K Puroh
The rise of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in India’s political landscape is neither accidental nor temporary. It reflects deep social, cultural, and political transformations that have been unfolding across the country over several decades. What India is witnessing today is not merely the electoral success of a political party, but the emergence of a broader political and civilisational movement that has reshaped the national conversation.
India’s demographic composition provides part of the explanation. As the overwhelming majority of India’s population belongs to the Hindu community, any political party capable of consolidating a substantial section of this electorate naturally gains a significant electoral advantage. Under India’s current electoral system, where the candidate with the most votes wins, even a vote share of around 40 percent can translate into a commanding parliamentary majority.
As early as 2003, when Narendra Modi assumed office as Chief Minister of Gujarat, I had remarked while teaching Government and Politics in India at Kohima College that the BJP was likely to emerge as a dominant national force in the years ahead. Even at that time, the signs of a major political shift were already visible.
One of the underlying reasons for this transformation lies in the evolution of India’s secular framework. Over the decades, many among the Hindu majority began to feel that secularism in practice often operated unevenly. Hindu cultural assertion was frequently portrayed as majoritarian or aggressive, while similar expressions by minority communities were celebrated as diversity and pluralism.
This perception deepened through policy debates and institutional practices. Hindu religious institutions often came under state regulation, while minority institutions retained greater autonomy.
Hindu personal laws underwent reform, whereas minority personal laws remained largely untouched. Gradually, a growing section of the majority community came to believe that they were expected to constantly demonstrate that they posed no threat to minorities. For many, this did not appear as equal citizenship, but as a form of managed majority-hood. Supporters of this framework argued that such protections were necessary in a religiously diverse and historically divided society. However, over time, many among the Hindu majority came to perceive these arrangements as structurally unequal.
Ironically, the more the state attempted to suppress or dilute overt expressions of Hindu identity in the name of secularism, the more it contributed to the consolidation of that very identity. The assumption that pluralism requires an anti-Hindu political framework proved historically unsustainable. Over time, these sentiments accumulated into a larger political consciousness.
However, the BJP’s rise cannot be explained solely through the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the ideology of Hindutva, or the leadership of Narendra Modi, important though these factors are. The political transformation underway in India is much broader and deeper.
For decades, public debates surrounding temple administration, school textbooks, Kashmir, minority rights, and secularism existed in fragmented and disconnected spaces. For over half a century a small group of elite media outlets and universities controlled what is counted as respected and propagateable knowledge. The arrival of the internet, social media, smartphones, and inexpensive mobile data radically altered that reality.
Suddenly, historical documents, political commentaries, podcasts, videos, and alternative viewpoints became accessible to millions of ordinary citizens. The internet did not create these sentiments; rather, it connected and amplified them. Individuals who once believed they were isolated in their opinions discovered that large numbers of others shared similar concerns and frustrations.
Simultaneously, the growing global interest in yoga, Sanskrit, Indian philosophy, temple architecture, Ayurveda, classical music, and other aspects of Indian civilisation contributed to a renewed sense of cultural confidence among many Indians. A civilisation that had long been conditioned to view itself through colonial or post-colonial frameworks began rediscovering pride in its own heritage.
This combination of historical grievance and renewed cultural confidence generated powerful political energy. The BJP did not create this energy from nothing. Instead, it successfully organised, articulated, and channelled it into a coherent national movement.
As a result, the consolidation of a large Hindu voter base is likely to remain a defining feature of Indian politics for the foreseeable future, irrespective of which political party occupies power at the Centre. Whether one agrees with this development or not, it has undeniably become one of the most powerful forces shaping contemporary India.
Today, the BJP governs or shares power in a large number of Indian states and continues to expand its organisational reach and political influence. With each successive electoral victory, the party has grown increasingly confident and assertive in advancing its national agenda.
This changing political reality is already being felt in Nagaland.
Nagaland’s economic dependence on the central government makes the state particularly sensitive to shifts in national politics. As a deficit state with limited internal revenue generation, Nagaland relies heavily on central assistance for governance, salaries, infrastructure, and development activities.
Recent political developments, including the BJP’s expanding organisational activities and its willingness to contest local body elections independently in several urban centres, may well be early indicators of a broader long-term strategy leading toward the 2028 Nagaland Assembly elections.
There was a time when merely participating in a coalition government in Nagaland was itself considered a significant achievement for the BJP. However, considering the party’s present national strength, organisational resources, and political ambitions, it may no longer remain content indefinitely as a junior coalition partner.
At the same time, the political culture within Nagaland has also undergone substantial changes. Electoral politics today is increasingly influenced by financial power rather than ideological conviction. The existence of multiple political parties within such a small state reflects not only political diversity but also deep fragmentation.
In such an environment, a nationally dominant and financially well-resourced party like the BJP possesses considerable strategic advantages if it chooses to pursue power more aggressively in the state.
This possibility requires serious reflection among the Naga people.
Nagaland’s population is small. Its Christian identity distinguishes it sharply from much of mainland India. Its history, culture, and political aspirations remain unique within the Indian Union. In an era marked by rapid political centralisation and cultural integration, preserving these distinct characteristics will require conscious effort, clarity of vision, and collective resolve.
For many Nagas, the principle of self-determination has historically formed the foundation of political identity and collective aspiration. Any meaningful attempt to preserve Naga history, culture, and political consciousness must therefore be rooted in institutions that genuinely reflect and protect Naga interests and values.
The rise of the BJP represents one of the most significant political developments in contemporary India. Its expansion is rooted not merely in electoral strategy, but in deeper social, historical, cultural, and psychological forces that are reshaping the country’s political future.
For Nagaland, this evolving reality presents both challenges and choices. The question is no longer whether national political currents will influence the state; they already do. The more important question is whether the Naga people can preserve their unique identity, historical consciousness, and political aspirations while navigating an increasingly centralised political environment.
Ultimately, the future of Nagaland will depend not on the strength of national political parties, but on the wisdom, unity, political maturity, and historical awareness of the Naga people themselves.
