Extended Abstract
Introduction
India, as one of the world’s most diverse and pluralistic societies, has long been a site of contestation among competing identity discourses. Religious, linguistic, cultural, and regional plurality have historically shaped the Indian nation, giving rise to multiple—and often conflicting—visions of national identity. Among these, the discourse of Hindutva has emerged as one of the most influential and contested projects of identity construction. Originating in the early twentieth century through figures such as V.D. Savarkar and M.S. Golwalkar, Hindutva articulated a vision of India as fundamentally a Hindu nation, seeking to redefine belonging through the prism of shared territory, culture, and civilizational heritage. This study examines the articulation, institutionalization, and reproduction of Hindutva during the decisive period between 2014 and 2024, marked by the consolidation of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) under Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In this decade, Hindutva not only gained unprecedented salience in public discourse but also sought to stabilize itself as a hegemonic framework for defining Indian nationhood, culture, and citizenship. The research employs discourse theory as developed by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, combined with critical discourse analysis, to interrogate how Hindutva constructs meaning, mobilizes symbolic resources, and negotiates power within India’s contested socio-political terrain. Drawing on key concepts such as nodal points, chains of equivalence, floating signifiers, and antagonism, the analysis demonstrates that Hindutva functions as a dynamic and evolving discursive field. It articulates nation, culture, civilization, and territory in ways that both generate symbolic cohesion around Hindu identity and demarcate boundaries vis-à-vis minority communities, particularly Muslims, who are discursively constructed as the constitutive other. This dual process of inclusion and exclusion lies at the core of the Hindutva hegemonic project.

Methodology
The study highlights several mechanisms through which Hindutva consolidates its centrality. Legal and political interventions—such as the abrogation of Article 370, which revoked Jammu and Kashmir’s special constitutional status, and the Citizenship Amendment Act of 2019—exemplify the use of state power to reshape notions of citizenship and belonging. Simultaneously, cultural and religious symbolism, most prominently the construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, provides powerful affective and historical anchors that link political authority to civilizational continuity. Beyond the formal political sphere, the discourse of Hindutva permeates everyday life through media narratives, educational reforms, popular culture, and emerging cultural forms such as H-Pop (Hindutva pop music). Bollywood cinema, in particular, has become a crucial site for disseminating Hindutva-inflected narratives, often through the reimagining of history, the glorification of Hindu heroes, and the demonization of minorities. A notable feature of contemporary Hindutva is its adaptive flexibility. While earlier formulations emphasized exclusivist notions of Hindu nationhood, more recent articulations—particularly those advanced by figures such as Ram Madhav—have framed Hindutva as a broader civilizational paradigm. This strategy seeks to reconcile cultural authenticity with modernity and exclusivity with conditional inclusivity, projecting Hindutva not merely as a rigid ideology but as a capacious framework capable of absorbing dissenting or minority voices, provided they accept the primacy of Hindu culture. Such discursive maneuvers strengthen Hindutva’s claim to ideological legitimacy and broaden its political appeal.

Result and discussion
The findings suggest that Hindutva is neither a static nor a monolithic doctrine but rather an unfinished and contested discourse, continuously reshaped by internal tensions and external resistance. Its power lies in the ability to rearticulate nodal points, deploy state and cultural institutions, and inscribe symbolic meanings into the social fabric. Yet, it remains challenged by secular, liberal, and minority perspectives that contest its universality and resist its hegemonic claims. By tracing these dynamics, the study demonstrates how nationalist discourses in plural societies negotiate identity, hierarchy, and power in an age of globalization. Ultimately, the trajectory of Hindutva between 2014 and 2024 exemplifies the intricate entanglement of religion and politics in contemporary India.

Conclusion
The analysis reveals how cultural and civilizational narratives can be mobilized to redefine national belonging, produce internal and external others, and assert hegemonic influence over political imagination. Understanding this evolving discourse is therefore essential not only for analyzing the transformations of Indian democracy but also for advancing broader theoretical debates on discourse, nationalism, and identity construction in complex, plural, and globalized contexts.