The Mahishasur Movement Online: a Precarious Network of ‘Demon-Followers’

Abstract

This article addresses the reframing of Hindu history, mythology and rituals in a WhatsApp group as part of a larger social movement called the ‘Mahishasur movement’ arising from a nation-wide controversy around a religio-political ritual. It addresses the mediatized controversy that led to the movement, the creation of this particular social media network, the material circulated on it and the nature of hierarchy between different participants. Contrary to existing scholarship, the findings from my fieldwork in different parts of India show that non-elite precariat groups involved in identity politics at different levels participate in social media activism which has so far been understood as a domain of Anglophone middle classes. The article shows the possibilities and challenges generated by the participation of these non-elite political activists in rural and small town India in social activism alongside their urban counterparts on social networking sites particularly WhatsApp.

No Room for Dissent: Domesticating WhatsApp, Digital Private Spaces, and Lived Democracy in India

“…Whilst WhatsApp can be a generative space for those previously excluded from political arenas (Monteiro et al. 2020; Omanga 2019), it is striking how existing community dominances often prevail (see Sen 2019).…”

Outrage

“…In this sense the Mahishasur movement contains elements of ethnicisation in its attempts to reform the religiosity of their people, return to 'authentic' practices and purify an identity in order to create a stronger position from which to bargain for economic and political rights with the postcolonial state. By 2017, one year after the blasphemy controversy around the Asur ritual in the national media had died down, disparate activists and groups under the Mahishasur banner had coalesced into a pan-Indian network called the 'Mahishasur movement' (Sen 2019).…”

From demon to deity: Forging a new iconography for Mahishasur

“…The majority of the participants are men (between early twenties to late sixties) belonging to indigenous groups (Adivasis; listed as 'scheduled tribes' in the Indian constitution), and oppressed castes (Dalit-Bahujans, listed as 'scheduled castes' and 'other backward castes' in the Indian constitution). In addition to the affordances and challenges of a leaderless movement driven by social media discourse, there are internal hierarchies within the movement based on caste, class, gender, language, and geographical location (Sen, 2019b). Despite these distinctions, there is a clear ideological consonance between different political actors on the issue of upper caste hegemony and the need for counter-culture.…”