Communalism

Also called: Communal politics · Topic: Gender, Religion and Caste in Politics · NCERT: Class 10, Ch 3 "Gender, Religion and Caste"; Class 11, Ch 2 "Freedom"; Class 11, Ch 8 "Secularism"; Class 12, Ch 1 "Challenges of Nation Building"; Class 12, Ch 8 "Recent Developments in Indian Politics"

Meaning

Communalism is the belief that religion is the main basis of social community. It assumes that all followers of one religion share the same basic interests, and that followers of different religions cannot form one community. It matters because it turns religion into a tool for political dominance or separation. It also leads to prejudice, election appeals based on religion and communal violence, all of which damage a democracy built on equal citizens.

Explanation

When religion in politics is fine, and when it becomes communal

• Religious diversity: India has far more religious diversity than countries like Northern Ireland. So the link between religion and politics needs careful handling.
• Gandhi's view: religion can never be separated from politics.
• For Gandhi, "religion" did not mean Hinduism or Islam.

• It meant the moral values shared by all religions, and these should guide politics.

• The acceptable link (NCERT):

• People may raise their needs and demands as members of a religious community.
• The state may regulate religious practice to stop discrimination. One example is reforming unfair family laws (laws on marriage, divorce, adoption and inheritance).

• Both are fine as long as every religion is treated equally.

• Four warning signs that the link has turned communal:

• Religion becomes the basis of the nation. In Northern Ireland, Catholics wanted to join the Republic of Ireland and Protestants wanted to stay in the UK. The result was decades of violence.
• One religion is presented as superior to the others.
• One group's demands are set against another group's.
• State power is used to give one religion dominance over the rest.

The belief and why it is wrong

• What communalism assumes:
• All followers of a religion share the same basic interests.
• Differences between religions are basic and cannot be removed.

• Extreme form: followers of different religions cannot live as equal citizens of one nation, so one community must dominate the others or they must separate.

• Why the belief is wrong:

• Every person has many identities. One person can be a woman, a worker and a member of a region, and also has a language and a caste.
• Every community has many voices. Each religion is divided by caste, class, region, gender and sect.

• So uniting people on religious lines alone suppresses many voices inside the community.

• Bipan Chandra's three stages (Communalism in Modern India, 1984):

Stage	Core belief
Communal nationalism	Followers of one religion share common secular interests (political, economic, cultural)
Liberal communalism	Different communities have different interests, but these can still be adjusted inside one nation
Extreme communalism	The interests of different communities are hostile, so they cannot live together. This is the language of fear and hatred

• Nehru's warning: majority communalism is more dangerous than minority communalism, because the majority can easily present its communalism as "nationalism".

Four forms of communalism

1. Everyday beliefs: prejudice (judging people without knowing them), stereotypes of religious groups and a belief that one's own religion is superior.

2. A quest for political dominance: - In a majority community, this is majoritarian dominance (the view that the majority alone should decide everything). - In a minority community, it can become a demand for a separate political unit.

3. Political mobilisation on religious lines: using sacred symbols, religious leaders, emotional appeals and plain fear to unite one religion's followers. In elections, this means making special appeals to voters of one religion.

4. Communal violence: - Partition (1947): riots killed a very large number of people. - After 1947: 1984 (anti-Sikh violence), 1989 (Bhagalpur), 1992-93 (Mumbai), 2002 (Gujarat), 2013 (Muzaffarnagar) and 2020 (north-east Delhi). - Newer forms: online hate and misinformation, mob lynching and calls for economic boycott of a community.

In the Constitution and practice

• Secular state, the constitutional answer:
• No official religion. This is unlike Buddhism in Sri Lanka, Islam in Pakistan or Christianity in England.
• Freedom of religion: everyone may profess, practise and propagate any religion, or none (Articles 25-28).
• No discrimination on the ground of religion (Articles 15-16).
• Article 325: no one can be kept off the electoral roll because of religion. This rules out colonial-era separate electorates (separate voter lists for each religion).
• Intervention for equality: the state can step into religious matters to ensure equality. One example is the ban on untouchability (Article 17).
• The word "secular" was added to the Preamble by the 42nd Amendment (1976).

• In S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994), the Supreme Court held secularism to be part of the basic structure. These are the core features of the Constitution that even Parliament cannot destroy.

• Election law:

• Under Section 123(3), Representation of the People Act, 1951, a candidate, or someone acting with the candidate's consent, commits a corrupt practice by doing either of two things:
  • asking people to vote for or against anyone on the ground of religion, race, caste, community or language;
  • using religious symbols to help a candidate [3].

• A corrupt practice is an illegal act that can cancel an election win.

• Abhiram Singh v. C.D. Commachen (2 January 2017):

• A seven-judge bench decided the case 4:3.
• The majority read "his religion" broadly. It covers the religion of the candidate, the voter and anyone else.

• The minority (Chandrachud, Goel and Lalit JJ) held that "his" means only the candidate's religion or a rival candidate's religion [5].

• Criminal law:

• Section 153A IPC punishes promoting enmity between groups on grounds of religion and similar grounds [4].

• Section 196 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 now carries the same offence.

• Tehseen Poonawalla v. Union of India (17 July 2018): the Supreme Court set out a three-part approach to mob lynching [6]:

• Preventive steps:
  • identify high-risk areas;
  • appoint a nodal officer in every district, not below the rank of Superintendent of Police;
  • stop the spread of messages and videos that incite violence;
  • have the police break up mobs.
• Remedial steps: protect witnesses, give legal aid to victims, finish trials within a fixed time and pay compensation.

• Accountability: act against police and district officers who fail to act [6].

• Centre (2018): the Centre set up a high-level committee chaired by the Union Home Secretary to suggest ways to stop mob lynching [7].

• State anti-lynching laws [6]:

State	Year	Distinct feature
Manipur	2018 (first an ordinance)	Collective fines; jail for police who fail to prevent lynching
Rajasthan	2019	No collective fine; life imprisonment if the victim dies
West Bengal	2019	Death penalty as the highest punishment

• All three laws cover attacks based on religion, caste, language, dietary practices, sexual orientation, political affiliation and other grounds [6].
• Demography and the "overtaking" myth:
• Census 2011: the total population was 121.09 crore. Hindus were 96.63 crore (79.8%) and Muslims were 17.22 crore (14.2%) [2].
• From 2001 to 2011: the Hindu share fell 0.7 percentage points and the Muslim share rose 0.8 percentage points [2].
• Growth rates, 2001-11: Hindus 16.8%, Muslims 24.6%, Christians 15.5%, Sikhs 8.4%, Buddhists 6.1% and Jains 5.4% [2].
• Sachar Committee projections: the Muslim share would rise only about 3-4 percentage points in 50 years.
• NFHS-5 (2019-21): the national total fertility rate (the average number of children a woman has in her lifetime) fell to 2.0 from 2.2 in NFHS-4. This is below the replacement level of 2.1 [8].
• EAC-PM working paper (May 2024):
  • It reported relative change in religious shares between 1950 and 2015. With relative change, a small rise can look very large.
  • It did not rely on census data.
  • Quote it as a debated paper, not a settled fact.

Don't confuse with

• Religion in politics vs communalism: Gandhi's "religion in politics" meant shared moral values of all faiths. Communalism treats one religion as the basis of community and dominance.
• Liberal vs extreme communalism (Bipan Chandra): in liberal communalism, interests differ but can be adjusted inside one nation. In extreme communalism, interests are hostile and communities cannot live together.
• Abhiram Singh (2017) vs Tehseen Poonawalla (2018): Abhiram Singh is about religious appeals in elections under Section 123(3) RPA [5]. Tehseen Poonawalla is about mob-lynching guidelines [6].
• Indian secularism vs Western separation: Indian secularism keeps equal distance and equal respect towards all religions and allows state intervention for reform. This is unlike the strict separation of state and religion in France or the US.

Prelims Hooks

• Section 123(3), RPA 1951: an appeal for votes on the ground of religion, race, caste, community or language, or the use of religious symbols, is a corrupt practice [3].
• Abhiram Singh (2017): a 7-judge bench, decided 4:3, held that "his religion" covers the voter's religion too, not only the candidate's [5].
• Tehseen Poonawalla (2018): mob-lynching guidelines that require a district nodal officer not below SP rank [6].
• Census 2011: Hindus 79.8% and Muslims 14.2%. From 2001 to 2011, the Muslim share rose 0.8 points and the Hindu share fell 0.7 points. The lowest decadal growth was among Jains (5.4%) [2].
• "Secular" entered the Preamble through the 42nd Amendment (1976). S.R. Bommai (1994) made secularism part of the basic structure.
• Trap: the West Bengal (2019) anti-lynching law has the death penalty. Manipur (2018) has collective fines. Rajasthan (2019) has no collective fine [6].

Mains Points

• Why communalism hurts democracy:
• It reduces many identities to one.
• It silences women, dalits and the poor inside each community.
• It replaces debate on policy with debate on identity.

• Majority communalism can pass itself off as nationalism (Nehru). The line is crossed when religion claims superiority, pits groups against each other or captures state power.

• The legal toolkit and its gaps:

• Existing tools: Section 123(3) RPA, Section 153A IPC / Section 196 BNS and the Tehseen Poonawalla guidelines [3][4][6].
• Gaps:
  • The guidelines are unevenly followed.
  • Only a few states have anti-lynching laws [6].
  • Coded speech and social media appeals are hard to punish under Section 123(3).

• Possible reforms: a central anti-lynching law, fast-track courts, police accountability for failing to act and platform rules to curb misinformation.

• Demography as a tool of fear:

• The "overtaking" myth feeds communal mobilisation through fear.
• Census 2011 shows only small shifts [2], and fertility is falling for everyone (TFR 2.0 in NFHS-5) [8].
• Sachar-era projections show slow change.
• So policy should target education, income and health, not religion.

Related concepts

• Forms of communalism

Read more

• Religion in politics and communalism