Protection of the minorities, it seems, is a standpoint of good governance. I vehemently disagree.

Not because I believe that the minorities do not deserve protection. But because good governance entails the protection of all its peoples from any threat, internal or external. We can logically conclude that it includes the protection of the minorities from any majority mischief, as well as the protection of the majority from any troubles. In other words, it defines the upkeep and maintenance of harmony in society.

In India, protection of minorities is an irrelevant issue because for millennia we have had Buddhists and Jains, who even though originated as a tiny sampradaya or tradition, have lived and flourished to the present day. Though there have been skirmishes throughout history, there is largely peace between these religions.

Similarly have the Christians who came to Kerala, the Jews who fled the Christians, and the Pharisees who fled the Muslims, and the war-mongering Muslims themselves arrived in India. They have all lived well here and most of these communities, especially the Jains, original Christians and Pharisees, have ascended the social ladder to the higher classes though they came initially as refugees.

Now in a country or amongst a people that are anything other than peaceful or tolerant, it is impossible and inconceivable that refugees should evolve to outdo the original inhabitants. Therefore, we can safely conclude that Indians, who are largely Hindus, are mostly peace-loving people tolerant of different cultures and traditions.

In which case, where does the question of minority rights, as a separate entity from majority rights, come about?

In modern history, peace between Hindus and Muslims and more recently between Hindus and Christians has been greatly disturbed leading to quite a few unfortunate events. It is always true that when a society is threatened by something alien to its own, then it will put up resistance and struggle to survive.

Jains, Buddhists, Jews or Pharisees did not cause much threat to Hindu society, therefore, there has not been any threat or ensuing resistance.

Whereas, it is very well known that, historically, the Mughals and the European Christians who invaded India posed serious threat to Hindu society by directly indulging in actions amounting to their destruction by genocides or conversions. Hindus were not very capable of reacting in those times because they were lower down in the corridors of power.

However, today, in a society that is largely equal, in terms of the government being secular and democratic, Hindus have gained some strength to put up resistance. The Islamic tendency to violence or the Christian zeal to convert is not passively borne anymore. The Hindu society today strives to survive.

The government, instead of tackling the root cause of disharmony, is adding fuel to fire by favouring one section of people over another. It is ironic that in a country where almost all the religions of the world have lived and blossomed together, there should be minority rights to protect them from a majority that allowed and welcomed them in the first place.

What is lacking in India today is protection of social harmony. This can only be achieved by favouring and respecting all religions and all traditions equally and thereby treating them without differences. In other words, the majority needs as much protection from the minorities as the minorities need from the majority. Hindus perceive the violence of the Muslims and the missionary zeal of the Christians as a threat and react to them by putting up resistance in a struggle for survival.

The difference also, in India, is the definition of a minority. Universally, India considers Muslims as the minority. It does not recognize that in Jammu and Kashmir, Hindus and Buddhists are in minority and live in continuous peril due to the threat from the Muslim majority. There is no minority protection here.

Any government that does not safeguard the survival of all of its
religions or peoples with equal respect is not worthy of ruling a
historically secular country as India. This is where most of the
political parties lack the credential to govern India as they cater to
only sections of the society in hopes of winning consolidated vote
banks. It thereby results in fragmentation of a nation that has
historically been seen as a safe haven for persecuted religions.