Abstract

Over the last five years, the Indian right-wing has been discrediting left-liberal experts and encouraging pseudo-scientific religious knowledge systems. Yet, crucially, it has also cultivated its own institutional networks of those it considers to be intellectuals and experts: an ostensibly anti-colonial alternative authority to challenge the “hegemony of the progressives” and the “erstwhile custodians of discourse.” This article examines the evolution of a shifting network of experts and elites, interrogating what is considered to be expertise in the context of governance. Through a study of Indian think tanks, this article shows how two forms of political legitimacy govern contemporary India: (i) populist politics, which appeals to the masses/majority by defining nationalism through rigid boundaries of caste, class and religion; and (ii) technocratic policy,which produces a consensus of pragmatism and neutralises charges of hyper-nationalism. Using data from participant observation and over 50 interviews in New Delhi, before and after the Bharatiya Janata Party’s election victory in 2019, this article emphasises the relational dynamic between the two: they function through different, often contradictory, logics and content yet are able to work towards the same goals in key moments of mutual reinforcement.

摘要

在过去五年中，印度右翼一直在诋毁左翼自由派专家，并鼓励伪科学的宗教知识体系。然而，至关重要的是，它还培养了自己的知识分子和专家的制度网络：一个表面上反殖民的替代权威，以挑战“进步人士的霸权”和“昔日的话语保管人”。本文考察了不断变化的专家和精英网络的演变，询问在治理背景下被认为是专业知识的东西。通过对印度智库的研究，本文展示了两种形式的政治合法性如何统治当代印度：（i）民粹主义政治，通过严格的种姓、阶级和宗教界限来界定民族主义，从而吸引大众/多数；(ii) 技术官僚政策，产生实用主义共识并消除对超民族主义的指控。本文使用来自印度人民党 2019 年大选胜利前后在新德里的参与观察和 50 多次采访的数据，强调两者之间的关系动态：它们通过不同的、通常相互矛盾的逻辑和内容发挥作用，但能够在相互加强的关键时刻朝着相同的目标努力。