Communalism: A Product of Modernity and Colonialism

by Ramya Ramanathan and Shashi Singh 

communal harmony

The shadow of communalism lurks everywhere and to such an extent that it has figured quite prominently in the arts and literature of South Asia. Be it Mrs. Rupa Mehra’s extremely sentimental reaction against her daughter Lata’s relationship with Kabir in Vikram Seth’s ‘A Suitable Boy,’ or Safir’s mother’s insistence that he get married to Saba despite already having a wife and a child in the popular Pakistani show ‘Bin Roye.’ The only problem was that his wife was Hindu and therefore unacceptable (apart from her desire to see her son get married to a girl of her choice). While not explicit in tone, these narratives have undoubtedly been influenced by communal beliefs, a legacy of the events that rattled the Indian subcontinent in the 20th century.

Popular culture becomes an important medium that conveys the realities of a divided and battered South Asian society. It reveals the grotesqueness of the phenomenon known as communalism, a political instrument utilized by the powerful to create rifts between communities. They devise various ways to ensure that divisions remain rooted in society so that they can reap the benefits accrued via hatred and political acrimony. Oftentimes, these tendencies give rise to spasmodic sectarian savagery where people from both communities are butchered.

The inheritors of communal politics are creating new narratives of their own, very often cloaked in false consciousness. They give rise to spiteful jingoism which ultimately results in outbursts of violence and riots. In ‘Born A Muslim,’ Ghazala Wahab states that before 2014, perpetrators of communal violence were safe under the shrouds of anonymity. “However, after 2014, the mob, confident in its invincibility, threw away the cloak of anonymity.” We have enough proof to justify this. Social media acts as a new repository of evidence and has the potential to be seen as a ‘neo-archival’ source. However, it is a double-edged sword because the riots which take place, for example, the violent displays in Mewat last year, are very often the result of provocative sloganeering and fake news with communal dimensions spread via social media itself. It adds more fuel to the fire and continues to play a part in instigating more hatred among gullible citizens.

Another recent phenomenon is the bogey of love jihad, explained by Wahab as an attempt to terrorize young couples, snatching away from them the safety that the dichotomy between private and public space offers. It was used to militarize unemployed youth who were brainwashed into thinking that the Hindu faith was in danger. This economic angle—mobilizing the lumpen by the stakeholders of power—existed even in the 20th century, a time when the Indian National Movement was making new strides. The major causal factors continue to be the social monsters known as poverty and unemployment.

Contrary to what the adherents of communal politics would have us believe, communalism is not an age-old custom. In the medieval period, persecution based on religion was predominant, yet medieval politics cannot be called communal. Communalism is a modern ideology that arose under certain specific circumstances—as a byproduct of colonialism and modernity. In the modern period, a structural shift had occurred in the nature of politics: politics based on popular sovereignty, popular mobilization, and the creation of public opinion came to the fore. Even though the term ‘people’ was markedly narrow in its scope, they came to play a major role compared to the pre-1857 period. Earlier, when politics was the prerogative of the upper ruling classes, ‘people’ merely served as ‘cannon fodder’. It was only with the introduction of notions such as popular sovereignty that mobilisation along religious lines could materialize.

Apart from modernity, the advent of colonial rule also had grave implications for the social life of Indians. In a stagnant economy where resources and opportunities were scarce, there was cut-throat competition for jobs. People tried to use whatever they had at their disposal to secure a job. Over time, people resorted to sectional grouping to advance their individual interests. This led to the burgeoning of communal ideology which found its most receptive audience in the middle classes.

What is more, the communal juggernaut entailed that rifts between different religious groups could help preserve the power dynamics enjoyed by the British Raj. Indian elites—aristocrats, landlords, zamindars, merchants—appropriated the economic benefits that were attained at the cost of igniting the flames of bloodshed and extreme vitriol. Communal politics was used to combat the rising tide of nationalists from the Indian National Congress who had identified the malignant nature of communalism. While being utilized to keep the forces of nationalism at bay, communal politics also nurtured politicians who were described as ‘communal parasites’ by historian Bipan Chandra. They blindsided the peasantry and the common folk into believing that communal differences were irreconcilable while leaving them bereft of their hard-earned livelihoods, all for political mobilization.


These were the very figures who can be viewed as the benefactors of the communal brigade of 21st-century India that manipulates not only mainstream narratives but purports the historical truth as well. Essentially, communalism always worked as a reactionary force. It was used to torpedo any progressive movement that threatened the interests of the landed elites and aristocrats. Even at present, politicians frequently exploit this communal fear psychosis to serve political ends: the prime minister of the country made utterly reprehensible remarks, arguing that the Congress was plotting to snatch away the ‘mangalsutra’ of Hindu women and give it to those who have many children—referring to Muslims.

Therefore, communalism has not always existed in South Asian societies. It is a 20th-century occurrence which can be analyzed as a tool to bring out politically deviant behavior among the masses and misappropriate them to gain the upper hand. It was this very development which gave Mohammed Ali Jinnah his ‘truncated’ and ‘moth-eaten’ Pakistan and it also appears in the literature and visual cultures of South Asia quite frequently. We wait for a day when couples like Lata and Kabir, who definitely bore the brunt of Partition in a newly crafted India (1951), will be free to choose for themselves, a luxury even in 2024.

This article has been written by Ramya Ramanathan and Shashi Singh.  Both Ramya and Shashi study History at Kirori Mal College, DU,

Support Countercurrents

Countercurrents is answerable only to our readers. Support honest journalism because we have no PLANET B.
Become a Patron at Patreon

Join Our Newsletter

GET COUNTERCURRENTS DAILY NEWSLETTER STRAIGHT TO YOUR INBOX

Join our WhatsApp and Telegram Channels

Get CounterCurrents updates on our WhatsApp and Telegram Channels

Related Posts

Celebrate Diversity

It is late evening, the day after Uttarayan (15 January), traditionally called ‘vasi uttarayan’. It has been a dull, cloudy day; the wind has been fairly good though. Since yesterday…

Join Our Newsletter


Annual Subscription

Join Countercurrents Annual Fund Raising Campaign and help us

Latest News