Ram Mandir: Use of History in Authoritarian Populism

Yagmur Karakaya, Yale University
Shivani Choudhary, Yale University

Right before the 2024 national elections, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) Narendra Modi held a grand opening for Ram Mandir, a Hindu temple constructed on contested land in Ayodhya, India. The temple materialized the decades-long promise of Hindutva to deliver a place of worship for the mythological deity Ram, in his alleged birthplace. Yet, a mosque stood on this mythical geographical location for centuries, which Hindu extremists vandalized periodically culminating in a deadly incident in 1992 when the rioters attacked and demolished the monument, killing hundreds of Muslims. After the demolition construction was illegal till the Prime Minister Modi won his second term in 2019, when he mobilized the Supreme Court to decide in favor of a permit and embarked on a massive building project. By studying the Ram Mandir case, we ask how authoritarian populism uses history to garner consent. We investigate what techniques incumbent candidates such as Narendra Modi use to remind their supporters of their victim status—a necessary component of authoritarian populism. Our analysis points to three ways in which populism uses history: legalization, monopolization, and use of science; whereby myth turns into reality in the form of a modern temple. Through “legalization” we highlight the role history and myth plays in authoritarian populists’ seeming reliance on legal action. We show how the incumbent politician did not move forward without going through the court system’s approval. In “monopolization,” we argue that while giving “the people,” their “true history” the populist lays a claim on what true religion is and flattens the complexity thereof by distilling it to one God: Ram, who actually is only one amongst many. By the “use of science” we highlight how archeology became a crucial tool to excavate, and thus create and revivify an ancient temple dedicated for Ram to bolster credibility.

No extended abstract or paper available

 Presented in Session 51. History, Politics, and Memory I