So ITTL, let's say that Subhas Chandra Bose's faction won out in his power struggle with the Gandhi-led clique in the Congress Working Committee, enabling him to retain his presidency over the Indian National Congress (rather than being forced to resign from the Congress Presidency in April 1939, in spite of Bose having been democratically elected over Gandhi's preferred candidate Pattabhi Sitaramayya). And that in light of his presidency, rather than the unilateral decision being made by Viceroy Lord Linlithgow to declare war on India's behalf without consulting the Congress leadership, and to reject the Congress' request for a declaration that India would at the very least be given the chance to determine its own future (via an independence referendum) after the war, the British instead consult the Congress leadership first ITTL, and accept the Congress' demands for a post-war independence referendum, with the immediate granting of Dominion status providing sufficient mollification to keep the Bose administration on their side.
Looking at Subhas Chandra Bose's ideologies, he described himself as a leftist and socialist, having called in his book The Indian Struggle for a hypothetical "left-wing revolt" inside the Congress, after which the party will transform and will "stand for the interests of the masses, that is, of the peasants, workers, etc, and not for the vested interests, that is, the landlords, capitalists and money-lending classes", governed by Soviet-style central planning "for the re-organisation of the agricultural and industrial life of the country", having also proposed the adoption of "a synthesis between communism and fascism" throughout the 1930s, and expressed the belief that an independent India needed socialist authoritarianism, along the lines of Turkey's Kemal Atatürk, for at least two decades- as well as advocating a similar non-aggression pact between socialist authoritarian India, under his leadership, and the USSR.
Bose's core ideology was essentially a Hindi-nationalist variant of Kemalism; to an even greater extent than Hitler (who himself described Mustafa Kemal Atatürk as the "star in the darkness" in the early 1930s, and proclaimed Kemalist Turkey to be a "postgenocidal paradise" worthy of emulation), Bose greatly admired Kemalist Turkey, and proclaimed it to be the country which India should try its utmost to emulate. And IOTL, after he was elected the Congress president at the Haripura session in 1938, he'd also proclaimed that “to promote national unity, we shall have to develop our lingua franca and a common script... I am inclined to think the ultimate solution would be the adoption of a script which would bring us in line with the rest of the world. Perhaps some of our countrymen would gape with horror when they hear of the adoption of the Roman script, but I would beg them to consider this problem from the scientific and historical point of view.”
Bose said he was inspired by a trip to Turkey in 1934, when “Ataturk enforced a new national script in 1928”. But this source of inspiration for his proposed universal enforcement of Hindi was the enforcement of the Citizen, speak Turkish! initiative. Which had been accomplished via widespread book-burnings, and outright criminalization of all citizens found to be using any language other than Turkish who used a language other than Turkish, the imposition of fines upon and arresting any persons (including foreigners) who spoke a non-Turkish language in any public place, and citing of "insulting Turkishness" as a legal justification for prosecuting those who spoke any languages besides Turkish even in their own homes.
As such, we can speculate that under Bose's continued leadership, if he'd have the chance to implement his promised policies, language rather than religion had been the decisive dividing factor in India under his administration; and that it would have almost certainly been greatly exacerbated by the ‘Hindification’ policies which he loudly advocated imposing upon the Indian population, paralleling the 'Citizen, Speak Turkish!' initiative (but on a far larger, grander and more ambitious scale), which would have increasingly criminalized the use of all other written and spoken languages across India in the name of ‘national unity’. So then, how do you think that Bose's India would have fared? Better, or worse, than it did IOTL? And how'd you rate its potential for stability and long-term national unity, as opposed to instability and wholesale Balkanisation?
Looking at Subhas Chandra Bose's ideologies, he described himself as a leftist and socialist, having called in his book The Indian Struggle for a hypothetical "left-wing revolt" inside the Congress, after which the party will transform and will "stand for the interests of the masses, that is, of the peasants, workers, etc, and not for the vested interests, that is, the landlords, capitalists and money-lending classes", governed by Soviet-style central planning "for the re-organisation of the agricultural and industrial life of the country", having also proposed the adoption of "a synthesis between communism and fascism" throughout the 1930s, and expressed the belief that an independent India needed socialist authoritarianism, along the lines of Turkey's Kemal Atatürk, for at least two decades- as well as advocating a similar non-aggression pact between socialist authoritarian India, under his leadership, and the USSR.
Bose's core ideology was essentially a Hindi-nationalist variant of Kemalism; to an even greater extent than Hitler (who himself described Mustafa Kemal Atatürk as the "star in the darkness" in the early 1930s, and proclaimed Kemalist Turkey to be a "postgenocidal paradise" worthy of emulation), Bose greatly admired Kemalist Turkey, and proclaimed it to be the country which India should try its utmost to emulate. And IOTL, after he was elected the Congress president at the Haripura session in 1938, he'd also proclaimed that “to promote national unity, we shall have to develop our lingua franca and a common script... I am inclined to think the ultimate solution would be the adoption of a script which would bring us in line with the rest of the world. Perhaps some of our countrymen would gape with horror when they hear of the adoption of the Roman script, but I would beg them to consider this problem from the scientific and historical point of view.”
Bose said he was inspired by a trip to Turkey in 1934, when “Ataturk enforced a new national script in 1928”. But this source of inspiration for his proposed universal enforcement of Hindi was the enforcement of the Citizen, speak Turkish! initiative. Which had been accomplished via widespread book-burnings, and outright criminalization of all citizens found to be using any language other than Turkish who used a language other than Turkish, the imposition of fines upon and arresting any persons (including foreigners) who spoke a non-Turkish language in any public place, and citing of "insulting Turkishness" as a legal justification for prosecuting those who spoke any languages besides Turkish even in their own homes.
As such, we can speculate that under Bose's continued leadership, if he'd have the chance to implement his promised policies, language rather than religion had been the decisive dividing factor in India under his administration; and that it would have almost certainly been greatly exacerbated by the ‘Hindification’ policies which he loudly advocated imposing upon the Indian population, paralleling the 'Citizen, Speak Turkish!' initiative (but on a far larger, grander and more ambitious scale), which would have increasingly criminalized the use of all other written and spoken languages across India in the name of ‘national unity’. So then, how do you think that Bose's India would have fared? Better, or worse, than it did IOTL? And how'd you rate its potential for stability and long-term national unity, as opposed to instability and wholesale Balkanisation?