If political parties can come together to agree on what must be avoided, and if citizens can come together to reject what divides, India can offer the world something rare
In a country where every few kilometres the language changes, unity has never been accidental-it has been intentional. India did not survive as a republic by erasing differences, but by respecting them. And yet, in moments of political convenience, language, region, caste, and religion are repeatedly dragged into the arena as weapons rather than identities to be honoured.
The recent trolling and attacks directed at BJP leader K. Annamalai, where regional language identity was used to delegitimise and ridicule him, are a reminder of how easily political discourse slips from disagreement into division. This is not about one individual or one party. It is about a pattern that has become disturbingly familiar across political lines.
When Identity Replaces Ideology in Political Discourse
Democracy thrives on debate-on competing ideas, policies, and visions for the future. Progressive governance demands scrutiny, criticism, and even sharp disagreement. But when political communication targets identity instead of ideology, it corrodes the very foundation of democratic trust. What begins as a political jibe often ends as social hostility.
India’s diversity has never been a weakness. Loving one’s mother tongue or cultural heritage does not require rejecting another’s. Tamil pride does not diminish Hindi. Bengali identity does not threaten Kannada. Our languages and cultures have flourished precisely because they have coexisted, not competed for legitimacy.
Political disagreements should sharpen policy outcomes, not sharpen social divides. Reducing individuals to where they come from or what language they speak distracts from real issues-governance, accountability, employment, education, and justice.
The Responsibility of Leadership in a Hyperconnected Democracy
The greater responsibility rests with political parties and their leadership. In the age of instant virality, every statement-whether at a rally or on social media-travels far beyond its intended audience. Careless words do not remain political tactics; they become social cues. When leaders normalise divisive language, they license it among supporters and deepen fault lines within society.
This is why India urgently needs a common code of political communication-agreed upon across party lines. A framework that draws clear boundaries on what must never be used for political gain: language-based ridicule, caste stereotyping, religious dog whistles, and regional antagonism. Such a code would not curb free speech; it would elevate it.
Healthy politics should be about policies, performance, and promises-not about questioning someone’s belonging. Electoral competition is inevitable; social fragmentation is not.
Citizens, too, play a crucial role. What we amplify, endorse, or excuse shapes political behaviour. Silence in the face of divisive rhetoric is not neutrality-it is permission. Political maturity, both from leaders and voters, lies in demanding accountability without dehumanisation.
India stands at a choice point.We can allow identity-driven rhetoric to slowly weaken the idea of a shared nation, or we can insist on a political culture that reflects constitutional values-dignity, equality, and unity in diversity.
If political parties can come together to agree on what must be avoided, and if citizens can come together to reject what divides, India can offer the world something rare: a democracy that debates fiercely, governs responsibly, and remains united despite its differences.
That is not idealism. That is necessity.
