This is paper is an opinion piece, but it must maintain a largely academic tone. The paper must address multiple questions in a cohesive manner. I would like for this paper to incorporate my own thesis and argue on behalf of that with the sources provided. Any additional academic sources (i.e. journals, books, scholarly articles) can be added to further argue this point. Please reference writing samples to further understand the position of the paper I'd like you to write.
This paper focuses centrally on providing commentary on developments in India & Pakistan's modern history, largely in regards to rising religious intolerance in both countries. My overall argument is the following:
"The rising religious intolerance within India & Pakistan was an inevitable process due to the religious divides set forth during the British Raj colonial occupation. The British Raj's treatment of the Indian's subcontinents Muslims & Hindus encroached on both group's religious practices with varying degrees of preference. This ended up causing both religious groups to feel the British Raj had a preference for other group over themselves.
HOWEVER, this initial religious divide between Hindus & Muslims on its own could not catalyze into the religious intolerance we see in India & Pakistan today. There were significant movements in India & Pakistan's independence that formed the basis of their governments when Partition happened. It was the founding ideology which reflected each countries' first prime ministers -- the idea that the government protects each countries' religious majority (Muslims in Pakistan, Hindus in India) by maintaining their lifestyles…while protecting minorities through its secular government.
Religious fundamentalists, as a minority, would manage to sway the founding secularism of both countries towards religious intolerance. Religious fundamentalists would garner a base in sensitive hotspots in each country -- the VHP, and ESPECIALLY the BJS (now BJP) in India would rally up religious anger in people through culturally sensitive areas such as Somnath, Ayodhya, and Kashmir & Jammu. One of the central ideologues, V.D. Savarkhar, would have his ideas spread to religious nationalists who would ultimately kill Mahatma Gandhi - the man who managed to mobilize unity between Muslims & Hindus through massive protests. Religious fundamentalists in Pakistan would almost immediately take over the government after Muhammad Ali Jinnah's death and this would make the country's beginnings start with botched elections with following religious conservative (and intolerant) governments [ex. Yahya Khan's block of the assembly's covening after East Pakistan (Bengali) Mujib party formed the assembly's majority
Religious fundamentalists managed to act on exaggerating the injustice experienced by masses & minorities in both countries -- thus they created the fear that allowed their success -- and results in the religious tolerance present in both countries today."
This passage can be adjusted and does NOT need to be this long. But it hopefully summarizes the main opinion I'd like supported throughout the paper.
As for citations, I will attach various texts that can be used to support this argument. There will ALSO be my notes (however…informal they are) that must be cited. You do not need to use ALL of the notes. Nor do you need to cite my notes formally, just place [CLASS NOTES #] if citing them in the text. Other writings need to be parenthetical cited properly.
The majority of the paper should not be summarizing the sources. A folder will be Commentate on the sources to support the argument given, please :-)