Dr Buragadda Srinadh
Historically, before independence, India witnessed the emergence of various political entities, notably the Communist Party, inspired by Karl Marx’s ideology against capitalism in 1848, and the Indian National Congress, established in 1882 by British national Allan Octavian Hume to foster civil and political dialogue among educated Indians. Both institutions were foreign in origin and lacked a true understanding of Indian sentiments. Initially, neither functioned as a political party in the conventional sense. Over time, the Communist Party evolved into a global force, while the Congress emerged as the dominant political power in post-independence India. As these parties engaged in a power struggle, they failed to comprehend the sentiments of the vast majority of Indians, particularly Hindus.
The movement for India’s independence was a prolonged struggle that united various groups, leaders, and ideologies against British rule. The Congress Party capitalized on the gains of the independence movement, with many people following its leadership, influenced by the reverence for Gandhi, often suppressing their own sentiments. A thousand years of foreign domination had devastated indigenous Indian culture, leading to the destruction of temples and the imposition of penalties, such as the jizya tax, for practicing one’s faith. This resulted in feelings of humiliation and marginalization, leaving a lasting emotional scar on millions of Indians.
During World War II, Britain, the United States, Russia, and China constituted the main Allied powers. Indian communist parties were primarily influenced by Russian and Chinese communist leaders. Due to their alliance with the British, Indian communists largely overlooked local aspirations and served British interests in India. Alongside their opposition to capitalism, they also began mocking Hindu beliefs. The Communist Party, with its strong cadre-based structure, identified the Jan Sangh, the political arm of the RSS, as a rising cadre-based party that openly supported Hindu nationalism and posed a potential political threat. Rather than opposing the Jan Sangh on political grounds, the Communists shifted their focus to criticizing Hindu beliefs, diverting their struggle from capitalism to communalism. Millions of Indians remained passive in the face of these attacks on Hindu faith by both political parties. The intellectuals associated with these parties misinterpreted this silence as consent, leading to an escalation in their criticism of Hinduism until growing Hindu discontent reached a critical threshold.
Under the leadership of Nehru, the Congress Party began undermining Hinduism for electoral benefits and self-image building. Hindus remained silent, and their silence was taken for granted by political parties. The attacks on Hinduism reached their pinnacle under Sonia Gandhi’s leadership.
One of the most contentious aspects of her tenure was the discourse surrounding Hinduism. For instance, Sushil Kumar Shinde, the Home Minister during her tenure, introduced the term “Hindu terrorism,” which many saw as an unfair label targeting a significant portion of the population to appease minority groups. This narrative was intensified by former Home Minister Shivraj Patil, who made offensive comments about the Bhagavad Gita, equating it to jihad—an analogy that many Hindus found deeply disrespectful. Sonia Gandhi reportedly advised party leaders that criticizing Hinduism was crucial for obtaining ministerial roles, leading Congress leaders to attack Hindus for political gain.
Current party president Mallikarjun Kharge has mocked the Kumbh Mela, a significant Hindu religious event, further alienating a large segment of the electorate. Several controversial bills and actions during the UPA administration were seen as attempts to win minority support. Sonia Gandhi denied Sri Pranab Mukherjee the Prime Minister position twice due to his Hindu identity, and the UPA government assigned all key portfolios to non-Hindus, sidelining others. Under her leadership, former Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao faced humiliation both in life and posthumously. The UPA government, led by Sonia Gandhi, targeted Ram Sethu and took significant steps to dismantle it, even filing a petition in the Supreme Court against it.
These actions were perceived as part of a broader strategy by Sonia Gandhi to bolster her political standing among minority communities through an anti-Hindu stance, reminiscent of historical efforts by invaders to undermine India’s dominant religious and cultural identity.
For sixty years, the Congress and Communist parties have been the principal political entities in India, frequently altering their manifestos and ideologies to secure electoral advantages. They have often taken the Hindu community for granted, testing their patience.
In contrast, since its establishment in 1925, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has remained steadfast in its core ideology, without seeking power or making compromises for political gain. Although the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) serves as its political arm, the RSS retains its identity as the foundational organization. While the Congress and Communist parties have lost their distinct identities, lacking a guiding force like the RSS for the BJP, the RSS has continued its work with unwavering commitment for 100 years.
The current circumstances have evolved into a critical juncture, prompting genuine patriotic citizens to express deep concerns regarding the threats associated with global religious intolerance and instability. There is a pronounced yearning among the populace to preserve India’s culture, which is rooted in peace and harmony. In this context, the nation is looking to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) to assume a vital role in steering and unifying society. The expectation is that the RSS will help safeguard cultural heritage and identity, ensuring that the values held dear are protected against these challenges.
Bharatiya culture is the life-breath of Hindustan. It is, therefore, clear that if Hindustan is to be protected, we must first nourish our own Bharatiya culture. If our culture perishes in Hindustan itself, and if the true Bharat society ceases to exist, it will hardly be appropriate to refer to the mere geographical entity that remains as Hindustan. Mere geographical landmasses do not make a nation. The entire society should be vigilant and organized so that no one dares to cast an evil eye on any of our sacred traditions.
Strength, it should be remembered, comes only through organization. Every patriotic Indian, therefore, must do their best to consolidate society. The Sangh is carrying out this supreme task. The present fate of the country cannot be changed unless lakhs of young men dedicate their entire lifetime to this cause. Molding the minds of youth toward this goal is the supreme aim of the Sangh—a true torchbearer and pathfinder for the glory of our nation.
