The study of Indian political thought is currently undergoing a maturation process, moving beyond the influence of contemporary political demands. For decades, Indian thinkers have been conveniently divided into camps within academic and cultural circles, broadly categorized as either progressive or conservative. Figures such as Gandhi, Nehru, Tagore, Azad, and more recently Ambedkar and Phule, are often celebrated and virtually revered. In contrast, others like Savarkar, Jinnah, Tilak, Vivekananda, and Lajpat Rai are labelled as conservative or associated with Hindutva and are often dismissed. This dichotomous framing overlooks the complexity and nuance of these thinkers’ contributions.
Although there is a superficial acknowledgment of the need for sophistication, nuance, and complexity in scholarly writings, these qualities are rarely practiced in depth. Instead, what is presented as sophistication often leads to obfuscation and mystification, generating complications that reinforce the status quo. This framing broadly serves the interests of both Hindu and Muslim elites who identify themselves as liberal-Left or secular, while labelling their rivals as anti-secular and regressive. Lajpat Rai’s political thought is generally placed within this broad and convenient spectrum, often portrayed as a proto-Hindutva thinker and activist akin to Savarkar. It is well-known that Hindus and Muslims differed in articulating their grievances and issues within the broader liberation struggle against British colonialism. The closer the liberation day was, imagined anxieties about the power sharing between these dominant configurations called Hindu and Muslim shaped the politics of the day. As said earlier, the author traces the shifts and re-articulation of these Hindu-Muslim equations in the writings of Lajpat Rai.