The socio-cultural landscape of South Asia, once a vibrant tapestry of interwoven identities and shared traditions, has dramatically transformed over the past few centuries. Historically characterised by diverse ethnic, linguistic and religious groups living in relative harmony, the region has recently witnessed increasing fragmentation, religious intolerance and extremist tendencies.

In countries India and Pakistan in particular, a rich history of syncretic traditions and coexistence has given way to a climate of antagonism, where the ‘other’ is often vilified and feared. The root cause of this shift can be traced back to several interconnected factors, including colonial legacies, the redefinition of identity in post-colonial states and the rise of political and religious extremism.

Historically, South Asia was known for its pluralistic traditions where Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism and other indigenous beliefs coexisted and often blended together. This syncretism was especially evident in the Bhakti and Sufi movements. The Bhakti movement, emerging in the 7th Century, centred around personal devotion to God, moving away from ritualistic practices and offering an inclusive space for individuals from various social, religious, and caste backgrounds.

Saints like Kabir, Sant Tukaram and Mirabai not only promoted devotion but also stressed the idea of a universal divine presence that transcended societal divisions. Their work and philosophies united people across religious lines in a shared vision of love and devotion.

The Sufi tradition in Islam similarly promoted mysticism and a focus on personal connection with the divine, encouraging interfaith dialogue and inclusivity. Sufi shrines became spaces for people of different religious and ethnic backgrounds — Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and others — to come together and seek spiritual solace. The historical practice of such religious syncretism fostered a sense of collective identity and shared humanity.

The advent of British colonial rule marked a pivotal turning point in this landscape. The colonial project sought to divide and classify communities, imposing rigid categories that had previously been fluid. The British administration institutionalised religious, ethnic and linguistic distinctions, transforming the diverse cultural fabric of South Asia into a rigid system of divisions.

Sudipto Kaviraj, a political scientist, argues that this colonial process of “enumeration” effectively redefined the South Asian populace by categorising people into fixed, mutually exclusive identities. Kaviraj’s concept of “enumerated communities” suggests that the colonial state did not merely observe but actively constructed and solidified social distinctions, turning complex, multifaceted identities into static markers of difference.

The colonial British administration’s categorisation of communities was not a neutral act. Rather, it was a politically motivated process that served to reinforce imperial control. Communities were increasingly seen in isolation from one another and their differences exaggerated to keep them apart.

Social interaction, once fluid and open, became more rigid and antagonistic. The colonial state’s creation of these fixed identities made it increasingly difficult for communities to see one another as interconnected or coexistent. The result was a binary opposition that pitted one group against another, creating a sense of mutual exclusivity.

This reification of identity laid the groundwork for the deep social and political divides that would follow in the post-colonial period. When India and Pakistan emerged as independent nations in 1947, the newly formed states inherited the binary thinking fostered by colonialism.

The partition of India — an event marked by mass violence, forced migration and profound trauma — was the most visible consequence of the division between Hindus and Muslims, two communities that had, for centuries, coexisted in the region. The partition crystallised these identities and entrenched the sense of the ‘self’ and the ‘other,’ as each nation-state came to define itself in opposition to the other.

In India, the rise of Hindu nationalism has created a climate in which Muslims, once integral to the country’s fabric, are increasingly seen as outsiders. Organizations like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the Bharatiya Janata Party have promoted a vision of India as a Hindu nation, marginalising Muslims and other minority groups. This growing nationalism has not only resulted in communal violence but has also led to a sense of alienation among Muslims, who find themselves increasingly distanced from the broad national identity.

In Pakistan, the emphasis on Islamic identity has marginalised religious minorities, including Hindus, Sikhs and Christians. The emphasis on a singular Islamic identity has fostered sectarian violence, with various sects — such as Sunnis and Shias — competing for dominance.

Pakistan’s educational system, political rhetoric and public discourse often prioritise religious and ethnic identity as the defining features of citizenship, further entrenching divisions. In both countries, the rise of extremism has turned once-fluid cultural and religious identities into rigid categories, leaving little room for coexistence or understanding.

The growing influence of global jihadist ideologies has exacerbated these tendencies, as these ideologies frame the world in stark, binary terms — ‘believers’ versus ‘infidels,’ ‘us’ versus ‘them.’ Such ideologies often reject pluralism, tolerance and multiculturalism, viewing them as weaknesses. This ideological shift dovetails with the process of colonial enumeration, which had already divided communities into discrete, antagonistic groups. The ideological rigidity of both Hindu nationalism and political Islamism further erodes the region’s historical traditions of syncretism and shared cultural practices.

Modern social theorisation, particularly through the lens of social identity theory and the concept of “othering,” can shed light on the process by which identity politics have evolved in South Asia. Social identity theory, as proposed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner, suggests that individuals derive their sense of self from their membership in social groups.

This categorisation can lead to in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination. When these social identities are perceived as threatened, they can escalate into conflict. In South Asia, the increasingly polarised identities of Hindus and Muslims, reinforced by political and social forces, have fuelled this dynamic.

Edward Said’s concept of “othering” further illuminates the situation. Othering involves constructing an identity that is defined in opposition to an external, often hostile, group. In South Asia, the process of othering has been highly politicised, with religious and ethnic groups viewing each other as existential threats rather than as potential partners in a shared social contract. This process has been particularly evident in both India and Pakistan, where religious nationalism has created competing identity narratives with little space for reconciliation.

The extremism that dominates much of South Asia today is the product of these historical and ideological processes. The syncretic traditions of Bhakti and Sufi thought, which once offered a path toward understanding and unity, now seem distant in the face of the ideological forces that have driven the region apart. Concept of unity in diversity that could be a bedrock of a plural social formation has been consigned to oblivion. The binary of ‘self’ and ‘other,’ solidified by colonial and post-colonial dynamics, continues to shape the socio-cultural landscape, rendering coexistence increasingly difficult.

Looking ahead, the challenge for South Asia is to find a way to reimagine collective identity in a manner that embraces diversity rather than fostering division. The region’s history of pluralism, tolerance and shared religious and cultural practices offers a foundation upon which new forms of coexistence can be built.

Only by moving beyond rigid, exclusive identities can the region hope to overcome its present divisions and chart a course towards a more harmonious future. We must learn to live in harmony with people from diverse backgrounds by rediscovering the means of mutual understanding and cooperation that have long been forgotten. This involves fostering respect, empathy and shared values, while recognising the rich diversity that each individual brings to the community.

By acknowledging our common humanity and rebuilding the connections that once allowed for peaceful coexistence, we can create a society where differences are celebrated rather than feared, and where mutual respect becomes the foundation for building stronger, more inclusive communities.

The writer is a professor in the Faculty of Liberal Arts at the Beaconhouse National University, Lahore.