What to Read in The Hindu Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1: A deliberate strategy to usher in a communal order

Context

The right-wing assault on the Constitution must be countered through public awareness, legal action, political mobilisation, and democratic resistance.

Introduction

Just before the 75th anniversary of the Indian Constitution, the Supreme Court of India strongly confirmed that “secular” and “socialist” are important parts of the Constitution’s Preamble. These words were added in 1976 during the Emergency, under Indira Gandhi’s government, through the 42nd Amendment. Over the years, some right-wing groups have tried to challenge and remove these words through legal and political efforts. However, the Supreme Court recently rejected several petitions that questioned their inclusion. The Court said that just because these words were not in the original Preamble of 1949, it does not mean they are invalid or unconstitutional now.

Judiciary’s Stand vs. RSS-BJP’s Ideological Offensive

• The judiciary’s reaffirmationof secularism and socialism in the Constitution was a clear and powerful signalupholding India’s foundational values.
• In response, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)— the ideological nucleus of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) — launched a renewed attack on the very idea of India enshrined in the Constitution.
• RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabaleopenly called for the removal of the terms “secular” and “socialist” from the Preamble, claiming they were not part of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s original constitutional vision.
• Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankharescalated the rhetoric by calling the inclusion of these terms a “sacrilege to the spirit of Sanatan”.
• The timing and statusof these statements — emerging from top constitutional offices — are not accidental. They reflect a coordinated political narrative.
• This is not a scholarly or legal debate— it is a deliberate political strategy aimed at:
  • Delegitimisingthe vision of a modern, plural, democratic India
  • Replacingit with a communal, hierarchical, and exclusionary order

Constitutional Consensus on Secularism

When the Constitution was being framed, the Constituent Assembly stood united and unequivocal in its endorsement of a secular state. There was not a single voice advocating for a theocratic polity. This overwhelming consensus reflected the founding vision of India as a nation rooted in unity in diversity — a decisive rejection of:

• Colonial divide-and-rule tactics
• Communal politics
• Caste and religious supremacy

Present Challenge: From Consensus to Crisis

Today, this foundational consensus is under sustained attack. The RSS-BJP establishment is actively pursuing a Hindu Rashtra agenda — one that seeks to reshape India’s constitutional identity. What was once considered fringe rhetorichas now entered the political mainstream.

• On the day of the consecrationof the Ram temple in Ayodhya, Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a symbolic and provocative assertion: “Ram is Rashtra, Dev is Desh”
  • This statement blurs the linebetween religion and state — something the Constitution explicitly sought to prevent.

What the Framers Intended vs. Today’s Fusion of Faith and State

Foundational Ideal	Current Contradiction
Secularism endorsed by all members of the Constituent Assembly	Fusion of religion and nationalism in political discourse
Unity in diversity as core national ethos	Push toward Hindu majoritarianism
Constitution designed to avoid theocratic state	Statements equating religion with nationhood
Supreme Court ruling: Secularism is part of the basic structure	Political actions defying the spirit and letter of the Constitution

Historical Warnings and Enduring Relevance

The cautionary voices of India’s founding leaders echo louder today than ever before. Their emphasis on secularism, constitutional morality, and social justice was not mere idealism — it was a safeguard against the very threats we face in contemporary politics.

Key Historical Assertions: Secularism as Constitutional Core

Leader	Year	Key Message
Mahatma Gandhi	1931	In his Resolution on Fundamental Rights, stressed that the State must remain neutral in religious matters.
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar	1940s	Asserted: “The State shall not recognise any religion as State religion.”
Hindu Mahasabha (Ironically)	1944	Despite boycotting the freedom struggle, its Hindustan Free State Act contained a clause supporting religious neutrality.

Constituent Assembly Debates: Voices for a Secular Republic

• Govind Ballabh Pant (Aug 27, 1947):
  • Asked pointedly: “Do you want a real national secular State or a theocratic State?”
  • Warned of exclusion and insecurityfor religious minorities if India turned into a theocracy.
• Jaspat Roy Kapoor (Nov 21, 1949):
  • Reiterated Gandhi’s belief: Religion is a personal matter, not the domain of the state.
• Begum Aizaz Rasul (Nov 22, 1949):
  • Called secularism “the most outstanding feature”of the Constitution.
  • Urged it be kept “guarded and unsullied.”
• Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel (Oct 14, 1949):
  • Assured that the Indian Constitution would not be disfigured by communal provisions.
• J.M. Wilson (Nov 23, 1949):
  • Warned presciently about clouds forming over India’s secular character— a vision now frighteningly real.

Socialism: Economic Justice Rooted in the Constitution

Aspect	Explanation
Ambedkar’s Vision	Part IV’s Directive Principles reflect socialist ideals – not imported theories, but homegrown visions of justice.
Supreme Court Verdict	Interpreted “socialist” in the Preamble as advocating a welfare state, ensuring equality, justice, and economic dignity.
Real Goals of Socialism	– End caste exploitation – Abolish landlessness – Tackle poverty – Ensure non-discrimination

Ambedkar’s Final Warning and Contemporary Crisis

“If Hindu Raj does become a fact, it will, no doubt, be the greatest calamity for this country… Hindu Raj must be prevented at any cost.” — Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in Pakistan or the Partition of India

• Today, that cost is upon us.
• The RSS-led campaignto remove the terms “secular” and “socialist” is part of a calculated move to:
  • Dismantle the modern constitutional republic
  • Promote religious supremacyand caste hierarchy
  • Push market fundamentalismover welfare
  • Cement authoritarian political structures

The need for resistance

• This growing threat must be firmly resisted — not just through isolated efforts, but through widespread public awareness, legal challenges, political mobilisation, and a sustained democratic mass movement.
• The Constitutionof India is far more than a legal document;
  • it is a political, social, and moral pact, born out of the freedom struggleand shaped by the sacrifices of martyrs, revolutionaries, and visionary constitutionalists.
• It enshrines the ideal of an India that belongs equally to all its citizens.

Conclusion

In today’s context, defending the principles of secularism and socialism is inseparable from defending democracy itself. It means standing up for the rights and dignity of every Indian — irrespective of religion, caste, class, or gender — and upholding the values of equality, freedom, and justice. The Republic is not self-sustaining; it must be protected, nurtured, and when threatened, defended — even from forces that emerge within. That is our collective responsibility, and we must meet it with courage, clarity of purpose, and an unshakeable resolve.

 

Editorial 2: Cease the cess

Context

Weak GST revenues underscore the need for systemic corrections.

Introduction

The Goods and Services Tax (GST), now in its eighth year, was envisioned as a landmark reform for creating a unified indirect tax system across India. However, stagnant revenue growth, structural inefficiencies, and the continued exclusion of fuel and alcohol expose its limitations. To achieve the goal of “one nation, one tax”, urgent policy corrections are now indispensable.

Sluggish GST Growth: Signs of Structural Issues

• GST collections in June 2025stood at ₹1.85 lakh crore — the lowest in 4 months.
• Growth was only 2%compared to June 2024 — the slowest in 4 years.
• Net revenue(after refunds) rose by just 3%, showing weak fiscal returns
• Revenue from domestic transactions(excluding imports) increased by only 6%, barely above the average inflation rate.
• As a consumption-based tax, low GST collections indicate both a slowdown in economic activityand systemic inefficiencies.

Inclusion of Fuel and Alcohol: An Unfinished Reform

• Fuel and alcoholremain outside the GST framework, despite the “one nation, one tax” promise.
• State governments resist inclusion, as these are among their few independent revenue sources.
• However, permanent exclusionweakens the integrity and comprehensiveness of the GST regime.
• The Centre should increase States’ sharein central taxes to offset potential revenue losses
• States must avoid usingthe additional revenue for untargeted election-time freebies

Rationalisation of GST Rates and Cess Removal

• Simplification of GST rate slabsis overdue; committees are currently reviewing the structure.
• The GST Compensation Cess, levied over the 28% slab, was meant to offset States’ revenue lossespost-GST rollout.
• It was extended till March 2026to repay pandemic-related loans
• With its job done, the cess should be removedrather than absorbed into the main GST structure.
• Removing outdated cessescan rebuild public trust and stimulate urban consumption.

Restoring Trust and Efficiency

• Eight years on, GST requires structural reforms, not just slogans.
• The system must be inclusive, efficient, and based on mutual trust.
• Genuine reform calls for Centre–State cooperationand transparent, citizen-friendly taxation

Conclusion

India’s GST framework stands at a crucial crossroads. To ensure long-term efficiency and fairness, the government must focus on rate simplification, cess removal, and a broader tax base. Strengthening Centre–State fiscal relations, curbing untargeted spending, and honouring cooperative federalism will restore trust. It is time to transform GST from a mere reform to a truly inclusive tax regime.