In the aftermath of demolition of mosque at Ayodhya on December 6, 1992, a leading English daily of India editorially commented that double/treble speak was understatement in the case of RSS. The RSS ideologue, Rakesh Sinha’s write up (‘Of swayamsevaks and intellectuals’ IE, March 24, 2017) only reaffirms this judgement. The facts become the first casualty for any organization practising this trait.
The RSS always claimed to be a cultural organization but this RSS ideologue tells us that ‘RSS dominates India’s politics’. When did India vote for RSS? He is perhaps referring to BJP’s victory in recent UP election and takes it as RSS victory. Fine but he is oblivious of the fact that BJP+allies secured around 40% of the polled votes and almost 60% votes polled went to the parties which declared BJP as the main adversary. Even in 2014 parliamentary elections NDA had secured around 33% votes. Despite securing minority votes it is claimed that India is under the hegemony of RSS.
Indians are expected to ‘de-colonize’ their minds and believe that RSS vision of Hindu rashtra is not antithetical to a democratic-secular India, it participated in the anti-colonial freedom struggle, it does not discriminate against minorities, it has never rebelled against the state or used anarchist methods and it does not want to impose any uniformity.
Let’s compare these claims with the RSS own documents. Constituent Assembly of India passed Indian Constitution on November 26, 1949. RSS was not happy. Its English organ, ORGANIZER in an editorial titled ‘Constitution’ on November 30, 1949, rejected it because “there is nothing Bhartiya about it” and demanded promulgation of MANUSMRITI which decrees sub-human status to Sudras and women complained.
ORGANIZER just on the eve of Independence (14 August 1947), demeaning the choice of the National Flag wrote that Indian rulers “may give in our hands the Tricolour but it never be respected and owned by Hindus. the word three is in itself an evil, and a flag having three colours will certainly produce a very bad psychological effect and is injurious to a country.”
In the same issue of Organizer, RSS rejected the vision of an all-inclusive democratic-secular and demanded a Hindu polity. In an editorial titled ‘Whither’ it said, “in Hindusthan only the Hindus form the nation and the national structure must be built on that safe and sound foundation the nation itself must be built up of Hindus, on Hindu traditions, culture, ideas and aspirations”.
So far as democracy is concerned it was as early as 1940 that Golwalkar addressing the 1350 senior most RSS cadres declared that “RSS inspired by one flag, one leader and one ideology is lighting the flame of Hindutva in each and every corner of this great land”. This slogan borrowed from 20th century Nazi and Fascist parties of Europe RSS always believed in hegemony and exposes latter’s claim that it does not want ‘excessive uniformity’.
There cannot be a more brazen lie to claim that RSS participated in the freedom struggle. In fact, even founder of RSS Dr. Hedgewar (RSS chief 1925-1940) and second head of the RSS, Golwalkar (1940) did not make this claim. A biography of RSS published by RSS informs that “after establishing Sangh  Doctor Saheb [Hedgewar] in his speeches used to talk only of Hindu organization. Direct comment on Government used to be nil”. Golwalkar confessed that due to keeping aloof of the RSS from the freedom struggle, “upheaval (uthal-puthal) in the minds of Sangh volunteers continued. Sangh is an organization of inactive persons, their talks are useless, not only outsiders but also many of our volunteers did talk like this. They were greatly disgusted too”. Can RSS share name of a single leader/cadre who participated in the freedom struggle?
RSS hatred for minorities specially Muslims and Christians can be measured by Golwalkar’s writings. Before Independence he declared, “there are only two courses open to the foreign elements, either to merge themselves in the national race and adopt its culture, or to live at its mercy so long as the national race may allow them to do so and to quit the country at the sweet will of the national race. That is the only sound view on the minorities [sic] problem…That alone keeps the nation safe from the danger of a cancer developing into its body politic of the creation of a state within a state”. This hatred hardened after Independence. The ‘Holy’ book for the RSS cadres, Bunch of Thoughts, has a long chapter titled ‘Internal Threats’ in which Muslims and Christians are described as threat number one and two respectively.
So far as RSS love for Indian State is concerned two crucial documents need to be perused. When Sardar Patel’s ministry banned RSS for facilitating Gandhi’s murder on February 4, 1948, following reasons were given: “Undesirable and even dangerous activities have been carried on by members of the Sangh. It has been found that in several parts of the country individual members of the RSS have indulged in acts of violence involving arson, robbery, dacoity, and murder and have collected illicit arms and ammunition. They have been found circulating leaflets exhorting people to resort to terrorist methods, to collect firearms, to create disaffection against the government and suborn the police and the military.” Patel in a letter to Golwalkar (September 11, 1948) stated, “RSS men expressed joy and distributed sweets after Gandhiji’s death”.
The fact is that if any organization needs to be Indianised it is RSS. It must discard its anti-democratic-secular India agenda.