The Hospitality of Goan-ness and the Hostility of Hindutva: A Dialogue

Goa, a coastal state on India’s western shore, is often celebrated for its syncretic culture, where diverse traditions—Hindu, Catholic, Muslim, and others—have historically coexisted in a vibrant tapestry of coexistence. This “Goan-ness” embodies a spirit of hospitality, welcoming difference and fostering a shared sense of belonging. In contrast, the rise of Hindutva, a nationalist ideology advocating Hindu supremacy, has introduced a politics of hostility, seeking to homogenize India’s plural identity under a singular ethno-religious framework.

By engaging with Jacques Derrida’s concept of hospitality and Rabindranath Tagore’s vision of cosmopolitanism, this article explores the tensions between Goan-ness as an inclusive ethos and Hindutva as an exclusionary force, illuminating their implications for India’s cultural and political landscape.

Goan-ness: A Praxis of Hospitality

Goan-ness, as a cultural identity, is rooted in a history of encounters—between indigenous traditions, Portuguese colonialism, and global trade routes. This confluence has produced a unique social fabric, evident in Goa’s cuisine , architecture and festivals (like the inclusive celebration of Shigmo and Carnival). Such inclucivism reflects what Derrida calls “unconditional hospitality,” a radical openness to the Other without demanding assimilation or conformity

.Derrida distinguishes between unconditional hospitality—welcoming the stranger without conditions—and conditional hospitality, which imposes limits or expectations (e.g., cultural assimilation). Goan-ness leans toward unconditionally, as seen in its historical accommodation of diverse communities. This openness aligns with Derrida’s idea that true hospitality risks the self’s stability, embracing the unpredictability of the Other. In Goa, this risk manifests as a willingness to let identities intermingle, producing a creolized culture that resists rigid boundaries.

Tagore’s cosmopolitanism complements this framework. In The Religion of Man and other essays, Tagore envisions a “world-consciousness” where humanity transcends parochial loyalties to embrace universal fellowship. Unlike Western cosmopolitanism, which can erase cultural specificity, Tagore’s vision celebrates local traditions while fostering dialogue with the global. It is glocal at several levels.

Goan-ness embodies this Tagorean ideal: it is deeply rooted in its Konkani heritage yet open to external influences, from Portuguese fado to Bollywood. Tagore’s metaphor of the “guest” resonates here—Goa treats newcomers not as threats but as contributors to its cultural mosaic, much like Tagore’s call to see the divine in the stranger.

Hindutva: The Hostility of Exclusion

In contrast, Hindutva, as articulated by ideologues like V.D. Savarkar and institutionalized by organizations like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), promotes a vision of India as a Hindu Rashtra (Hindu nation). This ideology constructs a rigid hierarchy where Hindus are the primary citizens, and minorities—Muslims, Christians, and others—are tolerated only if they subordinate their identities to Hindu hegemony.

Hindutva’s hostility lies in its rejection of Derrida’s unconditional hospitality, replacing it with a conditional framework that demands cultural conformity.Derrida warns that hospitality can turn hostile when the host asserts sovereignty over the guest, imposing rules that erase the guest’s alterity. Hindutva exemplifies this turn. Its campaigns—such as “ghar wapsi” (reconversion to Hinduism) or cow protection vigilantism—are acts of symbolic and physical violence, signaling that non-Hindus are unwelcome unless they align with Hindu norms.

In Goa, Hindutva’s influence has disrupted the state’s inter-people harmony. For example, communal tensions have risen over issues like beef consumption (in Margao in recent days), a staple in Goan Catholic diets, which Hindutva activists frame as an affront to Hindu sentiments. Such actions reflect Derrida’s notion of “hostipitality”—the simultaneous presence of hospitality and hostility—where the host’s welcome is laced with control.

Tagore’s cosmopolitanism starkly opposes Hindutva’s insularity. Tagore criticized nationalism as a “machine” that crushes human diversity, advocating instead for a world where cultures meet in “creative unity.” Hindutva’s obsession with a homogenous Hindu identity contradicts Tagore’s vision of India as a “confluence of streams,” where differences enrich rather than threaten. In Goa, Hindutva’s push for Sanskritization and Hindu majoritarianism undermines the Tagorean ideal of celebrating multiplicity, replacing it with a monolithic narrative that marginalizes minorities.

Tensions and Contradictions in Goa serves as a microcosm of the broader clash between these ideologies. Goan-ness, with its Derridean hospitality, thrives in practices like the interfaith reverence for deities (e.g., Hindus venerating Our Lady of Miracles) or the shared spaces of village feasts. Yet, Hindutva’s hostility encroaches through political rhetoric and cultural policing. For instance, the BJP-led government in Goa has faced criticism for promoting Hindu-centric policies, such as prioritizing Sanskrit over Konkani in schools, which alienates the state’s plural linguistic heritage.

Derrida’s framework reveals the fragility of Goan hospitality. Unconditional hospitality is inherently vulnerable, as it risks being overwhelmed by guests who refuse reciprocity—here, Hindutva’s aggressive assertion of Hindu primacy. Similarly, Tagore’s cosmopolitanism, while idealistic, struggles against the realpolitik of nationalist fervor. Tagore himself faced resistance from orthodox nationalists, and today, his vision is sidelined by Hindutva’s populist appeal.Yet, Goan-ness persists as a site of resistance. Community initiatives, like interfaith dialogues and cultural festivals, embody Tagore’s call for unity-in-diversity. These acts of hospitality challenge Hindutva’s hostility, proving that local traditions can counter nationalist homogenization. Derrida might argue that Goa’s strength lies in its willingness to remain open, even at the risk of tension, as this openness sustains its cultural vitality.

Conclusion:

Toward a Cosmopolitan FutureThe hospitality of Goan-ness and the hostility of Hindutva represent two visions for India’s future. Goan-ness, through its Derridean embrace of the Other and Tagorean celebration of diversity, offers a model of inclusive coexistence. Hindutva, with its conditional hospitality and rejection of cosmopolitan ideals, threatens to fracture India’s plural fabric. Goa’s syncretic culture is not a relic but a living praxis, demonstrating that hospitality can flourish amid diversity.To preserve this ethos, Goa—and India—must heed Tagore’s call to nurture “world-consciousness” while resisting the lure of exclusionary nationalism. Derrida reminds us that true hospitality is a courageous act, requiring vulnerability and trust. In embracing these principles, Goan-ness can inspire a broader movement toward a cosmopolitan India, where the stranger is not a threat but a guest, and diversity is not a challenge but a gift.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

GREETINGS

Attention is a generous gift we can give others.

Attention is love.

- Fr Victor Ferrao