The hatred against the British rule is justiﬁed. At that time, it was inevitable to wage war against the British to achieve independence. The British too did everything to crush the mutiny. They called the Muslims as fundamentalists, terrorists, activists, etc. They were not employed in the police, and the army, and were treated as second class citizens.
Therefore, the hatred and boycott for British was natural and understandable. Consequently, hundreds of Madrasas, Baitul Maals, and social welfare organizations came into existence. The English were conﬁdent that the Muslims would surrender if they were deprived of the basic needs. But the opposite happened. The Muslims succeeded in establishing a parallel system of life through the Madarsas, Baitul Maal, welfare organizations, etc.
It was the same Madarsa that led the freedom struggle and produced several leaders including Hasrat Mohani, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad etc. who were the most successful presidents in the history of Congress. Unfortunately, now some fascist political parties are demanding to change the syllabus of the Madarsa. In the recent U.P. elections, the party has promised in its manifesto to change the syllabus.
The British left the country in 1947. The Muslims too played a vital role in the war of independence. But the British proved to be too cunning. They had planted the seeds of hatred in the two main communities; the Hindus and the Muslims. The British had started pushing the fascist and communal minded parties who are now dominating the country and following the same policies of keeping the Muslims backward. A recent judgment of an U.P. court that the Muslims can not be regarded a minority, is a part of this conspiracy. Day to day accusations against the innocent youths, inaction of the riot’s enquiry commissions, almost zero percent Muslims in the employment of police, army, administration, judiciary etc. have made the minds of Muslims a reactionary and retaliatory. Generally, the Muslims hate to pay even the taxes as the government has failed to protect their life, property and cultural dignity. There are, of course, fundamental rights in the constitution, but it is not possible to ﬁght for these due to various reasons. As a result, the Muslims are more distant from the government than they were at the time of the British.
Therefore, it is not strange that if a common Muslim is against the life insurance too as it was nationalised in 1956. Knowing the fact that the main beneﬁciary is the government, the Muslims do not trust the Government that it will spend for the Muslims’ development. And no doubt this is a fact. For example, under the social security scheme, the LIC has spent thousands of crores of Rupees under the government’s guidance but hardly any of these funds were spent for the development of minorities.