:Hindu Nationalism and the Language of Politics in Late Colonial India.<i>(Cambridge Studies in Indian History and Society, number 11.)</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this provocative and important study, William Gould broadens and deepens our understanding of the rise of Hindu nationalism and the complexities of the nation-building effort that paralleled and intersected the nationalist struggle for independence in India. He focuses his analysis on the role of provincial and local politicians in the Uttar Pradesh (UP) Congress, their construction of a politicized Hindu framework for the campaign against colonial rule, and its impact on the national Congress's identity and its commitment to secularism. While historians have noted the overlapping membership and links between the (UP) Congress and various Hindu nationalist organizations, major agency for the communalizing of north Indian politics has generally been assigned to forces beyond the control of the Congress. In this reading, the colonial state's emphasis on caste and religious identities, the rise of Muslim separatist politics, and the establishment of institutions of the Hindu right share responsibility for the challenge to a progressive, modernist, and inclusive Congress unity message. Gould's work deconstructs this image of the Congress by emphasizing its “heterogeneity,” the role of individuals in such a strategically significant setting as Uttar Pradesh acting in its name, and the variable forms of secularism that they embraced. In this regard, he notes the porousness of ideological borders and the ways in which apparently antagonistic ideas of nationhood could and did coexist.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".