The new-found aggression among Hindus in India and elsewhere is due to the Hindu society having been at war for over 1,000 years and finally awakened with the Sangh’s support, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has said.“You see, Hindu society has been at war for over 1,000 years – this fight has been going on against foreign aggressions, foreign influences and foreign conspiracies. Sangh has offered its support to this cause, so have others. There are many who have spoken about it. And it is because of all these that the Hindu society has awakened. It is but natural for those at war to be aggressive,” Bhagwat has said in an interview to the RSS-affiliated magazines Organiser and Panchjanya.The interview was conducted by Organiser editor Prafulla Ketkar and Panchjanya editor Hitesh Shankar.Claiming that the Hindu society is in the midst of yet another war, Bhagwat said, “This war is not against an enemy outside, but against an enemy within. So there is a war to defend Hindu society, Hindu dharma and Hindu culture. Foreign invaders are no longer there, but foreign influences and foreign conspiracies have continued. Since this is a war, people are likely to get overzealous. Although this is not desirable, yet provocative statements will be uttered.”Bhagwat said Muslims have nothing to fear in India but they must abandon their claim of supremacy. “The simple truth is this – Hindusthan should remain Hindusthan. There is no harm to Muslims living today in Bharat. If they wish to stick to their faith, they can. If they want to return to the faith of their ancestors, they may. It is entirely their choice. There is no such stubbornness among Hindus. Islam has nothing to fear. But at the same time, Muslims must abandon their boisterous rhetoric of supremacy,” he said. “We are of an exalted race; we once ruled over this land, and shall rule it again; only our path is right, rest everyone is wrong; we are different, therefore we will continue to be so; we cannot live together – they (Muslims) must abandon this narrative.”Bhagwat also broached the issue of LGBTQ rights and reiterated the Sangh’s support for it. “These people (LGBTQ) also have a right to live. Without much hullabaloo, we have found a way, with a humane approach, to provide them social acceptance, bearing in mind they are also human beings having inalienable right to live. We have a transgender community; we did not see it as a problem. They have a sect and their own deities. Today, they have their own Mahamandaleshwar too. During Kumbh, they are accorded a special place. They are part of our everyday life,” he said.The RSS chief narrated the story of demon king Jarasandh’s generals – Hans and Dimbhaka – suggesting they were in a homosexual relationship, adding that the “problem of LGBTQ” is a similar one. “When Krishna fanned the rumour that Dimbhaka has died, Hans committed suicide. That is how Krishna got rid of those two generals. Come to think of it: what does the story suggest? This is the same thing. The two generals were in that sort of a relationship. It’s not that these people have never existed in our country. People with such proclivities have always been there for as long as humans have existed. Since I am a doctor of animals, I know that such traits are found in animals too. This is biological, a mode of life,” he said.Bhagwat said the RSS wants them (LGBTQ) to have their own private space and to feel that they, too, are a part of the society. “This is such a simple issue. We will have to promote this view because all other ways of resolving it will be futile. Therefore, on such matters, the Sangh relies on the wisdom of our traditions,” he said.On the RSS’ engagement with political issues despite being a cultural organisation, Bhagwat said the Sangh has consciously kept itself away from day-to-day politics but always engages with politics that affect “our national policies, national interest and Hindu interest”.“The only difference is, earlier our Swayamsevaks were not in positions of political power. This is the only addition in the present situation. But people forget that it is the Swayamsevaks who have reached certain political positions through a political party. Sangh continues to organise the society for the organisation’s sake. However, whatever Swayamsevaks do in politics, Sangh is held accountable for the same. Even if we are not implicated directly by others, there is certainly some accountability as ultimately it is in the Sangh where Swayamsevaks are trained. Therefore, we are forced to think – what should be our relationship, which things we should pursue (in the national interest) with due diligence,” he said.Bhagwat also said while the Sangh would continue to maintain distance from traditional politics, it would convey the concerns of the people to the powers that be, if they are Swayamsevaks.“Even when Swayamsevaks were not there in power positions, there were people who used to pay heed to the advice of others. Pranab da (Pranab Mukehrjee) was finance minister in the Congress government. He was also looking after Nepal affairs. We used to take our concerns to him. And he would listen to us too. That is all we do. Otherwise, we have no business in other spheres of active politics,” he said.On the state of the Indian economy, Bhagwat said, “Bharat’s economic logic suggests that if we have decentralised production, we will produce in abundance. It further stipulates that to sell the production, do not promote consumerism. If there is a restrained consumption, the prices will go down. Because commerce is the very basis of life in the western countries, they are votaries of price rise, for which consumerism is necessary, which is again based on individualism.”Bhagwat said being “Atmanirbhar” does not mean winning this global race. “To be Atmanirbhar implies offering a new paradigm of trade and progress that assures material comforts, security, guarantees future life and also ensures a feeling of peace and contentment,” he said.
Before everyone with internet access had a pulpit, “outrage” did not quite mean what it does today. It was used more often as the description of an emotion, an uncountable noun – a feeling that was not really measurable. Not so in the age of social media. Now, it is a verb, a performance that news stories can often trigger. And it can be counted in likes, shares, impressions and views. In the last few days, two outrageous incidents justifiably pushed Indians to display their righteous rage. But what we choose to be angry about can often mask the things we would rather not confront — and it is in those hidden corners of our collective (lack of) conscience that we might find the answers to the culture of entitlement and brutality that is so often on display in our public life and spaces.The first of the two incidents was the brutal death of Anjali Singh on the intervening night of New Year’s Eve and January 1 in a drunk driving incident. The manner in which her body was dragged for over 10 kilometres, and the implied apathy and negligence of society and state, are perhaps why it has struck such a chord. It is also a haunting reminder of just how unsafe our streets and public spaces are for women, and the entire architecture of our social life is one in which precarity seems to be built in. While writing about the incident, many women have recalled the 2012 Delhi gangrape and murder and illustrated how the promises of policing and less violent, dangerous streets stand belied a decade later.The second incident is from November but came to light only earlier this month. An inebriated man on a flight from New Delhi to New York urinated on a woman passenger, and little was done to punish him till now. (Since his behaviour became public, he has lost his job and faces criminal charges. Air India has apologised for the incident, which has become an international news story). In this case, the entitlement of the Indian male, the constant victimisation of women even in spaces where they expect basic decency, the lack of travel etiquette and the general inability to drink responsibly (especially when the liquor is free) have all been laid at the door of one drunk, boorish man.Both incidents are clearly, and graphically, repulsive. But are they the only kind of graphic violence that Indians are exposed to? Sample the following list: Young Muslim men are publicly flogged by the police at a garba event; Dalit men are beaten in the name of cow protection for plying their trade; a young man on a train is knifed to death for refusing to give up the seat he paid for; an elderly man is forced, while being beaten and threatened, to chant a political-religious slogan; adults in love are accused of “jihad”; in one state, people are killed by the police and the “encounters” are celebrated by the chief minister; in another, the police are caught on camera seemingly shooting a prison escapee while he is already subdued; murderers and rapists are released while an old man is denied a sipping cup (he dies in prison); a man is killed for the suspected possession of beef — the police test the meat to ensure it’s beef. This list is not exhaustive. It barely scratches the surface.The purpose of this contrast is neither to engage in crude whataboutery nor is it to target those who are moved by Anjali Singh’s or Jyoti Singh’s death. It is, rather, to point out that the cries against injustice are about more than just morality. What we feel “outraged” about is mediated by several factors.The first is who we identify with – the victim or the perpetrator. At a time when the politics of identity is rampant, almost totalitarian in its reach, who the victim is matters. When the person attacked is a member of the minority community, when the chant they are forced to utter is “Jai Shri Ram”, empathy is now hard to come by for many. This is the essence and success of a now over-used term – “othering”.The second is a fear of consequences, or the lack thereof. Only a select few — often with ulterior motives — will try to blame Anjali Singh for her death. For most, standing with her and grieving her passing — especially through a social media post — is unlikely to invite retribution. It is also, unambiguously, the right thing to do. This may not be the case when the same is done for, say, someone killed in an “encounter” or jailed for being an “urban Naxal”. After all, cases are now filed because of cartoons and social media posts.Third, these cases are not “polarising”. They will not lead to fights on family WhatsApp groups or a pointless, exhausting and eventually, depressing argument at the school or college reunion. Few will say, “but these people did…” of the victims. And given how intimate politics has become, and how it has wormed its way into so many aspects of our lives, it is understandable why so many of us want to avoid those battles now.Finally, the contemporary form of “outrage” is indeed driven by social media and 24/7 news in search of TRPs and views. But equally, it provides us with something that human beings have always needed — a sense of collective action.For all the talk about “135 crore Indians”, we are — too many of us and too often — divided on too many things, even within the bubbles of class and caste. Since so much injustice is now commonplace, and so much of it acceptable in the name of politics, imagined wounds of history and religion, the few times when we can come together become all the more precious. That we can do so in grief for a fellow citizen we did not know, or a stranger on a plane and to make the case for a world that is safer and less entitled perhaps mitigates all the injustices we turn a blind eye to.Perhaps not.aakash.joshi@expressindia.com
