The reasons for this are different from what OP is implying. It’s not due to some conspiracy to emasculate, demean and belittle Kshatriyas - at least not before independence. It has more to do with the nature of Parashurama as an avatar. https://twitter.com/yashasvipratap/status/1281903093509062656

Parashurama in Vaishnava tradition is NOT a full avatar. Bhargava Rama was not born as an avatar of Mahavishnu.He was merely possessed by Vishnu at a point in his life and the possession ended with his limited purpose on earth as an avatar- long before Dasharatha Rama’s birth.

Temples don’t exist to Shri Parashurama because he is not worthy of worship as per Vaishnava doctrine itself. He is a Chiranjeevi for starters, and still alive somewhere. Temples are not supposed to be built to the living. He is not a sattvik personality. As per his own legends

he sheds the blood of innocents indiscriminately. Why would one worship a god like this? Now, getting to the subject of Parashurama as a political icon. Before independence, you don’t find him figuring prominently in Brahmana iconography excepting some specific groups.

Now no Brahmana organisation makes a single poster/pamphlet/promotional material of any sort without either Parashurama or his weapons figuring therein. How did this happen? Why did it happen? For this we need to go back to changes in Hindu polity that happened over a hundred

years ago in the Arya Samaj’s Sanskritisation programs as well as the resulting claims arising from a number of subaltern groups to higher ritual status within Hindu society. There was a largely stable order prevailing in Hindu society prior to this where a certain sense of

acceptance pervaded all Hindu communities towards their respective histories as well as their place in the varnashrama. It wasn’t that this order had not seen upheavals earlier. Buddhism and Jainism are examples of Kshatriyas trying to overreach into the domain of adhyatmik

upadesha - with disastrous results in most cases - at the expense of their natural and indispensable place in the varnashrama. Then we have Sant Kabir, Sant Ravidasa, and other apostles of egalitarianism who preached the upending of an order that had sustained us for yugas.

However, never before had it been a free-for-all as it was in the wake of Sanskritisation. Never before had the adjudicator been a foreign power with little or no clue about Hindu social organisation. This being Kaliyuga, people gravitate towards power and the symbols of power.

Power was embodied mostly by Kshatriyas. Thus we saw a wave of communities claiming martial pasts and trying to Kshatriya-fy their histories. It’s around this time that we see Pasis claim Suheldev (who existed but wasn’t as important as the popular version says), Bhumihars

trying to be recognised as Brahmanas, Jats and Gujjars claiming whatever they felt like claiming, and so on. It’s also around this time that Shri Parashurama enters the iconography of Brahmanas in the North and even the East (he still doesn’t figure prominently in the South).

Please also note that the claim of Mohyals of having fought at Karbala (which BTW makes no sense to anybody exercising such recessive faculties) also gains currency around this time.

Getting back from our digression, Shri Parashurama is what one calls an Āveśāvatāra. He has always existed in the shastras and was not concocted by a group of Brahmanas to belittle and delegitimise Kshatriyas. But he was never widely worshipped for the simple reason that he

is not worthy of worship as per Vaishnava doctrine (wasn’t shuddhasattva). There are numerous episodes where he actively goes against Dharma. The instance of beheading his mother on the orders of his father Jamadagni (in a fit of rage) comes to mind. He sought vengeance on an

entire Varna for the sins of a few Kshatriyas.He himself admits as much and is in penance in the wild somewhere to repent for these very sins.He conducts human sacrifices which are against shastras.Brahmanas in saner times rightly recognised that worshipping him would be an error

Per my limited understanding, he is worthy of worship ONLY if one is worshipping the Vishnu within and even then the conformity to doctrine is tenuous.

We need to understand one thing. Modern democracy is like a jungle and it is antithetical to Hindu society in that it necessarily pits its many constituent groups against each other in electoral contests. The currency in this jungle is muscle, numbers and money. The outrage in

the wake of the Anandpal encounter (he was of the Ravana subcaste seen as low by all Rajputs in Rajasthan) or the Dubey encounter must thus be seen in this context. Democracy itself is a manifestation of Kali Asura, causing us all to behave like demons. END