On Anthropology of Power

Every country and every society has it's own mode of operating power. The dominant modes of power operate based on three aspects : a) the culture of power,b) the history of institutional modes of mobilizing people and c) the political economy of a society.
The culture of power is how dominant modes of hierarchies power and identities of power locations are internalized by people in a given society over a long period of time (patriarchy, caste hierarchy, religious orders , tribal Dynamics). The culture of power is often based on the collective memories of power and that of primary identity of people in relations to the most coercive and consensual power. It is often through family and religious institutions that the culture of power is maintained and operated This evolved over a period of time.

Institutional modes of power are societal , linguistic, and political. For example in some societies people get mobilized around mosque or temple or church. In some other societies , they get organized around work place , and some other societies on the basis of tribal identity.

Political economy of power depends on who control the dominant mode productive resources and dominant modes of communications in a given society at a given time.

How Power operate in different social and culture context ?

The social and political anthropology of power will be very different forms in terms of how power get operated in a given society. This has also an implications in terms of how governments , political parties and even economy work in a society.

Hence the way dominant modes of power operate differently in the USA, Russia and in different countries of Europe. In Africa, tribal identity is still a major locus of power. In Asian countries too there are very diverse ways of operating power. China has a history and culture of power organized by centralized institutions and indigenous​ ethical and philosophical framework of power.

Feudal and Caste Power Matrix

South Asia is primarily driven by the underlying structures and collective memories of feudal and caste power matrix. Hence, in dominant mode of all institutions hereditary notions of power are realized through patriarchal family and caste/community locations and kinship ties. That is why even political parties, the loyalties are often to a leader- based on kinship model , rather than to particular ideological system. That is also the reason that parties are often 'leader -centric' and personality driven rather than system driven. The highly personalized modes of institutions are also due to this In South Asia most of the institutions( including NGOs) are personality driven rather than system driven( like in the case of UK or Europe). Because of such focus on predominant power position of the person, even the power gets transferred to someone identified with that person. Hence hereditary get legitimized both socially and politically..

Hence in South Asia political, economic and media families are common and seen as 'normal'. In India almost all business are 'family business'. Media too is often family business. Even Cinema, there is hereditary streak. In democracy, political families have emerged all over India. But that is also the case of all South Asian countries. As a result, institutionalized power gets transferred to the sons in consonance with patriarchal culture of power. If there is no male progeny, only then women get a chance such as the case of Indira Gandhi or Benezir Bhuto or Bangladesh political dynasties. Here too women get to power due to feudal patriarchal power, rather than through women's empowerment . In Indian Politics, Mamta Banerjee is the only woman leader who came to power without the family legacy or a God Father.

This is why in India and South Asia , leaders of political parties, government , business, media and even NGOs often behave like feudal chieftains. Such modes of feudal and caste power often operate on descent and hereditary legacies of professions and power. That is why the children of Bollywood end up taking up acting as a family career. Such legacies and behavior tend to 'normal'in India and South Asia.

How Power operate in the Indian Context?

This mode of managing feudal-caste modes of power is based on benevolent patronizing, strategic co-option, conformist approach , profiled modes of coercion of opponents or potential opponents and signaling credible threat of excommunicate through deligtimising . In such modes of caste feudal modes of power, violence is used sparingly and strategically to annul the possibility of a backlash. It is through a mix of power management tactics all governments in India and many countries of South Asia operate.

It is within this fine balance of feudal -caste modes of power , the power software of Brahmanism operate . Brahmanism, like patriarchy, is an internalized ordering of hierarchical power.This operates as cumulative hierarchies within the mind and collective social consciousness. Hence a significant number of people born in Brahmin caste may not be Brahminical​, though Brahminical attitude of hierarchical mindset can operate across caste and communities in India, Nepal and to some extent other countries of South Asia. In many ways Brhaminical mindset is like patriarchy.It is not only most of the men are patriarchal, but it often operate through women also .

Hence, the way power operate in Europe is different from that of Asia and South Asia. So the way governmental power operate in Europe or Russia or China is very different from India. India is too diverse a country to manage through one locus of centralized authoritarian or oppressive modes of totalitarian power. That is why India never became a communist country. That is why Indira Gandhi's emergency backfired badly .That is why India will not survive as a country if a totalitarian mode of fascism or any is is forced.

During the Congress times and BJP rule, the dominant mode of operating system of power is on the feudal and caste matrix of power. This still gets operated through benevolent patronizing, strategic co-option, profiled coercion and credible threat. The ongoing effort is to operate on Brhaminical supremacist political ideology of RSS. And the PM does not have to of Brhamin caste to be Brahminical. It is a similar case where a woman leader can also be the torchbearer of patriarchy.

The new neoconservative hegemony of supremacist Brahminism, through consensus and coercion will be operated within the framework of electoral democracy.This operate through strategic subversion and cumulative mode of controlling power.

Totalitarian Modes of Power is not feasible in India

Hence the totalitarian modes of Italian fascism or German Nazism is not possible in India. Authoritarian modes of power will operate differently in India. The purpose of RSS is to replace the inclusive and accommodating Hindu liberal democracy of Gandhi variety with that of more exclusive Hindutva Brhaminical neo-conservative democracy through a mix consensus and coercion.

Once such a new hegemony​ is established, they too will operate on the same feudal-caste​ software of power rather adopting any totalitarian ideology of oppressive coercive power. Because India is too big and diverse a country through one single locus of power or even network of power. The proponents and leaders of this government too well know this as they are in many ways the byproduct of the movement against authoritarian Emergency adventure of Indira Gandhi that back fired. They also know how to create emergency like conditions without making it too obvious.

India is arguably the most diverse country in the world. There is no country in the world as diverse as India in terms of language, religion, caste, race and cultures. And it is disastrous to manage such a wide diversity with any totalitarian modes of power.
Hence, the totalitarian mode of Italian fascism or German Nazism is not possible in the Indian context and even a mild effort in that direction will be disastrous for the very idea and integrity of India. Those who are in control of power are intelligent enough to understand the context of power-matrix in India too well to try for any political adventure.