Thread by @CursedRaitaTake

Golly! Would you look at the time? It’s thread ‘o’ clock already!

Contrary to what you might have been taught, "Divide and Rule" is fake and gay, it doesn't work. It's psuedo-realpolitiks. It's a misunderstanding at best, or deliberately deceptive political education at worst.

According to mainstream narrative of "divide n rule", conflicts arises among different groups when an outside power convinces them that they are diff^n from each other (as if they didnt know already) ++

++and then also convinces them that those differences are politically relevant enough for them to have seperate place.

But seperate people with seperate space do not fight with each other usually, they do not have much of a reason to fight with each other at all since they have seperate places to live freely and follow their way of life without messing with other's.++

++Untill and unless one of the two has aggressive expansionist aspirations, a fight between two groups with independent seperate places is impossible.

In case two internal parties fight, a third party might be backing one of the two while it happens, but this backing is not possible at all without one of the two parties in conflict being aggressive out of it's own volition in first place.

So taking the responsibility of conflict away from aggressive party is both morally and logically wrong.
Outside party is just taking advantage of internal conditions here, it did not create it in first place.

If there are any internal conflicts which are primarily instigated by third parties in first place, "Collide and Rule" is a much better description of what top down politics of those outer parties do.

If you compell two different groups to fit together in same territory, in same polity, under same law and same central authority, with no right to free association and self-determination of the distinct groups involved, friction and collision is bound to happen++

++ because both groups will be competing for same limited resources and same status positions.
These manufactured collisions happen under the name of Unity itself.
Reject false perception of 'divide and rule', and try seeing things through the lens of 'collide and rule'.

Unity does not implies uniformity.
Unity does not requires uniformity.
The fact that we need to agree upon 100% of subjects in order to be united together is unrealistic, we can work together for something even if disagree on 50% of things lets say.

Problem with raitas is that they made party-worship a nonnegotiable matter, and their party decided to disagree with hindus on 100% of things. Unity may not require uniformity, but it definitely requires compatibility.

Uniformity means interchangeability of member units, and interchangeability means equality.

If you assume that people need to be uniform in order to be united, you will also conclude that people need to be equal in order to be united.

This is where all the raita justification for affirmative action, intercaste marriage incentivisation and other such vindictive policies come from.

These vindictive policies have shown no effect on increasing equality or uniformity between different communities, or even within a community, they however have hurt the compatibility by antagonizing multiple sections of society.

Ironically, all of this happened under the name of hindu unity. This is "collide and rule".

It happens because if you consider member units interchangeable, the only value you will see in them is their quantity. And when quantity of member units is all that matters, then whenever abandoning of some leads to gain of many, some will always be abandoned.

Uniformity leads to interchangeability, interchangeability leads to disposability.
We all become mere statistics in the eyes of some vote-counter's game. Subject to their sociopolitical engineering.

And that's what modi-shah have been throughout their careers: the vote-counters, the effective organizers and campaign managers, the marketing men. This is why they had such a winning streak, through ruthless pragmatism.

It's nothing personal to them. They don't actually hate savarns, they are just indifferent to savarn's sufferings.
Because they don't see people, they only see numbers.

And our numbers are unfortunately not good enough. Their supporter's however, really do hate us, and their numbers are lot.
Electoral politics has robbed us of our humanity. It has devalued our diversity.

Uniformity, or even an illusion of it, can lead to concentration of powers under a centralized command. And that's what these careerist-campaigners want.