|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Saturday, July 07, 2001 |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Opinion
| Previous
| Next
The failed swayamsevaks
By Shamsul Islam
WITH RECURRING electoral setbacks to the BJP in different parts
of the country in the last one year, we have been witnessing a
spate of media reports claiming that the RSS is not happy with
the NDA Government led by Mr. Atal Behari Vajpaee. In fact, the
RSS top brass, including its head, Mr. K.S. Sudarshan, has gone
public with hard hitting criticism of the BJP-led Government at
the Centre. Last March, he went to the extent of calling the
Prime Minister's Office incompetent. He also lamented the fact
that the BJP had become ``Congressised''. One month later, in
April, the senior RSS leader and founder of the Bharatiya Mazdoor
Sangh (BMS) as well as the Swadeshi Jagaran Manch (SJM), Mr.
Dattopant Thengadi, attacked Mr. Yashwant Sinha. Around the same
time, Mr. Murlidhar Rao, SJM convener, declared that ``the
Government is not being led by political leadership but by people
who are insensitive to national interests''. Recently, the RSS
joint general secretary, Mr. H.V. Seshadri, castigated the
Government for indulging in a kind of ``tandav of corruption''.
Is the RSS really being honest with these comments or judgments
on the BJP? Isn't the BJP solely the creation of the ``infallible
and disciplined'' RSS which tolerates no nonsense so far as its
philosophical goals are concerned? How the RSS controls the BJP
can be learnt from two statements of M. S. Golwalkar, who headed
the RSS after the death of Dr. Hedgewar and is considered its
greatest ideologue. The first statement is about the kind of
personnel sent to manipulate politics and what is expected of
them by the RSS. While delivering a speech on March 16, 1954, in
Sindi, Wardha, he said, ``If we say that we are part of the
organisation and accept its discipline then selectiveness has no
place in life. Do what is told. If told to play kabaddi, play
kabaddi; told to hold meeting then meeting. For instance some of
our friends were told to go and work for politics that does not
mean that they have great interest or inspiration for it. They
don't die for politics like fish without water. If they are told
to withdraw from politics then also there is no objection. Their
discretion is just not required''.
The second statement is also very significant. ``We know this
also that some of our swayamsevaks work in politics. There they
have to organise according to the needs of work public meetings,
processions etc., have to raise slogans. All these things have no
place in our work. However, the actor should portray the
character accepted to the best of his capability. But sometimes
swayamsevaks go beyond the role assigned to an actor as they
develop over-zealousness in their hearts, to the extent that they
become useless for this work. This is not good.''
We find here Golwalkar referring to the swayamsevaks loaned to
political offshoots as performers who are meant to dance to the
tunes of the RSS. Golwalkar's above design of controlling the
political arm was elaborated in March 1960 almost nine years
after the establishment of the Jana Sangh (the forerunner of the
BJP) in 1951. And, if earlier RSS cadres loaned to the BJP could
be counted on one's fingers, today this number has gone up to
thousands. The top and middle rung of the BJP is almost totally
made up of RSS cadres.
The RSS cadres who control the BJP also keep on harping on the
theme that the party is an independent political organisation and
does not work on the dictates of the RSS. Compare this claim with
the facts available in the official publications of the RSS. The
central publication house of the RSS, the Suruchi Prakashan,
Jhandewalan, New Delhi, published a book, ``Param Vaibhav Ke Path
Par'' (1997) detailing more than 40 organisations created by the
RSS for different tasks. The BJP figures at number three in the
list of prominent organisations created by the RSS.
In the light of these facts, it is difficult to swallow the logic
presented by G. M. Vaidya, RSS spokesman (while rationalising the
bribe-taking of Mr. Bangaru Laxman), that ``He has failed as a
swayamsevak but it is an individual failure, not a failure of the
system... It is not necessary that everybody passes the test of
lessons we at the RSS teach, some fail too''. Such individual
failures are becoming too many and happening too often. The list
of failed swayamsevaks is getting lengthier everyday. In Lucknow,
this March, Mr. Pradeep Narain Mathur, chief trustee of the RSS
publication cell, Vishwa Samvad Kendra, in league with other
racketeers duped people of more than Rs. 250 crores. It came to
be known as the Century Consultants scandal. In Nagpur, under the
very nose of the RSS, scores of BJP corporators, many of whom
functioned as Mayor or Deputy Mayor for the last so many years
were recently jailed for brazen loot of nearly Rs. 40 crores of
public money. The Nagpur Municipal Corporation has traditionally
been controlled by the BJP. Its only ``solace'' is that
corporators of other parties also joined in this loot.
And what about the builders of Ahmedabad whose sheer greed added
to hundreds of deaths in the January earthquake? The link between
these builders and the rulers of Gujarat (the blue-eyed boys of
the RSS) has been thoroughly documented by the media and the
survivors. How many of them were shakha regulars is difficult to
know as the RSS does not keep any formal record which can be
scrutinised. The RSS national organs, Organizer and Panchjanya
have maintained absolute mum till date on these builders. A
comparative study of the public postures or media releases of the
RSS about the BJP and its Government at the Centre and scrutiny
of its official organs throw up an astonishing scenario. Whatever
critical comments we may be hearing from the RSS top brass about
the BJP in the media seems to be only for public consumption. Its
official organs tell a different story. Tehelka is debunked as a
``Conspiracy to destabilize polity'' (cover story, Organizer
dated March 25, 2001). ``Who funded Operation Westend?'' was the
poser in Organizer, April 1, 2001. Despite the anti-Government
public postures of the SJM and the BMS, the RSS official organs
in totality praised the budgets presented by Mr. Yashwant Sinha.
For instance, this year's budget was given a front-page multi-
colour banner headline with a smiling photograph of the Finance
Minister, declaring, ``It's Different'' in Organizer of March 11,
2001. Last year's budget was welcomed through Laghu Udyog Bharati
(LUB), a creation of the RSS; the headline read ``LUB welcomes
budget''. (Organizer, March 12, 2000)
The SJM has declared t will launch a satyagraha from July 25,
against the ``anti-national'' policies of the Central Government.
However, the same SJM is richer today by almost Rs. 8 crores
thanks to the same Government. For, the SJM with other RSS fronts
such as Seva Bharti have become the most favoured NGOs for
different departments of Government of India or State Governments
run by the BJP. These organisations have turned into parasites
flourishing on public funds.
The dilemma of the RSS is that while professing to be working for
the cultural re-generation of Hindus, it does not want to miss
enjoying the material benefits available with the swayamsevaks
ruling the country who happen to be friendly to market forces.
Flush with money and power, the RSS leadership is unable to
understand that corruption is an integral part of this life which
affects not only individuals but the whole system.
(The writer is Reader, Department of Political Science, Satyawati
College, Delhi University.)
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Opinion Previous : Where are the jobs? Next : Summit must succeed | |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyrights © 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|