Ideologies are seductive. They offer certainty in a complex world, identity
in an age of confusion, and meaning where there is doubt. But look closely, and
you’ll often find hypocrisy wrapped in righteousness. That’s exactly why I have
no patience for either the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) or the
Indian Communist movement. Both claim to serve the people. Both behave
like monopolists of truth. And both, ironically, have become mirror images of
each other in their hypocrisy and authoritarian reflexes.
Let’s begin with the Sangh.
The RSS projects itself as a cultural force committed to
"Bharatiyata" — Indian-ness. But scratch the surface and you’ll find
a homogenising impulse: one language, one religion, one narrative. It has a
visceral discomfort with diversity, especially if that diversity doesn't
conform to its curated vision of Hindu civilisation. What it calls culture is
often dogma. What it calls tradition is usually selective memory.
It screams nationalism from rooftops, but behaves like an elite capitalist
cartel. Its political progeny, the BJP, has overseen some of the most
aggressive privatisation campaigns in post-liberalisation India. Public sector
units — once seen as symbols of national pride — have been sold off to private
conglomerates. Labour laws have been diluted, environmental safeguards
weakened, and farmer protests dismissed with disdain. All this while chanting
“Vande Mataram” and invoking Lord Ram. Is this nationalism or neoliberal
corporatism with a saffron filter?
The Sangh’s idea of nationalism isn’t about public welfare or
constitutional values — it’s about controlling the narrative. Journalists who
question the regime are branded anti-national. Students who protest are charged
with sedition. Even Supreme Court judges aren’t spared trolling if they show
signs of independence. The message is simple: toe the line, or prepare for war
— digitally, legally, and socially.
On the other side, we have the Indian Communists — draped in Marxist
jargon, forever nostalgic for a revolution that never happened.
They claim to speak for the proletariat, the worker, the marginalised. But
many of them haven’t seen the inside of a factory since their student days at
JNU or Presidency College. Their revolution is largely rhetorical, performed in
conferences, campus debates, and op-eds. In practice, they are often just
another elitist clique — patronising the poor while living comfortably off
state subsidies, academic tenures, or NGO consultancies.
Much like the RSS, the Left hates being questioned. Dissent within is
treated as betrayal. Remember what happened in Bengal? The CPI(M) was in power
for 34 years, and by the end of it, they had turned into a bureaucratic
dinosaur — indifferent, arrogant, and increasingly violent. Land acquisition in
Singur and Nandigram exposed their double standards. The same party that once
cried hoarse about farmers’ rights ended up suppressing them in the name of
"development."
Both the Sangh and the Communists use history as a political tool. The RSS
rewrites it to glorify a mythical Hindu past and vilify Muslims. The Communists
whitewash it to erase uncomfortable truths — their silence on the Soviet
gulags, on Chinese authoritarianism, or even on India's own missteps under
Communist rule.
Here’s the bitter truth: both are deeply hypocritical.
In the name of nationalism, the RSS behaves like a capitalist syndicate —
selling assets, courting billionaires, and muzzling voices. In the name of
society, the Communists often practice a soft version of capitalism themselves
— hoarding power, monopolising institutions, and living lives entirely
disconnected from the people they claim to represent.
Their hypocrisies don’t stop at economics. The RSS claims to protect Indian
culture but is often silent or complicit when Dalits are lynched, when Muslims
are demonised, when women are harassed. The Communists talk of equality but are
notoriously male-dominated and caste-blind. How many Dalit or Adivasi voices do
we see leading the charge in elite left spaces? Very few.
Even structurally, both formations are disturbingly similar. The RSS runs
through a hierarchy — shakhas, pracharaks, and sarsanghchalaks. The Communists
have their politburos, central committees, and cadres. Both distrust mass
participation that isn’t tightly controlled. Both fetishize discipline. Both
despise messiness — the very essence of democracy.
And here’s the danger: they are both fundamentally authoritarian in
temperament. They may differ in aesthetics — one wears khaki, the other
prefers Lenin caps — but they operate with the same mindset: conformity is
loyalty; questioning is rebellion.
I have no quarrel with individuals who believe in change. Many idealists on
both sides truly care about the country. But when noble intent calcifies into
ideological dogma, it ceases to liberate and begins to imprison. That’s what
these ideological camps have become — intellectual prisons.
I write this not as a fence-sitter or a centrist trying to please everyone.
I write this as someone who believes politics should be rooted in principle,
not posture. I believe in the Constitution, not Nagpur’s civilisational
sermon or Karl Marx’s Manifesto. I believe in the right to dissent — whether
it’s a student shouting slogans or a judge writing a dissenting opinion. And I
believe in truth — not the kind curated by propaganda cells, IT wings, or
ideological commissars.
India doesn’t need more ideologues. It needs more citizens. Citizens who
can think critically, vote wisely, question loudly, and dream boldly. Not men
marching in lines with flags and slogans, but men and women walking
independently — with their eyes open and minds free.
So no, I don’t like the RSS.
I don’t like the Communists.
And I don’t like any ideology that pretends to free you while tightening
the leash around your neck.
Let’s stop choosing between two extremes of the same disease. India
deserves better than dogma wrapped in a flag — saffron or red.
Siddhartha Shankar Mishra is an Advocate at the Supreme Court of India. He writes
on law, politics, and society with a focus on democratic accountability, civil
liberties, and ideological critique. He can be reached at ssmishra33@gmail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment