To turn a statement on its head it must first be taken out of its context. Leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party excel in this, which they follow up by distorting the statement’s application. This was the approach of the Union home minister and other BJP leaders, who pounced on the recent remarks of Udhayanidhi Stalin, the son of the Tamil Nadu chief minister and a minister himself in the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam state government. At a conference organised by the Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers and Artistes Association, Mr Stalin said that Sanatana Dharma was against social justice and had to be eradicated. The BJP, led by Amit Shah, declared that not only was the comment an attack on India’s identity, basic ideology, culture and history but also an incitement to the genocide of 80% of its people. Mr Shah mentioned that Hinduism and Sanatana Dharma were one and the same. This identification requires that the multiple strains of Hinduism in religion, ways of life and philosophy be stifled under one BJP-coloured blanket — it has a problem with plurality — with the whole bundle labelled Sanatana Dharma. As Mr Stalin said even after the BJP demanded an apology from him, Sanatana Dharma was associated with social inequality, distancing, hierarchies, caste and the devaluation of women. This set of principles had to be eradicated, just as diseases such as malaria should be. He was not saying that those who believed in Sanatana Dharma should be killed any more than the prime minister meant killing off members of the party when he spoke of a Congress-mukt Bharat.

The BJP appeared to want to drown the voice of reason in loud condemnation, which included the leaders of INDIA. Attacking the criticism of Sanatana Dharma was useful: it might alienate voters from INDIA, and make the issues of price rise, joblessness and questions about suspected corruption vanish. Mr Stalin’s criticism was an outcome of the Dravida movement for social egalitarianism. This is not the BJP’s favourite bit of history; the only history it recognises is the narrative evolving in recent textbooks mixed with myths and omissions that supports its majoritarian notions. It probably finds India’s ‘basic’ ideology in inequality and division, for its attack on Mr Stalin was premised on its self-recognition as the sole upholder of India’s identity.