Comment on current political wars in Maharashtra

India became a country about 63 years ago. Before that there was no existence of the country. We embraced a democratic and unified government with a build up to it from 1930, post The non-co-operation movement lead by Mahatma Gandhi. Actual realization of it happened in 1947, post a very troubling world war - II. Perhaps not much for India, but for most of the western of world as we see it.

Now how all of these things affect or are related to current Marathi asmita related problems. Please note - I am not trying to blame any one, neither I am trying to provide a escapist view that if these things happen, let them happen, lets all move on from one crisis to other.

Few notes -
1. India as a country is very young. Only reason we became a country is we all had a common enemy in British.
2. India is a very big country. Population of India is more than a billion and thats a lot of people.
3. We have many different cultures and languages with in the this country. But most of these cultures where never part of a unified government before British rule. And even under British rule, all parts of India did not have exactly same rules. Also some parts of India, even during british rule were governed by Kings, even if amount of power these kings had was nominal. Some of the areas were ruled by other outsiders like Portuguese, French or African Siddi's.
4. Many of these cultures have had a violent past with each other, based on political aspects. For example Suja's of Bengal and Peshwas of Pune clashed. Nizam's , Adilshashi, Chikkmangalaur's King, Chhatrapati Shivaji, Bundels, Gorakhas all fought with each other at some point or the other.
5. The north and south, typically above Narmada and below Tapi respectively, are 2 regions which were never part of same government. North saw dynasties of Vikramaditya, Shrung, Maurya, Mughals. Where as south saw dynasties of Satvahanas, Vijaynagar, Peshwas, Nizams etc.
6. If British rule was not there, India as a country would probably have never existed. We have had democracy, but in sub-parts.

So essentially, even though we are taught in school that we a country of different cultures and values, what we arent told is we as a nation, as country are recent concepts.

How this is different from other countries - neither country on this planet has such history. For example United Kingdom of Great Britain is still a sovereign state of four countries. Even though these four countries are bound by same governance, they still have their individual identity intact like 4 different cricket teams or Soccer teams etc.

So even though we can all debate about being a nation and one rule for all, we need to also understand that perhaps having one single rule and one single identity for such a big and diversified nation is perhaps not a good idea. I still love you all Indians and I know you all love me too. But it is my natural instinct and perhaps a right to protect my people. And when its comes to defining my people physical closeness is more important than governing closeness. I will care about the stranger living in my colony more than I can care about stranger living in some distant part of India.

Disclaimer - Idea behind this post is not to support any kind of violence or any kind of division based politics. But if we as a nation, as one single country cant solve Kaveri water issue in 40 years, perhaps we dont deserve to be one single nation.

Update: The questions that I am asking in this post are not for any individual, group, but for myself and perhaps my readers. I have been stuck with this questions since I learned about Riots against Sikhs and after I did a study about various regional debates happened in last 6 decades ie post independence.