By Arun Srivastava
RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has called for the intensification of “ghar wapasi” (reconversion to Hinduism) and emphasized strengthening Hindu society, rather than reacting to deepening of the internal feud within the BJP. Ever since RSS was founded in 1925, the idea of Ghar Wapasi prominently featured in its programmes as an increase in the population of Hindus would help the RSS mission to turn India, gain strength. But its divisive and communal politics scared even the convert Hindus and it could not accomplish the task during its hundred years of existence.
The latest campaign of RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has a completely new dimension and also dynamics. It is a bigger part of his design in the struggle of one-upmanship between him and Narendra Modi. Bhagwat’s two actions ought to be paid serious attention: first, his consistent rhetoric that Hindu population in India has been systematically declining and second, his persistent thrust on Ghar Wapasi. He attributed the decline to the illegal conversion, which is a completely a wrong narrative and underscores that Bhagwat is far removed from the ground reality.
It is indeed a matter of pity that RSS chief lacks moral strength to stand and speak the truth. RSS has been using the issue of illegal or forced conversion to polarise Hindus and project Muslims or Christians as the proselytizers instead of telling the truth, the exploitation and oppression of the poor and Dalits by the feudal lords and Hindus believing in the Brahminical system. Blame is the most sophisticated and safest game. RSS is the protector of these exploiters and oppressors obviously they will not speak out against their subjects. In his statements, he mentioned that while voluntary conversion is not opposed, “forced or inducement-based conversions are condemnable and the response to them would be Ghar Wapasi”.
Since Bhagwat is supposed to be learned and intellectual, one ought to construe that he must be aware of the fact that Hindus have been widely practicing family planning. It has been the most favourite word for the urban Hindus. Incidentally the Hindu urban middle class which has been core support base of saffron ecosystem has been strongest advocates of small family. At a time when Bhagwat has been giving the call to produce three kids, most of his saffron followers are for one issue, they are even averse to beget two, as their economic condition does not allow them to have more child.
During RSS-BJP rule the job scenario has turned so bleak that fathers of girls are even reluctant to get their daughters marry an unemployed boy. If his disciple, Narendra Modi, is not bothered to ameliorate the economic situation it is irony that Bhagwat too has been least bothered of the impending crisis. He was never seen pulling up or asking Modi to focus on economic development, instead both have been busy pursuing their divisive politics of Hindu vs Muslims.
Statistics always do not speak the truth. According to government figures ,Hindu percentage share of India’s population has shown a gradual decline, dropping from 84.1% in 1951 to 79.8% in 2011. But during his period the absolute number of Hindus continues to rise. Despite a drop in percentage, the actual number of Hindus is increasing, with projections showing the population growing from over 300 million in 1951 to over 1.3 billion by the end of the decade. The decline in percentage share is largely driven by lower total fertility rates (TFR) among Hindus compared to Muslims, with studies noting a 4.4 percentage point rise for Muslims and a 4.3 point decline for Hindus between 1951 and 2011. Despite these shifts, India’s overall religious composition has remained relatively stable since Partition. Only 1% of Indian adults have left Hinduism, and a similar share has become Hindu after being raised in another religion or with no affiliation. The Hindus remain the vast majority, and the population is not shrinking in absolute terms.
Bhagwat maintains that the Hindu society should be more organized and vigilant, asserting that there is “no threat” to the community, but that it must remain active. The question arises if the Hindu society does not face threat, then why are you turning them into a band of mercenaries? While sons and daughters of RSS and BJP leaders are going abroad for higher studies, the children of Hindus are becoming musclemen and mercenaries to help the leaders in their pursuit. This is really condemnable.
According to Bhagwat, the responsibility to intensify “Ghar Wapasi” (reconversion to Hinduism) lies with Hindu society as a whole. What does it mean? Why a common Hindu should made responsible for implementation of RSS plan? He shows his reluctance to help the reconverts by entrusting the responsibility on common Hindus: “those who return to the Hindu fold must be “supported” and “cared for” by the community”. In the period of crony capitalism when a Hindu is not sure of his own future, is unable to maintain his own family, how could he be expected to look after the families of the reconverts. Bhagwat must refrain from practising populism and hide behind hegemonic politics.
RSS and the saffron politics has been primarily responsible for decline of the Hindu society. Undeniably Hindus are significant force in Indian politics and have succeeded in positioning Hindu interests centrally in the nation’s cultural and political agenda. This has true enough primary reason for their attitudinal change and treating themselves as the symbol of capitalist economy. It is they, the urban Hindu middle class, which has been promoting and patronising the capitalist vested interest.
Despite electoral gains for BJP, there are still internal challenges related to caste divisions and economic disparities that need to be addressed to achieve true empowerment. It is also a fact that despite the emphasis on Hindu unity, various sections of the community, such as Dalits and OBCs, still experience inequality and lack economic security, indicating that empowerment is not uniformly distributed. Whether Hindu society is “empowered” is a complex, debated topic with varying perspectives, largely influenced by political and social viewpoints.
The rise of right-wing or nationalistic ideologies has led many Muslims to adopt a more defensive and, consequently, assertive posture to protect their communal identity. A new generation of Muslims, often aided by social media, is challenging traditional leadership and older, more docile, approaches, favouring a more vocal, rights-based discourse. Muslims are no more willing to be treated as vote bank. Rather than acting as a “vote bank,” there is a move toward forming independent political entities that demand specific rights, such as the rise of parties like AIMIM in India or DENK in the Netherlands. There is increased mobilization against policies perceived as discriminatory. Muslim organizations are increasingly using legal frameworks, such as filing petitions in high courts and the Supreme Court, to contest changes to personal law or community property rights.
In this backdrop Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind’s Maulana Arshad Madani opposing the Ghar Wapasi campaign, viewing it as a divisive, hate-fuelled initiative that creates an “atmosphere of murder and violence” ought to be taken seriously. Little doubt Bhagwat’s created the impression of coercion and intimidation. His opposition is based on several key arguments regarding religious identity, social harmony, and constitutional rights. Madani asserted that Indian Muslims are not “converts” needing to return to a previous faith, but rather they and their ancestors have been Muslims for centuries. He declared, “Muslims are alive and will remain alive on their faith”.
Madani was absolutely right in saying that such campaigns create an atmosphere of hostility and fear, viewing the calls for Ghar Wapasi as a “revival of a divisive game” that threatens the unity and integrity of the country. He characterized the Ghar Wapasi campaign as a violation of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to freedom of religion and personal choice. He emphasized that India is a secular nation, not a theological one. Madani was right in expressing concern at the narrative leaders were discussing about mass conversion of 200 million Muslims and 60 million Christians and calling it an unprecedented and deeply troubling development in post-independence India. (IPA Service)
