One hundred years of divisiveness: RSS sticks to its core ideas

With all the references to great Indian minds, including Gandhi, Vivekannad, Ramkrishna Paramhans, and others, his programs centre around Kashi and Mathura, population imbalance, and infiltrators. Or, he made India a Hindu Rashtra

It is a revivalism, albeit in a completely different form, wherein one seeks to revive a borrowed idea. The RSS and the BJP are pursuing the same strategy. The saffron outfits stick to a deadly mix of colonial and fascist ideas and use a colonial interpretation of history. They also adopt discriminatory tactics to marginalise minorities, akin to the Nazis.

The recent lecture of RSS Chief at Vigyan Bhavan in Delhi on the occasion of 100 years of the RSS revealed that the saffron outfit has not changed its stance on most things and still employs the same old technique of showing less and hiding more. The organisation claims to speak on behalf of all Indians, but openly declares India to be a Hindu nation.

The Sangh has been painstakingly trying to prove that it is wedded to the Indian idea and opposed to the European viewpoint on society, culture and politics. This time, the magazines and newspapers have portrayed Bhagwat’s speech as anti-colonial, anti-West and anti-capitalism. However, a closer look at his revelations reveals the hypocrisy.

“Bharat is Akhand (undivided)—it is a fact of life. Ancestors, sanskriti, and motherland unite us. Akhand Bharat is not just politics but the unity of the people’s consciousness. …Changing religion does not change the community. Both sides must build trust. Hindus must awaken their strength, and Muslims must shed the fear that joining together will end Islam,” says Bhagwat.

The contradiction is apparent, and the indications are clear. He appeals to Hindus to awaken, but asks Muslims to shed fears. Is he not indicating that the awakening of Hindus should not frighten Muslims? He is, in fact, accepting that Hindu unity worries Muslims?

Is it logical to suggest one community to unite in a country that claims to be united socially, culturally, geographically and politically? Is it a secret that Hindutva outfits cry for unity against an imagined attack on their religion, culture, and even economy by minority populations?

The Sangh has indeed developed a language of its own that has no parallels. Every sentence in its statement is loaded with hatred, but the organisation will talk of harmony and benevolence.

Bhagwat says, “The life of an RSS volunteer reflects the philosophy of Sarve Bhavantu Sukhinah (everyone should be happy.” Except for some voluntary programs, the RSS has always been a champion of divisive politics. Has Bhagwat been able to shed the image in his three-day address in Delhi?

With all the references to great Indian minds, including Gandhi, Vivekannad, Ramkrishna Paramhans, and others, his programs centre around Kashi and Mathura, population imbalance, and infiltrators. Or, he made India a Hindu Rashtra.

He says that demographic changes may even lead to partition. The change, according to him, is the result of a religious conversion that, he alleges, is done by force or coercion. He also finds infiltration to be one of its causes and declares that no job should go to infiltrators.

Anyone can understand that this is directed to Muslims and Christians, and the saffron outfits use the issue to create fear among Hindus. The talk on population strengthens the agenda. The RSS has been claiming for years that Muslims will outnumber Hindus because they produce more children. Bhagwat appealed to the people to have at least three children. However, he made this appeal in the name of saving the institution of the family.

The experts on population science have time and again made it clear that there is no possibility of Muslims outnumbering Hindus in India. The RSS never shows any inclination to change its stance on the issue, despite knowing that the bogey of demographic change and infiltration has pushed our bordering states in the North-East into eternal instability.

We know how people confuse the Bangla-speaking minority from West Bengal with the Bangladeshi infiltrators. Even if some Bangladeshis have come to India, should we throw them out? Is it not hypocritical for an organisation that believes the Indian subcontinent is a unit? Does it echo the idea of the well-being of the entire humanity? Can the chant of a Sanskrit couplet help hide the hatred embedded in the concept of Akhand Bharat?

The idea may look lofty and inspiring to all those who love the motherland. But it negates the existence of diverse communities, religions and cultures. Bhagwat says that Bharat is Akhand (undivided)—it is a fact of life. Ancestors, sanskriti, and motherland unite us.

Akhand Bharat is not just politics but the unity of the people’s consciousness.” The emphasis is clearly on ancestry, culture, and geography. He says that the RSS is firm on the idea that Bharat is a Hindu Rashtra.

The idea of common culture and ancestry needs decoding. It gets clarified when he says, We may follow Christianity or Islam, but we are not Europeans or Arabs, we are Bharatiyas. The leaders of these religions must teach their followers this truth.”

This is the rejection of the idea that India is a melting pot of cultures where Greeks, Arabs, Persians, Kushans, Hoons and Shakas all came with their culture and language to enrich the land.

All the major religions of the world flourished in India, including Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and Islam, with all their respective sects. It is misleading to say that we are diverse yet share a single culture. The proper understanding is that we can live by celebrating diversity.

The RSS must understand that the idea of one race, one culture on a geographical unit is a Western idea. The freedom struggle rejected the very idea and formulated the Idea of India based on the diversity of culture, religion, and race.

The RSS might claim that it participated in the freedom struggle. However, its negation of the core values of the battle only serves to testify to its distance from it. It still believes in the colonial interpretation of history that Muslims were invaders.

(The author is a senior journalist. He has experience of working with leading newspapers and electronic media including Deccan Herald, Sunday Guardian, Navbharat Times and Dainik Bhaskar. He writes on politics, society, environment and economy)