Sectarianism: Economic Impact on Subcontinent (1875-1947)

Purpose of this paper is to analyze the development of sectarianism, and its effects on economic conditions during the British era. It is true in the history sects or groups gave large structure. Sectarianism is exceptionally compound and complex issue. This paper tells the answer to some question these are. Why increase the sects aggregate and group’s quantity. How Sectarianism affects the economic conditions. Why economics is vital for any territory. This paper also explains how sectarianism system is dangerous for the economy. This paper provides the information about sect’s devilment. What reason for writing the article? Some groups are adopting the own theory and belief and develop the history which not gassiest. While the leaders of groups don't understand the arguments of other sects; that is why they have certainty on their own beliefs. They are the strike and rigid for not adopting the theories of other groups. Furthermore, social division in India has Jurisdiction issue. This division directly affected the economic conditions, which is much more dangerous for Indian progress. Factors of social division are very bored. It has importance for solving, and it has the flexibility to make easier to answer.


Introduction
All these groups face the problem due to culture difference, and no group is ready to understand the culture of other sects. Moreover, lack of sufficient knowledge also hinders the groups to follow the ideas and beliefs of other groups. These facts create the aggressiveness among factions of even strictly related cultures. This aggressive behavior and unpleasant environment affect many fields. We need to analyze all the areas of socioeconomic development in this contest, and economics is a critical field for any country. It plays a role in society as a backbone of the human body.
Delhi Sultans and Mughal emperor occupied India for many centuries. The British came to that territory in the nineteenth century. British played a role like Sultan and Mughals. All sovereign had no interest in sectarianism matter. The new generation was growing up in that environment. That matter and issue which could be solved, but the ignorance transformed the problem into a terrible situation.
But all groups which consist in India more spread and more expand during British time. The western position about sectarianism was estimated and noticeable. They admit that the religious trend was robust during British time. Sects and groups remain afraid of each other. Classification of the people and grouping already existed in regna.
British face the readymade groups and sects but British policy was to divide and rule. Therefore, British were not trying to reduce those groups, and not strive to reduce the gape about that sect. It's possible that those factors gave more social benefits and elevated values of the frontline societies.
Many groups dominating this area, first was Hindu, second Muslims, and in the last and the most important the ruler British. Any ruler group did not work about release the distance between different sects and groups even to Muslims. Muslims ruled thousand years ago in that regna. But Muslims also not observed on that matter. Solving that matter was very easy, but Passage of time that matter changed complex bond. Day by day that problem was default and complex. During British period Sectarianism arrived on its peak.

History Background of Sectarianism in Subcontinent
People of Neolithic and Pal eolithic were migrating to India regna. Even Africa moved to India through southern said and migration of western people through northwest ruts [1].
People of Tibet-Burma and Austro Asiatic language speaker came to South Asia and lived near the river of Ganga. Because this region provided arbitrage platform for refugees, the economic condition was also improved. Any refugees who migrated towards that area didn't face any disturbance. The financial situation was very good of those people of the region [2].
Himalaya Mountains provide the quality of safe place permanently for entering the sects, and Indus river valley attracts the humankind for migration there to gain benefits from wealthy Indian sects of the subcontinent. In start Indian subcontinent development in characteristics and principles that make the foundation of Hindu civilization. Hindu civilization was dominant on any field, sect, and culture. Hinduism was already complex society about belief and cults. This society affected the social, political and religious institutes of India, and create the significant change in the Indian community in every aspect. Due to facilities Indus river valley minority groups comes to India, which Hindu migrated and reached to this land. Hindu and minorities were unable to understand each other; and unmanageably these nations made the mixture of race, religions, cultures, languages, and political.
Many groups came to India there for Himalaya provides the shelter. People felt safe beyond the Himalaya range. Indus River had a prime role in mass migrations in history. Indus valley was attracting other groups of people. In the first Hindu migrated and came to India. They live there and cultivate the crops. We found Hindu characteristics and principles that make the foundation of Hindu civilization. Hindu was already dominant and abundant society, which affected the social, political, religious, and economic aspects of this region. After the arrival of Hindu society, many other cultures came to India and affected Indian region.
Some religions other than Hindu migrated to India. The most famous among these are the migrations through China, Tibet, and Burma (Myanmar) during different time periods.
Second meager Sect in India which came was Muslims. That came from Turkey and Afghanistan range. They migrated and staled near Indian rivers. After came the Muslims, Hindu and Muslims made two main sects of this region. Wealth and many beneficial things were the penetrable tools for Hindu, Parse, Sikh and Crichton counties. Those things created a magic source of attraction for Muslim. After the Muslims rule, British were ruled at Subcontinent the end of 19th century.

Economic History of Subcontinent
Any society faces the main problem, when divided into some or many groups and sects. This problem changed into the critical situation when people of other factions didn't understand the people of other groups. They are stack on own beliefs thought and theory. Leaders of sects were trying to implement their theories and ideas on other denominations. Indian society was divided on the ethnic, religious, political, and economic basis. During British rule that division extended. Groups were more aggressive on each other than previous. Sectarianism proved a significant threat for peace and economic progress of India [3].
In the history living style of Indian people. Observe we found the evidence about economic condition and collect the data be very carefully [4].
Akbar was four members in the court during 1595. The average living standards help the researcher about the economic situation of people in those days. This paper shows the per daily head wages income of unskilled Indian workers during British rule. People of Subcontinent had not equal wages income. Subcontinent had many verities of land area and atmosphere. So in that reasoning people had variation about Daily wages income [5].
In the first disused the economic condition about the Mughal period and then analyses the economic growth droning British era. Many aliments exist that effect on Subcontinent economics, significant was Sectarianism [6].
In 1612 East India Company received the permeation for trading from Mughals. So other European companies came to India for trading. India was famous in textile. European trading companies bought the textile aliments and sold in South East Asia. English and Duchy two great players subsisted and proliferated in cotton trading. Cotton trading provides the competitive industrial sector in India.
Weavers had to compete in weaving skill. The quality of cotton and poor designs lowered the wages of the textile workers. In two centuries cotton industry had not made any progress. The improved, simple, and latest technology not introduced any governance. At the end of 18th century, the cotton industry made the place of importance in the market. East India Company struggled for finding the suitable market for cotton export. The company raised the land taxes to be used to pay for the textiles [7].
In this study, Subcontinent sect affected the economy. Hindu and Muslims were two main sects of Subcontinent. We allow for two channels that link economics to conflict. In the first, Hindu Muslim religion sullenness used the market; in that case, the economic position was down. That financial condition directly affected jobs, businesses, and property. Now secondly, groups had hatred feelings about other's economic program. One group didn't accept the financial progress of second group. They had not flexible behavior for each other.
Does economic growth affect ethnic violence? And, if so, is this effect beneficial or adverse? The primary goal of this article is to answer these questions in the context of Hindu-Muslim riots in India. Our primary hypothesis which we develop more fully below -is that increases in economic growth should lead to decreases in the occurrence of violence. We test this hypothesis empirically controlling for other factors such as economic inequality, demographic variables, and political competition, which have been shown by others to influence the occurrence of riots. Also, we include temporal lags, a measure of the influence of the disturbances occurring in adjacent states and state and year fixed effects. We find, even after controlling for all of these factors, that periods of higher growth indeed negatively correlated with ethnic riots [8].
Does economy growths affect ethnic violence? And, if so, is this effect beneficial or adverse? Now we found the answer to these questions in context Hindu Muslim in Subcontinent. Development of any country is shallow when increasing the violence. One thing which affects the economic growth is an agitation condition of any state. Different variable are create the source about increase the havoc. Violence is creating uncertainty position and shutting down the business. So, during the British time violence and agitation situation were not under control.

Sectarianism Effect on Economic condition
The Hindu Muslims relation during the second half of 19 century was not friendly. Many sources were creating unfriendly attitude. The political situation is the main reasoning of that problem. Many scholars believed that the policy of the Indian Congress Party against Muslims. Same there the behavior British India was not in the Muslims fever, the ignoring the Muslims. Due to that behavior create the hall of difference between Hindu and Muslims [9].
Muslims were feeling insecure due to the behavior of Indian National Congress and British India Council. British India Government rule was supporting the Hindu rules. Therefore, Muslims were so aggressive from that policy. It increased the violence day by day [10]. There are some reasons which directly affected the economic growth. Ethnic violence is the main reason for down the economic growth [11].
First, electoral competition and electoral disunion effect on economic growth. Violent political groups is not a friendly behavior for other political groups. They create disunion about society, sects and ethnic groups. These attitudes towards society slow down the economic growth. Politicians are gaining the vote; creating the uncertainty and unpleasant atmosphere. Politicians are distracting the attention and blamed the violence on other political parties. From this, political parties gain the advantage to split the people for ethnic basis. These politicians encourage their supporters which have aggressive behavior towards racial and beliefs [12].
Wilkinson [11] noted that an effective method for elite-dominated ethnic parties to mobilize those target voters who were at risk of voting for the primary rival parties is to employ racial wedge issues that increase the salience of ethnic problems that would favor their party. In periods of slower economic growth, when promises to provide economic benefits to target voters may not seem credible, and when the politician wishes to deflect blame for relatively weak economic conditions, this strategy may work particularly well. Moreover, Asghar [13] noted that 'communalism served a pernicious function by diverting attention from the economic crisis and the breakdown of the political system; instead, people tend to blame the other community for their troubles. ' For example, militant communal groups who were often allied with incumbent governments employed rhetoric that explicitly blamed Muslims for the country's economic woes.
Second, the effect of economic growth may work through the mechanism of greater ethnic competition. As economic conditions worsened, competition between ethnic groups increased, leading to heightened tensions and perhaps violence. There are some examples cited by scholars in which riots used as an excuse to drive out economic competitors. In case of Jabalpur, competition in the cigarette industry (over which Muslims had control) intensified violence over there [13]. While, in Aligarh, Hindu businesspeople precipitated riots to try to force the Muslims to leave and sell their houses at low cost to grab their property holdings [14].
The mechanism is another element of ethnic competing in economic growth. When ethnic group competitions increased, their economic conditions get lowered. Increase the tension and violence, so groups do not agree for trade reciprocally. Scholars cod the many examples of uncertainty violence and low economics condition. In the case of Jabalpur, Muslims create the agitation due to their control of cigarette industry [13,14].
The third reason for lower economic growth was World War I and World War II in the subcontinent. During that period the economy growth was very slow [15].
Although some arguments made in existing studies on violence could imply the effect of economic growth, violence could be positive [16], we do not think that these argument shave much power in explaining short-term variations in Hindu-Muslim violence in India. For example, Huntington and Samuel's [16] argument that modernization leads to political disorder examines the effect that industrialization and the radical social changes that accompanied it had on political order. It is by design an analysis that looks at longterm changes and not at the short-term changes that we examine in this article. Chaudhuri is another study which posits a positive relationship between economic growth and violence. The authors argue that economic growth can lead an economy to a phase where redistribution opens up investment opportunities, which leads to conflicts over redistribution and increases the likely hood of violence. Again, the focus is on long-term structural changes and not on shortterm fluctuations.
In the end, some statement made existing that violence could have positive effects on economic growth. Agitations could be positive; it is not always harmful to economic growth [16]. We do not think that this argument is appreciating. This statement is not a compelling statement. An excellent example of this argument is Hindu Muslim violence in India especially British period. Possible is that this rule effected for short term. But long-term this theory is not favorable. We have many examples, but Hindu Muslim controversy during British era provides the strong prove that sectarianism creates the violence and violence directly affected the economy.

Conclusion
Paper gave the result that; Sectarianism is called groups and sects. These groups are divided on the base of belief culture politics and ethnic values. These sects are not harmful to any territory and state. These groups didn't give the space to other groups for living rights. They are dangerous for any country. They create the reason for violence. Violence is increasing the terrorism.