The RSS position on the Constitution of India was revealed by its chief, Rajendra Singh in an article published on 14 January 1993: "Certain specialties of this country should be reflected in the Constitution. In place of 'India that is Bharat', we should have said 'Bharat that is Hindustan'. Official documents refer to the 'composite culture', but ours is certainly not a composite culture.
Culture is not wearing of clothes or speaking languages. In a very fundamental sense, this country has a unique cultural oneness. No country, if it has to survive, can have compartments. All this shows that changes are needed in the Constitution. A Constitution more suited to the ethos and genius of this country should be adopted in the future". The plea for "changes" is swiftly altered to one for a new Constitution altogether suited for the ethos and genius" of the RSS. This was written soon after publication, on 1 January, of a pamphlet by Swami Muktananda Saraswati on the Constitution. He denounced it as "anti-Hindu".
The RSS claims to be a "cultural" body but its definition of "culture" includes politics and its activities are nothing but political. In a letter to Nehru (12 November 1948) Golwalkar claimed that the RSS was "aloof from politics". Nehru had no illusions about its "declared objectives" having" little to do with the real ones" and its "anti-national and often subversive and violent" behaviour (10 November). The duality came to the fore when, to escape tax, it claimed to be a charitable body. But to escape registration as a public charity, it claimed a political complexion, as Dr. M.D. Kamdar of Nagpur brought out in the proceedings he had instituted.
In miscellaneous application No. 17 of 1978, Rajendra Singh and Deoras's brother, Bhaurao, asserted in para 14 that it does not indulged in politics, i.e. day-to-day politics though the Sangh has a political philosophy within its wide sweep of political work. It is possible to change this policy and even participate in politics" - a far cry from the 1948 claim of "being aloof from politics" ..
... He argued: "The work of the RSS is neither religious nor charitable but its objects are cultural and patriotic as contra-distinguished from religious or charitable. It is akin to political purposes though RSS is not at present a political party inasmuch as the RSS constitution, quoted above, bars active political participation by RSS as such, as a policy ... Tomorrow the policy could be changed and RSS could participate in even day-to-day political activity as a political party because policy is not a permanent or irrevocable thing". Nothing could be more explicit.
On 15 and 16 November 1987, Deoras said that the RSS planned to enter politics. Three years later, Advani said in his famous speech at the RSS meeting in Coimbatore on 17 March 1990: "We have to intensify our efforts to project the viewpoint of the RSS". He amplified: "There has been a conscious effort on the part of Swayamsevaks who are working in the BJP to make each one understand the ideological base to which we belong, and our connections with sister organisations like the VHP, the ABVP, the BMS, the Sena Bharati and the Kalyan Ashram which are all based on the inspiration from the RSS".
A decade later, comes the edict to Gujarat - let the RSS enter the services. This, from a government which disavows a "hidden agenda" and speaks of the NDA's programme. But if it can go so far when it is hopelessly dependent on the allies what will the BJP not do if it acquires a majority in its own right ?... (Source: The Indian Express, 15 January,20000)
Rajender Sachar On 'Hindu' Cowardice
I did not know that "cowardice" had religious connotations. I thought it was a human trait. But then the RSS chief, Rajendra Singh, informs us that the recent release of three terrorists shows the cowardice of Hindu society ... no one, not even the RSS chief, is suggesting that we should have allowed 150 lives to be sacrificed. India's strength and courage is not enhanced or lowered by acting strategically in peculiar conditions or dispensation.
The RSS is entitled to feel that Indian prestige would have been enhanced had we not released the terrorists and allowed the hostages to be killed. I take it that the RSS would have at least 150 such courageous cadres old or young. I wish the RSS had offered to send such "courageous RSS cadres" to substitute for the hostages, to save their lives and then dare the hijackers to do their worst. That would have enhanced the prestige of the country. But may be even the RSS, the self-appointed champions of Hindus, is no different from the rest: Lacking in ... courage.
It is pointless to continue to take the position that refusal to accept the hijackers' demands would have spelt the end of all hijacking ... (Source: The Pioneer, 12 January, 2000)
Not a Happy Model, Editorial, The Hindustan Times, 6 Jan., 2000
Since the chief minister himself is rooted in the RSS shakhas of Gandhi's home state, he was afready in a position to frame policies that would help his friends in the Sangh Parivar to paint the province saffron. There was no need, therefore, for an even closer link between the government and the RSS. So, his decision may be regarded as no more than a flourish of sorts, an act of wearing his colours on his sleeves, as it were ... The organisation claims to be interested only in social service but its detractors are not entirely convinced. Hence, they feel that it will now be used in Gujarat to advance the BJP's so-called hidden agenda ... The reputation of the RSS, and the circumstances in which it was earlier banned, tend to raise questions about those who are its members ...
