Author: Shyam Khosla
Publication: Organiser
Date: March 31, 2002
An innocuous advice in the RSS resolution
"Let the Muslims understand that their real safety lies in the goodwill
of the majority" is provocation enough for the secular-liberal brigade
to pounce upon the Sangh. A vicious campaign of calumny is launched in
the media and on the floor of Parliament. Distorting and twisting the Sangh
viewpoint, they go to the town saying the RSS has "warned" the Muslims
"Behave or else....". The RSS resolution says a vicious editorial in The
Hindu is as much a brazen challenge to the country's pluralist polity and
constitutional authority as it is an open threat to the minority community.
The newspaper indulges in outrageous misinterpretation of the resolution
adopted by Akhil Bharatiya Pratinidhi Sabha at Bangalore to suggest that
the RSS has declared that unless the minorities "earn" the goodwill of
the majority community there can be no guarantee of their safety, the implication
being they will have to face "Gujarat-type pogroms".
This Communist-dominated rabidly
anti-Hindu daily castigates the RSS by alleging that the resolution strikes
at the very root of the cardinal Constitution-mandated right of equality
and non-discrimination on the basis on religion, caste or creed. It blames
the Sangh for arrogating to itself the authority of the state whose exclusive
responsibility it is to protect and ensure the safety of citizens. One
of the "wise" secularists went overboard to give a distorted and malicious
interpretation of the resolution by suggesting that it means, "Muslims
can live in India only on the reham-o-karam of the Sangh parivar as though
India is their fiefdom."
The "secularists" have missed
the point, or should one say, resorted to distortions to discredit the
RSS and to vitiate the atmosphere by creating a sense of insecurity among
the minorities. The Communists and the "secularists" have all along survived
on Hindu-bashing and creating a ghetto mentality among the Muslims by persistently
hammering into their ears that they are insecure in a Hindu-dominated society
and will be safe only in a "secular" dispensation. They neither adhered
to the text nor to the context of the resolution that is straightforward
and simple. It points out that though a few Muslim leaders don't subscribe
to the concept of "jehadi terrorism", they have failed to influence the
Muslim mind. The RSS, says the much-maligned resolution, wants to make
it clear that it does no credit to the Muslim community to allow themselves
to be made pawns in the hands of such extremist Muslim leaders and Hindu-baiting
political elements. "Let the Muslims understand that their real safety
lies in the goodwill of the majority", it adds. What is wrong with it?
Should the RSS tell the Muslims that their real safety lies in destroying
goodwill of the majority by burning alive Rambhakts returning from Ayodhya
after a pilgrimage?
The "secularists" might have got
away with distortions and interpolations but for the fact that it is not
a speech or response to a question but a document that speaks for itself.
RSS, they screamed, warned Muslims to "earn" the goodwill of the majority
community "or else..." The resolution merely says, "real safety lies in
the goodwill of the majority". Where is the warning? Who interpolated the
words "earn" the goodwill "or else..."? It is an interpolation-pure and
simple. The Hindu is guilty of misleading the nation. Will the editor show
the moral courage to offer an unconditional apology to the RSS and the
Hindu society for this deliberate distortion and interpolations Where is
the room for the implication ("face Gujarat-type pogroms") suggested in.
the editorial? On what ground it says the RSS advice to Muslims go against
the Constitution-mandated right of "equality"? How does a Muslim become
unequal if he depends for his security on the goodwill of the Hindus? How
is it against the pluralistic ethos enshrined in the Constitution? The
RSS is committed to the Hindu maxim: Ekam sadvipraha bahudha vadanti (Truth
is one, wise men tell it in different ways). What is it if not pluralistic
ethos? The Muslims and the Christians, however, don't believe in this concept
that is why they think it is their pious duty to convert others to their
religion. Let the secularists understand that Hindu-bashing poses a grave
threat to communal harmony. They are out of sync with the national mood.
They survive on communal tensions by generating a spurious fear psychosis
among the Muslims.
They say the Sangh has sought to
arrogate to itself the authority of the state by enunciating such a vicious
theory. Read the resolution twice over. Is there any hint that it is the
RSS that will provide security to the Muslims or anyone else? Their aim
is to malign the RSS hence they invent a "vicious theory" that they falsely
claim was enunciated by the Sangh. The resolution simply states a fact
of life. It is not the police, the para military forces and the army that
can provide "real safety" to citizens. It is mutual goodwill among people
and communities that does the job best. That is what was underlined by
Shri Madan Das, Joint General Secretary of the RSS who released the resolution
to the media. According to The Hindustan Times, the RSS leader said Ayodhya
movement represented the national aspirations of the people and added,
"No social harmony can be achieved by litigation or by deployment of forces.
It can be accomplished by respecting each other's sentiments'. Any hint
of threat or communalism in it?
HT and several other dailies too
editorialised the news by saying the RSS condemned the Godhra attack but
"justified" subsequent violence as spontaneous and natural reaction. No
one can justify retaliatory violence howsoever strong the provocation.
The RSS too didn't. Its resolution on "Godhra and after" said it was "unfortunate"
that a number of people died in the violence that erupted. If the purpose
of distortions and vicious campaign against the RSS is to alienate the
masses from the nationalist organisation, the "secularists" failed miserably.
There is a groundswell of sympathy and support violence that, erupted after
the burning alive of Rambhaktas by a 2000strong Muslim mob near Godhra.
It condemned certain political parties that in their greed to garner Muslim
votes turned a blind eye to the 'original action' and condemned only the
"resultant reaction" linking it with the Ayodhya movement that had hurt
the Hindu psyche deeply. Only a biased person can say it means justifying
sectarian violence in Gujarat.
If the intention was to alienate
the masses from the Sangh, the "secularist' failed miserably. There is
groundswell of sympathy and support for the RSS viewpoint. But if the real
intention is to sow seeds of mistrust between the Hindus and the Muslims
and to create a sense of insecurity in the minorities, the 'secularists'
have succeeded to a large extent. The "secularists" survive on the support
of insecure minorities and the ghetto mentality among the Muslims. They
want the Muslims to accept as gospel truth that they will be safe only
under a "secular" dispensation. They encourage them to resort to "tactical"
voting to defeat the Hindu nationalist party knowing fully well that such
tactics lead to polarisation on communal lines and pose a serious threat
to social harmony. They are totally mistaken if they think the mandate
in the recent Assembly elections was against Hindutva. The mandate was
against dilution of Hindutva by the ruling dispensation. Hindutva does
not pose any threat to social harmony. Minorityism does.
