	New content
Ethnicities

Restricted access

Other

First published March 2002

Nationalism, religion and the search for chosen traumas: Comparing Sikh and Hindu identity constructions

Catarina KinnvallView all authors and affiliations

Volume 2, Issue 1

https://doi.org/10.1177/1469682002002001523

Abstract
References

Get access

Abstract

This article proceeds from the argument that various forces of globalization have resulted in increased dislocation and uncertainty for many people in the world. Religion and nationalism, compared to most other identity constructions, are viewed as particularly relevant organizing principles at a time when modern society is making increasing demands on individuals. In comparison to much constructivist research, however, the article discusses the difficulties in understanding religious identity formation and nationhood without taking into consideration the sociopsychological aspects of category formation and the essentialization of the `other'. To clarify the discussion, an illustrative study of religious nationalism in India is made, with a particular focus on, and comparison of, Sikh and Hindu religious nationalism. I show how, in their search for `chosen traumas', similar processes of categorizing and demonizing the `other' have been prevalent in both the Sikh and Hindu cases. However, while Hindus were (and are) successful in fusing nationalist and religious concerns in their attempts to monopolize both sources of self and identity, Sikhs have been less successful in integrating the two.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

Get Access

1 The ideas presented in this article are elaborated in Kinnvall (forthcoming).

2 Object-relations theory is mostly associated with D.W. Winnicot, who proceeds from the premise that human beings by nature are `object-seeking'.

3 Oommen (1994: 161—4) differentiates, for instance, between four kinds of others, ranging from the `Equal Others', the `Internal Others', the `Deviant Others' and the `Outside-Unequal Others'.

4 Ontological security refers to a person's elemental sense of safety in the world where trust of other people is like an emotional inoculation against existential anxieties: `a protection against future threat and dangers which allows the individual to sustain hope and courage in the face of whatever debilitating circumstances she or he might later confront' (Giddens, 1991: 38—9).

5 It should be noted that I mainly highlight those aspects of religion and nationalism that facilitate mobilization and manipulation. Both religion and nationalism can obviously serve as important positive identifiers and are not negative by definition.

6 As noted by Jane Flax (1990), this is obviously a drastic reduction of complex ideas.

7 See similar arguments in Alam (1999), Bidwai et al. (1996) and Beyer (1994).

8 To argue that religion has commonalities with the nation in being territorially defined refers to the boundedness inherent in the notion of the nation, not to the physical territory as such. While the nation (in real or imagined form) can not be conceived without a territorial referent, religion as an idea can and is often transterritorial.

9 To be ontologically secure and avoid existential anxiety means to Giddens (1991: 51—3) that we can provide `answers' to fundamental existential questions, such as those outlined here.

10.

10 See Calhoun (1997) and Alam (1999) for a similar argument.

11.

11 See Kolodner (1995), who further argues that Gandhi attempted to broker a compromise between secular and religious forces by applying Hindu ethical norms of satyagraha (the force of truth) and ahimsa (non-violence) to the nationalist movement.

12.

12 This argument has been made and developed by many, see, for example, Bidwai et al. (1996), Bose (1997), Deol (2000), Kolodner (1995) and Panikkar (1997).

13.

13 The Khalsa (`the pure') was a step toward full militarization by a group of Sikhs willing to sacrifice themselves for the Guru. The new members of the Khalsa were enjoined to wear five `articles of faith', defining them as Khalsa Sikhs. These were: kesh, unshorn hair; kanga, comb; kaccha, breeches; kara, steel wristband; and kirpan, sword.

14.

14 There are various explanations to account for the growth of Sikh communalism, neither of which can be discussed in any great detail here. However, it is interesting to note the differences in those (primordialists) who attribute the formation of a `distinct Sikh identity' to the British and their insistence on the Sikhs as a `martial race' (see Fox, 1985) with those (often instrumentalists) who argue that it had to do with the British `divide and rule' policy where religious communalism served as a counterweight against Indian nationalism (see Pandey, 1990). Finally, we have those like Harjot Oberoi (1994) who argue from a more poststructuralist perspective that it was the emerging bourgeoisie that created a new standard discourse of modern Sikhism.

15.

15 The SGPC was institutionalized by the British, as they were becoming increasingly afraid of losing the `loyal' Sikhs.

16.

16 Hindu nationalism got a name in 1925 through the Rashtriya Swayaseval Sangh (RSS), but did not become influential until the struggle in 1947. The RSS later developed its political wing, the Jana Sangh (People's Society), which in 1977 became part of the Janata Sangh. In 1980, the Janata Sangh evolved into the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), as the political arm of RSS. The BJP has close ties with Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP), a non-governmental organization formed in 1964 to spread `Hindu spiritual values'.

17.

17 See Christophe Jaffrelot (1999: 191) who argues that the fear in the 1920s was that Hinduism would be drowned not only by a `Christianization' of India, but even more quickly by the expansion of Islam.

18.

18 Actually, to establish any monolithic Sikh culture is indeed problematic, as witnessed by the British attempts to do so in the late 19th century.

19.

19 For a detailed account of state-center relations and the political economy underlying these relations, see Purewal (2000).

20.

20 As argued by Bose (1997), majoritarian nationalism is always defined in opposition to a vilified other.

21.

21 The introduction of high-yielding seeds and modern inputs, launched in November 1966. For an overview, see Puri (1984).

22.

22 Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC). The SGPC was constituted in December 1920 by Akali Dal to manage important Sikh temples. The SGPC is both politically significant and economically powerful.

23.

23 I conducted a large number of interviews in Punjab during 1997, both in cities and in villages.

24.

24 `I feel threatened by the other, therefore, the other threatens me', see Murer (1999: 21).

References

AIFODR (All India Federation of Organisations for Democratic Rights) (1987) Punjab: People Fight Back - A Report to the Nation. Bombay : Rajni X. Desai.

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References

Also from Sage