Assertion of nationalism

The Sangh directed its energy and resources intosocio-economic upliftment of slum-dwellers and the lower strata of society through the Seva Bharti, formed in 1989. In 1993, the Hindu Economics authored by M. G. Bokhare was published, to show that economics bears not only economic rationality but also a spiritual content. It was a reinforcement of philosophy of Integral Humanism propounded by Deendayal Upadhyay. The Swadeshism of the RSS represents a broader vision than economic nationalism. The shift of its paradigm coincided with the West-sponsored ideology of liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation (LPG).

The first hurdle before the Swadeshi campaign is the propaganda by its critics, who derive inspiration from the LPG ideologues, that it is a sectarian, isolationist approach. This makes it necessary to turn it into a people’s movement rather than a theoretical concern of only the cadres. Swadeshism is an alternative economic approach with two correctives — first, achieving a more equitable distribution of income and wealth along with agreater degree of economic decentralisation and, secondly, undoing the unequal and discriminatory world order based on the hegemony of the US and its European allies.

The debate became more conspicuous with the controversies in the Sangh Parivar over issues like the Enron power project and opening of the insurance sector. The ongoing crisis is more due to unpreparedness of the BJP to meet the present socio-economic challenge than ideological. The Vajpa-yee government inherited a crown of thorns from the previous reg-imes. The open resistance by the movement, however, forced the go-vernment to abandon Manmohanics and ad-opt moderate economic nationalism. Yet the presence of Coke, Pepsi and Kentucky Fried Chicken on the Indian soil is a sign of the weakened resiliency of the Indian state. The new class, which emerged in the post-LPG phase, supports integration with `global’ economy with the sole consideration of sunshine consumerism.

In seven decades, the Sangh has increased its zone of influence, and thoseintegrated with the capitalist ideology have got associated with it. They approve the cultural and social agenda of the RSS, but with serious reservations on its economic world-view. Mostly present in the BJP, this microscopic but powerful section has been trying, even if in vain, to hijack the movement. But the RSS is unlikely to meet the fate of all other nationalist movements of Europe or even Hindu organisations of the 20th century. They had a history of becoming the tools of big business in their respective periods of growth. Organisations like the Hindu Maha Sabha (HMS) and the Arya Samaj were predominantly controlled by moneybag Hindus.

It is true that the RSS was not formed with the aim of economic emancipation of the people, but seeds of Vedantic egalitarianism (socialism) have been present in its dhyeya (objective) of achieving the parambhaivam (highest glory) of the Hindu nation. Its founder K. B. Hedgwar proposed a draft resolution in the Nagpur session of the Congress in 1920 stating that theparty’s aim was “to liberate the countries of the world from the vicious circle of exploitation by the capitalist countries.”

The RSS pracharaks are the nucleus of its entire edifice. The first principle for their training, later imparted to swyamsevaks, is to make them conscious of the Hindu society’s contradictions. Hedgewar’s concept of a `corporate national life’ contains collectivism, castelessness and classlessness. His successor M. S. Golwalkar described it as a “higher duty” to the nation, for which “personal and family wants can wait”. It is this wisdom which led the RSS to maintain financial autonomy — and avoid the influence of the upper-class gentry whom Vivekananda called “walking corpses.”

The RSS has rejected both communism and capitalism since both are inherently dehumanising. Deendayal Upadhyaya, as a deputy provincial Head (Sah Prant Pracharak) of the Uttar Pradesh unit of the RSS, declared in 1949, “It is sheer foolishness to think that the Sangh aims to perpetuate capitalismor zamindari. Thousa-nds of young men have not abandoned their homes and hearths to support a handful of zamindars.” Golwalkar supported the Vedantic philosophy of trusteeship.

The Bharatiya Jan Sangh (BJS) refused to collaborate with the Ramrajya Parishad since it represented, according to Upad-hyay, “reactionary and capitalist elements and its root does not lies in the cottage of Karpatrijee (the founder of the Parishad) but in the palace of zamindars and Marwaris.” The BJS expelled 11 legislators in Rajasthan who opposed its disapproval of the presence of pro-capitalist elements in the party who saw in every strike of workers “the hidden hand of communism”.

When the SJM published a list of 326 consumer goods manufactured by the MNCs and Indian product alternatives in 1991, left ideologues derided it for benefiting `national capitalism’. It cannot be gainsaid that national capitalism has demonstrated an insensitiveness to the social and cultural needs of the country and more than an unwillingnessto compete with the manufacturers of foreign goods. It has preferred to surrender before the multinational corporations rather than invest in research and development (R&D) to improve its products. Nevertheless, in the first phase of the battle against the neo-colonial apparatus (the World Bank, the World Trade Organisation and the MNCs), there is a need to inculcate in it a new confidence and a spirit of economic nationalism.

The RSS has to confront both the modernists of a parasitic character and the Left which is not ready to abandon textbook socialism.

The writer teaches political science at Delhi University