Even Muslim activists whose counterparts in Turkey or Egypt denounce secularism as a demonic betrayal of Islam, call themselves “secularists”. Check the editorials of Syed Shahabuddin's monthly Muslim India, or the Jamaat-i-Islami weekly Radiance: they brandish “secularism” in every issue... Other Milli (i.e. of the Muslim nation) resolutions include a call for separate electorates (MPs elected by joint electorates are denounced as “lackeys of the Hindus”) and the creation of autonomous states in Muslim-majority areas.

The Muslim League was always an extremely weak organization by comparison. Originally created by Islamic princes and nobles in 1906 "to foster a sense of loyalty to the British government among the Muslims of India" (to cite from its statement of aims), it was captured by the educated Muslim middle class led by Jinnah in the 1930s and for a brief period was in alliance with the Congress Party. However, its main thrust was always anti-Hindu rather than anti-British.

The distinctive feature of the Muslim League in Kerala is that it strove to keep the community at the centre of the state’s politics, unlike other Muslim political formations elsewhere in India that revelled in confessional isolationism. As a result, the Kerala Muslims emerged as probably the only community of that faith in India that achieved genuine political empowerment on the one hand and, on the other, lived out the promise of equal citizenship enshrined in the Constitution.

In other words, Indian Muslims did not aim to blend into an Indian nation, but to fight within the Indian context alongside other communities to achieve the right to live freely, that is, following the rules of their religion and law (the sharia). Peter Hardy concluded from this, “In 1920–2 Abdul Kalam Azad and the Jamiyat were advocating the mental partition of India”.

To add to this, social media was brought into operation with thousands of trolls, fake news and what have you. Today’s speed of hate-creation has only become possible because of the ground "work" done over decades. It is in this light that many Muslim intellectuals have come together as a , which they call Indian Muslims for Progress and Reforms. One hopes that they will be able to push for reform and open the pathways for jobs for the Muslim youth while countering the media that demonises them. Apart from these contemporary steps, one wishes to urge upon them to study and reflect upon the foundations on which the present hate-ethic is being spread.

The Indian Muslims are first Muslims, then Indians. According to the Muslim leaders like Syeed Amir Ali, if the foreign Islamic countries invade India, the duties of the Indian Muslims will be to help those Muslim invaders against India, because ‘Muslim identity’ is more important to them.

The Jamaat-e-Islami is the oldest Islamist political party in the sub continent. The party has carried out several positive works. These include: (i) they have demonstrated that Islam is a complete code of life, it is a prac tical system, and it is the best way of life; (ii) they have enabled themselves in making the youths and the educated people understand these facts about Islam; (iii) they have largely motivated people for Islamic economy, educa tion, and so on; (iv) they have succeeded in building awareness amongst the people on the existing superstitions in the society, such as worshipping persons, pirs, and grave. Side by side, Jahangir continues, Several errors can be traced all along in the politics of the Jamaat-c-Islami: (i) they have designated politics as jihad. This was first done by Maulana Mawdudi; (ii) they have made a serious error by reducing the meaning of the concept of ckamat-e-deen (establishment of religion) to the establish ment of an Islamic state; (iii) the party has compromised its ideology and concentrated more on power-politics and made alliances with the secular parties and people for power; and (iv) during the liberation war the Jamaat supported and took arms for what it had earlier termed a "non-Muslim tagudi [tyrant] government." This was their biggest mistake.... Yes, the ulama also supported Pakistan because they loved Pakistan. They were obsessed with the spirit of the creation of Pakistan in 1947. In 1971, still they remembered this glorious event. However, [during the liberation war] they did not organize people for Pakistan and actively take part in the military effort to preserve the integrity of the country. They just gave passive support.... The lust for power demonstrated by the Jamaat proves that they have deviated from their original ideological stance that the secularists will not promote Islam; instead, a group of highly Islamized people should attain power to properly serve the cause of Islam. But the party became the part of power by the help of the secularists. This is their ideological deviation. This trend still continues. What Jamaat considers development; it is, in fact, underdevelopment. In our society, merely 10-15% people are namazi-deendar [practicing Muslims). But, the Jamaat, having shared power with the BNP, gives the world a message that the Islamists take over and Bangladesh is on the verge of becoming a Taliban state. So, at any cost, Jamaat will have to be crushed. For example, you have power of 10kgs, you showed 100kgs. Your opponent hit you with 60kgs, but you have only 10kgs. You will be definitely crushed. Because of this, it is better for the Islamists to influence and pressurize the secularists in power at least so long as they do not attain power unilaterally. Jamaat did not raise voice against the alleged corruption during the four-party alliance government (2001-2006), rather they silently supported it. This is a clear deviation from their ideological standpoint. Those who do politics in the name of Islam, they have to take Islamic ideology into full consideration. Islamic politics is ideological politics. Islamic politics is not just a passport to power.

The Muslim League advocates of Pakistan have been prolific with assurances of fair treatment towards minorities-assurances never seriously meant to be kept, and broken in the most unworthy manner in all the territories which became part of the Pakistan State. What the Muslim Leaguers had been planning all these years was really to drive out minorities from Pakistan, and in this way to solve the minority problem.

The Muslim Brotherhood is a global movement whose members cooperate with each other throughout the world, based on the same religious worldview - the spread of Islam, until it rules the world.

To this convention you must re-state as clearly and as strongly as possible, the political objective of Indian Muslims as a distinct political unit in the country. It is absolutely necessary to tell the world both inside and outside India that the economic problem is not the only problem in the country. From the Muslim point of view the cultural problem is of much greater consequence to most Indian Muslims. At any rate it is not less important than the economic problem.

[Muslims (of the right-thinking kind) constitute a Revolutionary Party whose objective] is to expend all the powers of body and soul, your life and goods in the fi ght against the evil forces of the world, not that having annihilated them you should step into their shoes, but in order that evil and con- tumacy should be wiped out and God’s law should be enforced in the world.

The so-called Muslim women’s movement is predicated on the idea that Muslim men, not Islam, have been responsible for the suppression of women’s rights. For this reason, Muslim feminists throughout the world are advocating a return to the society Muhammad originally envisioned for his followers. Despite differences in culture, nationalities, and beliefs, these women believe that the lesson to be learned from Muhammad in Medina is that Islam is above all an egalitarian religion. Their Medina is a society in which Muhammad designated women like Umm Waraqa as spiritual guides for the Ummah; in which the Prophet himself was sometimes publicly rebuked by his wives; in which women prayed and fought alongside the men; in which women like Aisha and Umm Salamah acted not only as religious but also as political—and on at least one occasion military—leaders; and in which the call to gather for prayer, bellowed from the rooftop of Muhammad’s house, brought men and women together to kneel side by side and be blessed as a single undivided community.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s foundational texts call for the progressive moral purification of individuals and Muslim societies and their eventual political unification in a Caliphate under Sharia law. To this day the Muslim Brotherhood characterises Western societies and liberal Muslims as decadent and immoral. It can be seen primarily as a political project.

It is unwise for the Muslims of India,'... 'to shut their eyes to the tremendous progress in the fields of personal law and succession made in a major part of the world of Islam. A unified, codified and modernized law of personal status is now the order of the day in a large number of countries where Muslims constitute overwhelming majorities. In India, the Muslims have to live in the company of a dominant non-Muslim majority and other co-minorities, all of whom are now governed by largely modernized and codified personal laws. How can they afford to insist on an absolutely undisturbed continuance of their classical and uncodified personal law? And if they do so it would be to their own sheer detriment.