Thank you dear subscribers, we are overwhelmed with your response.
Your Turn is a unique section from ThePrint featuring points of view from its subscribers. If you are a subscriber, have a point of view, please send it to us. If not, do subscribe here: https://theprint.in/subscribe/
In the past ten years, India has witnessed one of the most significant transformative periods in its history. It has for a long time, thrived under a modern secular heritage where the role of religion and the state is distinctly defined. This role is enshrined in the 42 nd Amendment of the Indian constitution, which defines the state as being a secular one where the state and religion are separate. In other words, the country’s constitution forbids leaders from mixing state and religious power. Today, the secularism roots to which the state of India was established are under threat due to what many perceive as a mix-up of state and religious power. This is contrary to the fundamental principles of secularism, which underscores the concept of religious neutrality in the first place.
In its place, what is emerging is a resurgence of a religious-dominated state, with Hindu undertones registered in most government decisions and policies. Stated differently, India is experiencing a DE secularization phase where religious power and people’s faiths are being used as exploitative tools to advance government ideologies and policies.
Evidence of De secularization exists in the religious targeting of minority religious groups in the country. Specifically, Muslims, who are the largest ethnic minority group in India, are experiencing the brunt of this change because they have encountered years of isolation under the current regime. The actions of the BJP, which is the largest political body in India that wields hegemonic state power, have come under sharp criticism because it is perceived as being used to deconstruct India’s secular roots for a Hindu-centered ideology of nation-state building. The relationship between Hindu nationalism and secularization in India suggests that the development of a common national identity was designed to be in tandem with the growth of the nation’s democratic ideals. Given that most democracies around the world are operationalized in a non-homogenous society. it is increasingly difficult to understand why India has been unable to implement its secularist ideals because only two major groups compete for power in the state – Hindus and Muslims. In other secular states, an increased number of diverse groups of people compete for power but secularism works, nonetheless. Furthermore, the operationalization of democracy in these democracies implies the existence of minority and majority groups of people within a country where the majority rules and the minority have their say. However, given India’s billion-strong population, it is difficult to wish away the influence of the minority group. Large religious groups competing for political power in India have undermined secularist ideologies because political actors havebeen unable to restrain themselves from using religion to mobilize people to win elections. In this regard, democracy and secularism are at odds with one another because secularism promotes the unification of people, but democracy makes it possible to polarize a section of the population to win elections. This analogy suggests that the development of national identity in India behind secularism is not as much a state project as it is a religious one. Therefore, when secular actors participate in India’s political systems, they do not do so as agents of the state intended to advance a national agenda, but as politicians who exploit people’s religious passions for political gain.
Despite Hinduism having a powerful influence on India’s political space, some of the earliest proponents of the religion did not take their religious roots too seriously and instead advocated for a secularist approach to govern the country’s politics. For example, the Indian National Congress was made up of Hindu proponents who believed that a secular view of governance would help heal the divisions that existed in the state, especially between Hindus and Muslims. Those who followed Gandhi preferred the establishment of a Hindu state and did not oppose the use of nonviolent means to achieve this objective. After the assassination of Gandhi in the late 1940s, tensions between the Hindus and Muslims escalated. This resulted in huge populations of people migrating from both countries, such as India and Pakistan in which the Muslims migrated from India to Pakistan and Hindus migrated from Pakistan to India. Their main concern was that the escalating tensions between the two groups would lead to violent confrontations.
Nonetheless, the post-colonial Indian government was more concerned with the establishment of a secular state, and successive regimes have invested in maintaining this policy. The Modi government has not been confined to the implementation of this secularist ideology because it has enacted policies that have established a “Hindu character” in Indian politics. However, some sections of the government have enacted legislation that forbids the development of religious fundamental beliefs in national politics, such as Congress, which has tried to erode traditional prejudices founded by Hindu nationalists against sections of the population. Despite some of these efforts being aimed at strengthening democratic governance in the state, within the prism of a secularist ideology, strong social customs founded on Hindu ideologies have made it difficult to enforce some secular policies. However, there is a need to redirect the country’s national identity towards secularism, which will foster diversity and inclusivity in social, political, and economic life.
These pieces are being published as they have been received – they have not been edited/fact-checked by ThePrint.