How Congress’ Appeasement of Minorities gave way for Majoritarian sentiment in India

India, the world’s largest democracy, has always stood as a mosaic of languages, faiths, castes, and cultures. The strength of the Indian republic has historically been its pluralism. But over time, this pluralism has also bred political fault lines—where electoral strategies often revolved around group identities rather than shared goals. At the heart of this transformation lies the story of post-independence minority politics, the anxieties it stirred, and the resulting rise of majoritarian sentiment that propelled the BJP to power.

Congress and the Politics of Inclusion

Following independence in 1947, the Indian National Congress positioned itself as the umbrella party of all Indians. With Partition’s trauma still fresh, the Congress sought to promote secularism and inclusivity. Muslims, who were left behind in India post-Partition, needed assurance and protection—and Congress attempted to provide that.

Policies focused on cultural autonomy, minority education, personal laws, and representation were born out of a desire to protect India’s plural identity. However, over time, these policies—sometimes lacking accountability—were viewed by critics as appeasement rather than empowerment.

Issues such as the Shah Bano case (1985), where the Rajiv Gandhi government reversed a Supreme Court verdict to align with orthodox Muslim leaders, symbolized to many the Congress’s willingness to prioritize vote banks over gender justice or reform. Such moves planted early seeds of discontent among sections of the Hindu middle class and intelligentsia.

The Visibility of Faith in the Public Sphere

India’s secularism, unlike the Western model, allows all religions to express themselves publicly. Mosques with loudspeakers, processions during Muharram, community gatherings during Eid—all became part of the Indian cultural fabric. But for some in urban and semi-urban areas, especially those disconnected from the historical context, this religious visibility was often misread as special treatment or dominance.

The dressing styles—beards, caps, burqas—symbolized, for some, not cultural pride but separation or non-assimilation. This perception, while often unfair and generalized, gained traction in polarized media discourse. These symbols became political talking points rather than respected cultural expressions.

Socioeconomic Tensions and Urban Anxieties

Many of India’s Muslim communities, particularly in rural and semi-urban belts, remained socioeconomically marginalized. Lack of education, employment opportunities, and political leadership often kept these communities on the periphery of economic growth. This underdevelopment, rather than being addressed holistically, became a weapon for both sides.

For some Hindus in growing urban centers, particularly those struggling with their own economic insecurities, the narrative of a “pampered minority” who received “special rights” added fuel to latent resentment—even when the reality was often more complex.

The Consolidation of Hindu Identity and Rise of BJP

The BJP, through its ideological backbone in the RSS, offered a different vision—one rooted in civilizational pride, cultural unity, and majoritarian mobilization. By the 1990s, with the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, the BJP had begun galvanizing support around a Hindu identity that was framed as being under threat.

Events like the 2002 Gujarat riots, the debates over triple talaq, and demands for a Uniform Civil Code all played into a growing polarization. For many, the BJP presented itself as a party that would stop “minority appeasement” and instead treat everyone under a common civil law—an idea that resonated with middle-class aspirations for equality and modernization.

The 2014 and 2019 elections cemented this shift. With slogans like “Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas,” the BJP rebranded itself as a development-first, strong governance party. But the undercurrent of Hindu unity, strengthened by concerns over cultural identity, continued to drive voter behavior.

Navigating the Future: Beyond Polarization

It is essential to recognize that India’s strength lies not in silencing differences, but in harmonizing them. The challenge is not about whether one community dresses or worships differently—it is about ensuring that no community feels marginalized or politically exploited.

For the Muslim community, the path forward lies in pushing for better representation, education, and engagement—moving beyond symbolic politics to structural empowerment. For the Hindu majority, the challenge is to ensure that cultural pride does not mutate into exclusionary nationalism.

Political parties must resist the temptation to treat communities as monolithic vote banks. What India needs is a shift toward policy-driven politics—where the metric of success is education levels, job creation, innovation, and healthcare access, not who wears what or prays where.

Germany, often referenced as a model for development, rose from the ashes of division by focusing on civic identity, rational policymaking, and public accountability. It embraced modernity without sacrificing its cultural roots. India, too, must aim for such a transformation—not by imitating the West, but by learning from its evolution.

Conclusion

India’s journey from Congress-led pluralism to BJP-driven majoritarianism is not just a political shift—it reflects the deep currents of identity, fear, aspiration, and perception that shape the national consciousness. To heal, India must move beyond politics of polarization and embrace a new era where every citizen—regardless of faith—feels seen, respected, and empowered.

Because true unity is not forged in uniformity, but in shared purpose. And the only identity that must matter in the end is: Indian.