Hindutva as a global far-right project Fascism, neoliberalism and transnational networks in twenty-first century India

The far-right’s resurgence spans continents, from Donald Trump’s MAGA movement to former president Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, Marine Le Pen in France, and Viktor Orbán in Hungary, to Narendra Modi in India. While rooted in their national contexts, their projects share a common grammar of civilisational nationalism, racial majoritarianism, anti-immigrant sentiment, misogyny, anti-Muslim mobilisation, nostalgia politics and attacks on pluralism.

Hindutva is deeply woven into this ecosystem. Its leaders cultivate strategic relationships with conservative Western think tanks, Christian Zionists, Islamophobic networks, and global ‘culture war’ entrepreneurs. Diaspora groups such as the Hindu American Foundation (HAF), Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America (VHPA), and Overseas Friends of the BJP (OFBJP) serve as diplomatic, financial, and ideological intermediaries helping to normalise Modi and Hindutva in Western capitals and providing political cover for India’s authoritarian drift. The 2019 ‘Howdy Modi’ rally in Houston, attended by Trump, was not merely a spectacle but a demonstration of how Hindutva has become an active player in the global far-right political theatre. Hindutva has become a model of how cultural majoritarianism, neoliberalism and religious revivalism can co-exist within a nominally democratic state.

Rise of the Far-Right: Historical and Contemporary Causes

Globally, far-right movements have flourished amidst crises of neoliberalism, precarity, and identity anxiety following the 2008 crash. In India, these dynamics have merged with older fissures, such as caste hierarchy, communal polarisation, colonial legacies, and the collapse of secular nationalist institutions. The Indian National Congress’s ideological drift, corruption scandals, and inability to articulate a clear post-liberalisation vision created a vacuum that Hindutva filled with a promise of ‘civilisational renaissance’.

The BJP’s journey from a marginal force to a hegemonic power was aided by the RSS’s century-long grassroots indoctrination infrastructure, unparalleled in scale among global right-wing movements. Modi’s image as a muscular Hindu leader was cultivated through aspirational narratives (‘New India’, ‘Vishwaguru/ World Teacher’, etc), hyper-nationalism and promises of economic revival despite the Indian economy’s growing inequalities and informalisation. This fusion of economic disillusionment, cultural supremacy, and identity-based grievance politics mirrors the ascent of the far-right across the world.

Hindutva and Neoliberalism

Hindutva’s rise is inseparable from neoliberal capitalism. Rather than rejecting neoliberalism, the BJP-RSS combine fuses market fundamentalism with majoritarian authoritarianism. Corporate deregulation, privatisation, weakened labour protections and the concentration of capital among oligarchic conglomerates (particularly the Adani and Ambani groups; both close affiliates of Modi) are paired with cultural warfare against minorities and dissenters.

Neoliberal precarity is politically managed through cultural scapegoating. Rather than addressing unemployment, inflation or agrarian distress, Hindutva directs popular frustration towards Muslims, Dalits, Christians, and so-called ‘Maoists’ and ‘urban Naxals’. This mirrors trends seen in Bolsonaro’s Brazil and Trump’s US, where economic failures were masked by xenophobic cultural conflict.

India’s digital economy compounds this system as big-tech firms (such as Amazon, Google and Meta, as well as local Indian IT giants) benefit from deregulation and profit from the engagement generated by hate speech, polarising content and misinformation. This makes Hindutva a textbook case of neoliberal authoritarianism, where capital accumulation and digital repression operate together. This fusion of market logic with authoritarian cultural nationalism exemplifies how neoliberalism can survive by mutating into new and more exclusionary forms.

Modi’s Hindutva state is a coalition of ideological, economic, and technological power centres. Locally, RSS-affiliated bodies like the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal coordinate grassroots mobilisation while the BJP’s IT Cell and sympathetic influencers orchestrate narratives across social media outlets like X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, and WhatsApp, often employing disinformation to target critics. Corporate media houses, owing to their dependence on government advertising and owned by business elites, amplify Hindutva talking points. Religious organisations serve both as ideological schools and paramilitary enforcers, blurring lines between civil society and the state. 

Abroad, transnational networks such as the Hindu American Foundation (HAF) have succeeded in lobbying US legislators to dilute Californian school standards on caste discrimination. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad America (VHPA) has worked with evangelical Zionist groups on anti-Muslim narratives and pro-Israel mobilisation. The Overseas Friends of BJP (OFBJP) group has mobilised diaspora rallies during Indian elections, lobbied British MPs and spread disinformation targeting UK Labour candidates critical of Modi. Furthermore, India–Israel partnerships extend to predictive policing, Pegasus spyware, border militarisation, and crowd-surveillance technologies – deepening a shared architecture of techno-authoritarianism and criminalising dissent against the Modi government.

These interconnected structures ensure that Hindutva is not just a political ideology but a hegemonic system that penetrates every facet of public life in India and among the Indian diaspora. This structural power nexus ensures that Hindutva functions not just as a political or religious tool, but as a totalising ideological state project.

Militarism, Surveillance, and Security Politics

Militarism is central to Hindutva’s political imagination. The abrogation of Article 370 in Kashmir was accompanied by the world’s longest internet shutdown, mass detentions of Kashmiri Muslims and military lockdowns, signalling how dissent would be managed nationwide.

So-called counterterrorism laws such as Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) coupled with sedition statutes are deployed against journalists, students, environmental activists, and human rights defenders, both within India and beyond its borders. This mirrors global patterns where the far-right leverages national-security discourse to delegitimise opposition, ensure ideological consolidation, and expand avenues for external projection of power.

India’s military posturing toward China, Pakistan and recently Bangladesh, arms procurements from France, Israel, Russia, and the US, and aggressive nuclear signalling fit into a broader geopolitical strategy: positioning India as a civilisational military power in the Indo-Pacific, allied with US/ Western strategic priorities while being driven by Hindu nationalist irredentism. Domestic militarism helps feed the myth of a strong state while also providing cover for economic failures and social unrest.

Digital Infrastructure and Right-Wing Radicalisation

Hindutva thrives in the algorithmic architecture of digital platforms, as it feeds on the BJP's highly sophisticated online propaganda apparatus. Through micro-targeted political advertisements, WhatsApp disinformation swarms, coordinated troll armies, AI-driven content generation (as seen in the aftermath of the April 2025 Pahalgam incident), online harassment campaigns against minorities and critics, and a plethora of state-funded YouTube channels, public discourse is flooded with communal narratives aimed at desensitising the public to radicalisation. 

Social media platforms, driven by engagement algorithms, amplify hate speech and conspiracy theories, while AI surveillance tools are increasingly used to monitor dissent. Studies show that pro-BJP networks also seed anti-Muslim rumours during elections, often linked to diaspora accounts in Canada and the US, as well as the UK. The same strategy is applied during elections in other countries (particularly the US 2024 elections) and during international crises such as the 2025 Israel–Iran crisis, and ongoing Israeli attacks in Gaza and the West Bank. 

The internet thus becomes both a radicalisation machine and a surveillance tool, a space where ideology is disseminated and resistance is surveiled with platforms cooperating with Indian state actors.

Class Composition of the Far-Right in India

Hindutva’s class base is heterogeneous yet highly unified through ideological consolidation: Upper-caste elites support Hindutva for preserving social hierarchy; middle classes see it as a guarantor of national pride and economic order; while sections of the working class, often lacking secure livelihoods, find solace in communal belonging. 

The absence of a credible left alternative along with the failure of caste-based parties to build broader coalitions have allowed Hindutva to hegemonise discontent in India. Welfare schemes like ‘jan dhan yojana’ or ‘ujjwala gas subsidies’ serve to appease economic needs while deepening dependency on the ruling regime. 

The BJP-RSS combine’s ability to build networks across caste and class divides, while quietly maintaining Brahminical dominance, makes Hindutva unusually adaptable compared to its European far-right counterparts.

Hindutva aligns with US-led imperialist interests by positioning India as a counterweight to China. Military alliances such as the QUAD, joint naval exercises, intelligence cooperation, arms purchases from France, Israel and the US, and shared anti-Muslim narratives reinforce India’s relevance in this role. At the same time, under Modi India has adopted an aggressive regional posture. Hindutva inflames tensions with Pakistan and alienates neighbours like Bangladesh, Myanmar, Nepal, and Sri Lanka, through anti-Muslim and caste-based policies. This has destabilizing implications for South Asia. 

India’s relations with Pakistan have deteriorated dramatically, marked by ‘surgical’ strikes, air raids, and continuous demonisation of Muslims in domestic media. The 2025 India–Pakistan clash after the Pahalgam terrorist attack in Kashmir, in which India lost fighter jets and both countries exchanged ballistic missiles, came on the heels of growing calls by mainstream Indian politicians for war with Pakistan and its annihilation or occupation. These actions are not merely tactical but ideological, rooted in the vision of ‘Akhand Bharat’, a fictional Hindu-civilisational state that transcends India’s current borders to encompass South Asia, China, Tibet, and parts of Iran and Thailand. 

This civilisational irredentism threatens regional peace and undermines India’s claim to democratic global leadership. Further, Hindutva’s global alliances give it strategic depth, making its authoritarianism not only domestically entrenched, but geopolitically reinforced.

Tactical Playbook of Hindutva

Hindutva’s strategy includes educational revisionism (rewriting history to cast Muslims as invaders and Hindus as eternal victims), institutional capture, such as hollowing out of the judiciary, Election Commission, universities, and investigative agencies, and so-called lawfare through legislation like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and National Registry of Citizens designed to disenfranchise Indian Muslims, restrictions on non-government organisations (NGOs), and sedition and anti-terror charges. History textbooks in India have been rewritten to glorify Hindu kings and demonise Muslim rulers, especially the Mughals. Government bodies like the NCERT are stacked with ideologues to propagate Hindu–Muslim binaries. Control over institutions like the Election Commission, the judiciary and investigative agencies help ensure that legal opposition is neutered. 

The Indian state uses strategic litigation, media trials (stigmatising dissenters as ‘anti-national’, ‘jihadi’, ‘Talibani’ or ‘Khalistani’) and administrative harassment to suppress civil society, effectively converting democratic institutions into instruments of ideological enforcement. The Indian judiciary’s increasing pliancy, use of ‘anti-national’ labels against dissidents, and deployment of administrative tools to control NGOs and academia all demonstrate how electoral democracy can be hollowed out from within. The Indian state also increasingly mobilises its diaspora through overseas networks to influence Western policy debates and suppress critical academic scholarship.

Hate, especially anti-Muslim bigotry, is a core political currency of Hindutva. The BJP-RSS combine regularly weaponise misogyny, Islamophobia, and homophobia to consolidate their base. Hate also functions both as a mobilising tool and a method of governance. Moral panics over ‘love jihad’, allegations of slaughtering cattle or building Hindu temples over the sites of mosques and churches are actively orchestrated to stoke communal divisions, while lynchings and vigilante violence act as public spectacles of dominance. 

Hate speech by ruling party members and Hindu ideologues mostly goes unpunished, signalling impunity. Gendered violence is normalised, while queer identities are delegitimised. This bigotry and manufactured polarisation are not a side effect but a core strategy: by creating a continuous sense of existential threat, the regime maintains loyalty, suppresses solidarity, and sustains a permanent state of emergency. 

BJP leaders regularly deliver inflammatory speeches against minorities, especially Muslims, with no legal consequence. Online spaces amplify this hate, building a permanent sense of communal siege and justifying authoritarian measures. This strategy mirrors far-right hate mobilisation from Europe to the US, making Hindutva part of a global pattern of racialised governance.

Narrative Capture and Public Discourse

Hindutva has also completely reshaped India’s ideological landscape. Television news channels now openly serve as propaganda arms for the Modi regime, peddling its narrative warfare while Bollywood films, school curricula (e.g. NCERT textbooks erase or distort Mughal and Islamic contributions to Indian history) and digital media are increasingly infused with nationalist messaging. Media outlets like Republic TV and films like ‘The Kashmir Files’, ‘The Bengal Files’ and ‘Padmavaat’ propagate fictionalised narratives of Muslim oppressors instigating violence against Hindus across history. They essentially rewrite history in service of Hindu victimhood.

Social media influencers echo state propaganda and act as crucial platforms in labelling dissenting voices as ‘anti-national’, creating a chilling effect. Independent journalism is undermined through arrests, defamation suits and financial strangulation, ensuring that the ideological terrain is reshaped to align with Hindu supremacy. Education, culture and even entertainment are now enlisted in the project of normalising fascist discourse, leaving little space for counter-narratives. The Indian state also enforces control over diaspora discourse whereby academics critical of Hindutva face online harassment, conference disruptions and coordinated smear campaigns. 

By monopolising narrative production, the Modi regime constructs a reality where Hindutva is synonymous with patriotism, and opposition is seen as betrayal. This cultural hegemony neutralises resistance not only through coercion but also through consent, helping to create a moral universe where Hindutva equals patriotism and dissent equals treason.

Sustaining Authoritarianism

Authoritarianism under Hindutva is stabilised through a combination of myth-making, coercion, and co-optation. Modi is projected as a messianic figure or ‘Vishwaguru’ who transcends party politics and is ‘a guide for all Hindus’ and for the rest of the world. Elections, though held regularly, are manipulated through money power, media control and digital micro-targeting. 

Opposition parties are thoroughly delegitimised through raids and disinformation particularly with regard to their ‘support or patronage of Muslims’, eroding their political capital and voter base. Institutions meant to uphold accountability, such as the judiciary and Election Commission, are systematically undermined. Yet, the Modi regime maintains a veneer of democratic legitimacy, allowing it to evade international criticism and scrutiny while repressing domestic dissent and also deepening autocracy.

Fault lines in the Global and Indian Far-Right

Despite its dominance, Hindutva is not entirely monolithic and there are contradictions within the Indian state’s Hindutva project. Caste tensions within the Sangh (between RSS Brahmin elites and OBC-led BJP factions), RSS-BJP power struggles, disillusionment among small farmers, and unease among regional allies expose very deep cracks. 

Globally, the far-right has suffered electoral setbacks such as the defeat of Jair Bolsonaro and fragmentation across the European far-right, illustrating that such regimes can be defeated through mass mobilisation, intersectional alliances, and resilient democratic institutions. Recognising and exploiting these fissures is crucial for effective resistance against the Hindutva project.

Climate Crisis and Eco-Fascism

As ecological collapse accelerates, Hindutva may adopt eco-fascist policies, using environmental concerns to justify minority exclusion, resource hoarding and militarised borders. Environmental deregulation, India’s repression, and displacement of Adivasi environmental defenders/ repression of Adivasi resistance, forest clearances for mining, and refusal to uphold international water treaties (e.g. placing the Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan ‘in abeyance’) foreshadow this trajectory, with complete disregard for international and humanitarian obligations.

In the name of development, forests are razed and Indigenous resistance to Modi-affiliated conglomerates ravaging India’s eco-systems are also being criminalised. As climate migration increases, communal rhetoric could be weaponised by Hindutva ideologues supported by the Indian government to deny aid or scapegoat vulnerable populations, deepening both ecological and social injustice in the country.

Opposition to Hindutva needs to be multi-scaled. Grassroots movements like Shaheen Bagh, farmers’ protests, and student movements demonstrate the power of collective resistance. Reviving democratic institutions requires rebuilding public trust, ensuring media independence, promoting inclusive economic policies and academic independence. 

Globally, linking Indian activists with anti-fascist movements, progressive diasporas and international human rights bodies is also essential. The left must offer not just critique but also a vision: a politics rooted in justice, dignity, and ecological sustainability that can reclaim the future from fascist forces. Transnational solidarities, inclusive political organising, and democratisation of digital spaces are necessary to combat the global far-right and its iteration in India. 

The fight against Hindutva is inseparable from the global struggle against racism, Islamophobia, neoliberal authoritarianism, and imperial militarism.

Conclusion

Hindutva is currently  one of the world’s most powerful far-right movements, representing a quintessential form of twenty-first-century fascism that combines majoritarian ideology, neoliberal economics, diaspora lobbying, militarised geopolitics and digital authoritarianism embedded in global networks of right-wing power. It also reshapes India’s political and cultural landscape, destabilises South Asia, and influences global right-wing ecosystems from Washington to London to Tel Aviv.

Hindutva is not an anomaly but part of a global pattern of far-right resurgence. Its regional ambitions, systemic repression, and cultural hegemony threaten democratic values not only in India but the region as well as worldwide. Resisting Hindutva requires coordinated international solidarity, democratic revitalisation, and a transformative political vision capable of confronting both economic precarity and identity-based exclusion. The struggle against Hindutva is not merely an Indian struggle, but a front in the global fight for pluralism, justice and democratic futures.