Hindutva and Sangh: The ‘party with a difference’ experiments with truth
The Hindutva sangh and its frontal organisations have long proclaimed themselves ‘protectors’ of ‘Indian culture’. The ‘sangh’ would broadly be the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Bajrang Dal (BD). Each of these is for different sections of Hindu Society—the VHP for the Brahmins, the RSS for the middle castes, OBCs) and the BD for those lowest in the caste hierarchy or outside it—from the Shudras on.
These are by far the best known, though there are many others. This note looks at how they fare in each of the ‘core’ areas where they present themselves as a ‘party with a difference’. It is to look behind the media image they project, and document their actual practice.
1. Common civil code: a common deception
Most Indians, including those who support the right to separate personal laws, concur with the Supreme Court judgement that that it is illegal for others to convert to Islam, only for the purpose of marriage. The only two MPs who have ‘converted’ to Islam, and got married—he for the second time, and she knowingly the second wife—are the dream girl, Jat—Tamil Brahmin couple from the BJP. Perhaps Aisha Bi R. Chakravarty and Dilawar Khan Kewal Krishn who got married in accordance with Islamic rites On August 21, 1979 would like to clarify? Incidentally, the lady in question is a Rajya Sabha MP—meaning the party, and not the general electorate—chose her because she embodies their values. She has since been made a party vice president.
This common deception is commonplace within the sanghi world. They certainly know how to talk the talk, and then talk the walk!
2. National security: Flight to Kandahar
The sanghi political front, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) came to power on the promise of hot pursuit of terrorists, and strong action on national security. Apart from attacking civilians as ‘soft targets’, the sanghis proved to be even more weak kneed than their predecessors. They not only released dreaded terrorists but also sent the union Minister for Foreign Affairs to personally escort them to Kandahar.
Apart from being in the cabinet meeting and being party to the decision to trade terrorists for hostages, Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister L K Advani, the pseudo–iron man of India wilted when it came to the test of character. He not only disowned the decision but also lied about being in the meeting itself. He was a multi–term president of the BJP, its founding member, its star campaigner, and a lifelong member of the RSS. Just as the RSS distances itself from the BJP, claiming to be a cultural organisation with nothing to do with either politics nor the BJP, its faithful child does the same with his decisions.
3. Culture and tradition: Parivar or Sanghi?
The sanghis call themselves the sangh parivar, parivar—meaning family. But how do they treat families? Their lead second generation leader was murdered in cold blood by his own brother. His son was found in a compromising position in drug–induced stupor, got into a marriage of convenience, and divorced by the wife due to domestic violence within a year. The BJP split the mother son duo of an erstwhile royal family. It split a family in the hope of coming to power for the first time in south India too. They did not. However, until the alliance lasted, they managed to keep the family apart.
So which ‘family’ do they have in mind, the global family? In which case why burn a man and his children just because of ‘religious conversion’?
4. Partition and the ‘core of nationhood’: from secular Jinnah with love to communal Nehru
In a strange twist reminiscent of the Stockholm Syndrome, the top leadership of the sanghi party fall in love with Mohammed Ali Jinnah serially with amazing regularity. It is comical since they often demonise Jinnah as the architect of the partition of India, never mind historical evidence that it was their guru who propounded the two nation theory (‘we, or our nationhood defined’) decades before Jinnah.
After cursory research, they suddenly find that Jinnah was a secular person, who wanted a secular Pakistan. They dig out his speech to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, discover that he was once the poster boy of Hindu–Muslim unity and conveniently gloss over very many inconvenient facts. True to form, they cannot have a comprehensive analysis of the man and the phenomenon in its totality.
These pseudo–intellectuals who suddenly find Jinnah secular have maintained for long that Jawaharlal Nehru was communal. Secular Jinnah and communal Nehru… a revealing insight into the clarity of non–thought and penetrating insights of the Hindutva brigade.
5. Hinduism as ‘verbal vomit’
Can it get worse? Oh yes it can. The pseudo–Hindu sanghis routinely burn down and vandalise people, works of art and property of those whom they don’t like. They burn people. They burn property… and they call the entire Upanishads and the Vedas as ‘verbal vomit’. Surprised? Read on…
The BJP chose as their Rajya Sabha MP a person who wrote an entire section in a book condemning virtually every tenet of Hinduism in the Vedas and Upanishads as worshipping false gods. And the section title? ‘Verbal vomit’ and a subsection ‘empty boxes within empty boxes’. The book? Hinduism, essence and consequence. The author, Arun Shourie.
Well versed in Nazi ways, they know that a big lie mentioned a hundred times becomes the truth and have used Gobbelsian techniques not only to demonise entire sections to consolidate their ‘vote bank’, but also to promote a totally different image of themselves than they really are. Hinduism or Hindutva? Hindus or pseudo–Hindus?
We have presented the evidence. You decide.
(we present more evidence for the strong hearted in the attached file)