Recent political discourse has seen the Indian National Congress party directly attacking the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), alleging that the organization sided with the British during India's struggle for independence. These accusations, labeled as "historical facts" by some Congress leaders, have ignited a fresh war of words between the two ideological camps.
The core of the Congress's argument rests on the claim that the RSS and its earlier version Jan Sangh, did not actively participate in the freedom movement and, in some instances, even collaborated with the British rulers. They point to the fact that the RSS did not officially participate in the Quit India Movement and that the British Home Department considered the RSS as non-threatening to law and order in British India. Congress leaders have also referred to letters purportedly written by Jan Sangh founder Syama Prasad Mookerjee to the then-Bengal Governor, allegedly suggesting ways to combat the Quit India Movement.
Conversely, the RSS maintains that it was focused on social and cultural upliftment of the Hindu community and that its efforts were directed towards defending "religion and culture" rather than engaging in direct political confrontation with the British. Some argue that the RSS's priority was safeguarding Hindu interests, which they believed were threatened by both Islamic communalism and the Congress's appeasement politics.
Historical accounts present a nuanced picture. While it is true that the RSS, as an organization, did not spearhead any major anti-imperialist movements, some historians argue that the RSS literature was openly hostile to the Congress and Mahatma Gandhi, accusing them of weakening Hindus and "appeasing" Muslims. They suggest that the RSS was more focused on mobilizing Hindus against Muslims and against inclusive nationalism.
Notably, the relationship between Congress and RSS has been complex. Some Congress leaders were initially sympathetic to the RSS's cause, but this sentiment waned over time. After Mahatma Gandhi's assassination, the RSS was banned by Sardar Patel, who remarked that RSS men expressed joy and distributed sweets after Gandhi's death.
These allegations and counter-allegations raise critical questions about the interpretation of history and its impact on contemporary politics. The Congress party views the RSS's alleged collaboration with the British as a betrayal of the freedom struggle, while the RSS presents its actions as a strategy to protect Hindu interests during a tumultuous period.
Ultimately, whether the RSS "sided" with the British is a matter of interpretation and historical perspective. The organization's lack of participation in the freedom movement is a matter of record, but the motivations behind this choice remain a subject of debate. These debates continue to shape the political landscape and influence the narratives of Indian history.
