How is communalism harmful for the unity and intergrity of our nation?

Answer 1

The commune is founded on the idea that everyone has an equal stake in all the assets of the commune, so everyone has an equal say in the affairs of the commune and an equal interest in the commune's success. Sounds good, right? Doesn't that appear to be a model that would guarantee success? See, it looks good on paper, but in practice it doesn't work. Here's why:

(1) This structure is founded on the presupposition that people are all inherently good and that they will always put the good of the commune first. History has taught us that human nature is inherently selfish, so what happens in reality is you get people in the commune making decisions based on their own selfish, greedy motives. Would everyone in a commune be like that? Of course not, but all it takes is one selfish person to cause dissent and all of a sudden you have alliances being forged and divisions widening between those with opposing points of view. Meanwhile, NOTHING is getting done because the parties involved can't agree on anything, and eventually you get to the point where people disagree with each other just because the ideas being expressed are "from the other camp." Say goodbye to unity...

(2) In the communal system everyone gets an equal share, regardless of how much effort they put in. That means those who work harder get the same amount as those who do the minimum in order to get by. Eventually, what you get is a bunch of people who do no more than the minimum amount in order to get by because they're not getting any extra for working harder. At the same time, no one is coming up with better ways to do things or new innovations that may be helpful or marketable. The end result is a stagnant work force.

(3) Even in a situation where everyone gets an equal voice in the government, you still have to operate under the system of majority rule because it's very rare that you'll ever have a unanimous vote. The opinions of people differ too greatly for that. So what happens if someone gets disgruntled because the rest of the group votes against him/her? That sense of unity is gone, and he/she begins to question the integrity of the system. Again, going back to that selfish human nature, it's hard for people to see that what they want may not be the best for everyone involved, and what happens in most cases is you get people who take it personally and start crying about whatever injustice they can come up with to rationalize their outrage for a decision that didn't go their way.

No system of government is perfect, but the most effective system is one that recognizes how people operate in the real world, NOT one based on high-minded ideals of how people should behave in a perfect world.

Answer 2

I take it you mean tensions between communities defined by religion such as Sikh/ Muslim/ Hindu or by caste?

Unity of the nation comes because people want to belong to their communities as part of the nation, not apart from the nation. If the nation as a whole is multicommunal, which it is as the President shows, and as the cricket team shows, then communalism is contained. But if people started to believe they belonged to their faith group only and never mind the nation, then you have trouble.