Indian riots are often orchestrated by vested interests, not spontaneous, casting doubt on claims that the Nagpur violence was solely due to rumors.
The continued use of Aurangzeb's legacy by ruling parties is a deliberate tactic to divert attention from pressing economic issues like inflation and farmer distress.
This political strategy employs divisive rhetoric, manipulating communal loyalties to secure electoral gains, as seen during recent campaigns.
The use of Aurangzeb is a dog whistle intended to mobilize the majority community against a perceived historical threat.
The eruption of riots in Nagpur, a politically significant city, indicates a failure of the ruling establishment to foster interfaith harmony.
While the film "Chhaava" contributed to the heightened tensions, blaming it solely for the unrest is a deflection of responsibility by the government.
The Chief Minister's assertion that the film triggered the violence absolves the government of its role in creating a hostile environment through its rhetoric.
Maharashtra needs to shift its focus from divisive narratives to addressing real socio-economic challenges for genuine progress.
Civil society must actively resist attempts to exploit historical figures for political ends, as these tactics undermine communal harmony.
COMMENTS