Vice President Hamid Ansari is making headlines for his exit interview to Rajya Sabha TV. He spoke at length about how Muslims in the country are ‘feeling uneasy due to the current wave of ‘hyper nationalism’. That he deemed it fit to speak on behalf of only one community and not on wider national issues that are faced by the nation is a debate for another day.

In his interview, he ascribed the spate of vigilante violence, mob lynching, beef bans, Ghar waapsi campaigns to the breakdown of Indian values. Unfortunately, the current liberal narrative has hyphenated mob lynching with Gau rakshaks and Hindutva forces, though there is enough data to prove otherwise.

It is a sorry state of affairs that the lynching of Junaid near Faridabad gets acknowledged by the Chief Minister of Kerala while the lynching of Dr Manoj Narang in Delhi was not even acknowledged by the Delhi Chief Minister.

The Prime Minister and his Cabinet have already addressed the issue of Gau rakshaks on multiple forums. These have all been incidents carried out by individuals with no backing from the State. The perpetrators have also been punished in most cases. Justice has been meted out as the crime was committed by individuals.

- Advertisement -

But is redressal possible when injustice is perpetrated by the State?

Since we are on the subject of citizen insecurity, let us look at a few incidents in recent history, which bring forth a deep sense of insecurity to many, as Hindu citizens of this country:

It is increasingly being revealed how the UPA govt had tried to implicate Hindu terror in what was a cross border attack (with or without local support). It was a well thought out and minutely detailed plot, aimed solely at establishing the existence of something called “Hindu terror”. Not only was this done with the agenda of giving Pakistan a clean chit and a free pass, there was a more nefarious plan of implicating Hindus in terror cases, with the help of the might of the state machinery. Sadhvi Pragya and Colonel Purohit’s lives are a tragic testimony to this. How secure am I supposed to feel as a Hindu when the government of the day was looking at ways of cornering, labelling and brandishing me as a terrorist? Mulayam Singh has gone on record saying that he had ordered the shooting of Karsevaks to placate the feelings of Muslims after Babri demolition. How secure am I supposed to feel as a Hindu if my blood is going to be used as armour for vote bank politics? After the 1993 Mumbai blasts, the then Maharashtra Chief Minister Sharad Pawar had concocted a story about a 13th blast, whereas in reality there had been only 12 blasts. The reason for this blatant lie was that all 12 blasts had occurred in Hindu dominated localities and he did not want Muslims to be victimised. Thus he added a fictitious account of a blast in Masjid Bunder, a Muslim dominated locality in Mumbai. To add insult to injury, he was praised by Justice Srikrishna Commission for this noble gesture. How secure should this make me feel as a Hindu citizen? Haji Mehboob, a litigant in Babri Masjid dispute was exposed on secret tape proudly admitting that he threw bombs at Hindus for 2.5 hours back in 1992, and further proclaiming that he would not hesitate throwing bombs at devotees if Ram Mandir was constructed on the disputed site. He roams free. How secure am I expected to feel as a Hindu if I cannot pray in a temple that will only come up after a due legal process has been conducted? Talking of throwing bombs at Hindu devotees, there have been numerous attacks on Amarnath Yatris in the last decade or more. How secure should I feel as a Hindu if I’m not confident of returning alive from one of the oldest pilgrimages, that dates back to the 11th century in a state that is being aggressively eyed by Islamists? And when the state, for a change, helps Hindus here, blatant Hinduphobia is spread by international publications calling it ‘Weaponisation of spiritual tourists’. Are we supposed to just die? Lebensunwertes Leben? How secure am I supposed to feel as a Hindu in Kanglapahari village in West Bengal where I am not allowed to organise or participate in Durga Pujo celebrations? Because I am told my celebrations may offend the local Muslim community? How safe did Kashmiri Hindus feel when messages of hatred were delivered to them from loudspeakers in mosques back in 1990? How safe do Kashmiri Hindus feel now at the prospect of going back to the only place they have ever called Home? How safe does the juvenile Hindu boy somewhere in West Bengal feel after he has been jailed for an innocuous Facebook post? (Though in this case must admit he is probably safer in jail than out of it). How safe should Hindus feel when the constitution doesn’t allow them to run schools and institutions that can preserve and promote their culture and beliefs? You need to have a minority tag to have this right. Hindu groups are now in a race to prove that they are not Hindus so that they can have “minority” rights. Imagine, a constitution that forces Muslims to prove they are non-Muslims if they want these rights. How safe and secure should Hindus feel when hate crimes against them are not even acknowledged as hate crimes, and their religious festivals are branded as provocative political gestures that must be banned? And if they can’t be defamed and banned, put restrictions on them and extract money for celebrating the festivals. Jaziya anyone?

These are just 10 reasons – one each for every year Hamid Ansari spent in a constitutional office. But trust me, one each for every week can be found, but let us keep it short. You get the drift basically.

It is abundantly evident that an average Hindu citizen in India has enough reasons to feel “insecure” as well. Probably more so as erstwhile governments and secular state governments have been guilty on numerous occasions of using their might to oppress or tarnish Hindus.

The Muslim citizen on the other hand has been pandered to by the State with multiple overreach programmes. What we are looking at today is lawless behaviour by a few individuals (which is peddled as Muslims under attack) vs Victimisation by the State (Which has been proved to be a reality under former governments).

While we witness awards being returned for one, the other is brushed under the carpet or dismissed as Whataboutery. This hypocrisy of seculars has already yielded terrible electoral results for them. But for some strange reason they refuse to see the writing on the wall.

Perhaps they were confident that thanks to their command over media and academia, they have convinced the average Hindu to live perpetually in guilt and be blind and numb to these injustices. Perhaps they were confident because the narrative has been hijacked by self- hating Hindus in positions of power, who have peddled untruths and half lies to the unsuspecting masses all along.

Thankfully an awakening has been witnessed among many Hindus, who refuse to tow the burden of secularism any longer. Faux victimisation and shaming the country is no longer being accepted without a murmur. The backlash received by Mr Ansari bears testimony to the fact.