to see Nepali teenagers idolizing Chinese/Korean/Japanese actors/actresses. The newer generation is quite atheist.
That's because of spineless anti-Hindu policies of India and Indians. While Indian secular-liberal "tribal protection" laws kept the entire northeast isolated for decades, the missionaries from Korea backed by US money ensured that a mix of Far Eastern/American cultural aspects invade the region.
RSS has done some work in reverseing the flow but the glitz of the K-POP world (Korea is more responsible for Xtianity in NE than you guys would know) is just too alluring for the youth. Hindu narrative needs to change with time. The outdated methods used by the Sangh won't work, maybe except with those who are inherently proud of nationalist iconism.
Now tackling some of your points -
Never happened. Common Bengali people were bored with old farts of Communist govt. and their recessive anti-progress ideologies. Also TMC polarized Muslims (which are very easy to polarise, contrary to Hindus).
TMC's majority are Hindu Bengalis who hated the Communists. But they are doing the same as what CPI did and even worse. How do you attribute the only 2 types of Bengalis that are there in the world?
a) The rabid Hinduphobes b) the ultra-proud Hindu nationalists.
There is no 'in-between'.
This is a trait I see even in Keralites or Kashmiris; two other Hindus that have been pushed to the brink.
Should have been already used to create numerous roads and development project like metros, practically making it like a state of India. More inflow of Nepali people in India's jobs and education institutes with the help of quotas that would practically make them inseparable from India. Likewise, greater Indian investments like Metro & Educational institutes in Nepal would have proven valuable.
A better approach would have been using Nepal to create a tourism network, similar to what Switzerland and Austria have and integrate their economies. The problem is, for such developments to happen, you need some form of permanence in the governments with visionaries like PM Modi ji, Nitn Gadkari & Piyush Goyal at the helm of designing and implementation of such policies.
The pre-Xi China succeeded because it was authoritarian but with some semblance of control over the decisionmaking chairs; the president and PM had term limits and both had separate powers away from the Central Military Committee.
Hu Jintao's era of governance for China was the perfect model for India to replicate (sans the communist ideology). Without a forceful sense of permanence enforced by multiple technocrats and nationalists, India would never be able to develop a strategic thought the way China has developed. Until some form of this permanence is enforced, the bite-sized ceremonial investments, schemes, etc. would do little to lure Nepal towards us.
Just before you say that I am supporting an autocratic governance model; I mean to advocate for a Republican model with 10-year terms and more executive powers to the PM position.
Every model of governance whether democracy, republican state, communism, dictatorship, etc. is just a means to an end - the goal of achieving global influence and national prosperity. Unfortunatley, we Indians have a bad habit of worshipping the process rather than ensure the end result.
But all that is in the drain because now China will replace India with these measures.
You cannot project soft-power and make them "close" if Indian citizens actively discriminate against them.
4 : And if we try to arm-twist them, that will increase the negative sentiments in Nepal. Meanwhile China's insane development capacity will most probably drill a tunnel straight under Mount Everest to reach Nepal if needed
6 : As I said before, I don't think Nepalis care, also the newer generation is increasingly atheist.
I agree.
The problem in Indian policy making is the imbalance that has existed until Modi 2.0 in projecting our country to the world. I don't blame PM Modi as he had to prioritize important bills and legislations in Modi 1.0. The inertia of projecting India was not due to a lack of ideas but due to the rot in the Indian system until 2013 when everything was done to isolate and weaken the country both from within and outside.
Most fellow Indians who are unfamiliar with the political developments, laugh this off as a conspiracy theory. But excessive reliance on 'soft power' was a result of this. There was no objective of using soft power to project India; rather, it was used to change India's visible cultural fabric and turn it into a soft state.
Modi 2.0 is undoing that damage AND has gone about handling the Indian Subcontinent's foreign affairs quite well. Especially managing Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives and SL.
Nepal under NCP is playing hardball and it is good to see us reminding them not to cross the proverbial golden line. Bhutan was trying to wean itself away from us, but thanks to
the idiocy of Xi Jinping, they are right back into our orbit 10x more than they ever were. At this point, I won't be surprised if PLA tries a hostile takeover of Sakteng Wildlife Sanctuary area in Bhutan.
If that happens, Bhutan might voluntarily accede to joining India as a state. While independence is their
top priority, Bhutanese people know very well that
they would any day be better off being Indians than being CCP's slaves. Especially under Winnie the Poo.
It will have both positive and negative impact on us that we can discuss separately.
There may be some smart way of tackling this, but I think if we try to leverage this, Nepalis might start hating us more.
Hopefully, if the Sangh is smart enough, they would engage with RPP of Nepal (second-largest party and Dharmic nationalist) it would be sensible. We don't have to meddle in their politics to the extent that we are visible, but we need a long-term plan to tackle Nepal's mismanagement. That can happen only through empowering and engaging with RPP.
RPP also needs to up its game and learn from BJP. While Dharmic identity is important, it needs to be supplemented by proper development schemes, infrastructure project plans and wealth creation initiatives. Just going on a temple tour spree won't help Nepal or convince the new generation of Nepalis who are grappling the Korean/Japanese cultural assault and at the same time juggling with the menace of Christian missionaries.
If there is any party that can reach out and change Nepal's negative perspective of India, it is the Sangh and BJP.