On the eve of 82nd anniversary of the glorious Quit India Movement 1942 [QIM], we must evaluate the anti-national role of the Hindutva flag-bearers (who shamelessly claim to be the original nationalists) in India’s anti-colonial freedom struggle. QIM also known as the ‘August Kranti’ (August Revolution) was a nation-wide Civil Disobedience Movement for which a call was given on August 8, 1942 by the Bombay session of the All-India Congress Committee. It was to begin on August 9 as per Gandhi’s call to ‘Do or Die’ in his Quit India speech delivered in Mumbai at the Gowalia Tank Maidan (renamed as August Kranti Maidan) on August 8.
Since then August 9 is celebrated as August Kranti Divas.
The British swiftly responded with mass detentions on August 8 itself. Contemporary official documents confirm that over 100,000 arrests were made which included the total top leadership of Congress including Gandhi, mass fines were levied and demonstrators were subjected to public flogging. Hundreds of civilians were also killed by the police and the British army assisted by their henchmen; native rulers. Many national leaders went underground and continued their struggle by broadcasting messages over clandestine radio stations, distributing pamphlets and establishing parallel governments. Innumerable patriotic Indians were shot dead for the ‘crime’ of unfurling and holding the Indian Tricolour, publically. Even before that a terrible massacre had taken place in Mysore where the armed forces of the Mysore Raja who was very close to both the Hindu Mahasabha (HMS) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) shot dead 22 Congress activists for saluting the Tricolour!
Significantly, after declaring Congress both an ‘anti-national and unlawful organisation’, the British masters allowed only Hindu Mahasabha and the Muslim League to function!
Most of us also know that the then Communist Party of India (CPI) opposed the QIM thus betraying a great phase of mass uprising in the history of the freedom struggle. But it is equally well documented that despite CPI’s call for keeping aloof from QIM a large number of Communist activists participated in it. However, the dubious role of the then Hindutva camp—consisting of the Hindu Mahasabha [HM] and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh [RSS] – in the QIM is under wraps for reasons unknown. The Hindutva camp not only opposed QIM but also provided multi-faceted and multi-dimensional support to the British rulers in suppressing this historic mass upsurge.
Documents, shocking for many a young reader are available to substantiate this:
‘Veer’ Savarkar-led Hindu Mahasabha joined hands with British rulers to suppress the Quit India Movement (QIM)
While addressing the 24th session of the Hindu Mahasabha at Cawnpore (now Kanpur) in 1942, Savarkar outlined the strategy of the Hindu Mahasabha of co-operating with the British rulers in the following words:
“The Hindu Mahasabha holds that the leading principle of all practical politics is the policy of Responsive Co-operation. And in virtue of it, it believes that all those Hindu Sangathanists [members of HM] who are working as councillors, ministers, legislators and conducting any municipal or any public bodies with a view to utilize those centres of government power to safeguard and even promote the legitimate interests of the Hindus without, of course, encroaching on the legitimate interests of others are rendering a highly patriotic service to our nation. Knowing the limitations under which they work, the Mahasabha only expects them to do whatever good they can under the circumstances and if they do not fail to do that much it would thank them for having acquitted themselves well. The limitations are bound to get themselves limited step by step till they get altogether eliminated. The policy of responsive co-operation which covers the whole gamut of patriotic activities from unconditional co-operation right up to active and even armed resistance, will also keep adapting itself to the exigencies of the time, resources at our disposal and dictates of our national interest.” [Italics as in the original][i]
[Cited in V.D. Savarkar, Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya: Hindu Rashtra Darshan, vol. 6, Maharashtra Prantik Hindu Sabha, Poona, 1963, p. 474.]
This ‘Responsive Cooperation’ with the British masters was not only a theoretical commitment. It soon got concretised in the ganging up of Hindu Mahasabha with the Muslim League. The Hindu Mahasabha led by ‘Veer’ Savarkar ran coalition governments with Muslim League in 1942. Savarkar defended this nexus in his presidential speech in the same session of Hindu Mahasabha at Kanpur, in the following words:
“In practical politics also the Mahasabha knows that we must advance through reasonable compromises. Witness the fact that only recently in Sind, the Sind-Hindu-Sabha on invitation had taken the responsibility of joining hands with the League itself in running coalition Government. The case of Bengal is well known. Wild Leaguers whom even the Congress with all its submissive-ness could not placate grew quite reasonably compromising and socialable as soon as they came in contact with the HM and the Coalition Government, under the premiership of Mr. Fazlul Huq and the able lead of our esteemed Mahasabha leader Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerji, functioned successfully for a year or so to the benefit of both the communities.”[ii] [Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya, vol. 6, 479-480.]
The Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League, together, besides Bengal and Sind, also ran coalition government in NWFP also during this period.
Hindutva icon Dr Shyama Prasad Mookerjee was deputy CM in the Bengal Muslim League ministry was responsible for crushing the QIM in Bengal
Following the Hindu Mahasabha directive to co-operate with the British, the present Hindutva icon, Dr. Mookerjee assured his British masters through a letter dated July 26, 1942. Shockingly, it read:
“Let me now refer to the situation that may be created in the province as a result of any widespread movement launched by the Congress. Anybody, who during the war, plans to stir up mass feeling, resulting internal disturbances or insecurity, must be resisted by any Government that may function for the time being”[iii]
[Mookherjee, Shyama Prasad, Leaves from a Dairy, Oxford University Press. p. 179.]
The second-in-command of the Hindu Mahasabha, Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee, also the deputy chief minister in Bengal Muslim league ministry in a letter to Bengal governor on behalf of Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League made it clear that both these parties looked at the British rulers as saviours of Bengal against Quit India Movement launched by Congress. In this letter, he mentioned item wise the steps to be taken for dealing with the situation. It read:
“The question is how to combat this movement (Quit India) in Bengal? The administration of the province should be carried on in such a manner that despite the best efforts of the Congress, this movement will fail to take root in the province. It should be possible for us, especially responsible Ministers, to be able to tell the public that the freedom for which the Congress has started the movement, already belongs to the representatives of the people. In some spheres it might be limited during the emergency. Indians have to trust the British, not for the sake for Britain, not for any advantage that the British might gain, but for the maintenance of the defence and freedom of the province itself.”[iv]
[Cited in A G. Noorani, The RSS and the BJP: A Division of Labour. LeftWord Books, p. 56–57.]
RSS followed Savarkar in opposing the QIM
THE other flag-bearer of Hindutva, the RSS, was not different in its attitude towards the QIM. It openly sided with its mentor ‘Veer’ Savarkar against this great revolt. The RSS’ attitude towards the QIM becomes clear from the following utterances of its second chief and most prominent ideologue till date, M.S. Golwalkar. While talking about the outcome of the Non-Cooperation Movement and QIM he said:
“Definitely there are bound to be bad results of struggle. The boys became unruly after the 1920-21 movement. It is not an attempt to throw mud at the leaders. But these are inevitable products after the struggle. The matter is that we could not properly control these results. After 1942, people often started thinking that there was no need to think of the law. This movement, specially, spread widely in Bihar. We witness today that trains are stopped, chains are pulled and travel without tickets is very commonly practised there…All this disorder and bizarre situation are the creation of this struggle.”[v]
[Golwalkar, M.S., Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan (Collected Works of Golwalkar in Hindi), vol. iv, Bhartiya Vichar Sadhna, Nagpur, nd, p. 41.]
Thus, the prophet of Hindutva, Golwalkar, wanted the Indians to respect the draconian and repressive laws of the inhuman British rulers! He admitted that this kind of negative attitude towards the QIM did not go well even with the RSS cadres:
“In 1942 also there was a strong sentiment in the hearts of many. At that time, too the routine work of Sangh continued. Sangh vowed not to do anything directly. However, upheaval (uthal-puthal) in the minds of Sangh volunteers continued. Sangh is an organisation of inactive persons, their talks are useless, not only outsiders but also many of our volunteers did talk like this. They were greatly disgusted too.”[vi]
[Golwalkar, M.S., Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan (Collected Works of Golwalkar in Hindi), vol. iv, Bhartiya Vichar Sadhna, Nagpur, nd, p. 40.]
It would be interesting to note what Golwalkar meant by ‘routine work of Sangh’. It surely meant working overtime to widen the divide between Hindus and Muslims thus serving the strategic goal of the British rulers and Muslim League. In fact, the contemporary reports of the British intelligence agencies on the QIM were straightforward in describing the fact that RSS kept aloof from the QIM. According to one such report, “the Sangh has scrupulously kept itself within the law, and in particular, has refrained from taking part in the disturbances that broke out in August 1942”.[vii]
[Cited in Andersen, Walter K. & Damle, Shridhar D. The Brotherhood in Saffron: the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Hindu Revivalism, Westview Press, 1987, 44.]
These historical and well-documented facts make it clear that Hindutva gang led by the RSS not only betrayed QIM but also rendered great service to their British masters by aligning with the Muslim League at a time when the foreign rulers were faced with a nation-wide popular revolt incolving large sections of Indians. In collusion, the HMS/RSS (also with the ML) mounted one of the fiercest repressions of the freedom fighters. Shockingly, this gang is ruling India today describing itself as a symbol of Indian nationalism. We need to convey these facts to the Indians so that these traitors are exposed and charged for crimes committed against Indian people.
Today’s rulers wedded to the RSS and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) know that betrayal of the QIM by their Hindutva ancestors cannot be covered up. It is crystal clear that RSS including its top leaders like Golwalkar (head of the RSS), Deendayal Upadhyaya, Balraj Madhok, LK Advani and KR Malkani who were RSS whole timers during QIM did not participate in this Movement or any other struggle launched for the freedom of India. RSS-BJP rulers continue raking up communal polarizing issues so that betrayal of the QIM is covered up.
Link for some of S. Islam’s writings in English, Hindi, Urdu, Marathi, Malayalam, Kannada, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujarati and video interviews/debates:
http://du-in.academia.edu/ShamsulIslam
Link for procuring Shamsul Islam’s books in English, Hindi & Urdu:
https://tinyurl.com/shams-books
REFRENCES:
[i] Cited in V.D. Savarkar, Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya: Hindu Rashtra Darshan, vol. 6, Maharashtra Prantik Hindu Sabha, Poona, 1963, p. 474.
[ii] Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya, vol. 6, 479-480.
[iii] Mookherjee, Shyama Prasad, Leaves from a Dairy, Oxford University Press. p. 179.
[iv] Cited in A G. Noorani, The RSS and the BJP: A Division of Labour. LeftWord Books, p. 56–57.
[v] Golwalkar, M.S., Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan (Collected Works of Golwalkar in Hindi), vol. iv, Bhartiya Vichar Sadhna, Nagpur, nd, p. 41.
[vi] Golwalkar, M.S., Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan (Collected Works of Golwalkar in Hindi), vol. iv, Bhartiya Vichar Sadhna, Nagpur, nd, p. 40.
[vii] Cited in Andersen, Walter K.& Damle, Shridhar D. The Brotherhood in Saffron: the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Hindu Revivalism, Westview Press, 1987, 44.
Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.