---

As people like Ram Madhav speak half-truths, let’s recall the fundamental difference between Gandhi’s Hinduism and the RSS’s Hindutva.

A half-truth is as bad as a lie, perhaps worse, because it helps the propagandist weave a false narrative that looks like the truth. We have over the past few years seen how half-truths are used as raw material to wrap lies in the tempting colours of legitimacy.

Ram Madhav, a more refined Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) ideologue than the typical apologists, said this Independence Day that Mahatma Gandhi’s concept of ‘Ram Rajya’ was abandoned in favour of Jawaharlal Nehru’s European vision of a modern nation-state.

Unlike other propagandists, Madhav sugar-coated the message, saying,

“Gandhi wanted independent India to be a Ram Rajya, which was the true democracy for him. Writing in Young Indian in 1929, he explained, ‘By Ram Rajya I do not mean Hindu Raj. I mean Ram Raj, the kingdom of God … I acknowledge no other God than the one God of Truth and righteousness. Whether Ram of my imagination ever lived on this earth, the ancient ideal of the Ramayana is undoubtedly one of true democracy in which the meanest citizen could be sure of swift justice without an elaborate and costly procedure.”

Madhav argued that Nehru gave up these ideals and what we got in place of a “resurgent nation” is Nehru’s ambition of a “nation in the making”. He concluded his article by saying, “A decade of Modi has seen efforts at building Atmanirbhar Bharat … a self-confident, self-respecting and self-made Bharat, true self-rule.”

Therein lies the rub; and the bane of half-truth. “A regime where the meanest citizen could be sure of swift justice…” Where did the RSS see this sacred principle of democracy under the Modi-Shah duopoly? “Truth and righteousness…” Ram Madhav, are you serious?

Gandhi said truth is the sovereign principle. Please don’t take Gandhi’s name while extolling lesser mortals. Gandhi could take bullets on his chest but could not digest lies.

Let’s not drift into the discourse about the kind of politics that was responsible for the birth of his assassin. Let’s not debate today what Gandhi would have done in the face of vicious divisive politics. But let’s remind ourselves of the fundamental difference between Gandhi’s Hinduism and the RSS’s Hindutva.

Gandhi said, “Nothing in the religious scriptures which is manifestly contrary to universal truths and morals can stand.” When asked about the flaws and infirmities in religious doctrines, he unambiguously declared, “All that is printed in the name of scriptures need not be taken as the word of God or the inspired word.”

What’s the message? That a bigoted mind is not allowed to discuss Gandhi!

Muddled narratives

Can the biggest democratic nation be afraid of the weak and vulnerable individuals who seek refuge in other countries for survival? Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced from the ramparts of the Red Fort on Independence Day that India was facing a sinister conspiracy to change the country’s demography. He described it as “a serious concern and a challenge” and said, “Eknayesankatkebeejboye ja rahehain (‘Seeds of a new crisis are being sown’).”

How can a nation aspiring to be ‘Vishwaguru’ express fears of infiltrators on such an important occasion as its Independence Day? Are we so fragile that the prime minister, not a sub-inspector, is so worried about the ghuspaithiya?

What’s new about infiltrators? This has been the Sangh parivar’s plank for decades. What’s new is that the problem has apparently become so big in this regime that the prime minister is alerting the nation to the lurking peril of demographic change.

If the menace has indeed acquired dreadful proportions, the first logical step is to sack defence minister Rajnath Singh and home minister Amit Shah. These two ministers have obviously failed.

What a slide! Shah used to tell people and parliament that “Aliya, Maliya and Jamaliya” crossed India’s border at will and beheaded our citizens during the Manmohan Singh regime. Now, he boasted, no such ghuspaithiya dared to enter Indian territory.

The reality is entirely different. The ghuspaithiya are giving nightmares to the Vishwaguru. The prime minister himself said infiltrators are posing a huge threat to our women and snatching jobs from our youth. What sissies! China must be chuckling to itself.

Tharoor, a mirage

A simplistic analysis of an enigma like Shashi Tharoor will always lead political observers to the wrong conclusions. While many in the Congress view his political stance with deep suspicion, some in the BJP look at it with hope. The intellectually challenged TV anchors have already started seeing him as a Modi bhakt.

But Tharoor is too much of a Nehruvian to digest the Sangh parivar worldview. It is difficult to accept that he is itching to join the Modi government. That’s simplistic.

What Tharoor might be doing is to carve out an image of himself as a statesman who is not a blind follower of any leader and is not bound by lesser principles such as party discipline. His political and intellectual acrobatics are designed to create a higher pedestal for himself, not for an ideological crossover. Tharoor is neither a JyotiradityaScindia, a power-hungry elite, nor an M.J. Akbar, an opportunist who sullied his ideology.

But the flamboyant MP from Kerala likes to play his cards with absolute freedom, in the process deepening the confusion about his motives. On August 16, the day of Janamashtami, he posted videos explaining the attributes of a true leader.

When he says a true leader should be able to assess the real potential of his team members and empower them, a simplistic analysis will suggest he is taking a jibe at Rahul Gandhi. But he also says in the same message that a true leader must possess moral strength, personal integrity and the capacity to deliver justice. Praise for Modi? Certainly not. He is obviously trying to push for greater space within the Congress, not aspiring to nestle into Modi’s lap.

A day before, on August 15, he delivered a message for Independence Day, possibly presuming that the nation was eagerly waiting for his guidance. Tharoor’s problem is his overweening ambition, not instincts of betrayal. He explained what freedom means today; stressing on the vitality of the liberty to think, speak, dissent and imagine. He sought dignity for every citizen, irrespective of caste, religion and region. He also talked of equality, pluralism and fraternity. These are binding commitments, he insisted. That will certainly leave the Sangh parivar’s ears burning.

Rubbing the message in, Tharoor contended that independence is more than national pride and India should be a leader not only in ambition, but in conscience as well. The context was clear: Modi’s apathy on genocide in Gaza. Patriotism is not conformity, he thundered, sending out a clear message that he can’t transform into a mute follower of any autocratic boss.

Long ago, in one of his books, India, Tharoor had said, “The singular thing about India is that you can only speak of it in the plural.” Rejecting the anti-minority philosophy of the Sangh parivar, he wrote, “An India that denies itself to some Indians could end up being denied to all Indians.”

Modi-Shah don’t live in an ivory tower. They would know Tharoor inside out. But what’s the problem in fishing in troubled waters? A Congress leader whose fierce ambitions make the top leadership uncomfortable should have enough fuel to stay afloat. Isn’t an enemy’s enemy a friend?

Sanjay K. Jha is a political commentator.

This article was originally published on The Wire.
Views in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect CGS policy.