Dr. Buragadda Srinadh
The stance of the Indian National Congress on Hinduism has been a subject of considerable debate and contention over the years. At the forefront of this discourse is Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister, whose limited understanding of Hinduism significantly influenced the party’s approach to the religion. Nehru’s tendency to conflate Hinduism with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a Hindu nationalist organization, led to a broad and often unfounded disdain for Hinduism within the Congress framework. This conflation not only misrepresented the diverse and pluralistic nature of Hinduism but also painted it in a negative light, leaving lasting repercussions for the community.
Nehru’s policies, driven by a desire to project an image of secularism and liberalism to secure minority votes and gain international recognition, often came at the expense of Hindu interests. In his quest to be seen as a champion of minority rights, he inadvertently marginalized the Hindu community, making them scapegoats for various socio-political issues. This approach fostered an environment where Hindu identity was often viewed with suspicion, leading to a growing sense of alienation among Hindus.
Moreover, Nehru’s disconnection from Hindu practices further exemplified this ideological rift. His lack of participation in Hindu rituals and absence from temples were not merely personal choices; they symbolized a broader disconnect between the Congress leadership and the cultural and religious sentiments of a significant portion of the Indian populace. This detachment contributed to the perception that the Congress party was against the values and beliefs of ordinary Hindus.
In his pursuit of minority votes, Nehru strategically positioned himself and the Congress party as oppositional to Hinduism, perceiving it as a means to consolidate power and maintain a secular image. This political maneuvering laid the groundwork for an anti-Hindu sentiment within the party, which can be traced back to Nehru’s era. Over the years, this sentiment has evolved into a significant ideological force within Congress, influencing its policies and rhetoric against Hinduism.
As a result, the relationship between the Congress party and Hinduism has become increasingly fraught, shaped by a complex interplay of political strategy, historical grievances, and cultural identity. The legacy of Nehru’s approach continues to resonate, shaping the party’s stance on Hinduism and its engagement with the Hindu community in contemporary India. This ongoing tension reflects broader societal dynamics and highlights the challenges of navigating religious identity in a diverse and pluralistic nation.
Jawaharlal Nehru and the Indian National Congress shaped the political landscape of post-independence India. Their emphasis on terms like secularism and the promotion of a liberal society reflected a vision of a nation that embraced diversity and pluralism—primarily for their own electoral strategy.
However, this strategy often overshadowed the fundamental principle of equality among all individuals as citizens. While secularism is undoubtedly important in a country as diverse as India, its prioritization sometimes came at the expense of a more robust discourse on citizenship and the responsibilities that accompany it.
In contrast, many developed nations have historically placed a strong emphasis on citizenship and the rule of law as foundational elements of their democratic frameworks. These nations have built their political identities around the idea that citizenship entails not only rights but also responsibilities, and that the rule of law is essential for ensuring justice and equality for all individuals. This focus on citizenship has fostered a sense of belonging and accountability among citizens, reinforcing the idea that everyone, regardless of background, is entitled to equal treatment under the law.
India, however, presents a unique case. The Congress Party, under Nehru’s leadership, initially prioritized secular propaganda as a means to unify a diverse population and mitigate communal tensions. While this approach was intended to retain power, it often led to the neglect of more foundational aspects of citizenship and responsibilities. The emphasis on secularism, while crucial for maintaining harmony in a multi-religious society, did not sufficiently address the need for a comprehensive understanding of what it means to be a citizen in a democratic state.
This divergence in focus has had lasting implications for Indian society. The lack of a strong emphasis on citizenship and responsibilities in the early years of independence may have contributed to ongoing challenges related to social justice, inequality, and the protection of individual rights. In many ways, the initial prioritization of secularism over citizenship has created a complex landscape where issues of identity, belonging, and legal recognition remain contentious.
As India continues to evolve as a democracy, the need for a balanced approach that integrates the principles of secularism with a robust understanding of citizenship and the rule of law becomes increasingly important. By fostering a culture that values both diversity and equality, India can work towards realizing the vision of a truly inclusive society—where all individuals are recognized as equal citizens, entitled to the full spectrum of rights, protections and responsibilities under the law.
