The Indian government claims to be a democratic and secular regime representing all the communities in the country, but its actions do not seem to conform to its assertion.

Let us review its democratic role since the inception of Independence in 1947. Democracy, as the name implies, is by definition, ‘A government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” The Punjab government has been superseded by the Presidential Rule quite a few times. Whenever Sikhs came into power by electoral process, the Indira government overthrew it by hook or by crook. The story of the Assam government is the same. The Mizos in the areas bordering Burma have been in constant conflict with the Indian government. They are the Christian by faith and they want freedom from Hindu-dominated government. The late Prime Minister, Mrs. Indira Gandhi, had contrived fake conditions in the country and imposed Emergency Rules so that she could stay in power. Consequently, she changed the Constitution to suit her needs. This is a very poor example of a government which is of the people or by the people. As for the ‘“government for the people” part, the minorities in the country are being suppressed and the Brahmans are making their power felt. In the first week of June and then in November this year, the Sikhs have been massacred for their fault of being Sikhs by faith. What was the fault of innocent Sikh children? Why were they burnt alive? The objective was, I guess, to eliminate the whole present blossoming Sikh generation and to delay the Sikh struggle for their independence as much as possible. Is. this the function of the ‘government for the people’? So the claim of being democratic is a big lie of the Indian government.

The secular character of Indian government is also not beyond doubt. The word ‘‘secular’’ means non-religious. Is the Indian government non-religious? One can say that it is Hindu dominated because of the Hindu majority in India. True, but are its actions not oriented in favor of Hindu religion? There are two major nations who have suffered at their hands — the Muslims and the Sikhs. Every year half a thousand Muslims are killed by Hindu mobs on one pretext or another. Very recently, Hindu mob claimed the present mosque to be at the site of a very ancient Hindu temple demolished by the then Muslim rulers, centuries ago. During Golden Temple massacre dozens of Sikh temples were burnt down and a good number of Sikh children were murdered because of their being Sikhs. After the demise of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, thousands of Sikh men, women, and children were either lynched or burnt alive. Hundreds of Sikh temples were demolished. The Guru Granth Sahib, the holiest book of the Sikhs, was desecrated at several places in the country and hundreds of hand-written scripts of the Gurus were burnt to ashes. On the other hand, the Hindu religion has flourished since independence and numerous Hindu temples have been erected. Not a_ single Hindu temple or religious book has been dese AS per policy of the government of India; the most appropriate name for it is Hindu government not Indian government. Another reason for naming thus is that the original name of the country is Hindustan which means ‘‘an abode of the Hindus.’’ The name, ‘‘India’”’ was given to it by the British government, later on. The favorite slogan of the Hindus is: ‘“‘Hindu Hindi Hindustan.’”’ Why are the Hindus of India acting as hypocrites? Why don’t they say what they really are Hindu government, of the Hindus, by the Hindus, and for the Hindus.

Article extracted from this publication >> January 25, 1985