 |
|
The article reports on the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's (RSS) renewed emphasis on propagating a concept it terms 'one nation-one culture'. This initiative, announced following the Akhil Bharatiya Pratinidhi Sabha (ABPS) meet, aims to 'set right a distorted narrative in written history' and build a 'harmonious and organised Bharat'. Dattatreya Hosabale, the RSS general secretary, outlined the organization's plans to reach out to people at the grassroots level through various programs tied to the RSS's centenary celebrations. This strategy involves engaging with communities in mandals and basthis, small population pockets, to disseminate their ideology and influence public opinion. The emphasis on 'one nation-one culture' and 'setting right a distorted narrative' is inherently tied to the RSS's perception of Indian history and identity. It suggests a belief that existing historical accounts are biased or incomplete, potentially downplaying the contributions of certain groups or perspectives while overemphasizing others. The RSS's initiative can be interpreted as an attempt to rewrite or reinterpret history according to its own ideological framework, promoting a specific vision of Indian culture and national identity. This ambition is further evidenced by Hosabale's comments regarding the choice of historical icons. He questioned the preference for figures like Aurangzeb, whom he described as an 'invader,' versus individuals like Dara Shikoh, who he claimed 'respected the ethos of Indian culture.' This comparison highlights the RSS's emphasis on figures perceived as representing 'authentic' Indian traditions and values, while marginalizing those associated with foreign influence or perceived opposition to Hindu culture. The statement that 'mental decolonisation is yet to be achieved' reveals a critical dimension of the RSS's ideology. This implies that despite achieving political independence in 1947, India continues to be influenced by colonial ways of thinking and cultural norms. The RSS believes that true emancipation requires a conscious effort to shed these colonial influences and embrace a distinctly Indian identity based on Hindu principles. The reference to Rana Pratap Singh as a figure who began the freedom struggle 'much before the Independence movement' underscores this point, positioning Hindu warriors as precursors to the modern nationalist movement and emphasizing the long-standing resistance to foreign rule. The re-naming of Aurangzeb Road in Delhi to Dr APJ Abdul Kalam Road is offered as an example of how historical narratives are being shaped. It underscores the RSS’s intention to promote figures whom they regard as true representatives of Indian values. The RSS's perspective on reservation policies also reflects its broader ideology. While opposing reservation based solely on religion, citing constitutional constraints and past Supreme Court rulings, the organization supports initiatives that empower underprivileged sections, such as sub-plans for Scheduled Castes and Tribes. This stance suggests a preference for addressing social inequalities through targeted programs aimed at specific communities rather than through broad-based reservation policies based on religious identity. The comments on the Karnataka government's decision to provide 4% reservation for Muslims in civil contracts suggest concerns that the government policy might lack constitutional or legal support. This indicates the RSS's commitment to challenging policies that it believes are inconsistent with the principles of secularism and equality enshrined in the Indian Constitution. The RSS's outreach to minorities, as mentioned by Hosabale, is a complex and potentially controversial aspect of its agenda. While the organization claims to be inclusive and open to dialogue with all communities, its historical association with Hindu nationalism and its promotion of 'one nation-one culture' may raise concerns among minority groups about potential marginalization or assimilation. The defense of appointing RSS workers as personal assistants to ministers in Maharashtra highlights the organization's influence in political circles. The claim that these appointments were based on merit and legality reflects the RSS's efforts to legitimize its presence in the government and defend its members against accusations of impropriety or undue influence. The RSS's stance on contentious issues such as waqf land, caste census, and delimitation of parliamentary seats suggests a cautious approach, opting to 'wait and watch' while the central government formulates its policies. This indicates a desire to avoid direct confrontation or premature engagement on sensitive matters, potentially allowing the organization to assess the political landscape and adjust its strategy accordingly. The statement that the RSS will not interfere in the internal affairs of its political wing regarding the delay in electing a new BJP national president underscores the delicate relationship between the two organizations. While the RSS is widely considered to be the ideological parent of the BJP, it maintains a degree of separation and avoids direct involvement in the party's internal decision-making processes. Overall, the article provides valuable insights into the RSS's current agenda, its ideological underpinnings, and its approach to various political and social issues. The emphasis on 'one nation-one culture', the critique of historical narratives, the stance on reservation policies, and the engagement with minorities all reflect the RSS's ongoing efforts to shape Indian society and politics according to its own vision. The claims of mental decolonisation and the correct choice of cultural icons are presented as essential to establishing a correct national identity.
The RSS's push for 'one nation-one culture' is a multi-faceted project involving the reinterpretation of history, the promotion of specific cultural icons, and the dissemination of its ideology at the grassroots level. This initiative is not merely a cultural or historical endeavor but a political one, aimed at consolidating a particular vision of Indian national identity and shaping the country's future trajectory. The concept of 'one nation-one culture' is inherently problematic in a diverse and multicultural society like India. The country is home to a multitude of languages, religions, customs, and traditions, each contributing to its rich cultural tapestry. Imposing a singular cultural identity, even under the guise of 'harmonious Bharat', risks marginalizing or suppressing the unique expressions of these diverse communities. Critics argue that the RSS's vision of 'one nation-one culture' is essentially a Hindu nationalist project aimed at homogenizing Indian society and marginalizing non-Hindu communities. They contend that the organization's focus on Hindu traditions and values, its selective interpretation of history, and its emphasis on cultural purity are all indicative of a majoritarian agenda that seeks to undermine the secular and pluralistic foundations of the Indian state. The RSS's claims of 'setting right a distorted narrative in written history' are also subject to scrutiny. Historians and scholars have raised concerns about the organization's attempts to rewrite or reinterpret history to fit its ideological framework, often downplaying the contributions of Muslim rulers and other non-Hindu figures while exaggerating the role of Hindu warriors and cultural heroes. This selective interpretation of history can have dangerous consequences, fueling communal tensions and undermining efforts to promote reconciliation and understanding between different communities. The RSS's stance on reservation policies is also a subject of debate. While the organization supports affirmative action for Scheduled Castes and Tribes, its opposition to reservation based on religion is seen by some as discriminatory and unfair. Critics argue that Muslims and other minority groups face significant social and economic disadvantages and that reservation is necessary to address these inequalities. The RSS's emphasis on 'merit' in appointments is also questioned, as it ignores the systemic biases and inequalities that prevent marginalized communities from accessing opportunities. The organization's engagement with minorities is viewed with skepticism by many. While the RSS claims to be inclusive and open to dialogue, its historical association with Hindu nationalism and its promotion of a singular cultural identity raise concerns about its sincerity and its willingness to genuinely address the concerns of minority communities. The RSS's defense of its workers appointed as personal assistants to ministers in Maharashtra raises further questions about its influence in political circles. Critics argue that these appointments are indicative of the organization's efforts to infiltrate the government and promote its agenda from within. The RSS's influence on the BJP-led central government is a matter of considerable concern. Critics worry that the government's policies are being influenced by the RSS's ideological agenda, leading to the erosion of secular values and the marginalization of minority communities. The rise of Hindu nationalism under the BJP government has been accompanied by a rise in hate speech, discrimination, and violence against Muslims and other minorities. This has created a climate of fear and insecurity and has undermined India's reputation as a tolerant and inclusive society.
The core tenet of the RSS’s argument rests on the perception of a distorted historical narrative. However, the very act of claiming a singular, 'correct' version of history is fraught with peril. History, by its nature, is subjective, influenced by the perspectives and biases of those who record it. To declare one particular interpretation as definitive is to silence alternative voices and perspectives, effectively erasing the complexities and nuances of the past. The claim of 'mental decolonisation' rings hollow when it is used to justify the imposition of a different, albeit domestically rooted, form of cultural dominance. True decolonisation should involve dismantling all forms of oppression and hierarchy, not merely replacing one with another. The promotion of specific historical icons, while seemingly innocuous, can serve as a powerful tool for shaping collective memory and national identity. By selectively highlighting certain figures and narratives, the RSS seeks to construct a particular version of the past that reinforces its ideological agenda. The exclusion or marginalisation of other figures and narratives contributes to a distorted and incomplete understanding of Indian history. The RSS's stance on reservation, while ostensibly based on principles of merit and equality, fails to acknowledge the deep-seated structural inequalities that continue to disadvantage marginalised communities. To ignore the historical and ongoing impact of caste and religious discrimination is to perpetuate the very injustices that reservation policies seek to address. The claim that the RSS is inclusive and open to dialogue with minorities is undermined by its historical record and its ongoing promotion of a Hindu nationalist ideology. Genuine inclusivity requires more than mere words; it requires concrete actions to address the concerns of minority communities and to ensure their equal participation in all aspects of society. The RSS's growing influence in Indian politics raises serious concerns about the future of secularism and democracy. The promotion of a Hindu nationalist agenda threatens to undermine the rights and freedoms of minority communities and to create a more divided and unequal society. The Indian Constitution guarantees equal rights and freedoms to all citizens, regardless of their religion, caste, or gender. The RSS's ideology, with its emphasis on Hindu supremacy, is fundamentally incompatible with these constitutional principles. The pursuit of 'one nation-one culture' risks creating a homogenous society where diversity is suppressed and dissent is silenced. True national unity can only be achieved through respecting and celebrating the diversity of India's cultural heritage. The RSS's project, at its core, is about power – the power to define national identity, to control the historical narrative, and to shape the future of India. This pursuit of power must be challenged by those who believe in a secular, democratic, and inclusive India. It's about shaping a new society according to their ideals and agenda.