by Prof.Shamsul Islam/ A K Shiburaj
Author and former professor of Political Science at the University of Delhi, Prof. Shamsul Islam, assesses the political changes shaping the country in 2025, when we celebrate 75 years of being a Republic and the RSS approaches its centenary.
As India celebrates 75 years of being a republic and the RSS approaches its centenary, how do you assess the ideological and political shifts that have shaped the nation during this period?
It is important to remember that the RSS has never shown the slightest interest in the Republic of India, let alone loyalty to it. This reminds me of a recent statement by Mohan Bhagwat, who claimed that “India attained independence on January 23, 2024, with the inauguration of the Ram Temple.” If an organization holds such a view, what interest could it possibly have in India becoming an independent republic on January 26, 1950?
The RSS is inherently anti-national, anti-democratic, and opposed to human values. It is a caste-based organization rooted in fascism. This is not just my opinion—numerous RSS documents confirm this stance.
To understand this better, we must look at Keshav Baliram Hedgewar and his associates, who founded the RSS in 1925. Hedgewar left the Congress after disagreeing with Gandhi’s ideas, particularly his vision of an India where all religions coexisted and Hindus and Muslims united to fight the British. Hedgewar’s ideology was influenced by Hindutva, a book written by Savarkar in 1923. Another key figure, B.S. Moonje, personally met Mussolini and believed that India needed a Hindu leader modeled after him.
The RSS does not believe in Indian democracy; it aligns itself with fascist principles. Crucially, its foundation rests on Brahminical ideology. It is the only organization in the world that claims to work in the cultural sphere while simultaneously worshipping weapons.
Given the erosion of democratic institutions and increasing authoritarian tendencies, can India still be considered a true democracy? What key indicators do you see that point towards democratic backsliding?
The Constitution of India, adopted on November 26, 1949, was founded on some of the greatest secular democratic values the world has ever seen. It enshrines the principles of non-discrimination based on language, region, caste, religion, and culture. It was also the first constitution to explicitly advocate for human fraternity. However, just four days after its adoption, the RSS mouthpiece Organizer criticized it, stating:
“”In our constitution, there is no mention of the unique constitutional development in ancient Bharat. Manu’s Laws were written long before Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. To this day his laws as enunciated in Manusmriti excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing.”
Savarkar is regarded as the ideological mentor of the RSS, which was first led by Hedgewar and later by Golwalkar. He considered Manusmriti to be India’s political and cultural heritage after the Vedas. Even today, many upper-caste communities in India continue to follow the principles of Manusmriti, which, rather than representing all Hindus, is primarily centered on Brahminical life. The RSS seeks to replace the Indian Constitution with the Manusmriti, which is inherently opposed to the rights of Shudras, Dalits, and women. Ironically, Manusmriti does not specifically target Muslims and Christians, who are often projected as the primary enemies of the RSS.
Verse 31 of the first chapter of Manusmriti states that the Brahmin was born from the mouth of the creator, the Kshatriya from his arms, the Vaishya from his thighs, and the Shudra from his feet. Verse 87 of the same chapter prescribes different occupations for each Varna, reinforcing a rigid caste hierarchy. Even a cursory reading of this text reveals the ideological foundation of the RSS. Chapter eight prescribes severe punishments for Shudras who defy the caste order, while chapter nine dictates that Hindu women should live under the control of men for their pleasure.
Some argue that Manusmriti is an outdated text with no relevance today and is not actively promoted by the RSS. However, this is far from reality.
Gita Press in Uttar Pradesh, which is controlled by RSS ideologues, is the largest publisher of Hindu religious texts. Last year, Prime Minister Modi awarded it the Gandhi Peace Prize. This same press has published 32 books by Swami Ramasukhdas alone, all of which advocate for the oppression of women. Hundreds of thousands of copies of these books have been printed and distributed (many for free) at railway stations, bus stands, and RSS-affiliated bookstalls. These publications reveal the RSS’s deeply regressive stance on Hindu social life.
For instance, Swami Ramasukhdas states that if a husband beats his wife, she is merely atoning for the sins of three past lives and thereby becoming pure. He also claims that if a Hindu woman is raped, she should remain silent and not inform anyone. Such ideas are in direct violation of the Indian laws and international human rights laws.
The RSS has never believed in democracy. In a speech delivered in 1940 at Rationing Bagh, Nagpur, the RSS declared its commitment to spreading Hindutva ideals across India under “one flag, one nation, and one leader.” The authoritarian tendencies of the Modi government are not a sudden development but a continuation of this long-standing ideology.
One of the greatest contributions of the Indian Constitution is its secular vision, which the RSS vehemently opposes. On August 14, 1947, Organizer urged Indians not to be misled by the creation of what it called a “pseudo-nation” and instead advocated for the establishment of a Hindutva-based nationalism. Shortly after, the RSS again wrote in Organizer that it did not accept the Tricolor, which was officially adopted on July 17, 1947. It dismissed the national flag as a mere “piece of cloth stitched together by a tailor” and even called it a “bad omen” on Independence Day.
The RSS is also opposed to India’s federal system—another cornerstone of the Constitution. Golwalkar explicitly called for India to be governed under a single centralized authority, an idea that Modi is now actively promoting.
Isn’t this position more evident in the approach towards the South Indian states?
This anti-democratic and casteist ideology is particularly evident in the RSS’s attitude towards South Indian states. The Manusmriti, which the RSS upholds, is not just against Shudras, Dalits, and women—it is also prejudiced against the Hindus of South India.
Malayalis, in particular, should be aware of what RSS leaders have said about the women of Kerala, a state that has historically resisted caste-based oppression. On December 17, 1960, while addressing students at the School of Social Sciences of Gujarat University, Golwalkar made a shocking statement:
“Today experiments in cross-breeding are made only on animals. But the courage to make such experiments on human beings is not shown even by so-called modern scientists today. Now let us see the experiments our ancestors made in this sphere. In an effort to better the human species through cross-breeding the Namboodri Brahmins of the North were settled in Kerala and a rule was laid down that the eldest son of a Namboodri family could marry only the daughter of Vaishya, Kashtriya or Shudra communities of Kerala. Another still more courageous rule was that the first off-spring of a married woman of any class must be fathered by a Namboodri Brahman and then she could beget children by her husband. Today this experiment will be called adultery but it was not so as it was limited to the first child.”
This statement reveals the RSS’s deeply casteist and patriarchal mindset. It shows that the organization viewed Kerala’s women not as individuals but as instruments for their ideological goals. While the RSS now claims to unite all Hindus under one banner for political gains, its historical stance has been one of Brahminical supremacy. The RSS has long regarded South Indian Hindus as inferior within the caste hierarchy.
What role does the judiciary play in safeguarding or undermining democratic values in contemporary India? Do you see judicial independence weakening, especially in cases with ideological or religious undertones?
The judiciary is increasingly aligning itself with Hindutva ideology. In recent years, several High Court verdicts, particularly those delivered by former Chief Justices, have favored the RSS agenda. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, for instance, has made rulings that weaken democratic principles—examples include the Babri Masjid verdict, the sub-classifications for reservation, and his critique of Justice Krishna Iyer’s stance on private property.
The mainstream media’s role in this erosion of democracy is equally concerning. However, it is worth noting that Indian media has never been truly independent. Even in the past, it tended to align with those in power, though there remained some space for government criticism. That space is now shrinking.
The RSS’s anti-Muslim agenda is often discussed, but do you think its attempts to perpetuate caste hierarchies through new mechanisms receive enough attention? What are some of the less-discussed strategies being employed?
The RSS’s efforts to maintain caste hierarchies have not received the scrutiny they deserve. Many perceive the RSS as an organization solely opposed to Muslims and Christians. However, if one closely examines its ideology, it becomes clear that its real objective is the preservation of Brahminical supremacy.
Golwalkar’s writings explicitly state who the RSS considers internal threats—first, Muslims; then Christians; then Communists. While this might suggest the RSS is only targeting these groups, its broader ideology is far more insidious. By emphasizing racial purity and historical memory, the RSS diverts attention from its primary goal: the suppression of lower castes, women, and South Indian Hindus.
When the RSS speaks of Hindu unity, it strategically omits the historical oppression of Shudras, whom the Brahminical system treated as subhuman. Even worse was the plight of Chandals, who were completely excluded from the Varna system. Today, the RSS has established organizations within tribal communities classified as Chandala, but its ultimate aim remains Brahmin supremacy. This is not mere speculation; there is ample evidence to support this claim.
Do you think Dr. B.R. Ambedkar foresaw the present crisis and warned Indian leaders and the public about the dangers of power falling into the wrong hands? He also spoke about the threat of oligarchy manipulating the Constitution. How relevant are his warnings in today’s context?
Ambedkar warned that Hindutva rule would be disastrous for India. A fierce critic of Brahminical Hinduism, he famously declared that while he was born a Hindu, he would not die one. His conversion to Buddhism was an act of resistance. If Ambedkar were alive today, he would likely be jailed or attacked for his views. The same fate would have befallen Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Sukhdev, and others who championed Hindu-Muslim unity.
How do you evaluate the role and effectiveness of opposition parties after the 2024 General Elections? Are they adapting to the political challenges of the time, or do you see structural weaknesses limiting their impact?
The rise of the RSS would not have been possible if so-called secular parties had actively resisted its regressive and destructive ideology. Over the past forty years, I have come across historical documents that opposition parties failed to examine.
For instance, they could have highlighted that Vivekananda once said, “One cannot be a Brahmin without eating beef,” at a time when Dalits and Muslims are being lynched for merely possessing beef. Instead, they focused on promoting a vegetarianized version of Hinduism.
Opposition parties also failed to expose the RSS’s opposition to democracy and human progress. Their negligence has contributed to the crisis we face today.
Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Get the latest CounterCurrents updates delivered straight to your inbox.
Amidst growing threats to democracy and constitutional values, what sources of hope do you see for strengthening India’s democratic fabric? Are there specific movements, leaders, or policies that inspire optimism?
Despite the current despair, India has a long history of resistance—against British rule, for labor rights, and farmers’ movements. I believe this tradition of struggle will continue. Modi is steering India toward civil war, but ultimately, the Hindutva agenda cannot succeed against the majority—Shudras, Dalits, and women. Our history of resistance against oppression gives me hope that we will overcome these dark times.
A K Shiburaj is an independent journalist based in Kerala
Originally published in Malayalam by Keraleeyam Masika
