Saturday, 24 January 2026

Hindutva, Corporate Capital, and the Reproduction of Graded Inequality in India: An Ambedkarite Political Economy

 

Hindutva, Corporate Capital, and the Reproduction of Graded Inequality in India: An Ambedkarite Political Economy

SR Darapuri, National President, All India Peoples Front

This paper analyses the Hindutva–corporate nexus through an Ambedkarite and Dalit–Bahujan political economy perspective. It argues that the contemporary alliance between majoritarian cultural nationalism and concentrated corporate capital represents not a rupture but a reconfiguration of India’s historical system of graded inequality. Hindutva provides ideological legitimacy to caste hierarchy and social exclusion, while corporate capital consolidates economic power through state patronage and neoliberal restructuring. Together, they undermine constitutional democracy, marginalize Dalit–Bahujan labour, and displace material questions of caste, class, and redistribution with cultural nationalism. The paper situates this nexus within global authoritarian neoliberalism while emphasizing its distinct Brahmanical and caste-ordered foundations.

1. Introduction

The consolidation of the Hindutva–corporate nexus in contemporary India must be understood against the historical backdrop of caste-based social order and Brahmanical hegemony. From an Ambedkarite perspective, this nexus does not merely erode democratic institutions; it actively reproduces graded inequality—the core organizing principle of Hindu social order identified by B.R. Ambedkar.

While neoliberal reforms have intensified economic inequality, Hindutva has supplied a cultural–political framework that normalizes hierarchy, obedience, and exclusion. Corporate capital, in turn, benefits from a political environment in which Dalit–Bahujan labour is disciplined, de-politicized, and fragmented, and redistributive demands are displaced by religious nationalism.

This paper argues that the Hindutva–corporate nexus represents a contemporary form of Brahmanical capitalism, combining market power with caste ideology.

2. Ambedkarite Framework: Caste, Capital, and Power

Ambedkar viewed caste not merely as a division of labour but as a division of labourers, sustained by religious ideology, endogamy, and social sanctions. In this framework: economic exploitation is inseparable from social hierarchy; capital accumulation historically rests on caste-graded labour extraction and political democracy without social and economic democracy is inherently unstable.

The Hindutva–corporate nexus must therefore be analysed as a continuation of caste power in modern form, rather than as a purely ideological or economic phenomenon.

Neoliberal capitalism in India has not dismantled caste; it has re-functionalized caste by informalizing labour predominantly occupied by Dalit–Bahujan communities, weakening collective bargaining and labour protections and preserving elite control over capital, knowledge, and state institutions.

3. Corporate Capital and Brahmanical State Power

Large corporate capital in India remains socially narrow in composition and culturally aligned with dominant-caste networks. The contemporary state facilitates corporate accumulation through privatization of public assets built through collective labour, dilution of labour and environmental laws affecting marginalized workers and fiscal concessions and regulatory exemptions for large firms.

From an Ambedkarite standpoint, this reflects the transformation of the state into a custodian of upper-caste corporate interests, rather than an instrument of social justice as envisaged in the Constitution.

Reservations, labour protections, and welfare provisions—hard-won safeguards for Dalit–Bahujan communities—are increasingly framed as inefficiencies or appeasement, delegitimizing the very idea of structural redress.

4. Hindutva as Ideology of Social Control

Hindutva functions as the cultural arm of caste capitalism. While projecting a homogenized Hindu identity, it systematically erases caste oppression by replacing it with civilizational pride converts Dalit–Bahujan assertion into symbolic inclusion without material power and rebrands hierarchy as cultural harmony.

Ambedkar warned that Hinduism’s strength lay in its ability to make inequality appear natural and sacred. Hindutva modernizes this function by deploying mass media, spectacle, and nationalism to suppress caste consciousness and class solidarity.

Religious polarization diverts attention from landlessness. precarious labour, educational exclusion, and declining public employment.

5. Electoral Politics, Money Power, and Exclusion

The increasing corporatization of elections intensifies the political marginalization of Dalit–Bahujan interests. Capital-intensive campaigns, media dominance, and opaque funding mechanisms ensure that political competition favours parties aligned with corporate interests.

While Dalit–Bahujan representation may increase numerically, decision-making power remains concentrated, reinforcing Ambedkar’s warning that political representation without economic power is hollow.

Electoral democracy thus coexists with weak redistribution, criminalization of protest and suppression of labour and caste-based movements.

6. Displacement of Caste–Class Politics

The Hindutva–corporate nexus systematically displaces caste–class politics by reframing social conflict as Hindu vs. Muslim, nationalist vs. anti-national and cultural insider vs. foreign-influenced outsider.

This fragmentation benefits capital by preventing the emergence of broad Dalit–Bahujan–Adivasi–working-class coalitions capable of challenging economic concentration and caste privilege.

Ambedkar emphasized that caste prevents the formation of a moral and political community among the oppressed. Hindutva exploits this structural weakness to stabilize an unequal political economy.

7. Democratic Institutions and Anti-Constitutional Drift

Ambedkar viewed the Constitution as a tool to annihilate caste through law and institutional safeguards. The Hindutva–corporate nexus undermines this vision by weakening autonomous institutions, diluting constitutional morality, and replacing rights-based citizenship with cultural loyalty.

Dissent—especially from Dalit, Adivasi, labour, and minority movements opposing land acquisition or privatization—is increasingly criminalized, revealing the class–caste character of state power.

8. Comparative Perspective: Caste Capitalism and Global Authoritarianism

While parallels exist with authoritarian neoliberal regimes elsewhere, India’s trajectory is distinct due to the fusion of capitalism with caste ideology. Unlike race-based populisms, Hindutva draws upon an ancient system of graded inequality, granting it deeper social legitimacy and resilience.

This makes resistance more complex, as economic exploitation is masked by religious belonging and symbolic recognition.

9. Conclusion

From an Ambedkarite and Dalit–Bahujan political economy perspective, the Hindutva–corporate nexus represents a consolidation of caste capitalism under majoritarian rule. It deepens inequality, hollows out constitutional democracy, and forecloses the emancipatory promise of social and economic democracy.

Ambedkar’s warning remains urgent: without annihilating caste and democratizing capital, political democracy will remain a façade. Any challenge to the current political order must therefore confront both Brahmanism and corporate power, not one without the other.

Courtesy: ChatGPT

Tuesday, 20 January 2026

The Hindutva–Corporate Nexus and the Restructuring of Indian Politics

 

The Hindutva–Corporate Nexus and the Restructuring of Indian Politics

-          SR Darapuri, National President, All India Peoples Front

This paper examines the emergence and consolidation of the Hindutva–corporate nexus in contemporary India and its implications for democratic politics, governance, and political economy. It argues that the alliance between majoritarian cultural nationalism and concentrated corporate capital (Global Finance Capital) has produced a new political configuration marked by policy capture, erosion of democratic institutions, and the displacement of class-based politics by identity-based mobilization. Drawing on political economy and democratic theory, the paper situates this nexus within global trends of authoritarian neoliberalism while highlighting its distinct caste–religious civilizational framing in the Indian context.

1. Introduction

Over the past decade, Indian politics has undergone a significant transformation characterized by the convergence of Hindutva ideology and large corporate capital. While the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its affiliated organizations have mobilized society through cultural nationalism and religious majoritarianism, major corporate actors have benefited from a political environment marked by deregulation, privatization, and preferential state support. This paper conceptualizes this convergence as a Hindutva–corporate nexus and examines its impact on India’s democratic institutions, governance structures, and socio-economic relations.

The central argument advanced here is that Hindutva functions as an ideological instrument to manage the social contradictions produced by neoliberal capitalism, while corporate capital provides the material and financial base for the consolidation of majoritarian political power.

2. Conceptualizing the Hindutva–Corporate Nexus

The Hindutva–corporate nexus should be understood as a structural alliance rather than a contingent political arrangement. Its foundations lie in India’s post-1991 neoliberal transition, which weakened redistributive politics and increased economic inequality. As scholars of authoritarian neoliberalism have noted, market-oriented reforms often require non-economic forms of consent generation, including nationalism, cultural identity, and internal enemies.

In the Indian case, Hindutva provides: A civilizational narrative that legitimizes hierarchy and obedience and a mechanism to depoliticize economic distress through cultural polarization.

Corporate capital, in turn, gains: Policy stability and predictability, access to state resources and regulatory forbearance and political insulation from popular accountability.

3. Electoral Politics and Political Finance

A crucial dimension of this nexus is the transformation of electoral politics through corporate financing. The introduction of opaque political funding mechanisms has dramatically altered the balance of electoral competition. Corporate donations increasingly flow to the ruling party, enabling unprecedented campaign expenditure, media dominance, and organizational expansion.

This has two major consequences: Asymmetry in political competition, marginalizing opposition parties and weakening of democratic accountability as policy decisions become insulated from public scrutiny.

Elections remain formally competitive but are substantively shaped by capital-intensive mobilization and media saturation.

4. Media, Discourse, and Manufacturing Consent

Corporate ownership and influence over mainstream media have played a central role in normalizing the Hindutva–corporate alliance. News coverage increasingly prioritizes: National security and cultural identity, spectacularized leadership and delegitimization of dissent.

Investigative journalism on corporate practices, inequality, and policy capture has sharply declined. This transformation reflects a shift from media as a democratic institution to media as a consent-manufacturing apparatus, aligning economic power with ideological hegemony.

5. Governance, Policy Capture, and the Corporate State

The impact of the Hindutva–corporate nexus is most visible in governance and policy-making. Key trends include: Large-scale privatization of public infrastructure and natural resources, dilution of labour protections and environmental regulations and tax concessions, loan restructuring, and selective regulatory enforcement for large corporations.

Simultaneously, the state’s welfare role is redefined. Social provisioning increasingly takes the form of targeted transfers framed as benevolence rather than enforceable rights. This produces a model that combines minimal welfare with maximal market freedom, sustained politically through cultural nationalism.

6. Displacement of Class Politics through Majoritarianism

One of the most significant political consequences of this nexus is the displacement of class-based political discourse. Structural issues such as unemployment, agrarian distress, and informalization of labour are reframed through communal and cultural narratives. Social conflict is redirected away from capital–labour relations toward religious and cultural antagonisms.

This process undermines the possibility of broad-based redistributive coalitions and fragments subaltern solidarities along religious and caste lines, even as economic inequality deepens.

7. Democratic Institutions and Authoritarian Drift

The Hindutva–corporate nexus has contributed to a gradual erosion of democratic institutions. Parliament, regulatory bodies, universities, and civil society organizations face increasing centralization and executive control. Dissenting voices—particularly those challenging corporate projects or majoritarian policies—are frequently criminalized or delegitimized.

Rather than a breakdown of democracy, this represents a managed democracy in which formal institutions persist but their autonomy and deliberative capacity are significantly reduced.

8. Comparative and Global Context

Globally, India’s trajectory aligns with broader patterns of authoritarian neoliberalism observed in countries such as Turkey, Brazil, and Hungary. However, India’s experience is distinctive due to the centrality of caste and religion in structuring political identity. Hindutva embeds neoliberal governance within a civilizational framework that naturalizes hierarchy and exclusion, giving the nexus deeper social roots.

9. Conclusion

The Hindutva–corporate nexus marks a fundamental reconfiguration of Indian politics. By combining majoritarian ideology with concentrated economic power (Global Finance Capital), it reshapes democratic institutions, weakens redistributive politics, and narrows the scope of citizenship. The long-term consequence is a political order in which economic inequality and social exclusion coexist with electoral legitimacy and nationalist consent.

Understanding this nexus is essential for any serious engagement with the future of democracy, social justice, and constitutionalism in India.

Courtesy: ChatGPT

Sant Kabir and the Ambedkarite Political-Theoretical Framework: A Critical Reappraisal

  Sant Kabir and the Ambedkarite Political-Theoretical Framework: A Critical Reappraisal -     SR Darapuri I.P.S.(Retd)     Intr...