Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Cultural-Politics of the Far-Right and Purposeful Simulations: A Comparative Study of India and the United States.

Sun, August 9, 2:00 to 3:30pm, TBA

Abstract

Over the past decade, many countries around the world have experienced the rise of far-right and extremist activities, along with a growing trend toward authoritarian politics that challenge the liberal-democratic world order. To analyze these trends, this paper moves beyond traditional social movement literature and argues that the framework of Purposeful Simulations provides broader analytical power to understand a wide range of extremists and far-right politics today. We define simulations as narratives built around possible future scenarios stemming from social movements, subcultures, or other claim-makers that emotionally resonate with audiences. They are purposeful because they aim to keep the audience engaged and inspire followers to take action, even if specific actions are not directly outlined in the narrative. The key to purposeful simulations is “deep stories” that serve as cultural toolkits, allowing adherents to interpret events, create, and inhabit their shared constructions. It is in this framework that we examine three cases from the US and India. First, we examine state-sanctioned purposeful simulations in India, where the BJP has enacted new laws to align with the deep story of Hindu nationalism, while also subtly signaling to vigilante groups that create and uphold these simulations. Secondly, we analyze organization-based, purposeful simulations in India, such as the VHP, and in the US, the Seven Mountain Mandate, that foster ritual reinforcement cycles around nationalism in their respective countries. Thirdly, we explore virtual-based purposeful simulations, such as Terrorgram Collectives, which generate and distribute simulated realities tied to the deep story. We conclude this paper by discussing decentralized groups like sovereign citizens, whose shared alternative vision drives them to cultivate conflict and resist authorities and institutions.

Authors