Understanding RSS Neo-Fascism and Building up of the Anti-Fascist Movement
P J James
The Background
The BJP that wields state power in India is the political tool of RSS, the longest-running and biggest fascist organization in the world. The RSS with Manusmriti as its ideological basis was founded in 1925 with Hedgewar as the first Sarsanghchalka almost at the same time when fascism appeared in Europe. In the case of India, the decade of the 1920s when RSS originated was a turbulent one that challenged not only the colonial rule but also the feudal order and Brahminical caste system. The Dalits, the untouchables inspired by Phule and then led by Dr Ambedkar had started entering into the political mainstream from inaccessible social peripheries. Including this, it was the challenges to the upper caste elite domination that prompted the Brahmin leadership to reassert its hegemony through the formation of RSS. Before the formation of RSS, Savarkar had laid down Hindutva, or ‘political Hinduism’ (which is different from Hinduism) as its ideological background. In his manuscript, ‘Hindutva: Who is a Hindu?’, Savarkar had argued that Hindus were a nation unto themselves, excluding Muslims, Christians and all other minorities in India. After Hedgewar’s death in 1940, Golwalkar who became the second Sarsanghchalka of RSS expanded it as a militant Hindutva organisation bent on subjugating the untouchables and stigmatizing and eliminating religious minorities, especially Muslims.
As many historians and scholars have pointed out, from the very beginning RSS had its close association with European fascism (classical fascism) that originated during the biggest imperialist political-economic crisis during the interwar period in Europe, especially in Italy and Germany, and RSS leaders of that time had established direct contacts with fascist leaders like Mussolini and Hitler. For instance, Moonje, the mentor and political guru of Hedgewar, had visited the Italian fascist dictator Mussolini in 1931 and inspired by the Fascist Academy of Physical Education that trained paramilitary lumpen goons like Black Shirts, started the Bhonsala Military School in Nasik in 1937 for imparting paramilitary training to RSS cadres and Hindutva goons under the management of Central Hindu Military Education Society. Bhonsala School’s links with terrorist actions by Hindutva extremist groups including the 2008 Malegaon blasts are much discussed. Golwalkar who had a high adulation of Hitler upheld the latter’s doctrine of racial purity. He praised the Nazi method of purging the Semitic races, the Jews by Hitler and even suggested the same as a good lesson for India to resolve the Muslim question. According to the core ideology of RSS or doctrine of Hindu Rashtra, “Hindus and Hindus alone, constitute the Indian Nation”, whereas for Golwalkar, casteism was synonymous with ‘Hindu Nation’. Historically India has been multi-religious, multilingual, multi-ethnic, multicultural and composed of many nationalities with the inhuman caste system cutting across all these identities. However, as a fascist organisation, RSS from its very inception has been Islamophobic, anti-Christian, anti-communist, anti-woman and anti-Dalit, and was in the habit of using violence to achieve its objectives.
Under colonial oppression, nationalism and patriotism for the oppressed countries were invariably anti-colonial in essence. But the ‘cultural nationalism’ of RSS was a camouflage for its servility to British colonialists and betrayal of the anti-imperialist struggle. Along with its genocidal hatred towards Muslims, extreme loyalty to British imperialism has been inherent in RSS from the very beginning, and on account of this, it totally dissociated with the independence movement during the British period. Top RSS leadership even advised its cadres not to waste their energy fighting the British but save it for fighting ‘internal enemies’ such as Muslims, Christians and Communists. As such the organization continued to remain on the periphery of Indian politics. But when Constituent Assembly was drafting the Indian Constitution, RSS came forward vehemently opposing the adoption of that Constitution and suggested ‘Manusmriti’ (the sacred book of chaturvarnya or varna system that identified women and Dalits as subhuman) in its place on the ground that a Republican Constitution would give equality to all castes against the interest of the elite castes. In fact, much before its objection to the Constitution that was drafted under the leadership of Ambedkar, the RSS’ mouthpiece, Organiser in August 1947 had opposed the tricolour National Flag also. Of course, following the assassination of the Father of the Nation in 1948, the RSS was banned for a few months, and one of the conditions that Sardar Patel put forward for lifting the ban on RSS on July 11 1949 was “loyalty to the Constitution of India and the National Flag”. However, the RSS that was not ready to follow this undertaking for more than half-a-century began hoisting the National Flag only during the time of the Vajpayee government which also unveiled Savarkar’s portrait in the central hall of Parliament in 2003.
Obviously, as in the case of European fascism during the interwar period, in the era of imperialism, it is the sharpening of the inherent contradictions of the ruling system that creates the opportune moment for the ascendance of fascists who are the most reactionary sections of finance capitalists. In other words, when the crisis cannot be resolved through normal methods of loot and exploitation and when people’s struggles become uncontrollable, the political-economic situation and social tension become favourable for the fascist forces to capture power. As far as India is concerned, it was the crisis of the 1970s and declaration of Emergency by the Indira Gandhi regime that enabled RSS which till then remained outside the mainstream to come to the political limelight. In the absence of a progressive-democratic alternative, RSS effectively utilised the situation to come to the forefront of the anti-Emergency movement. Within no time, replacing the Jan Sangh, the RSS constituted BJP as its political tool and the rest is part of contemporary history. Leading hundreds of secret and open, militant and terrorist outfits and widening and deepening its clout across space and time and with its far-right economic philosophy and unwavering allegiance to the US-led imperialist camp, today RSS still claiming itself as a cultural organisation, has grown into the biggest fascist organisation in the world with innumerable overseas saffron extensions and affiliates backed by immense corporate funding.
The seventies were also a turning point in the postwar neocolonial order due to the advent of the first major global crisis called ‘stagflation’. As a result, taking advantage of the ideological-political setbacks of the Left, imperialism abandoned its welfare mask and resorted to a change in the capital accumulation process through what is called neoliberalism. As noted above, the political-economic crisis that confronted India in the 1970s leading to the proclamation of Emergency by Indira regime in 1975 was integrally linked up with this imperialist crisis. Though Emergency was lifted in 1977, the post-Emergency period saw Indian state’s abject surrender to neoliberal diktats and intensified neocolonial plunder by imperialist-corporate capital. It was during this extremely crisis-ridden period of India resulting in its further integration with global corporate capital and consequent abandoning of the Nehruvian state-led model of ‘development’ and embrace of neoliberal policies that RSS designed its well-thought-out strategy of eventually transforming India into a Hindurashtra, i.e., a Hindutva fascist state by floating BJP as its political party. And, effectively taking advantage of the facilitating role of the soft-Hindutva pursued by the Congress and with immense corporate-backing, it has been easy for fascist RSS to transform BJP as India’s biggest ruling class party within a relatively short span of time, leading to fascist usurpation of state power with its multidimensional repercussions at micro and macro levels in the context of the ascendance of neofascism at a global level.
It is not intended here to draw out the whole trajectory of the process since the last quarter of the 20th century that enabled RSS to establish its fascist tentacles in the entire political, economic and cultural spheres. Unlike Mussolini-Hitler fascism that suddenly shot up from the political-economic crisis of the 1920s, Indian fascism led by RSS is rooted in a systematic, steady and long drawn out process spanning almost a century with deep-rooted and multi-dimensional penetration into the entire civilian and military apparatuses of the Indian state. And unlike classical fascism which had sharp contradictions with other imperialist forces, Hindutva fascists from the very beginning have been subservient to international finance capital during the colonial and postwar neocolonial period. However, in the neoliberal period, this process starts with the Ram Janmabhoomi movement since the 1980s, demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 in the context of India’s embrace of far-right neoliberal policies, the ‘second generation of globalisation’ under Vajpayee government in the late 1990s and early 21st century, Gujarat Pogrom in 2002, the ascendancy Modi regime in 2014 and its reiteration as Modi.2 in 2019, which are some of the important milestones towards this neo-fascist transformation.
As is obvious, under Modi.2, in the background of all round private-corporatisation of the economy and saffronisation of both civilian–including constitutional and administrative and institutional spheres—and military structures (ranging from RSS initiative to start Military Schools to the Agnipath scheme), RSS is now moving towards its ultimate goal of establishing the Hindurashtra, which is an intolerant theocratic state unequivocally defined by Golwalkar in 1939 in his magnum opus, ‘We, Our Nationhood Defined’ and in conformity with the principles of Manusmriti. All specificities of Hindutva such as anti-Muslimness (culminating in, for instance, depicting the Rohingyas whom the UN characterised as “the most persecuted” minority on earth today as “infiltrators”), pan-Indian homogenizing drive of deconstruction and subjugation of the oppressed caste organisations aimed at integrating them into Hindutva, rejection of all values of modernity such as rational-scientific thinking, fostering the cult of tradition and obscurantism, treating dissent and disagreement as treason, worship of heroism and elitism, anti-communism together with uncompromising integration with corporate finance capital are manifestations RSS neofascism.
On the Approach to Neofascism
At this critical juncture, concrete understanding of neofascism – i.e., fascism under neoliberalism where old terms and practices connected with fascism have become irrelevant — is indispensable for building up the anti-fascist movement and defeating fascism. No doubt, fascism’s inseparable integration with the hegemony of most reactionary corporate-finance capital is its universal character. However, ascribing a static form or pattern to the emergence of fascism for all situations is erroneous, and it will impede the building up of anti-fascist struggles too. For instance, the 7th Congress of Comintern (1935) that defined fascism in relation to its firm foundations in finance capital, had also underlined different course of development of fascism in colonial and semi-colonial countries, and “in these countries”, according to Comintern, “there can be no question of the kind of fascism that we are accustomed to see in Germany, Italy and other capitalist countries”. That is, depending on the specific political, economic and historical conditions of countries, fascism may assume different forms.
There is a macro dimension to this crucial question today. No doubt, fascism is the government of the most reactionary and terrorist elements of corporate-finance capital directed against the entire progressive-democratic sections, working class, peasantry, oppressed peoples and intelligentsia of the country. However, when classical fascism emerged during the interwar years of the 20th century, finance capital or imperialism was in its colonial phase. On the other hand, today imperialism is in its neocolonial phase, and on account of the crisis of capital accumulation, abandoning its welfare mask, finance capital has embraced neoliberalism whose essence is globalisation or internationalisation of capital as manifested in the limitless and uncontrollable cross-border movement of corporate capital. With the aggravation in imperialist crisis since the dawn of the 21st century, and especially since the 2008 “sub-crime crisis’, using the advancements in frontier technologies such as digitisation, imperialism is engaged in further shifting of its burden to the shoulders of world people. In this context neofascism is intensified to enforce the tyranny of corporate capital at a global level effectively utilising reactionary, racial, chauvinistic, revivalist, religious fundamentalist, xenophobic and obscurantist ideologies as its political basis.
Thus, neoliberal fascism or neofascism needs to be analysed with respect to the logic of corporate accumulation today. On the one hand, globalisation has enabled imperialism to restructure the erstwhile nation-centered production process by superimposing a new international division of labour and unleash a worldwide super-exploitation of the working people, thereby temporarily overcoming its crisis of accumulation. On the other, taking advantage of the ideological setbacks of the Left and by utilising the heterogeneity and diversity among working and oppressed people of different countries and through the effective use of postmodern/post-Marxist neoliberal ideologies such as “identity politics”, “multiculturalism”, etc., finance capital has also succeeded in creating division among anti-imperialist forces by diverting people’s attention from corporate plunder thereby disorganising and fragmenting resistance to capital. As such, the decadence and reactionary essence of corporate- finance capital have become more widespread and terribly destructive under neoliberalism. Unlike the period of ‘classical fascism’ which at that time was specific to capitalist-imperialist countries, neofascism, i.e., fascism under neoliberalism has become transnational in character cutting across national borders. A best example, is the manner in which the financial oligarchs of Europe have initiated a pan-European neofascist alliance against workers, migrants and refugees.
Today, neofascists everywhere are working overtime to take advantage of the mass psychology of social and economic insecurity created by the loss of livelihood, employment, habitat and environment arising from corporate plunder as well as people’s loss of faith in mainstream traditional parties including ‘social democrats’ who have no alternative to neoliberal policies. Making use of the specificities of countries, neofascists in general pursue an exclusivist and majoritarian line by propping up the so called ‘homogeneous’ part of the population pitting it against the ‘heterogeneous’ sections often composed of religious, ethnic/racial and linguistic minorities, migrants, refugees, dalits, tribals and other marginalized and oppressed sections of society. Including this, the all-round depoliticising and social engineering resorted by fascists provide a fertile ground for the flourishing of neofascism. And with its own specificities, RSS fascism in India (corporate-saffron fascism) is a typical example of neofascism today. Basing itself in unbridled neoliberal-corporatisation, the Indian regime today is engaged in establishing a Hindu theocratic state or Hindurashtra in accordance with the RSS ideology of aggressive ‘Hindu nationalism’ or Hindutva. A concrete evaluation of the international situation today amply makes it clear that majoritarian religion everywhere is amenable to be used by finance capital as the ideological basis of neofascism (for instance, Evangelism in the Americas, Political Islam in West Asia, Hindutva in India, Buddhism in Sri Lanka and Myanmar).
On Building up the Anti-Fascist Movement
Based on the foregoing brief sketch, the antifascist offensive is to be initiated based on the lessons from past experiences but also on the basis of a concrete evaluation of 21st century laws of motion of finance capital in relation to country specificities. Obviously, neofascism is the regime of the most reactionary sections of corporate-finance capital under neoliberalism. Therefore, though ruling class/bourgeois parties are basically neoliberal in orientation, all of them are not fascistic and, of course, there are sections who stand for rule of law, bourgeois-democratic rights, freedom of expression and press, free and fair election, etc. However, their class character with roots in neoliberalism and links with corporate capital along with engagement with electoral politics as the only sphere of action, make these parties incapable to take initiative in the struggle against fascists who have usurped the entire micro and macro spaces of social life. An electoral victory alone is not sufficient as the threat of fascist come-back will be there until and unless fascist tentacles are wiped out from already occupied strategic positions. Along with the control over the organs of the state, the saffron fascists through their vast and unparalleled organisational structure also have established spectacular control over ‘street power’ through lumpen and paramilitary goons. Unlike the situation under classical fascism, though electoral option of challenging fascists through the parliamentary route is theoretically there today as long as elections exist, free and fair elections are becoming difficult since the Hindutva fascists through their control over the entire administration coupled with the backing of immense corporate funding and formidable street power are engaged in transforming India into a full-fledged theocratic state based on the diktats of Manusmriti. Hence mere preoccupation with parliamentary work, devoid of a nation-wide anti-fascist movement, cannot confront the fascists, an aspect that the non-fascist ruling class parties often ignore.
Regarding the broad ‘left spectrum’, it ranges from the ‘social democrats’ (e.g., CPM) to adventurists (e.g., Maoists). The latter section, does not make a distinction between pro-fascist and non-fascist sections of the ruling classes and on account of this sectarian approach, disregards the most reactionary and terrorist class essence of neofascism which is a mere change of regime for sectarians. For the CPM, on the other hand, fascism is yet to come to India, and according to its ideologues, Modi regime is “on the verge of turning fascist” and only “symptoms of fascism” are there. Here it is to be stated that this evaluation arises from a stereotyped approach to fascism, a way of looking at neofascism as a textbook copy of the ‘classical fascism’ of the interwar period. This mechanical approach to neofascism is contrary to the dialectical-materialist analysis that any social phenomenon when transform and develops further in a new historical context and in a different social formation will inevitably adapt itself to the particularities and specificities of that concrete situation. To be precise, the concrete manifestations of fascism will vary according to space and time. Compared to the colonial period when classical fascism originated, today the parliamentary system has traversed almost a century, and corporate billionaires have become adept in keeping the reins of state power with them and carrying on incessant neofascist assaults on working class and oppressed peoples by keeping parliament as a mere edifice even as policy decisions are taken in corporate-board rooms. In other words, even under the veil of bourgeois democracy, neofascism has become capable to use terrorist methods of ethnic and racial cleansing, oppression and extermination of minorities, immigrants, refugees, and women, elimination of hard-earned democratic rights, super-exploitation of the workers through new technologies, plunder of nature leading to climate catastrophe and all round militarisation. No doubt, with a mechanical approach to fascism and being apologists of neoliberal-corporatisation, it is logical on the part of social democrats to wait for fascism that is yet to come, since they are also implementing the same far-right neoliberal policies wherever and whenever they are in power.
These varying perceptions on fascism, however, should not be a justification for refraining from the immediate and indispensable task of building up the anti-fascist movement for resisting and defeating RSS neofascism. No doubt, an ideologically equipped, politically and organisationally strong communist movement is the need of the hour. At the same time, we cannot wait till such an all India movement is ready, since it will be suicidal as was the case with many communist parties in Europe when fascists were advancing there during the twenties. And when the anti-fascist united front was formed in the 1930s, much damage had already been done by fascists. At the same time, failure to analyse and comprehend the fundamentally different class interests of the diverse forces including imperialists who joined the broad united front during the anti-fascist struggle and erroneous evaluations following the defeat of fascism led to many revisionist-opportunist deviations both at the global and national levels. The dissolution of Comintern in 1943 more or less at the same when US imperialism was preparing to launch its neocolonial offensive is a typical example of this international deviation, while the emergence of Browderism in the US that called for transforming the tactical alliance with sections of finance capitalists in the anti-fascist struggle into a long-term strategic alliance between the working class and bourgeoisie was a domestic example of this deviation.
Viewed in the context of such past experiences, even while acknowledging the absence of a strong communist movement to lead the fight against neofascism, care is to be taken to avoid both sectarian and opportunist deviations. While allying with non-fascist sections of the ruling classes in fighting the most reactionary corporate-bourgeoisie and the neofascist state propped up by them, communists and progressive forces must be aware of the overlapping, interpenetrating and complex class interests among different sections of bourgeoisie today. Coming to question of united front with social democrats, untiring ideological struggle should be carried forward. And where the social democrats are in power like the CPI (M) in Kerala serving corporate interests, this task becomes all the more significant. Any laxity on the part of communist revolutionaries in this issue will lead to surrender of the ideological-political line of the communists in the interests of “anti-fascist unity”, ultimately leading to sacrificing of proletarian independence and altogether abandoning of class struggle.
This does not mean that class struggle is to be counterpoised against anti-fascist struggle, or placing both in two watertight compartments or to be put in a one after the other manner; rather both are inseparable and interlinked in the fascist context. Many struggles against the corporate-saffron fascist regime have been there or are coming up in different parts of the country that combine struggles against both Hindutva fascism and far-right neoliberal policies, i.e., that comprise elements of anti-fascist struggle and class struggle. The Anti-CAA Movement, the people’s movement against denying citizenship to Muslims and the historic Farmers’ Movement against corporatisation of agriculture were two examples where almost all the anti-fascist forces ranging from organisations and parties of rich farmers to oppressed masses actively participated. Based on this experience, possibilities to develop sustained and uncompromising struggles against corporatisation and saffron-fascist forces uniting with all anti-fascist sections comprising secular, democratic and left forces are emerging throughout the length and breadth of the country. In these struggles, if appropriate organisational interventions are made, the working class, especially the vast unorganised sections, peasantry, oppressed peoples including women, Dalits, adivasis, minorities, especially the persecuted Muslims, youth and students will join against corporate onslaughts, displacement from habitat, environmental destruction, caste atrocities, communal oppression, violation of democratic rights and so on. Along with such resistance struggles of people, conscious efforts should be taken to initiate debates and discussions on a political alternative against neoliberal policies and RSS neofascism. Such initiatives leading to state-level coordination joining with revolutionary left, democratic and struggling forces can create an atmosphere for the emergence of a national coordination against corporate-Hindutva fascism based on a common program, which can be extended to electoral struggles for isolating and defeating neofascists. Of particular relevance here is the crucial significance of building up effective resistance against Manuvad and growing inhuman Brahmanical caste practices against Dalits under the patronage of RSS fascism. Hence appropriate ideological and political interventions joining with all progressive intellectuals and like-minded people against Manuvadi-Hindutva, the ideological basis of Indian fascism are inalienable components of the anti-fascist struggle. Such a movement comprising both parliamentary and non-parliamentary struggles, if initiated properly, can also explore the possibility of tactical alliances with non-fascist sections of the parliamentary parties in electoral struggles according to concrete conditions. It will enable the anti-fascist movement to effectively utilise contradictions within the ruling classes so as to isolate the reactionary elements who are allying with fascists.
