There is, however, a vast misperception that the division of British India into secular-India and Islamic-Pakistan is viewed by the Hindus as giving away of what belonged to them. Remember, two Hindus, Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi, were the ones who committedly accepted Muslims as a basic part of Indian soil. On the contrary, oppression of Hindus in Pak is known to all. And the displacement of Kashmiri Pandits is a dishonor for the Indian rulers.
The Muslims, who have stayed in India after 1947, share equivalent faith towards Indian laws, customs, moral values, and thus have been accorded the status of 'citizen'. The development of India rests on the shoulders of all citizens, then why some political leaders regard just Muslims as the most vibrant pillar in our success is something that nurtures doubts.
In the same context, shall we not raise questions when policies of some political groups become mere Muslim-centric rather than being development-centric? Why in the U.P., Hindus are more prone to communal attacks and penal actions, is also a crucial concern. When every news channel and newspaper is flooded with cases that clearly reveal politics of appeasement, is it reasonable to remain silent?
Internally, most of us know the real purpose behind several instances of religious conversion in the past few years. We are also familiar with the fact that governments extend undue favors to particular communities just to lure them and fetch votes. Let me be very clear that the common man, be it a Hindu or a Muslim, would never allow any differences in the name of religion. It is, however, a few communal leaders, politicians and their admirers who make illicit paybacks by infusing the seeds of hatred among communities.
Being favored by many political groups, the minority community is somewhat on the secured side; it is the Hindus who have been victims of this fake secularism which advocates opulence of the minority irrespective of the detriment.
Why the statement of Amit Shah in Bijnor was considered offensive and something that could have led to communal disturbance is a question I want to ask the so-called secular politicians. Also, what was off beam when Mohan Bhagwat denoted Hindustan as a Hindu nation? If the same had been alleged keeping the minority in the center, people had construed this as true secularism. The motive is not and can never be to displace the minority for the profit of Hindus.
Rather, the drive is to protect Hinduism from bogus secularism and organized damage. And believe me; the Muslims have to be an equal participant in this process. Development can never belong to just one cluster, inclusiveness and contribution by all is what that India craves for.
Lastly, it is expected from the new and vibrant leader of our country, Mr. Narendra Modi, to lay down such a structure wherein community based politics finds no other way than to perish. It is evident that Muslims too have parted from the decades-old politics of appeasement. In the U.P., the BJP managed to win all expect one of the 27 seats which have high concentration of Muslim voters.
Victory of BJP in Chandni Chowk and in constituencies in Assam (with considerably high Muslim votes) is enough to comprehend the prevailing milieu. Hinduism and Hindi are for sure the roots of India and BJP has proven that these very roots can never be forsaken. For those, who are looking forward to ruin these, I would say, no more forbearance will be allowed.