WHY SUFFOCATE UNITY IN DIVERSITY?
(What of honest answers? We do not even ask honest questions.)
1. Human nature and physical world both are dynamic systems individually. Their interaction is all the more so. All static social theories are meant to stagnate and become obsolete. Those who stick to them without necessary flexibility and fine tuning, popularly known as reforms, are sure to degenerate.
2. Unity devoid of adjustment and tuning becomes a threat to progress as well as others who are outside that specific circle of unity. The moment a group's unity turns into a dogma and threatens others it provokes violent reactions or counter-attack and is ultimately destroyed. That is why, ideally, long term unity should cover only broader themes like humanity, culture, and nation. For restricted and limited themes only short term and purpose-specific unity is healthy; the moment the purpose is attained it should be disbanded. Diversity is in fact the long term healthy concept to be pursued in a constructive manner.
3. Indian seers realized the importance of the intrinsic dynamism of social organization and so they evolved subtle methods to inculcate a feeling of tolerance for others. This diversity-conducive tolerance gradually evolved into a multi-faceted ethno-spiritual culture almost exactly on the model of a rain forest that lives and thrives in a dynamic symbiotic equilibrium. Though it is difficult to appreciate if evaluated on short term parameters of few decades or few generations, Indian culture has successfully done so for past few thousand years. Why suffocate it now in the name of political unity (or vote-bank unity)?