Hindutva, the Indian Left and the Liberal Poiint of View

["Dr.SubrotoRoy" <sroy@vgsom.iitkgp.ernet.in>]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Ashok Chowgule of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad has been kind enough to
forward to me the enclosed article by Marzia Casolari on "Hindutva's Fascist
Heritage".     Casolari clearly intends to establish that the originators of
the Hindutva movement had been much influenced by what they saw of Fascism
and Nazism in Europe at the time, and I think she (I am presuming Marzia to
be a female name) has succeeded.    This is the other side of the coin of
course to the Indian Left being such great admirers of Marx, Lenin, Stalin,
Mao and friends.    The liberal point of view typically got crushed out of
existence between the Right and Left in this way.    (Again for our American
friends, I mean liberal in the classical European sense of individualism,
not the current American sense of leftist.)

Yet it is the liberal individualist who may be able not only to understand
and appreciate both the Right and the Left points of view, but also require
of his system that they be allowed to freely express themselves.    A lot of
people in Europe, America, India and elsewhere thought that Mussolini and
Hitler were doing a lot of good for their countries.  Much of that may have
been caused by believing the propaganda of those regimes; some of it may
have been based on fact.  The Italians and Germans and others are to this
day trying to figure out their own histories on these matters.    Exactly
analogously, a lot of people around the world thought Lenin, Stalin, Mao etc
did a lot of good for their countries.  Again, much of that belief may have
been caused by believing communist propaganda machines, some if it may have
been based on fact.    The Russians and the Chinese (when they can) are
right now trying to figure out their histories on these matters --
fidelicet, Mr. Vladimir Putin.
There are even circumstances in which the liberal has to agree that a
fascist or nazi or communist dictatorship  provides a better method of
economic organisation than the liberal free market, namely, conditions of
total war.  (Viz.  the difference between Sparta and Athens.)

The critical difference is that the liberal individualist in power requires
himself or herself to allow the Right and Left points of view to both
flourish as being expressions of partial truths.   But if the Right or Left
ever come to acquire the full power their ideologies demand, then each -- as
a presumed repository of the total, absolute truth -- must necessarily
suppress the other and of course extinguish the liberal in between.    As
countries learn bitterly from their own experiences, they have invariably
moved from Right or Left to the liberal point of view.

In India today, it seems to me that both the Hindutva Right and the
so-called Indian Left  (including its grinning hypocritical elite versions
we have so often to suffer from Delhi's TV these days) could do with very
strong doses of waking up to the modern world, and realising that liberal
individualism is really the most progressive of political philosophies for
the 21st Century.    Let us remember that Mussolini, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin,
Mao et al are all, thankfully, now dead, and need no resurrection in modern
India.

(Who does need resurrenction perhaps?   In my humble opinion, Maulana Abul
Kalam Azad -- who saw no contradiction between being an Indian and being a
Mussalman.   Perhaps also the Mohammad Ali Jinnah who once defended Bal
Gangadhar Tilak against a British prosecutor.)

In Mumbai recently, I had the honour of being hosted to lunch by Shri M. R.
Pai and Shri S. Divarkar of the Forum of Free Enterprise, as well as Shri S.
V. Raju of Freedom First.  These three gentlemen crucially helped to keep
alive the liberal tradition in India of B. R. Shenoy, A. D. Shroff, Minoo
Masani and others -- all of this was before the fall of the Berlin Wall,
when it was exceedingly difficult for any liberal point of view to survive
in India.    I mentioned to them my point of view that the liberal in India
would want to stand up for the individual against the arbitrary action of
any collective group, whether it is the Government or society.    E.g., a
Dalit and a non-Dalit fall in love and want to get married; their own
parents and societies condemn them to death and kill them as a result.
The liberal individual would be horrified because it wwould be a violation
of their rights as individuals.    Similar cases can be found in Islam or
other communities too, let aside Leftist power structures like the
trade-unions or academia.    On the political side, the task of the  modern
Indian liberal seems to me to identify and articulate individual rights and
responsibilities in this manner (and by 'the individual" we may of course
mean "individual family"...).  On the economic side, I think the urgent task
is to identify wasteful Government expenditure and bring about maximum
transparency, but I'll leave that for another day.

Enclosed the article sent to me by Mr. Chowgule with his own prefatory
words.

Subroto Roy.




----------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a very cleverly written article.  The author has put enough subtle
qualifications to say that he did not really mean to say that the RSS is
fascist.  Of course, the whole tone of the article is otherwise, and will
give sufficient ammunition to the pseudo-secularists to open up one more
front, and so try and divert the attention from themselves.

-Ashok Chowgule.


==============================

Hindutva's fascist heritage
Author: Marzia Casolari
Publication: Communalism Combat
Date: March 2000

The existence of direct contacts between the representatives of the
(Italian) fascist regime, including Mussolini, and Hindu nationalists
demonstrates that Hindu nationalism had much more than an abstract interest
in the ideology and practice of fascism. The interest of Indian Hindu
nationalists in fascism and Mussolini must not be considered as dictated by
an occasional curiosity, confined to a few individuals; rather, it should be
considered as the culminating result of the attention that Hindu
nationalists, especially in Maharashtra, focussed on Italian dictatorship
and its leader. To them, fascism appeared to be an example of conservative
revolution. This concept was discussed at length by the Marathi press right
from the early phase of the Italian regime.

>From 1924 to 1935 Kesari regularly published editorials and articles about
Italy, fascism and Mussolini. What impressed the Marathi journalists was the
socialist origin of fascism and the fact that the new regime seemed to have
transformed Italy from a backward country to a first class power. Indians
could not know, then, that, behind the demagogic rhetoric of the regime,
there was very little substance.

Moreover, the Indian observers were convinced that fascism had restored
order in a country previously upset by political tensions. In a series of
editorials, Kesari described the passage from liberal government to
dictatorship as a shift from anarchy to an orderly situation, where social
struggles had no more reason to exist.

The Marathi newspaper gave considerable space to the political reforms
carried out by Mussolini, in particular the substitution of the election of
the members of Parliament with their nomination and the replacement of
parliament itself with the Great Council of Fascism. Mussolini's idea was
the opposite of that of democracy and it was expressed by the dictator's
principle, according to which 'one man's government is more useful and more
binding' for the nation than the democratic institutions.

Is all this not reminiscent of the principle of 'obedience to one leader'
('ek chalak anuvartitva') followed by the RSS?

Finally, a long article of August 13, 1929, 'Italy and the Young
Generations', stated that the Italian young generations had succeeded the
old one to lead the country. That had resulted in the 'fast ascent of Italy
in every field'. The article went on to describe at length the organisation
of the Italian society according to fascist models. The principal reasons of
the discipline of the Italian youths were strong religious feelings,
widespread among the population, attachment to the family, and the respect
of traditional values: no divorce, no singles, no right to vote for women,
whose only duty was to sit at home, by the fireplace. The article focussed
then on the fascist youth organisations, the Balilla and the Avanguardisti.

One can easily come to the conclusion that, by the late 1920s, the fascist
regime and Mussolini had considerable popularity in Maharashtra. The aspect
of fascism which appealed most to Hindu nationalists were, of course, both
the militarisations of society and what was seen as real transformation of
society, exemplified by the shift from chaos to order. The anti-democratic
system was considered as a positive alternative to democracy which was seen
as a typically British value.

The first Hindu nationalist who came in contact with the fascist regime and
its dictator was BS Moonje, a politician strictly related to the RSS. In
fact, Moonje had been Hedgewar's mentor, the two men were related by an
intimate friendship. Moonje's declared intention to strengthen the RSS and
to extend it as a nation-wide organisation is well known.

Between February and March 1931, on his return from the Round Table
Conference, Moonje made a tour to Europe, which included a long stop-over in
Italy. There he visited some important military schools and educational
institutions. The highlight of the visit was the meeting with Mussolini. An
interesting account of the trip and the meeting is given in Moonje's diary
and takes 13 pages.

The Indian leader was in Rome during March 15 to 24, 1931. On March 19, in
Rome, he visited, among others, the Military College, the Central Military
School of Physical Education, the Fascist Academy of Physical Education,
and, most important, the Balilla and Avanguardisti organisations. These two
organisations, which he describes in more that two pages of his diary, were
the keystone of the fascist system of indoctrination rather than education -
of the youths. Their structure is strikingly similar to that of the RSS.
They recruited boys from the age of six, up to 18: the youth had to attend
weekly meetings, where they practised physical exercise, received
paramilitary training and performed drills and parades.

According to the literature promoted by the RSS and other Hindu
fundamentalist organisations and parties, the structure of the RSS was the
result of Hedgewar's vision and work. However, Moonje played a crucial role
in moulding the RSS along Italian (fascist) lines. The deep impression left
on Moonje by the vision of the fascist organisations is confirmed by his
diary.

"The Balilla institutions and the conception of the whole organisation have
appealed to me most, though there is still not discipline and organisation
of high order. The whole idea is conceived by Mussolini for the military
regeneration of Italy. Italians, by nature, appear ease-loving and
non-martial, like the Indians generally. They have cultivated, like Indians,
the work of peace and neglected the cultivation of the art of war. Mussolini
saw the essential weakness of his country and conceived the idea of the
Balilla organisation... Nothing better could have been conceived for the
military organisation of Italy...

"The idea of fascism vividly brings out the conception of unity amongst
people... India and particularly Hindu India's need some such institution
for the military regeneration of the Hindus: so that the artificial
distinction so much emphasised by the British of martial and non-martial
classes amongst the Hindus may disappear.

"Our institution of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh of Nagpur under Dr. Hedgewar
is of this kind, though quite independently conceived. I will spend the rest
of my life in developing and extending this Institution of Dr. Hedgewar all
throughout Maharashtra and other provinces".

Definitely more meaningful is the report of the meeting with Mussolini. On
the same day, March 19, 1931 at 3 pm, in Palazzo Venzia, the headquarters of
the fascist government, he met the Italian dictator. The meeting is recorded
in the diary on March 20...

"I shook hands with him saying that I am Dr Moonje. He knew everything about
me and appeared to be closely, following the events of the Indian struggle
for freedom...

"Signor Mussolini asked me if I have visited the University. I said I am
interested in the military training of boys and have been visiting the
Military Schools of England, France and Germany. I have now come to Italy
for the same purpose and I am very grateful to say that the Foreign Office
and the War Office have made good arrangements for my visiting these
schools. I just saw this morning and afternoon the Balilla and the Fascist
Organisations and I was much impressed. Italy needs them for her development
and prosperity. I do not see anything objectionable though I have been
frequently reading in the newspapers not very friendly criticisms about them
and about your Excellency also.

"Signor Mussolini: What is your opinion about them?

"Dr Moonje: Your Excellency, I am much impressed. Every aspiring and growing
Nation needs such organisations."

"Signor Mussolini - who appeared very pleased - said - Thanks but yours is
an uphill task. However I wish you every success in return.

"Saying this he got up and I also got up to take his leave".

The description of the Italian journey includes information regarding
fascism, its history, the fascist 'revolution', etc, and continues for two
more pages.

One can wonder at the association between BS Moonje and the RSS, but if we
think that Moonje had been Hedgewar's mentor, the association will be much
clearer. The intimate friendship between Moonje and Hedgewar and the
former's declared intention to strengthen the RSS and to extend it as a
nation-wide organisation prove a strict connection between Moonje and the
RSS. Moreover, it makes sense to think that the entire circle of militant
Hinduism must have been influenced by Moonje's Italian experience.

Moonje's Plans for Militarising Hindus:

Once Moonje was back in India, he kept the promise made in his diary and
started immediately to work, for the foundation of his military school and
for the militant reorganisation of Hindu society in Maharashtra. He really
did not waste time, for, as soon as he reached Pune, he gave an interview to
The Mahratta. Regarding the military reorganisation of the Hindu community,
he stressed the necessity to 'Indianise' the army and expressed the hope
that conscription would become compulsory and an Indian would be put
in-charge of the defence ministry.

He finally made a clear reference to the Italian and German examples: "In
fact, leaders should imitate the youth movements of Germany and the Balilla
and Fascist organisations of Italy. I think they are eminently suited for
introduction in India, adapting them to suit the special conditions. I have
been very much impressed by these movements and I have seen their activities
with my own eyes in all details".

Soon fascism became a subject of public debate and Hedgewar himself was
among the promoters of a campaign in favour of the militarism of society,
according to fascist patterns. On January 31, 1934, Hedgewar presided over a
conference about fascism and Mussolini, organised by Kavde Shastri. Moonje
made the concluding speech.

A few months later, on March 31,1934 Moonje, Hedgewar and Laloo Gokhale had
a meeting, the subject of which was again the military organisation of the
Hindus, along Italian and German lines:

"Laloo - Well you are the president of the Hindu Sabha and you are preaching
Sanghathan of Hindus. It is ever possible for Hindus to be organised?

"I said - You have asked me a question of which exactly I was thinking of
late. I have thought out a scheme based on Hindu Dharm Shashtra which
provides for standardisation of Hinduism throughout India... But the point
is that this ideal cannot be brought to effect unless we have our own swaraj
with a Hindu as a dictator like Shivaji of old or Mussolini or Hitler of the
present day in Italy or Germany... But this does not mean that we have to
sit with folded hands until (sic) some such dictator arises in India. We
should formulate a scientific scheme and carry on propaganda for it.

The intimate connection between Moonje and the RSS and the fascist character
of the latter is confirmed by British sources. An intelligence report
published in 1933 and entitled, 'Note on the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh',
ascribed to Moonje the responsibility of the reorganisation of the Sangh in
the Marathi speaking districts and in the Central Provinces in 1927. The
report, describing the activity and the character of the RSS, warned that,
"It is perhaps no exaggeration to assert that the Sangh hopes to be in
future India what the 'Fascists' are to Italy and the 'Nazis' to Germany".

Summing up, it is clear that the Hindu nationalists were very much attracted
by the figure of a strong leader. Moreover, they were keen to give their
organisation a strongly centralised structure.

Moonje's trip to Italy, contrary to what happened in the case of Subhash
Chandra Bose and other nationalists, did not give place to any further
co-operation between Hindu nationalism and the fascist regime. However,
these contacts were important at the ideological and organisational levels.
In fact, Moonje kept his promise to improve military education in India and,
as soon as he came back from his European trip, he started to contact all
those who could support his idea of militarising Hindu society.

In 1934, Moonje started to work for the foundation of his own institution,
the Bhonsla Military School. For this purpose, in the same year he began to
work at the foundation of the Central Hindu Military Education Society,
whose aim was to educate them in 'Sanatan Dharma', and to train them in the
science and art of personal and national defence'. Moonje's programme was
therefore entirely devoted to Hindu society, and not to Indian society as a
whole.

It is possible that the other function of the society was that of
facilitating the diffusion of military education and supporting the
foundation of new schools. During the preliminary work for the foundation of
both school and society, Moonje publicly admitted that his idea of
militarily reorganising Hindu society was inspired by the "military training
schools of England, France, Germany and Italy".

Moonje's 'Preface to the Scheme of the Central Hindu Military Society and
its Military School' says at the outset: "This training is meant for
qualifying and fitting our boys for the game of killing masses of men with
the ambition of winning victory with the best possible causalities (sic) of
dead and wounded while causing the utmost possible to the adversary".

Moonje does not give any clear cut indication regarding this 'adversary',
whether is was the external enemy, the British, or the 'historical' internal
enemy, the Muslims. The document continues with a long dissertation on the
relation between violence and non-violence. In it are drawn many examples
from Indian history and Hindu holy books, all in favour of organised
violence, in the form of Militarism. On the contrary, non-violence is
considered a form of renunciation and cowardice.

Moonje's views corresponded almost perfectly with Mussolini's opinions:
"...The same thought is repeated though in a more forceful and direct
language by Signor Mussolini, the maker of modern Italy, when he says: "Our
desire for peace and collaboration with Europe is based on millions of steel
bayonets'." And again from Mussolini's Doctrine of Fascism: "I absolutely
disbelieve in perpetual peace which is detrimental and negative to the
fundamental virtues of man, which only by struggle reveal themselves in the
light of the sun".

"War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the
stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have the courage to meet it.

"Fascism believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual
peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of pacifism, which is born of
renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of
sacrifice".

As far as Germany was concerned, Moonje quoted a booklet entitled
Wehrwisssenschaft (Military Science), written by Ewald Banse, a professor at
the Brunswick Technical High School: "The starting point of the book is that
war is inevitable and certain and that it is imperative to know as much
about it and to be as efficient as possible ... the mind of the nation, from
childhood on, must be impregnated and familiarised with the idea of war",
because, the Professor says: 'The dying warrior dies more easily when he
knows that his blood is ebbing for his national god'."

The spirit of the last sentence is surprisingly coincident with the essence
of the Hindu nationalism.

When Moonje had to indicate practical ways of militarising Hindu society, he
returned again to the example of Italy and, its military and paramilitary
organisations, and reported what he had seen. He described in detail the
structure of the 'She Wolf's Children', the Balilla and the Avanguardisti.
He asserted that these organisations could provide paramilitary training to
the male population from the age of 8 upto l8, when the youth became young
fascists. Italy was therefore in a position of having "command of 6,000,000
trained and disciplined men ready to face any emergency".

The result was that, "The Balillas are taught to build up moral character
and take the first steps towards becoming soldiers". As a consequence,
"There will thus be no longer any distinction between the citizen and the
soldier, between the civilian and the man in uniform".

Of course, nowadays we know that, inspite of this remarkable number of
militarily trained citizens, Italy lost the war. Moonje did not know that
the level of the training was low, and the fascist faith of the people
skin-deep.

Fascist ideas were widespread among Hindu nationalists, at least in
Maharashtra. The above mentioned script had been printed in the form of a
pamphlet and distributed not only among the people Moonje tried to involve
in his project, but most probably, to an even wider public, which
unfortunately, is at present difficult to measure.

Eve of Second World War:

After Moonje's trip to Italy there was no further direct contact between
exponents of the main Hindu organisations and the Italian government.
However, by the end of the 1930s Italian representatives in India
established some connections with the extremist fringes of Hindu
nationalism. The Italian consulate in Bombay was very active in seeking
contacts with the local political milieu. The Italian diplomatic mission in
Bombay was part of a network linking consulates in Bombay and Calcutta with
the radical movements of Maharashtra and Bengal.

The influence of fascist ideology and practice must have gone far beyond the
limits of the main organisations of Hindu militant nationalism and must have
tended to the wide and intricate net of secondary militant groups and
centres of physical education or paramilitary training. This is shown by the
example of the Swastik League, founded on March 10, 1929 by M R Jayakar -
who became president - and by other local personalities. In organising the
Swastik League, Jayakar, who had a prominent position within the Hindu
Mahasabha, drew some inspiration from the fascist paramilitary
organisations.

Savarkar and Nazism:

At this point we have to dwell on the crucial problem of Savarkar's position
vis-à-vis the European radical right. With Savarkar's coming on the
political scene, from the late 1930s to the Second World War, there was an
intensification of cries in favour or in defence of Italian and German
policy, even if the preference for Germany increased progressively.

Savarkar was declared president of the Hindu Mahasabha as soon as he was
released in 1937, and he held that office until 1942. His presidentship
covered the most sensitive period of both Indian and international history
in this century. According to the commonly accepted opinion supported by the
organisations of militant Hinduism - the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha have
never been particularly close, and during Savarkar's presidentship, they
severed their links. Reality, however, seems to be different. In fact, the
available documentation shows not only that such a split never happened, but
that the two organisations always had close connections.

We should not forget that Hedgewar had been secretary to the Hindu Mahasabha
from 1926 to 1931. The RSS seems to have provided support to the Hindu
Mahasabha, as shown by the fact that groups of RSS militants used to gather
at the public meetings organised to celebrate Savarkar's release.

Two of the main topics of the speeches Savarkar gave at the gatherings
organised in his honour and at any other public function of his party were
the international situation and Hindu-Muslim relations.

Regarding the first aspect, Savarkar had a rather cynical view of the
relations India should entertain at the international level. He returned to
freedom and entered into politics at the time of the formation of the
Rome-Berlin Axis and Japan's adhesion to the pact. Such an outcome was
favourably assessed by Hindu radical nationalism, including the Hindu
Mahasabha.

"India's foreign policy' was the subject of a speech Savarkar gave to about
20,000 people in Pune on August 1, 1938. The following are the most
meaningful parts of the speech, according to a press note issued by the
Bombay office of the Hindu Mahasabha.

"He observed India's foreign policy must not depend on "isms". Germany has
every right to resort to Nazism and Italy to Fascism and events have
justified that those isms and forms of governments were imperative and
beneficial to them under the conditions that obtained there. Bolshevism
might have suited Russia and Democracy as it is obtained in Briton (sic) to
the British people'.

Political systems correspond then to the nature of the respective
population. This theory was clearly inspired by a deterministic conception
of race, similar to the conception of race then dominant in Europe.

Starting a controversy with Nehru, Savarkar openly defended the
authoritarian powers of the day, particularly Italy and, even more so,.
Germany: "^o are we to dictate to Germany, Japan or Russia or Italy to
choose a particular form of policy of government simply because we woo it
out of academical attraction? Surely Hitler knows better than Pandit Nehru
does what suits Germany best. The very fact that Germany or Italy has so
wonderfully recovered and grown so powerful as never before at the touch of
Nazi or Fascist magical wand is enough to prove that those Political "isms'
were the most congenial tonics their health demanded".

Savarkar asserted in a speech in the presence of some 4,000 people at Pune
on October 11, 1938, (that) if a plebiscite had taken place in India,
Muslims would have chosen to unite with Muslims and Hindus with Hindus. This
was a consequence of the principle according to which it was not enough
living together for a few countries to form a nation, as "the common desire
to form a nation was essential for the formation of a nation'.

During Savarkar's presidentship the anti-Muslim rhetoric became more and
more radical, and distinctly unpleasant. It was a rhetoric that made
continuous reference to the way Germany was managing the Jewish question.
Indeed, in speech after speech, Savarkar supported Hitler's anti-Jewish
Policy, and on October 14, 1938, he suggested the following solution for the
Muslim problem in India: "A Nation is formed by a majority living therein.
What did the Jews do in Germany? They being in minority were driven out from
Germany'.

Then, towards the end of the year in Thane, in front of RSS militants and
local sympathisers, right at the time when Congress expressed its resolution
against Germany, Savarkar stated that, "in Germany the movement of the
Germans is the national movement but that of the Jews is a communal one".
And again the next year, on July 29, in Pune, he said: 'Nationality did not
depend so much on a common geographical area as on unity of thought,
religion, language and culture. For this reason the Germans and the Jews
could no be regarded as a nation".

Without this unity, not even Muslims and Hindus could be regarded as
belonging to the same nation. Indian Muslims should rather resign themselves
to be considered as a minority, the recognition of whose rights should
depend on the magnanimity of the majority.

Finally, at the end of 1939, on the occasion of the 2i,t session of the Hind
Mahasabha, Savarkar made one of the most explicit comparisons between the
Muslim question in India and the Jewish problem in Germany: '...the Indian
Muslims are on the whole more inclined to identify themselves and their
interests with Muslims outside India than Hindus who live next door, like
Jews in Germany'.

One can find a certain continuity between the ideas of nations and
nationhood expressed in Savarkar's Hindutva and the content of these
declarations. Indeed in his book, Savarkar, referring to the Muslims,
asserted that 'their holyland is far off in Arabia or Palestine. Their
mythology and godmen, ideas and heroes are not children of this soil.
Consequently their names and their outlook smack of foreign origin
(Hindutva: Who is Hindu?).

A feeling of admiration for the Jewish policy of Germany seems to have been
shared by the entire circle of Hindu nationalism at the end of the 1930s. In
We, or Our Nationhood Defined, Golwalkar, who would become general secretary
of the RSS a year later declared that:

"German national pride has now become the topic of the day. To keep up the
purity of the nation and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her
purging the country of the Semitic races - the Jews. National pride at its
highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh
impossible it is for races and cultures, having differences going to the mot
(?), to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in
Hindustan to learn and profit by".

This had its root in the idea that being a Hindu was a matter of race and
blood, not only a matter of culture. In turn that was an idea which was
strikingly similar to the racial myths celebrated in Germany, wore than in
Italy.

Golwarkar's position regarding Muslims was even more extreme than
Savarkar's: "in one word, they (Muslims) must cease to be foreigners or may
stay in the country wholly subordinated to the Hindu nation claiming
nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment, not
even citizen's rights".

Waiting for the Right Enemy

The literature promoted by militant Hinduism is trying nowadays to compare
the attitude adopted by the Hindu Mahasabha towards the totalitarian regimes
with Subhash Chandra Bose's position towards the axis powers. According to
this literature, the evidence in favour of such interpretation is a meeting
which took place between Bose and Savarkar in Bombay in June 1940.

My impression of the episode is that it is a sort of historiagraphic
invention, directed to legitimise the otherwise ambiguous position of the
Hindu Mahasabha during the war. Asserting that Netaji's project had
Savarkar's sanction means not only that Savarkar had a sort of patronage on
Bose's activities in Europe, but more important, that Savarkar played an
important role in the freedom fight.

Certainly the meeting did take place, and very possibly the two leaders
discussed Bose's intention to go to Europe and seek support of the axis
powers. However, all this is far from meaning that Savarkar inspired Bose,
who, right from 1933, had his own connections with the dictators'
governments. The president of the Hindu Mahasabha put forward his claim on
the content of his meeting with Netaji four years after Gandhi's
assassination, when the image of the Hindu Mahasabha and its affiliation
were badly damaged by the suspicion of their involvement in the murder.
Accordingly it makes sense to think that the organisations of militant
Hinduism must have perceived the necessity to rehabilitate their political
past and re-invent a more clear-cut anti-British stand. What stronger
argument, therefore, could be available than the assertion that the Hindu
Mahasabha was secretly ready to support Bose's plan?

The involvement in Gandhi's assassination was not the only reason of crisis;
the image of Hindu nationalism was indeed already damaged by the ambiguous
attitude adopted in the war period. The policy actually followed by Hindu
nationalism during the war, namely, responsive co-operation, was far from
being unambiguous on both transfer of powers and relations with the British.

The committee wished for the realisation of the militarisation of Indian
society and the Indianisation of the army. It requested a reform of the Arms
Act, along the lines prevailing in the UK. It demanded also that territorial
forces and paramilitary groups be strengthened, that new military
organisations be created in those provinces where they did not exist before,
and finally that more Indian students be accepted in the military academies.
The Hindu Mahasabha requested the government to increase the local
production of modern armaments so that India could equip its army, without
depending on imports from other nations.

Soon after this resolution, the Hindu Mahasabha started to work for the
creation of a national militia. Naturally enough, Moonje became the person
in charge. Inviting party members to attend a preliminary meeting for the
foundation of the militia, in Pune on October 8, Moonje described the future
organisation in the following terms:

"I have the pleasure in bringing to your notice a resolution of the Hindu
Mahasabha for the organisation of the Hindu Militia in the country for the
purpose of taking part in the defence of India both from external and
internal aggression whenever an occasion of emergency may arise during the
course of the Anglo-German War.

"...I believe that it will be quite in the fitness of things, in view of the
historic All-India Military leadership of the Maharashtra, that a beginning
should be made in the Maharashtra; so that the lead may be taken up by the
whole of India afterwards".

Who could be the internal aggressors if not the Muslims?

The answer seems to be contained in a letter from Moonje to Khaparde of
October 18: "... the Moslems are making themselves a nuisance. The Congress
government will not stand up but will yield to them. We cannot expect any
consideration at the hands of the Congress government. We shall have to
fight both the government and the Moslems just as the Khaskars are doing in
UP. The Hindu Mahasabha will give its support to such fights as the Muslim
League is supporting the Khaskars: you must prepare the volunteers in your
towns. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh may be useful and handy.

The theme of the 'internal enemy' is a further element of affinity between
the ideology of fascism and of Hind nationalism, expressed by a similar
rhetoric. It seems nevertheless that the Sanghatanists were inclined to
fight the Muslims and the Congress, rather than the British.

According to Moonje's plans, the RSS should be involved in the creation of
the national militia. Indeed, in a letter of October 18 to General Nanasahib
Shinde of Baroda, Moonje affirmed: 'I am glad to note that you have approved
of my idea of a Hindu National Militia for Maharashtra as is being organised
by the Hindu Mahasabha.

"I have been myself thinking of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and I am
corresponding with their leader. They may have their peculiar (sic)
difficulties and the point is that the militia should be organised under
these circumstances whether the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh can undertake
the task or not.

During this preliminary phase, Moonje consulted Hedgewar, with whom he
exchanged several letters and whom Moonje hoped to meet, in order to discuss
the participation of the RSS in the militia.

On October 27 a militant from Lahore informed Moonje that: "We have at
present in Punjab several Dals and Sanghs, the total number of members of
which is approximately about 50,000, but they are not working under a single
organisation. There are Rashtriya Sevak Sangh, Atma Sangh, Mahabir Dal, Seva
Sangh and Akali Dal working under different leaders. They have a sort of
military organisation. The Akali Dal is armed with swords, but the others
have other weapons. The Rashtriya Sevak Sangh has only lathis. The first
thing to do is to bring all these sanghs on a uniform, basis working under a
single leadership though not of one man but of a council.

In spite of such mobilisation, the Hindu militia had not been formed. The
government did not withdraw the existing restrictions imposed on military
and paramilitary organisations and schools.

It is difficult to establish if the organisations of militant Hinduism were
arming themselves against possible foreign invaders, the internal enemy, or
the British. Most probably they were carefully hedging their bet, ready to
take advantage of any future development. However, it is a fact that at a
meeting with Linlithgow in Bombay on October 8, 1939, Savarkar adopted a
decidedly conciliatory position vis-à-vis the British.

When, in the 1940s, the totalitarian regimes had already revealed their true
colours, the attitude of the organisations of militant Hinduism towards
fascism and Nazism was still benevolent. In spite of the already, even if
only partially, known atrocities committed by Hitler and Mussolini, the main
organisations of Hindu nationalism still praised the dictators and their
regimes. This position could be justified, had it been part of a coherent
and strong anti-British policy. However, as I have tried to demonstrate, the
forces of Hindu nationalism seem to have concentrated their efforts more
against the so-called internal enemies - Muslims and Congress rather than
the foreign invaders. While Bose's alliance with the axis powers had mainly
an anti-British function, the Hindu Mahasabha used its support to the
dictators as an instrument in blackmail the British.

Conclusions:

The preceding discussion has shown that: (a) the main historical
organisations and leaders of Hindu nationalism had a distinctive and
sustained interest in fascism and nazism; (b) fascist ideological influences
on Hindu nationalism were present and relevant; and (c) to a certain extent,
these influences were channeled through direct contacts between Hindu
nationalists and members of the Italian fascist state. No doubt, beginning
with the early 1920s and up to the second world war, Hindu nationalists
looked at the political reality of fascist Italy, and subsequently of nazi
Germany, as a source of inspiration.

One of the results of the contacts between the fascism and Hindu nationalism
was the attempt to militarise Hindu society and to create a militant
mentality among the Hindus. If it is true that the Hindu society elaborated
its own patterns of militarisation - refer to the shakhas as a typically
Indian phenomenon - it is equally true that a most relevant result of
fascist influence was the transmission of a more functional organisation and
a stronger political character to the already existing organisation of
political Hinduism.

At the ideological level, the most meaningful effect of the fascist
influence is represented by the way in which Hindu nationalism developed its
own concept of diversity, transforming 'diverse' people into enemies. Of
course, the concept of internal enemy is already implicitly contained in
Savarkar's Hindutva. Nevertheless, the continuous reference to German racial
policy and the comparison of the Jewish problem in Germany with the Muslim
question in India reveals the evolution of the concept of 'internal enemy'
along explicitly fascist lines.

In my opinion, if one is to understand the evolution of Hindu radicalism in
the post-independence period, one has to take into account both the domestic
roots of this phenomenon and the external influence on its development.

In the 1920s and 1930s fascism was an international phenomenon. As such it
was bound to influence the ideology and practice of similar movements all
over the world. Since many of Bal Thackeray's most outrageously anti-Muslim
and racist statements are literal quotations of Savarkar's speeches and
theories, it is legitimate to conclude that such influence is still alive in
today's militant Hinduism.

(The above article has been excerpted from a much larger piece, with
detailed references under the title, 'Hindutva's Foregin Tie-up in the in
the 1930s - Archival Evidence', published in the January 22, 2000 issue of
the Economic and Political Weekly. Marzia Casolari is an Italian
researcher).





--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            ../debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------