Cinema, Nationalism, and Democracy in India

How the film ‘Dhurandhar’ shapes perceptions of nationalism and its troubling associations with violence in Indian society.
GopiGopi
5 mins read
When cinema trades constitutional nationalism for violent, partisan propaganda

Introduction

Cinema is not merely entertainment — it is a site where national identity, citizenship, and political loyalty are quietly constructed. In an era of mass viewership and polarised public discourse, the ideological content of mainstream films carries consequences for democracy itself.

"The most effective kind of propaganda is not the one that lies, but the one that selects which truths to tell." — adapted from Hannah Arendt

"Nationalism is a silly cock crowing on its own dunghill." — Richard Aldington

"Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first." — Charles de Gaulle


Key Data Snapshot

ParameterFigure
India's Press Freedom Index Rank (2024)159 out of 180
Dhurandhar opening weekend collection₹150+ crore (mass cultural reach)
Female screen time in a 4-hour film~15 minutes
Top 1% income share in IndiaHigher than last year of British Raj
Annual deaths from air pollution in India1 million+

Cinema as Soft Power and Ideology Globally, states and political movements have historically used cinema to consolidate national narratives — from Soviet propaganda films to Hollywood's post-9/11 productions valorising military intervention. In India, post-Independence cinema played a significant role in nation-building, projecting a pluralist, constitutional vision of India.

The recent wave of nationalist Bollywood films represents a qualitative shift — from state-centric patriotism to party-aligned nationalism, collapsing the distinction between the government, the ruling party, and the nation itself.


Key Concepts

1. Propaganda vs. Patriotism Patriotism celebrates the nation's constitutional values — justice, liberty, equality, fraternity. Propaganda instrumentalises national sentiment to serve a specific political agenda, often by identifying internal and external enemies.

2. Militarist Nationalism Sociologist Klaus Theweleit, in his study of male fantasies and fascism, introduced the concept of "soldierly masculinity" — an identity constructed around aggression, sacrifice, and violence in service of the nation. When cinema normalises this as the ideal citizen-type, it narrows the definition of belonging.

3. Reductionist Nationalism

"The reduction of nationalism from the Constitution's goals of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity to one that is merely about protecting the nation from enemies through performative violence."

This is a critical distinction for UPSC Ethics and Governance — the Constitution defines citizenship in terms of rights and duties within a democratic republic, not in terms of martial loyalty.

4. Glamorisation of Violence Cultural critic Henry Giroux warns that mass media can give violence "a glamorous and fascist edge" — where spectacle desensitises audiences and normalises vigilante justice, encounter killings, and extrajudicial action.


Analytical Framework: How Cinema Shapes Political Culture

Constructing the Enemy Nationalist cinema typically operates through a binary of heroes and enemies. External enemies (Pakistan, ISI) are well-established. More concerning is the portrayal of internal enemies — a category that in recent films has included NGOs, universities, socialists, and minority communities — effectively criminalising legitimate democratic dissent.

Selective Historical Memory Cinema that fictionalises real events carries the risk of rewriting history. Key data points that complicate nationalist narratives are omitted:

EventOfficial Narrative in CinemaDocumented Reality
Demonetisation (2016)Masterstroke against fake currency / terror financing99.3% of currency returned; GDP fell from 8.3% (2016) to 3.9% (2019); 100+ deaths reported
Encounter killingsHeroic elimination of terroristsWidely questioned for due process violations
Internal dissentPortrayed as terror-linkedConstitutionally protected democratic activity

Marginalisation of Structural Violence By focusing exclusively on terrorist violence as the only legitimate grievance, such films render invisible other forms of violence — economic inequality (top 1% of Indians earn more than during British Raj), deaths from air pollution (1 million+ annually), pandemic mismanagement, and communal lynchings. This selective moral framing has implications for public policy priorities.


Implications for Democracy and Governance

1. Erosion of Critical Thinking Philosopher Hannah Arendt argued that the roots of totalitarianism lie in thoughtlessness — the absence of independent, critical reasoning. Mass entertainment that discourages complexity and rewards emotional nationalism accelerates this tendency.

2. Legitimisation of Vigilante Justice When protagonists bypass legal institutions and deliver violent "justice," it builds popular common sense around extrajudicial action. This weakens the rule of law and the constitutional separation of powers.

3. Shrinking Democratic Space Equating political opposition with national enemies — as seen in narratives linking the Congress party to Pakistan — sets a dangerous precedent for democratic competition. It delegitimises electoral opposition as inherently anti-national.

4. Gender and Citizenship Militarist nationalism is inherently gendered. Women are reduced to passive symbols — victims to be avenged or mothers to be protected — rather than active citizens. This is inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of equality.


Relevant Scholarly Framework

ScholarConceptRelevance
Hannah ArendtThoughtlessness as root of totalitarianismCritical thinking in democracy
Klaus TheweleitSoldierly masculinityGendered nationalism in cinema
Henry GirouxGlamorisation of fascist violenceMedia and democratic culture
Antonio GramsciCultural hegemonyHow dominant ideas are normalised through culture

Conclusion

Cinema is not merely entertainment — it is a site of ideological production. The growing conflation of party, state, and nation in mainstream Indian films poses a quiet but serious challenge to constitutional democracy. A healthy democracy requires citizens capable of holding multiple identities — regional, religious, professional, and national — without violence being the measure of loyalty. India's constitutional vision, rooted in Ambedkar's framework of fraternity and reason, demands a nationalism broad enough to accommodate dissent, plurality, and complexity. The regulation of political content in cinema, transparency in state funding of productions, and media literacy in school curricula are governance responses worth examining in the UPSC context.


UPSC Mains Practice Question

Q. "The conflation of nation, state, and ruling party in popular cinema poses a structural threat to democratic culture and constitutional values." Critically examine with reference to the role of mass media in shaping political consciousness in India. (250 words / 15 marks — GS Paper 2: Governance, Democracy; GS Paper 4: Ethics and Values)

Approach: Define nationalism vs. propaganda → Role of cinema in democracy → Key concerns (vigilante justice, rewriting history, internal enemies, gendered citizenship) → Scholarly anchors (Arendt, Giroux, Gramsci) → Constitutional counter-framework → Governance responses → Balanced conclusion.

Quick Q&A

Everything you need to know

Cinematic propaganda refers to films that deliberately promote a particular political ideology, narrative, or agenda, often by selectively presenting facts, exaggerating certain viewpoints, or omitting inconvenient truths. Unlike neutral storytelling, propaganda aims to shape public opinion and influence perceptions about political actors, institutions, or national identity.

A crucial distinction lies between propaganda that supports the state and that which supports the ruling party. State-oriented propaganda, often seen in wartime or national crises, typically seeks to build unity, morale, and legitimacy for institutions such as the military or संविधान-based governance. For instance, many Hollywood war films glorify national defense but do not explicitly endorse a specific political party.

However, when propaganda aligns with the ruling party, it blurs the line between the party and the nation itself. This conflation can undermine democratic pluralism by delegitimising opposition voices and portraying dissent as anti-national. Implications:

  • Weakening of institutional neutrality
  • Polarisation of society
  • Reduced space for democratic debate
In the given context, the film’s narrative allegedly equates political opposition with national enemies, which is a significant departure from democratic norms and reflects a deeper politicisation of culture.

Nationalism in a democratic framework is ideally rooted in constitutional values such as justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. However, when nationalism is narrowly defined and intertwined with violence, it shifts from inclusive civic identity to exclusionary and coercive ideology.

Such portrayals are problematic because they redefine patriotism as the willingness to engage in or endorse violence against perceived enemies. Key concerns include:

  • Legitimisation of vigilante justice and extrajudicial actions
  • Delegitimisation of dissent as anti-national behaviour
  • Promotion of ‘us vs them’ binaries that fracture social cohesion
This undermines democratic principles where disagreement and debate are essential.

From a sociological perspective, the glorification of what Klaus Theweleit calls “soldierly masculinity” fosters aggressive identities, particularly among youth. It also sidelines alternative forms of civic engagement such as dialogue, protest, and reform. Implications: Over time, this can erode democratic institutions, normalize authoritarian tendencies, and reduce citizens’ capacity for critical thinking—an issue Hannah Arendt identified as central to totalitarianism.

Films are powerful cultural tools that shape collective memory by presenting historical and political events in emotionally engaging ways. Unlike academic texts, films reach a wider audience and often become the primary source of knowledge about complex issues for many citizens.

They contribute to narrative construction through selective representation and dramatization. For instance:

  • Events may be simplified into clear heroes and villains
  • Complex policies like demonetisation may be portrayed as unambiguously successful
  • Timelines and facts may be altered for dramatic effect
Such portrayals can create a distorted understanding of reality.

Case in point: The depiction of demonetisation as a decisive blow against terrorism, despite empirical evidence showing limited success, illustrates how films can rewrite public memory. Impact:
  • Shapes voter perceptions and political attitudes
  • Influences inter-group relations
  • Creates long-term ideological conditioning
Therefore, cinema acts not just as entertainment but as a subtle instrument of political socialisation.

The glorification of vigilante justice—where individuals take the law into their own hands—is a recurring trope in popular cinema. While it may provide emotional satisfaction and a sense of immediate justice, it raises serious concerns for the rule of law.

Negative impacts include:

  • Erosion of legal institutions: It undermines trust in courts and due process
  • Normalization of violence: Brutality becomes acceptable if justified as patriotic or moral
  • Encouragement of mob behaviour: Real-life incidents of lynching and encounter killings gain legitimacy
Audience reactions celebrating violent scenes reflect how cinema can shape societal attitudes toward justice.

However, some argue that such portrayals highlight systemic failures and public frustration with delayed justice. Balanced view: While cinema can critique inefficiencies, it must avoid endorsing lawlessness as a solution. Way forward:
  • Promote narratives emphasizing institutional reform
  • Encourage responsible storytelling
  • Strengthen civic education on constitutional values
Ultimately, a democracy thrives not on retributive violence but on fair and accountable legal processes.

The concept of ‘internal enemies’ refers to groups within a nation portrayed as threats to national security or unity. In political narratives and films, these often include ideological opponents, minority groups, or dissenting voices.

Examples from the context include:

  • Labelling groups like activists, NGOs, or universities as anti-national
  • Equating political opposition with foreign adversaries
  • Portraying regional or ideological movements (e.g., Naxalites, separatists) without nuance
Such representations simplify complex socio-political issues into binary conflicts.

Implications:
  • Delegitimisation of dissent: Democratic criticism is seen as betrayal
  • Social polarisation: Communities are divided into loyalists and traitors
  • Policy consequences: Justification for surveillance and repression
In a diverse democracy like India, this approach undermines pluralism and weakens the constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression. A more nuanced understanding of internal conflicts is essential for inclusive governance.

Demonetisation (2016) is a significant economic policy that aimed to curb black money, counterfeit currency, and आतंकवाद financing. However, its portrayal in cinema as a decisive and successful anti-terror measure reflects how complex policies can be politically reframed.

Ground reality:

  • 99.3% of currency returned to banks, indicating limited impact on black money
  • Severe disruption to the informal sector
  • Decline in GDP growth from 8.3% (2016) to 3.9% (2019)
Despite these outcomes, cinematic narratives may highlight selective benefits while ignoring costs.

Analysis: This reframing serves to:
  • Strengthen political legitimacy
  • Create a perception of decisive leadership
  • Align economic decisions with national security narratives
Implications:
  • Public discourse becomes less evidence-based
  • Policy evaluation is replaced by emotional appeal
  • Democratic accountability weakens
This case underscores the need for critical media literacy among citizens to distinguish between dramatized narratives and empirical realities.

The increasing acceptance of violent nationalist narratives can be attributed to a combination of psychological, social, and political factors. These narratives often resonate with emotions such as fear, pride, and anger, making them particularly effective in mass communication.

Key reasons include:

  • Perceived insecurity: External threats or internal instability create demand for strong, decisive action
  • Media amplification: Films and digital platforms sensationalize violence as heroic
  • Frustration with institutions: Delays in justice lead to support for immediate, albeit violent, solutions
Additionally, identity politics reinforces in-group solidarity while demonizing out-groups.

Theoretical perspective: Hannah Arendt’s idea of ‘thoughtlessness’ suggests that lack of critical engagement makes societies vulnerable to simplistic and extreme ideologies. Consequences:
  • Normalization of authoritarian tendencies
  • Erosion of empathy and pluralism
  • Reduction of complex issues to binary conflicts
Addressing this trend requires strengthening critical thinking, media literacy, and inclusive narratives rooted in constitutional values.

Attribution

Original content sources and authors

Sign in to track your reading progress

Comments (0)

Please sign in to comment

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!