Can There Be a Colour Revolution in India? By Manu Kant

 

Can There Be a Colour Revolution in India?

By Manu Kant

Echoing the famous opening of The Communist Manifesto, a spectre is haunting the Indian ruling class—the fear of a “colour” revolution. These vibrant, people-driven uprisings have become a new chapter in the history of political change in our region.

First, Sri Lanka’s masses rose and shook the island. Then Bangladesh saw waves of protest. Indonesia experienced its own tumult. Today, Nepal is roiling in the bright, charged colours of dissent. And now, whispers drift through Indian drawing rooms and political corridors: could India be next?

Recently, Congress leader Udit Raj posted on X warning that a situation akin to Nepal’s political unrest is emerging in India. His message captures the rising tensions beneath the surface, signaling that the tranquility the Indian establishment proclaims may be more fragile than it appears.

The Indian ruling class wears its composure like armor. Chief Justice Gogoi proudly declares, “We are proud of our Indian Constitution,” implying that the tremors shaking Nepal will never reach our land. On television a few days ago, Manish Tewari, Member of Parliament from Chandigarh, told NDTV that a colour revolution in India was unlikely. Republic TV echoed the same refrain: India is, by its nature and upbringing, immune to such unrest.

Yet beneath this serene exterior, much simmers. To paraphrase Jawaharlal Nehru from his remarkable Glimpses of World History—a work suffused with materialist analysis—“revolutions are like volcanoes. Under the surface, there seem to be peace and quiet, but below, restless energies are ever at work, seeking an outlet.”

This is not mere poetry but a sharp historical observation: stillness can hide a slow, dangerous storm. The question is not merely if such a storm could emerge, but how likely it is in the peculiar soil of India today.

This potential for dialectical shifts in the status quo is underscored by significant moments in recent Indian history where youth played a decisive role. The Mandal Commission agitation in 1990 saw Indian students rise with verve and determination, signaling that a major shift can take place anywhere in the country once sparked. Similarly, in 2012, the entire youth population poured onto the streets demanding justice for Nirbhaya, showing that the collective conscience of the nation is still very much alive and capable of mobilizing loudly and powerfully.

India’s social landscape is not static; ongoing social movements demonstrate vibrant popular participation. Environmental protests led by youth actively engage in cities such as New Delhi, Hyderabad, Bhubaneswar, Goa, Bengaluru, and Bhopal. Platforms like the Indian Youth Climate Network mobilize young voices nationally for climate justice. Concurrently, Dalit uprisings and movements against caste violence persist across states including Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab, and Tamil Nadu. Incidents of caste-based atrocities and protests remain a significant challenge, reflecting deep social fissures.

Despite these signs of active dissent and youth mobilization, several deep-rooted structural and cultural barriers make the outbreak of a full-scale revolution in India highly unlikely at present.

1. India’s vast population is deeply religious. From childhood, people are taught that patience, endurance, and tolerance are virtues. Inequalities and hardships are often seen not as injustices but as part of a natural, or even divine, order.

Take the Kanwars, for example—mostly poor devotees who walk hundreds of kilometers to fetch sacred water. Despite their harsh economic conditions, revolt is far from their minds. Their fervour is spiritual, not socio-economic. A single visit to Haridwar during the pilgrimage reveals a powerful collective focus on spiritual merit, not upheaval. This deep religiosity fosters a culture of acceptance rather than rebellion.

2. Many Indians hold a sincere, if perhaps naive, faith in democratic ritual. They believe that voting every few years is the primary way to air grievances and effect change. Elections are elaborate, noisy affairs that absorb immense public energy.

This channeling of dissent into sanctioned, periodic activity prevents it from spilling over into unsanctioned, disruptive action.

3. The Constitution is not merely a legal document but a sacred symbol of national identity. Protest and debate are permitted, but within well-defined limits. The unspoken contract is clear: change the person in power, not the system itself; express anger peacefully, reform from within, never overthrow.

4. The so-called parliamentary left has long acted as a safety valve. These parties, entrenched in the system they claim to oppose, channel popular discontent into debates, localized strikes, and controlled protests.

These sanctioned avenues absorb unrest and steer it away from direct confrontation. Without new, bold leadership capable of uniting fragmented frustrations into a clear vision, there is little fuel for a mass uprising.

5. The structure of the global economy acts as a critical pressure release valve. The West and the Middle East act like a cushion. Ambitious students from middle-class families travel west for studies and livelihood, while millions of workers find employment in the Gulf.

The remittances they send back home—over $100 billion a year—are a vital economic lifeline, easing domestic pressure and ensuring quiet compliance.

6. India’s intricate social fabric—woven of caste, language, region, and religion—makes unified mass action inherently difficult. The ruling class has mastered the art of divide and rule.

By granting small concessions here and appeasing certain groups there, they ensure collective movements remain scattered and ineffective.

7. India’s robust security and surveillance apparatus acts as a formidable deterrent to mass unrest. The state’s extensive network of law enforcement, intelligence agencies, and modern surveillance technologies—such as facial recognition and internet monitoring—enables it to detect and suppress potential uprisings before they gain momentum.

High-profile protests, like those against the Citizenship Amendment Act in 2019, faced swift state response, including arrests and internet shutdowns. This infrastructure, coupled with legal frameworks like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, ensures that dissent remains fragmented and contained, making a unified colour revolution difficult to sustain.

That is why leftist outfits such as Lalkar, CPI (ML) Liberation, urban Maoists affiliated with CPI (Maoist), and others have become very cautious in recent times. They fear arrest under these stringent laws—an anxiety confirmed by the cases of activists like Umar Khalid and Kanhaiya Kumar.

This climate of repression curtails open activism and limits the ability of revolutionary groups to mobilize mass movements.

Because of all these factors, it must be emphasized that for now, a colour revolution in India seems improbable. The deep religiosity, belief in electoral remedies, reverence for constitutional order, robust security apparatus, absence of revolutionary leadership, and social fragmentation all stand as formidable barriers to such a mass uprising.

But no system is permanent. The masses see the lifestyle of the rich; in the age of social media, it is not hidden from them.

When the top 1% of the population holds over 40.1% of the nation’s wealth while the bottom 50% struggles to claim a mere 6.4%, the stark contrast becomes a potent fuel for anger.

Beneath the surface, unrest gathers. Cracks deepen. Contradictions grow.

If the winds shift, if leadership arises, if popular patience wears thin—and if the glaring inequality can no longer be justified by faith or deferred by dreams of migration—then volcanoes, to echo Jawaharlal Nehru, may yet mark the landscape of India.

The only certainty is that change, when it comes, will come when least expected.