The Myth of Hindu Unity

In the grand tapestry of Bharat's socio-political landscape, one of the most enduring myths is that Hindus form a cohesive majority. Official statistics may indicate that around 80% of Bharat’s population identifies as Hindu, but beneath this numerical facade lies a complex web of divisions that belies this apparent unity. The notion of a monolithic Hindu identity often seems more like a political construct than a reflection of the country’s true socio-cultural fabric.

When we examine the internal dynamics of Bharat, the picture is far from unified. We are fragmented by numerous factors: geographical regions, ideological differences, economic disparities, caste, creed, and even fan loyalties. The nation's divisions are so pronounced that it is almost a given that we will find reasons to stay apart—whether by region (North versus South), political orientation (right wing versus left wing), or caste.

The historical narrative that Bharat remained a Hindu-majority country despite centuries of invasions and colonial rule often overlooks a critical issue: our internal disunity made us vulnerable. Additionally, while Hindu theology identifies kama (Desire/Lust), krodha (Anger), lobha (Greed), mada (Ego), moha (Attachment), matsarya (Jealousy), and alasya (Laziness) as key mental obstacles, many of us do not genuinely work to overcome these challenges in our daily lives. These factors highlight why we were subjected to rule by invaders (like the Mughals and British) and dynasts (such as the Indian National Congress) for so many centuries.

We take pride in the fact that, unlike many other countries that were religiously converted by invaders, Bharat remained a Hindu-majority nation. Statistically and on paper, this is accurate. However, what if the invaders did not exert significant effort to convert us? What if they considered us worse off remaining Hindus, or if they did not want their faith to be corrupted by our mindset?

Consider this: if Hindus were genuinely united, no one could have mocked us. No one could have taken things away from our plate in the name of appeasement. No one could have jeopardized Bharat’s medium to long term growth potential by playing vote bank politics. I am not at all suggesting that we should have been like a militant outfit and troubled others. Bullying others just because of the strength of numbers is cowardly. Saving cows is great, making Muslim drivers eat cow dung is not. Just a strength in character would deter people to not take us for granted.

Our divisions are laid bare during elections and in various other arenas, revealing a society where allegiance to caste and regional identity often outweighs national cohesion. The recent Lok Sabha elections offer a telling example. The ruling party, various other blunders aide, lost several seats due to the pervasive influence of caste-based voting. In certain constituencies, candidates were chosen based on caste affiliations rather than merit or party allegiance. It is actually good to not consider the religion while deciding who to vote for but then the consideration should be national interests, economic growth, integrity and not caste or freebies. This fractured approach to voting diminishes any party’s ability to implement substantial change.

In Bharat, the political and social landscapes are often shaped by fragmented vote banks such as Jats, Yadavs, and Bhumihaars. This fragmentation hampers the possibility of a unified and effective Hindu vote. In contrast, similar unity among other communities results in a more consolidated and influential political force. For instance, while Shia or Sunni vote banks may exist, they typically come into play only when the competition is between Muslim candidates.

Take the example of Rampur, Uttar Pradesh. Despite the BJP's reputation for Hindu-centric policies, the party allocated numerous houses under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana to residents of Rampur, which has a significant Islamic population. However, the BJP faced a significant defeat in this constituency. Why? Because, unlike the fragmented Hindu vote, the Muslim voters in Rampur were largely unified. While this unity helped them defeat the so-called 'Hindu party,' it came at a cost. Leaders who engage in vote bank politics rarely serve their constituents' best interests. Their aim is to keep people divided and perpetually dependent.

By failing to stay united and prioritizing caste-based interests and freebies over national and economic growth, we perpetuate a cycle of poverty and political myopia. Consequently, we later find ourselves lamenting issues such as unemployment, rising prices, and the loss of job opportunities, academic seats etc. Let us not play victim in a situation that we have created for ourselves.