Historical narratives shaped by academic work overshadowed by politically charged "WhatsApp" history

By Ram Puniyani

The rise of "WhatsApp University," as it’s popularly called, has profoundly impacted public perceptions. It’s a platform where historical narratives shaped by rigorous academic work are often overshadowed by politically charged interpretations. Academic historians, who have devoted years to producing historical work grounded in rational, scientific methods, are increasingly sidelined by a dominant political agenda. A key concern is that social perceptions shaped by this medium are advancing a specific ideological goal—namely, the retrogressive agenda of Hindutva or Hindu Nationalism.

This issue was highlighted recently by historian William Dalrymple (photo), who, in a conversation with journalists, pointed to the spread of "WhatsApp history." According to Dalrymple, the failure of Indian historians to connect with a general audience has given rise to a wave of misconceived ideas—such as the belief that Aryans were the original inhabitants of India, or that ancient India had advanced scientific knowledge including aeronautics, plastic surgery, and genetic engineering. This medium also fosters popular but misleading ideas about Islam and Christianity as “foreign” religions, portrays Muslim rulers as temple destroyers, and perpetuates the myth that Gandhi was anti-Hindu or that India's independence was not due to the national movement.

This narrative has its roots in the political ideology of Hindu nationalism. During India’s freedom movement, the prevailing narrative promoted by the national movement was one of inclusiveness, recognizing India as a “nation in the making.” However, Hindu nationalists at the time asserted that Hindus constituted a nation since ancient times, while Muslim nationalists dated their “nationhood” to the eighth century with Mohammad bin Qasim’s conquest of Sindh. British colonial historiography, such as James Mill's History of India, further divided Indian history into Hindu, Muslim, and British periods, reinforcing religiously polarized narratives.

Hindu nationalist historiography began taking hold through RSS programs and publications, later finding institutional support. This process gained momentum when Lal Krishna Advani served as the Information and Broadcasting Minister in the Janata Party government, leading to a strategic infiltration of Hindu nationalist narratives into government channels. Today, this process has expanded, with RSS-aligned educational campaigns and the introduction of a series of textbooks authored by Dinanath Batra in thousands of schools in Gujarat. Additionally, with corporate control of media by groups friendly to the ruling party, the reach of these narratives has grown exponentially. BJP’s IT cell has strategically utilized WhatsApp to circulate these versions of history, as analyzed in Swati Chaturvedi’s book I Was a Troll.

Meanwhile, academic historians like Romila Thapar, Irfan Habib, and Bipan Chandra have contributed comprehensive works on ancient, medieval, and modern Indian history, many of which were included in NCERT syllabi in the 1980s. However, with the BJP’s rise to power in 1998, the “saffronization” of education began, intensifying after 2014. The objective appears to be the full-scale introduction of pseudo-historical and mythological content as part of the official history curriculum.

While scholars have historically played a part in shaping public perceptions, these perceptions are largely molded by the ruling political ideologies. Noam Chomsky’s concept of “Manufacturing Consent” illustrates how governments create public understanding that aligns with their own agendas, often at the expense of historical truth. In India, despite the remarkable work of historians, the dominant political tendencies frequently dictate what becomes "common sense" for the masses.

Although Dalrymple’s concerns about WhatsApp's spread of irrational narratives are valid, the issue runs deeper. The rise of right-wing politics has amplified these narratives, creating a version of history that departs significantly from academic scholarship. Figures like Arun Shourie, once affiliated with the BJP, have written critiques against reputed historians, further fueling an antagonistic stance toward academic history.

Ultimately, WhatsApp is just an additional tool in the broader dissemination of Hindu nationalist propaganda. To counteract this trend, more groups need to help bridge the gap between historians and the public, fostering a social common sense rooted in inclusivity, scientific reasoning, and Indian nationalism. While academic historians continue to contribute, WhatsApp’s influence is largely a byproduct of the rise of communal politics, not a reflection of historians’ shortcomings.

---

A version of this article was first published in Newsclick