How media sells secular demands as pro-Hindu

This is the second article in this series on explaining the problems with emergence of real Hindu party. Read Part I, Part 3.

The media and intellectual environment has been so anti-Hindu in India that most of the issues which pass off as pro-Hindu issues hardly pass the smell test when looked at carefully. Given this hostile environment, it is no surprise that entire generations of Hindus have been brainwashed and converted into such meek cows that they have lost their mental faculty to even challenge and question the narrative which goes around as pro-Hindu.

The benchmark criterion to decide whether a policy is pro-Hindu or not is to look at it and ask the question- are Hindus the only beneficiary of this policy? If a policy helps all Indians then it cannot be pro-Hindu, so call it nationalistic policy. Similarly, all policies which bring Hindus at level playing field with other religions will again not be pro-Hindu as it will only correct historical bias against them, so call it secular. Using this criterion we can now look at some of the long standing issues to understand whether they are pro-Hindu issues or not.

1) Uniform Civil Code(UCC): It does not help Hindus explicitly in any way. Hindu civil law is almost modern and Hindus will hardly gain anything if Muslims cannot divorce their wives on triple talaq or can have four wives. It is a secular issue and if India really is a secular country as the libtards claim it to be, then they should support the implementation of UCC. Implementation of UCC will not really help Hindus but it will definitely bolster secular image of India by dismantling religion specific civil laws.

2) Article 370: J&K as a region is important for national security given that it can connect India to Central Asian republics and also provides connection between India’s two big rivals i.e. China and Pakistan. It is in the interest of India to integrate J&K completely into the country and wrestle back PoK. So again, repealing Article 370 does not help Hindus alone and is an issue of national importance. Any person opposing it is just helping Pakistan and China against India and weakens Indian security environment.

3) Right To Education(RTE) act: Hindu institutions are taxed under this law while minority institutes have no obligation to give quota to SC/STs or follow the stringent requirements of this law. Minority institutions are thriving thanks to this law while thousands of Hindu schools have closed down. So again, repealing this law will put Hindus on par with other minorities. So, it is a secular issue and not pro-Hindu in any way. In any other country with basic framework of law this discriminatory tax on schools operated by the majority would have been quashed by the courts on first hearing. And actually it was quashed by the courts before Congress brought in 93rd amendment to strangulate and kill Hindu schools.

4) Temple Control: Money from Hindu temples is siphoned off and used by the greedy governments while they pay Hajj subsidy to Muslims. Church and mosques are free to receive all donations they can and use their own funds in whichever way deemed important. Hindu organizations on the other hand are helpless against this state intervention and watch meekly while government takes away their donations. So freeing temples and putting them at par with other religious institutes is not a pro-Hindu but secular agenda, requiring the state to not rob the money from temples and hand it out as Hajj subsidy.

5) Jallikattu ban: This is an assault on local traditions while minorities are allowed to mutilate small kids under freedom of religion. A secular state has no mandate to dictate how religious festivals should be organized. Freedom to practice one’s religion and celebrate festivals in ways one deems important is not a place for government intervention, which again makes it a secular issue. If Muslims can slay thousand of meek goats on Bakrid, it reeks of hypocrisy when court challenges healthy Jallikattu bulls under the pretext of animal rights.

Some of the above mentioned issues have been paraded around as pro-Hindu issues but a careful look at them demolishes the whole narrative. Most of the gospel truths about pro-Hindu policies are taken at face value by gullible Hindus, while actually they hardly help Hindus in any way. It is like asking a runner to start 20 metres behind everyone else in a 100m race. And when this runner demands to be at the same starting position as everyone else, the thekedars in the racing fraternity rule against him citing they cannot put him at par with other runners as it gives him undue advantage completely ignoring the initial bias.

Given the above mentioned policies don’t explicitly help Hindus, what can be classified as pro-Hindu policies?

1) Ram Temple: This is a long standing issue and important for the collective Hindu consciousness given the importance of Lord Ram in Hindu history. Hindus are the rightful owners of the land in Ayodhya. One random mosque hardly counts for Muslims and they don’t think twice before demolishing one in Islamic nation of Saudi Arabia. It is Muslim iconoclasm which stands in the way of showing big heart and allowing Hindus to build the temple of one of the most important Hindu icons in his birth place. In case government decides to solve this issue in favour of Hindu temple using its legislative powers then it can be classified as pro-Hindu issue. However, the current litigation in Supreme Court just makes it another case of property dispute rather than a pro-Hindu issue.

2) Ban on proselytization by non-Hindus: A policy which will disallow missionaries to convert local population will fall under this category. Banning of conversions for all religions does not make it pro-Hindu. Only a policy which bans conversion out of Hinduism, while allowing Ghar Wapsi can be called pro-Hindu. Under current constitution, covert policies can be implemented to stop missionaries. For example- in tribal belts under the garb of protecting local culture, missionaries can be denied entry in the whole region while allowing Hindus to target Christian converts. This is not explicitly pro-Hindu but covertly achieves the same agenda.

3) Birth control restrictions on Muslims: To maintain demographic superiority of Hindus, it is very important to reduce the current boom in Muslim population. Any policy which explicitly or implicitly reduces Muslim births while having no impact on Hindus can be called pro-Hindu.

4) Force minority institutes to implement reservations: The reservation benefits are restricted to Hindus in most cases so if minority institutes are forced to educate SC/STs, it will increase opportunities for Hindus while reducing them for minorities. So, if 50% quota can be implemented in minority institutes, it can be called pro-Hindu policy as it will educate Hindu masses while minorities foot the bill for it. This is not a big tax given minority institutes will still get chance to preserve their culture but at a small cost of educating backward Hindus.

5) Throwing out illegal Muslim immigrants from Bangladesh and giving citizenship to minority Hindus both from Bangladesh and Pakistan.

The above examples clearly show that many other similar policies can be designed with explicit benefit for Hindus. But it is essential for Hindus to push back on unnecessary tags that are awarded to policies which do not pass the pro-Hindu criteria. Policies that do not exclusively help Hindus need to be declassified and put under secular or national policy header. The implementation of pro-Hindu policies will only be feasible after Hindus have dismantled the narrative and repealed anti-Hindu policies. But the first step would be to stop classifying secular policies under pro-Hindu basket. This brings us to the million dollar question- is there any such political party which can claim itself to be really pro-Hindu?

Read Part I and Part 3 of this series.