RELIGION AND POLITICS IN INDIA

There are one billion people in India, the second most populous country in the world. This means
every sixth person in the world is an Indian. About 450 million Indians live below the poverty
line. Suppression of religious minorities and its nuclear blasts have made India visible to the
world. One of the messages that India sent to the world was that it needs to be reckoned with.
The Hindu nationalist leadership on the whole sent this message. While each country needs
dignity before others, many ask why such a poverty-ridden country should invest massive
amounts in nuclear devices and why it persecutes a Christian religious minority that has made
bold attempts to empower the poor of India.

Religious Landscape in India

Of the one billion people in India, 85 percent are Hindus, 10 percent Muslims, and 2.5 percent
Christians. The rest belong to other religious minorities: Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Parsees and
other groups. Though the decennial census classifies 85 percent as Hindus, there is no positive
definition of what Hinduism is. Negatively, whoever does not belong to any of the other
religious minorities is taken to be a Hindu. British discourse shaped the terminology used in
reference to Hinduism. The British in India began by asking the Indians: "Our religion is called
Christianity, what is yours?" It was then decided to call India’s religion Hinduism. The British
asked, "We have the Bible as our scripture, what is your scripture?" It was decided to consider
the Vedas, the Upanishads, etc. as the scriptures of Hinduism. Further the British asked, "We
have religious heads like the pope and the bishops, but who are Hinduism’s heads?" They
declared the Shankaracharyas as their pontiffs. The West initially tried to understand the
religions in India in its own terms and categories.
ADVERTISEMENT
But in truth many religions are grouped together under the title of Hinduism. First of all, there
are the religions of autochthonous (indigenous or tribal) people, and second, there are the
religions of Aryan invaders known as Hindus (living on banks of the Indus River). The latter had
two main divisionsShaivism and Vaishnavism. Later came the protest religions, Buddhism and
Jainism, criticizing the religion of the Aryan or Brahminic Hindus. In the medieval period came
the Bhakti movements, through which the lower castes sought equality with the upper caste
Hindus. Then came Sikhism, blending both Hindu and Muslim religious elements. As a result of
the British colonial rule, reformist movements like Brahmo, Prarathana and Aryasamaj sought to
reform Hinduism from within. Today Hindu nationalists prefer to classify Buddhism, Jainism
and Sikhism as insider religions to India and Islam and Christianity as outsider religions, even
though Christianity has existed in India for 2000 years.
Two Traditions Within Hinduism

One useful approach to finding one’s direction within Hinduism is to see it as composed of two
traditions: the Great Tradition and the Little Tradition. The Great Tradition consists of the higher
forms of Hinduism, also known as Sanskritic or Brahmin Hinduism. This encompasses the
hegemonic classical philosophy, rituals, dance, music and art of the upper castes (middle and
upper classes) or the elite of Hindu society, who compose about 20 percent of Hindus. The Little
Tradition consists of the lower forms of Hinduism, also known as non-Sanskritic or non-
Brahminic. This encompasses the rites, folk wisdom, folk dance, music and art that have become
the cultural heritage of the lower castes (the lower classes) or the masses, who consist of 80
percent of all Hindus.

It is important to understand the existence of two categories of elite within the Great Tradition.
According to Schermerhorn, the first is known as the "parochial neo-traditionalists" and the
second the "conditionally Westernized." The parochial neo-traditionalists "had their education
primarily in the vernacular. They are more attracted to local or regional than to Western culture.
Males prefer Indian to Western garb. Vegetarianism retains a strong hold on dietary habits, while
caste restrictions and practices remain potent in the home, no matter how often they are violated
in public. Most members in this category have a strong susceptibility to patriotic appeals
couched in Hindu slogans, and they tend to share the suspicion that Muslims and Christians lack
commitment to the nation. They usually ignore members of the lower castes and/or untouchables
as much as possible unless the upper level politicians make a temporary display of favoritism
towards them."
ADVERTISEMENT
The "conditionally Westernized" have the opposite characteristics: "Educated almost universally
in English medium if not public schools, the members are fluent in the English language; they
prefer Western to regional culture. People in this category consume meat and alcohol without a
qualm, though in other respects they maintain an all Indian diet. Nearly all are secular minded.
For the most part, patriotic appeals touch them only lightly except during national conflicts. They
are convinced secularists in politics and have no difficulty in regarding Muslims and Christians
as loyal patriots." The "parochial neo-traditionalists" and "conditionally Westernized" are 80:20
percent of the total elite or those belonging to the Great Tradition of Hinduism.

Hinduism and Hindu Social Order

Hinduism and the Hindu social order (caste system) are two sides of a coin. One cannot be
understood without the other. One cannot exist without the other. The caste system is similar to
the racial society in many ways. One is born into a caste group. A caste (endogamous) group is
ranked high or low according to its purity or impurity and is always linked to a traditional
occupation. These caste groups are ranked in a hierarchical order like the rungs of a ladder. The
higher the caste, the greater its social status, wealth, power and privileges. The lower the caste,
the lesser its status, wealth, power and privileges. Hindu theological concepts like dharma,
karma and sanskara lend legitimacy to the privileges as well as the deprivations. For
instance, karma means, "as you sow, so shall you reap." You are born into a caste because of the
actions in your previous life. Dharma calls upon an individual to fulfill the proper obligations of
one’s caste (division of labor) assigned to it by the code of Manu (the lawgiver). Sanskara are
caste-specific performances of sacraments and rituals.

The lower castes in Hinduism perpetually suffered economic, social, political and religious
deprivations. They were largely laborers, who had to give free services to the upper castes by
working in their fields and doing demeaning jobs. They had to live in a segregated part of the
village. They could not be touched lest they pollute the upper castes. The Brahmins did not serve
them, so they had to create their own priestly castes. The upper castes were literate intellectuals,
and the caste system they created gave them a foolproof social security and welfare. Religion and
the social order were so intertwined that most of those who belonged to the Little Tradition were
the illiterate, laboring masses who make up 80 percent of the Hindus. These rebelled, protested
and asserted their rights from time to time, largely through religious movements. Buddhism,
Jainism, Sikhism and the Bhakti movement exemplify such movements within Hinduism that
sought equality from within.
ADVERTISEMENT
Paradoxically, what they got was spiritual but not socio-economic equality. Many lower castes
opted out of Hinduism and joined Islam and Christianity in order to overcome indignities and
deprivations through a new identity that would give them equality. Normatively, both
Christianity and Islam preached an egalitarian social order. The British colonial period brought
about a lot of social consciousness among the lower castes. Large numbers of them converted to
Christianity, setting off alarms among the upper-caste Hindus. If many from the lower castes
deserted the Hindu social order, who would provide cheap labor to the upper castes? Reactionary
movements like Arya Samaj began to reconvert the low-caste Christian converts
through shuddikaran (purification).

Struggle for Empowering the Poor

The struggle for freedom led by Mahatma Ghandi managed to throw out the British colonial
power. The architect of India’s constitution, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, an untouchable himself,
managed to put in generous clauses of affirmative action (reservation or protective
discrimination) for the lower castes. The egalitarian ethos of the secular, liberal and democratic
constitution was another blow to the hierarchical Hindu social order. "One man, one vote"
flattened the merit system of caste. A Brahmin’s vote and an untouchable’s vote were of equal
value. For the lower castes education opened new windows for upward mobility. Affirmative
action too had some beneficial impact on the lower castes. All this meant loss of power, loss of
opportunities for employment and loss of status for the upper castes. This was seen as
undermining the traditional Hindu social order. The upper castes were being sidelined. The
vertical social structure (caste ladder) was being brought down to a horizontal level. No longer
was it going to be one group placed on top of another, but groups placed side by side on the same
level.

The role of the church is significant in the above-mentioned context. The educational, health and
awareness-raising activities of the church have helped the lower castes in many ways to assert,
protest and defy the upper castes, and to become upwardly mobile, thereby escaping the
humiliation, indignities and exploitation suffered in the past. As droves of people from the lower
castes took conversion to Christianity as an escape route, the upper-caste Hindus were alarmed.
This is not to say that traits of caste do not exist in the Indian church.
ADVERTISEMENT
The church was also serving the upper castes through its educational institutions, and by and
large this service gave rise to the "conditionally Westernized" elite class mentioned earlier. The
church had in a way appeased the upper castes to allow it to work among the lower castes. But
the "parochial neo-traditionalists" mentioned earlier gave rise to Hindu nationalism. The
Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (national voluntary corps, known as R.S.S.) was the
fountainhead of Hindu nationalism during independence, and it was a man linked to the R.S.S.
who shot and killed Mahatma Gandhi for having permitted the division of India into India and
Pakistan. This organization was banned but later allowed to rise again. In post-independent India
it has been implicated by different inquiry commissions appointed by the government in a
number of Hindu-Muslim riots in different parts of the country.

Fury of Hindu Nationalism

In 1982 a federal government dominated by the middle order castes or other Backward Castes
(O.B.C.’s) appointed a commission to consider extending affirmative action to a few more
disadvantaged communities and castes. This further angered the "parochial neo-traditionalists,"
as if it were going to eat into their share of the cake. This was the turning point in the relations
between the upper castes and the O.B.C.’s. The upper castes declared war on the O.B.C.’s within
the Hindu fold.

Hindu nationalism upheld one religion, one culture and one nation. Being numerically small, the
upper castes needed mass support or lower-caste support to come to power in the "one man, one
vote" system. In order to regain political supremacy, they played the religious card to mobilize
the masses. On the one hand, they tried to homogenize the differences within Hinduism, and on
the other, they declared war against Muslims and Christians. The latter were defined as the
"other," enemy, outsiders, unpatriotic and were to be eliminated in order to realize the golden age
of Hinduism in India. Besides the R.S.S., multiple other organizations came into being, such as
the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (V.H.P.), the Bajrang Dal (B.D.), the Hindu Jagran Manch (H.J.M.)
and others, under the umbrella of the Sangh Parivar with the Bharatiya Janata Party (B.J.P.) as its
political organ. They all proclaimed that Hinduism was in danger. Accordingly, the birthplace of
Ram in the city of Ayobhya in the northeast state of Ultar Pradesh had to be liberated from the
Muslims, who had built a mosque over it hundreds of years ago.

In 1992 the demolition of the mosque known as Babri Masjib was preceded by rath yatras (car
processions) made by the Hindu nationalist leaders across the country to mobilize the masses,
which led to the death of scores of Muslims in the ensuing riots. More riots followed the
demolition of the mosque itself. In Bombay alone rioting took the lives of 900 Muslims. But the
general elections in 1994 saw the results of religion-based political mobilization. The Hindu
nationalists captured the highest number of seats they had ever won in the parliament. It was
almost as if the party rode in on the dead bodies of Muslims. But mobilization based on stirring
emotions, particularly hatred, does not last long. The Hindu nationalists had to identify newer
issues to stir up the emotions of the Hindu masses to keep them together and cultivate their vote
bank.
In 1997 the Hindu nationalists turned the heat up on Christians in India, particularly in Gujarat
State, where nationalists were in power. There were only 50 cases of registered atrocities against
Christians during the first 48 years of independence. But between 1997 and 1998 there were 500
cases, a geometrical rise during two years. Christian missionary personnel were accused of
converting tribals (indigenous people) and the lower castes by force or fraud, though no cases of
this were cited to substantiate the allegation. Christian churches were desecrated or burnt, sacred
festivals were disrupted, Bibles were torn and trampled upon, and priests and nuns were killed or
raped. Most recently, in my home state of Gujarat, the nationalists disrupted Christmas midnight
Masses by holding rallies outside Catholic churches.

These atrocities are taking place mostly in tribal areas, where Hindu nationalists have publicly
declared war on Christian missions. Their strategy is to use the existing ritual differences among
the Christian and non-Christian tribals to divide them further and pit one against the other. The
one-sided vernacular press is making it look as if the non-Christian tribals are fighting the tribal
Christians and missionaries for ruining their culture.

The Hindu nationalists focused upon the tribal regions (indigenous people) not so much because
of conversions among them to Christianity but because the tribals were awakening to their plight.
They were increasingly deprived of their life-supporting resourcesforests, land and waterby the
"developmental" policies of the state. Large dams displaced thousands of tribals. Tribals could
not cut trees even for fuel. Their land was acquired by the state for industrial plants. Non-tribals
also were encroaching on their resources. The educational, health or developmental activities of
missionaries raised the awareness of the tribals. Hindu nationalists struck upon the strategy of
actively Hinduizing the tribals and making missionaries the scapegoats. They did this first to pre-
empt or check the self-assertion of the tribals and, second, to cultivate a vote bank among the
poor tribals.

Real Agenda

The Hindu nationalists targeted minorities like the Muslims and the Christians, who historically
belonged to the lower castes, and tribals, who composed the lower strata of Indian society. It was
a war on the lower strata, their upward mobility and on the democratic constitution, which
upheld equality for all citizens irrespective of creed, code and cult. Hindu nationalists on the one
hand gloried in the fact that Hinduism was tolerant, and on the other fomented, provoked and
indulged in arson and atrocities, all in the name of producing a proud and glorious Hindu India.
The atomic blast has been glorified. The bodies of dead Indian soldiers who died in the recent
Kargil conflict in Kashmir have been used to whip up Hindu nationalistic hysteria among the
masses before the recent elections. Indian history is being rewritten from the Hindu nationalist's
perspective. School textbooks are being produced with an anti-minority bias. Muslims and
Christians are finding it increasingly difficult to get employment in the public sector. They have
little option except to eke out a living in the unorganized sector or migrate to the Middle East.

Hindu nationalism's hidden but real agenda is to wage war against the lower strata of Indian
society and against anyone who empowers them. The Christian missions-while acknowledging
the presence of an insignificant number of quixotic, aggressive salvation- and Bible-peddlers and
street preachers-have largely done empowering work among the lower strata. This empowerment
deals with social transformation, redistribution of power and human rights; it seeks to secure
basic needs, economic security, capacity building, skill formation and conditions of dignified
existence for the poor. By and large the secular Hindus, English press and the international
media have supported the Christians in India in recent times. More of this support is welcome in
the name of the poor in India.

But in truth many religions are grouped together under the title of Hinduism. First of all, there
are the religions of autochthonous (indigenous or tribal) people, and second, there are the
religions of Aryan invaders known as Hindus (living on banks of the Indus River). The latter had
two main divisionsShaivism and Vaishnavism. Later came the protest religions, Buddhism and
Jainism, criticizing the religion of the Aryan or Brahminic Hindus. In the medieval period came
the Bhakti movements, through which the lower castes sought equality with the upper caste
Hindus. Then came Sikhism, blending both Hindu and Muslim religious elements. As a result of
the British colonial rule, reformist movements like Brahmo, Prarathana and Aryasamaj sought to
reform Hinduism from within. Today Hindu nationalists prefer to classify Buddhism, Jainism
and Sikhism as insider religions to India and Islam and Christianity as outsider religions, even
though Christianity has existed in India for 2000 years.

Two Traditions Within Hinduism

One useful approach to finding one’s direction within Hinduism is to see it as composed of two
traditions: the Great Tradition and the Little Tradition. The Great Tradition consists of the higher
forms of Hinduism, also known as Sanskritic or Brahmin Hinduism. This encompasses the
hegemonic classical philosophy, rituals, dance, music and art of the upper castes (middle and
upper classes) or the elite of Hindu society, who compose about 20 percent of Hindus. The Little
Tradition consists of the lower forms of Hinduism, also known as non-Sanskritic or non-
Brahminic. This encompasses the rites, folk wisdom, folk dance, music and art that have become
the cultural heritage of the lower castes (the lower classes) or the masses, who consist of 80
percent of all Hindus.

It is important to understand the existence of two categories of elite within the Great Tradition.
According to Schermerhorn, the first is known as the "parochial neo-traditionalists" and the
second the "conditionally Westernized." The parochial neo-traditionalists "had their education
primarily in the vernacular. They are more attracted to local or regional than to Western culture.
Males prefer Indian to Western garb. Vegetarianism retains a strong hold on dietary habits, while
caste restrictions and practices remain potent in the home, no matter how often they are violated
in public. Most members in this category have a strong susceptibility to patriotic appeals
couched in Hindu slogans, and they tend to share the suspicion that Muslims and Christians lack
commitment to the nation. They usually ignore members of the lower castes and/or untouchables
as much as possible unless the upper level politicians make a temporary display of favoritism
towards them."
ADVERTISEMENT
The "conditionally Westernized" have the opposite characteristics: "Educated almost universally
in English medium if not public schools, the members are fluent in the English language; they
prefer Western to regional culture. People in this category consume meat and alcohol without a
qualm, though in other respects they maintain an all Indian diet. Nearly all are secular minded.
For the most part, patriotic appeals touch them only lightly except during national conflicts. They
are convinced secularists in politics and have no difficulty in regarding Muslims and Christians
as loyal patriots." The "parochial neo-traditionalists" and "conditionally Westernized" are 80:20
percent of the total elite or those belonging to the Great Tradition of Hinduism.

Hinduism and Hindu Social Order

Hinduism and the Hindu social order (caste system) are two sides of a coin. One cannot be
understood without the other. One cannot exist without the other. The caste system is similar to
the racial society in many ways. One is born into a caste group. A caste (endogamous) group is
ranked high or low according to its purity or impurity and is always linked to a traditional
occupation. These caste groups are ranked in a hierarchical order like the rungs of a ladder. The
higher the caste, the greater its social status, wealth, power and privileges. The lower the caste,
the lesser its status, wealth, power and privileges. Hindu theological concepts like dharma,
karma and sanskara lend legitimacy to the privileges as well as the deprivations. For
instance, karma means, "as you sow, so shall you reap." You are born into a caste because of the
actions in your previous life. Dharma calls upon an individual to fulfill the proper obligations of
one’s caste (division of labor) assigned to it by the code of Manu (the lawgiver). Sanskara are
caste-specific performances of sacraments and rituals.

The lower castes in Hinduism perpetually suffered economic, social, political and religious
deprivations. They were largely laborers, who had to give free services to the upper castes by
working in their fields and doing demeaning jobs. They had to live in a segregated part of the
village. They could not be touched lest they pollute the upper castes. The Brahmins did not serve
them, so they had to create their own priestly castes. The upper castes were literate intellectuals,
and the caste system they created gave them a foolproof social security and welfare. Religion and
the social order were so intertwined that most of those who belonged to the Little Tradition were
the illiterate, laboring masses who make up 80 percent of the Hindus. These rebelled, protested
and asserted their rights from time to time, largely through religious movements. Buddhism,
Jainism, Sikhism and the Bhakti movement exemplify such movements within Hinduism that
sought equality from within.
ADVERTISEMENT
Paradoxically, what they got was spiritual but not socio-economic equality. Many lower castes
opted out of Hinduism and joined Islam and Christianity in order to overcome indignities and
deprivations through a new identity that would give them equality. Normatively, both
Christianity and Islam preached an egalitarian social order. The British colonial period brought
about a lot of social consciousness among the lower castes. Large numbers of them converted to
Christianity, setting off alarms among the upper-caste Hindus. If many from the lower castes
deserted the Hindu social order, who would provide cheap labor to the upper castes? Reactionary
movements like Arya Samaj began to reconvert the low-caste Christian converts
through shuddikaran (purification).
Struggle for Empowering the Poor

The struggle for freedom led by Mahatma Ghandi managed to throw out the British colonial
power. The architect of India’s constitution, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, an untouchable himself,
managed to put in generous clauses of affirmative action (reservation or protective
discrimination) for the lower castes. The egalitarian ethos of the secular, liberal and democratic
constitution was another blow to the hierarchical Hindu social order. "One man, one vote"
flattened the merit system of caste. A Brahmin’s vote and an untouchable’s vote were of equal
value. For the lower castes education opened new windows for upward mobility. Affirmative
action too had some beneficial impact on the lower castes. All this meant loss of power, loss of
opportunities for employment and loss of status for the upper castes. This was seen as
undermining the traditional Hindu social order. The upper castes were being sidelined. The
vertical social structure (caste ladder) was being brought down to a horizontal level. No longer
was it going to be one group placed on top of another, but groups placed side by side on the same
level.

The role of the church is significant in the above-mentioned context. The educational, health and
awareness-raising activities of the church have helped the lower castes in many ways to assert,
protest and defy the upper castes, and to become upwardly mobile, thereby escaping the
humiliation, indignities and exploitation suffered in the past. As droves of people from the lower
castes took conversion to Christianity as an escape route, the upper-caste Hindus were alarmed.
This is not to say that traits of caste do not exist in the Indian church.
ADVERTISEMENT
The church was also serving the upper castes through its educational institutions, and by and
large this service gave rise to the "conditionally Westernized" elite class mentioned earlier. The
church had in a way appeased the upper castes to allow it to work among the lower castes. But
the "parochial neo-traditionalists" mentioned earlier gave rise to Hindu nationalism. The
Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (national voluntary corps, known as R.S.S.) was the
fountainhead of Hindu nationalism during independence, and it was a man linked to the R.S.S.
who shot and killed Mahatma Gandhi for having permitted the division of India into India and
Pakistan. This organization was banned but later allowed to rise again. In post-independent India
it has been implicated by different inquiry commissions appointed by the government in a
number of Hindu-Muslim riots in different parts of the country.

Fury of Hindu Nationalism

In 1982 a federal government dominated by the middle order castes or other Backward Castes
(O.B.C.’s) appointed a commission to consider extending affirmative action to a few more
disadvantaged communities and castes. This further angered the "parochial neo-traditionalists,"
as if it were going to eat into their share of the cake. This was the turning point in the relations
between the upper castes and the O.B.C.’s. The upper castes declared war on the O.B.C.’s within
the Hindu fold.

Hindu nationalism upheld one religion, one culture and one nation. Being numerically small, the
upper castes needed mass support or lower-caste support to come to power in the "one man, one
vote" system. In order to regain political supremacy, they played the religious card to mobilize
the masses. On the one hand, they tried to homogenize the differences within Hinduism, and on
the other, they declared war against Muslims and Christians. The latter were defined as the
"other," enemy, outsiders, unpatriotic and were to be eliminated in order to realize the golden age
of Hinduism in India. Besides the R.S.S., multiple other organizations came into being, such as
the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (V.H.P.), the Bajrang Dal (B.D.), the Hindu Jagran Manch (H.J.M.)
and others, under the umbrella of the Sangh Parivar with the Bharatiya Janata Party (B.J.P.) as its
political organ. They all proclaimed that Hinduism was in danger. Accordingly, the birthplace of
Ram in the city of Ayobhya in the northeast state of Ultar Pradesh had to be liberated from the
Muslims, who had built a mosque over it hundreds of years ago.

In 1992 the demolition of the mosque known as Babri Masjib was preceded by rath yatras (car
processions) made by the Hindu nationalist leaders across the country to mobilize the masses,
which led to the death of scores of Muslims in the ensuing riots. More riots followed the
demolition of the mosque itself. In Bombay alone rioting took the lives of 900 Muslims. But the
general elections in 1994 saw the results of religion-based political mobilization. The Hindu
nationalists captured the highest number of seats they had ever won in the parliament. It was
almost as if the party rode in on the dead bodies of Muslims. But mobilization based on stirring
emotions, particularly hatred, does not last long. The Hindu nationalists had to identify newer
issues to stir up the emotions of the Hindu masses to keep them together and cultivate their vote
bank.

In 1997 the Hindu nationalists turned the heat up on Christians in India, particularly in Gujarat
State, where nationalists were in power. There were only 50 cases of registered atrocities against
Christians during the first 48 years of independence. But between 1997 and 1998 there were 500
cases, a geometrical rise during two years. Christian missionary personnel were accused of
converting tribals (indigenous people) and the lower castes by force or fraud, though no cases of
this were cited to substantiate the allegation. Christian churches were desecrated or burnt, sacred
festivals were disrupted, Bibles were torn and trampled upon, and priests and nuns were killed or
raped. Most recently, in my home state of Gujarat, the nationalists disrupted Christmas midnight
Masses by holding rallies outside Catholic churches.

These atrocities are taking place mostly in tribal areas, where Hindu nationalists have publicly
declared war on Christian missions. Their strategy is to use the existing ritual differences among
the Christian and non-Christian tribals to divide them further and pit one against the other. The
one-sided vernacular press is making it look as if the non-Christian tribals are fighting the tribal
Christians and missionaries for ruining their culture.

The Hindu nationalists focused upon the tribal regions (indigenous people) not so much because
of conversions among them to Christianity but because the tribals were awakening to their plight.
They were increasingly deprived of their life-supporting resourcesforests, land and waterby the
"developmental" policies of the state. Large dams displaced thousands of tribals. Tribals could
not cut trees even for fuel. Their land was acquired by the state for industrial plants. Non-tribals
also were encroaching on their resources. The educational, health or developmental activities of
missionaries raised the awareness of the tribals. Hindu nationalists struck upon the strategy of
actively Hinduizing the tribals and making missionaries the scapegoats. They did this first to pre-
empt or check the self-assertion of the tribals and, second, to cultivate a vote bank among the
poor tribals.

Real Agenda

The Hindu nationalists targeted minorities like the Muslims and the Christians, who historically
belonged to the lower castes, and tribals, who composed the lower strata of Indian society. It was
a war on the lower strata, their upward mobility and on the democratic constitution, which
upheld equality for all citizens irrespective of creed, code and cult. Hindu nationalists on the one
hand gloried in the fact that Hinduism was tolerant, and on the other fomented, provoked and
indulged in arson and atrocities, all in the name of producing a proud and glorious Hindu India.
The atomic blast has been glorified. The bodies of dead Indian soldiers who died in the recent
Kargil conflict in Kashmir have been used to whip up Hindu nationalistic hysteria among the
masses before the recent elections. Indian history is being rewritten from the Hindu nationalist's
perspective. School textbooks are being produced with an anti-minority bias. Muslims and
Christians are finding it increasingly difficult to get employment in the public sector. They have
little option except to eke out a living in the unorganized sector or migrate to the Middle East.

Hindu nationalism's hidden but real agenda is to wage war against the lower strata of Indian
society and against anyone who empowers them. The Christian missions-while acknowledging
the presence of an insignificant number of quixotic, aggressive salvation- and Bible-peddlers and
street preachers-have largely done empowering work among the lower strata. This empowerment
deals with social transformation, redistribution of power and human rights; it seeks to secure
basic needs, economic security, capacity building, skill formation and conditions of dignified
existence for the poor. By and large the secular Hindus, English press and the international
media have supported the Christians in India in recent times. More of this support is welcome in
the name of the poor in India.