In Indian context.

This work is a systematic study of Bal Gangadhar Tilak's thought, focusing on his views on 'communal' relations within the Indian polity, on caste and reform in Hindu society, and on political ethics regarding violence and non-cooperation. The Thought of Bal Gangadhar Tilak adopts a contextualist approach, situating his ideas in local Maharashtrian as well as pan-Indian and global cultural-intellectual contexts. The approach blends Tilak's quotidian journalism and speeches alongside his canonical texts on Aryan history and on the Bhagavad Gita. The work marks a departure from current interpretations, emphatically arguing that he is misappropriated and/or misunderstood as a proto-Hindutva thinker. Instead, he is revealed to be a radical liberal who supports counter-autocratic violence, a majoritarian pluralist in terms of intercommunity relations, a self-strengthening reformer who focuses on masculinity, and a Brahmin supremacist who is committed to reshaping India for the challenges of modernity. This book lays emphasis on his remarkable recognition as the nation's 'founding father' and particularly demonstrates how this later appropriation by Gandhi was contested by those celebrating Tilak's approach to contest him during the crucial mid-1920s period when he was indelibly linked to re-emerging Hindutva. More recently, growing ahistorical demi-official insistence on his social progressivism illustrates a change in India's public culture, as does the use of popular or even legal pressure to de-legitimize perennial criticism of Tilak's socio-political positions.

Lokamanya (revered leader) Bal Gangadhar Tilak (1856 - 1920), the extremist politician of Maharashtra, a region of western India, was one of the first Congress Party leaders to adopt the strategy of mass politics. Interpretations of his role and his achievement differen greatly. Some historians depict Tilak as India's first mass politician who was a creative nationalist myth-maker; other suggest that he was an opportunist who manipulated politics for selfish, elitist purposes. With an eye to resolving these conflicting opinions, Cashman related Tilak's ideology to his political organization. the author concentrates on four mass movements, studying the Lokamanya when he was engaged in political action and comparing his public statements with his political tactics. This approach provides a means of examining the manner in which Tilak redefined myths and of assessing the value of myths for purposes of political mobilization. Cashman suggests deficiencies in previous interpretations of Tilak. Arguing that the limitations of the mass movements need not be explained by the inadequacies of myths, he demonstrates that instead they reflected the transitional state of Maharashtraian society, which lacked a broad consensus. Tilak was active at a time when there was no common goal, no broader objective, in which sectional interests might be subsumed. He symbolized the uncertain striving of his society for some new direction, whose nature was yet unknown. He did not create the myth of the Lokamanya or the ideology of nationalism but, responding to social and political pressures, became a prisoner of the myths. Much writing of Indian history has been influenced either by a narrow ideological approach or by a retreat to arithmetical pragmatism. Cashman attempts to restore a balance by reexamining the relationship of myth to politics. This title is part of UC Press's Voices Revived program, which commemorates University of California Press’s mission to seek out and cultivate the brightest minds and give them voice, reach, and impact. Drawing on a backlist dating to 1893, Voices Revived makes high-quality, peer-reviewed scholarship accessible once again using print-on-demand technology. This title was originally published in 1975.