A+| A| A-

Reading Sumit Sarkar through Anarchist History and Historiography

This paper points out why at two moments, nearly a century apart, a perceived affinity between anarchism, postmodernism and Hindutva might cause some progressive activists and historians to reject all three as hopelessly entangled. However, while it is important to take note of some commonalities in their jumping-off points and traits of form and sensibility, their differences are equally telling. And it is crucial to note these, if we are to jump in good directions. This is as true within each discourse as between them.

To read the full text Login

Get instant access

New 3 Month Subscription
to Digital Archives at

₹826for India

$50for overseas users

Comments

(-) Hide

EPW looks forward to your comments. Please note that comments are moderated as per our comments policy. They may take some time to appear. A comment, if suitable, may be selected for publication in the Letters pages of EPW.

This article argues that the deterritorialised politics of affinity generated by swadeshi, over and against the imagined community of the nation,...

The swadeshi movement has been classically studied in terms of its social constructiveness and its ultural productivity. But a view of the...

This article explores the gendered implications of the swadeshi rhetoric by focusing on how its language was creatively appropriated by the Hindu...

Vernacular political oratory in the Madras Presidency sought to bring the gospel of swadeshi to the common farmer and labourer and this was...

Back to Top