India’s democracy has long been seen as one of the most ambitious political experiments in modern history. At independence, the nation faced conditions that many believed made democratic rule impossible: the upheaval of Partition, widespread poverty and illiteracy, and incredible linguistic, religious, and cultural diversity. Within only a few years, though, India had organized the largest election the world had ever seen, extending the vote to more than a hundred million people through universal adult franchise. 

 

Viewed alongside the politics of contemporary India, that achievement feels newly significant. Since the decisive electoral victory of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) under Narendra Modi in 2014, India’s politics have been dominated by Hindu nationalism, an ideology that seeks to depart from the secular, liberal conception of Indian identity conceived at independence and to redefine the nation’s identity in religious terms. For supporters, the movement represents a much-needed departure from the secular politics of the past. For critics, it raises concerns about the place of minorities and the state of civil liberties. In response to this development, scholars and observers have increasingly asked over the last few years whether India is experiencing democratic backsliding, a gradual erosion of democratic norms, such as press freedom, judicial independence, and fair elections. 

 

Looking back to the origins of Indian democracy helps clarify what is at stake in this backsliding. The institutions established in the late 1940s and early 1950s embodied a commitment to inclusion on an unprecedented scale, one that required tremendous imagination and persistence to realize. If it took that much initiative to build India’s democracy, it stands to reason that it would take a commensurate amount to sustain it. Understanding the amount of labor required to establish India’s democracy underscores how imperative it is that the institution be safeguarded.