Saying that Hmar identity efforts are futile assumes that survival comes only through invisibility. If that's the standard for "Unity", then we're not talking about Survival - we're talking about Surrender. We're not asking to be isolated; we're asking _not to be absorbed_. We're not arguing for isolation, but recognition. We're not trying to survive alone. We're trying to survive, _at all_- without being overwritten. True inclusiveness allows space for all voices, not just the loudest or most established.
Affirming Hmar identity within the larger Kuki-Zomi-Hmar framework isn't about fragmentation, it's about *representation*. Recognizing one as a distinct group doesn't diminish another's. Unity does not mean erasure. And it absolutely doesn't mean fitting into a mould someone else made for their own convenience. If a shared umbrella demands silence from the smaller voices, maybe it's not unity but hierarchy pretending to be solidarity. They say, "We must be united" but they mean, "You must be like us." A not-so-subtle promotion of assimilative sameness masquerading as solidarity.
Let's be clear: *ethnic solidarity doesn't require homogeneity*. Solidarity means making space for each voice, like in a choir. Harmonizing doesn't ruin the music — it enriches it. Singing in only one key isn't what makes a choir; it's what makes a cult. When ethnic solidarity demands erasure of sub-identities and silence them, it's not solidarity. It's quiet domination. Let's aim for something better. Do not weaponise solidarity to suppress internal diversity.
Ethnic solidarity should recognize the presence of differences - and not see them as a threat. In fact, it _relies_ upon that very diversity to make for a *collective strength*. It then sees diversity as an advantage. Because you and I share historical, cultural and existential ties, I will support you — in the mountains and the valleys, in dialect and drumbeat.
*The Colonial Blueprint: Homogeneity as Control*
Control is easier when everything looks the same and everyone obeys the same rules. Naturally, the colonial powers promoted *homogeneity* as the only way out. They weren't here to celebrate our rich tapestry of indigenous identities.
*Political control, administrative efficiency and cultural dominance* - were all they were concerned with.
And what's a better tool than homogeneity for all three?
In fact, it was not just about colonial control, it was _lazy_. Too many tribes? Languages/dialects? Kinship systems? Who has the time to learn all that? Divide, simplify, rule. So, they flattened the differences. They grouped us under umbrella terms for the _convenience_ of their own maps — not to reflect who we actually are.
Ever notice how some of these umbrella names "Chin-Kuki-Mizo" and so on and so forth didn't really exist before colonial mapping? That's not a coincidence. They simply drew lines around things they didn't understand, giving them new labels — like a bunch of bored cartographers playing a game of risk-with-other-people's lives. Because it's easier to dominate people who have been convinced they are one single unit with one shared identity and one acceptable way of being.
So yes, when today's "unity" rhetoric sounds suspiciously like "_Be like the dominant tribe or shut up,_" you're not just hearing someone's over-inflated ego — you're hearing *colonial hangover in tribal clothing*.
*How to Heal the Hangover*:
So how do we get over this nasty inherited logic and avoid spiralling into a Monday morning existential crisis? We need to first start by naming it what it is. Recognize that this _obsession with sameness_ is *imported logic*. It's not ancestral or native. Someone taught us to think that homogeneity = harmony. Who originally taught us to think that? If the smaller groups are being dissolved into bigger ones for the _"greater good"_, who benefits from this erasure?
That is why especially in Delhi, the quest for reclaiming micro identities among the Hmars is at a fever high, not because they are against unity but unity built on invisibility isn't unity - it's _CONTROL._
*Your Brain Can Change — So Can Your Community*
Now let's talk *neuroscience.* Because colonial logic isn't just historical — it's psychological.
Here's the inconvenient truth:
_Your brain is wired to prefer the familiar. Even if the familiar is harmful._
Studies in neuroplasticity show that humans often cling to familiar structures, roles, and systems because the brain reads "familiar" as "safe." It's survival instinct, not logic. That's why some people, maybe even you, no judgment — keep going back to their toxic ex. Not because it's healthy. Not because it's working. But because it's _*familiar.*_ That's how the brain works. It doesn't always choose what's *good*. It chooses what's *known*. Even if the situation is harmful, a known pattern gives a false sense of comfort. It's like your nervous system saying, _"Well, we've survived this before — so let's just keep doing it!"_
Similarly, when people defend outdated colonial hierarchies or resist reclaiming micro-identities, it's not always because they believe in the system — it's because the system *feels normal*. It's not just about ideology. Sometimes it's biology. The brain thinks, _"This is what I know, therefore this is what protects me."_ It feels safer to stay inside a system that has always been there — even if that system was designed to contain you. And that's how domination survives: not just through oppression, but through *internalized safety.*
But here's the good news: the brain is also plastic — it can *rewire, renew, and reshape*. Just like minds can be colonized, they can also be _*decolonized*_.
The challenge is not just unlearning false histories. It's *rewiring the emotional loyalty* to systems that have long outlived their usefulness. But rewiring doesn't happen accidentally. It's a conscious and deliberate act — to stop mistaking predictability for safety. We must be brave enough to feel unfamiliar — because unfamiliar doesn't mean wrong. It often means we're finally moving on.
So yes, choosing a new path might feel weird and uncertain. But weird and uncertain is how freedom usually begins. We have to look at what we've inherited and ask, _"Does this system actually serve me in today's context, or am I just clinging to it because I'm scared or just lazy to look for an alternative?"_ Maybe it's time to replace these old, colonial thinking patterns with new alliances and not replicas. To make spaces for solidarity across the tribes without pretending everyone is the same. To *replace the colonial idea of "sameness = peace" with "diverse respect = strength".*
Colonial homogeneity was a political hack — a shortcut for control. If we keep replicating that model in the name of "ethnic unity," we're not building the future. We're just copy-pasting the past with better fonts.
So yes — whether we're talking about language, land, history, or hope:
Rip up that blueprint.
It was never designed for you to thrive anyway.
By:-
Jubilee Mawii @ Lalrammawi,
General Secretary, HSA Joint Headquarters, New Delhi and Delhi NCR.(15 May 2025)
WAP
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
