Every ruling party tries to impose its version or vision of nationalism. Still, if India's Bharatiya Janata Party's attempts in this direction cause so much concern and alarm, it is because the party's vision of nationalism not only ignores the diverse nature of the country's culture and the plurality of its society but is heavily weighted in favor of the majority community (Hindus). It brooks no dissent and hounds intellectuals, students and activists who hold a vision of India that differs from that of its own. Maharashtra provides an example of where all this narrow nationalism will lead to. Last Wednesday the state legislature suspended a lawmaker, Waris Pathan, belonging to the All India Majlis Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) for refusing to chant "Bharat Mata ki Jai" (victory for Mother India). Madhya Pradesh Assembly has passed a censure motion condemning AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi for saying he is not obliged by Indian Constitution to chant "Bharat Mata ki Jai". The BJP is aware of the advantages of using motherhood as a political tool. The party also knows that associating the cow as mother can be politically convenient. But Hindu culture is not the only one that sees motherhood as sacred as it evokes the highest emotions in people. In Europe, for example, the Serbian nationalists treat women as mothers of the nation. But as the Indian poet and Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore pointed out long back, Europe in its culture and growth has had the advantage of the strength of the many, as well as the strength of the one. India is just the opposite of what Europe is. It "is many countries packed in one geographical receptacle." In India, there are people who think worshiping the land or cow is against the tenets of their religious faith. One Sikh leader, Simranjit Singh Mann, has said that Sikhs "cannot" chant the slogan "Bharat Mata ki Jai" as "Sikhs don't worship women in any form". If the Constitution does not oblige an Indian to do the things the BJP wants, let us amend the constitution seems to be the attitude of some party leaders including some of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Cabinet colleagues. But the ruling party does not have the requisite majority in the upper house of Parliament to amend the Constitution for this purpose. So what is the alternative? This is what sends fear down the spine of minorities and liberals in Hindu society. There are reports of people being intimidated to prove their patriotism. In October 2015, a young man was beaten to death in a village outside Delhi for allegedly killing a cow. Protestors also beat his 75-year-old mother. One month earlier, a mob in the north Indian city of Dadri dragged a man from his bed in the middle of the night and beat him to death with bricks for having eaten beef. And a few weeks ago, the Indian government banned beef in Kashmir, which has a Muslim majority. Is BJP suggesting a cow test for Indians the way Lord Norman Tebbit suggested a cricket test in April 1990 for immigrants and their children to prove their loyalty to Britain? Whatever the truth, the silence of a usually articulate Modi about some recent developments in India is intriguing. He came to power promising for the whole of India the kind of economic development he is supposed to have brought to his own state of Gujarat of which he was the chief minister for a long time. But those promises remain just that — promises. This means he is not hopeful of winning the votes of the non-BJP segment of the electorate in the next election. This may be the reason he does not do or say anything that would alienate his core supporters. But Modi should realize that India will have to pay a big prize for his silence and inaction.
