Loyalty of RSS towards National Flag

The RSS since its inception in 1925 hated anything which symbolised the united struggle of the Indian people against British rule. The case of the tricolour, the Indian National Flag, is the most pertinent one. In December 1929, Congress at its Lahore session, adopted ‘Purna Swaraj’ or complete self rule as the national goal & called upon the people to observe January 26, 1930 as Independence Day by displaying & honouring the tricolour (the Tricolour was by consensus considered the flag of national movement by this time).
In response to this Hedgewar as Sarsangchalak issued a circular to all the RSS shakhas to worship the Bhagwa Jhanda (Saffron Flag) as the national flag. The RSS leaders like Murli Manohar Joshu might have gone to unfurl the Tricolour in 1991 at Lal Chowk of Srinagar, Kashmir, in order to hypocritically demonstrate their patriotism, but the fact is that the RSS openly decries & denigrates the National Flag. 
Golwalker while addressing a Gurupurnima gathering on July 14,1946, stated- ‘It was the saffron flag which in totality represented Bhartiya culture. It was the embodiment of God. We firmly believe that in the end the whole nation will bow before this saffron flag’

On the eve of independence when Indian Constituent Assembly adopted Tricolour as its National Flag, the English organ of the RSS, Organiser, in its issue dates August 14,1947, denigrated this choice in following words- ‘The people who have come to power by the kick of fate may give in our hands the Tricolour but it will never be respected & owned by Hindus. The word three is in itself an evil & a flag having three colours will certainly produce a very bad psychological effect & its injurious to a country’

According to RSS Indian National Flag was never to be respected by Hindus. It was a bad omen & injurious for the country. Even after independence it was the RSS which refused to accept it as the National Flag. Golwalker while denouncing the choice of Tricolour as National Flag in an essay entitled ‘Drifting & Drifting’ in the book Bunch of Thoughts wrote- ‘Our leaders have set up a new flag for our country. Why did they do so? It is just a case of drifting & imitating. Our’s is an ancient & great nation with a glorious past. Then, had we no flag of our own? Had we no national emblem at all these thousand years? Undoubtedly, we had. Then why this utter void, this utter vaccum in our minds?‘ 
  

Savarkar : A Nationalist Or Coward??

A line has been drawn over an uncomfortable facet of the Hindutva icon’s personality. For, unlike other patriots like Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Ashfaqullah, who refused to ask the British Raj for mercy even at the cost of their lives, Savarkar, the father of the BJP’s Hindutva ideology, had actually sought clemency while lodged in Andamans’ Cellular Jail.
Savarkar’s letter asking for forgiveness dated November 14, 1913 is reprinted in a book, Penal Settlement In Andamans, published by the Gazetteers Unit of Union ministry of education.

Savarkar described himself as a ”prodigal son” longing to return to the ”parental doors of the government”. While referring to his earlier letter of clemency in 1911, Savarkar wrote, ”…if the government in their manifold beneficence and mercy release me, I for one cannot but be the staunchest advocate of constitutional progress and loyalty to the English government which is the foremost condition of that progress. As long as we are in jails, there cannot be real happiness and joy in hundreds and thousands of homes of His Majesty’s subjects in India, for blood is thicker than water; but if we are released, the people will raise a shout of joy and gratitude to the government, who knows how to forgive and correct, more than how to chastise and avenge.”

Savarkar went on to add, ”Moreover, my conversion to the constitutional line would bring back all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide. I am ready to serve the government in any capacity they like, for as my conversion is conscientious so I hope my future conduct would be. By keeping me in jail, nothing can be got in comparison to what would be otherwise. The Mighty alone can afford to be merciful and, therefore, where else can the prodigal son return but to the parental doors of the government.”

How could Savarkar, who aligned with the British regime and asked for clemency, be an epitome of valour and counted among the “bravest freedom fighters”?

Hindutva groups claim that this was a ruse by Savarkar ruse to slip his fetters so that he could resume his activities for India’s freedom. But his alignment with the British later refutes the explanation. The volte-face has been explored by Indian historians and writers.

Savarkar, historians have noted, told Lord Linlithgow, in October 1939:
“…But now our interests were so closely bound together, the essential things was for Hinduism and Great Britain to be friends…The Hindu Mahasabha favoured an unambiguous undertaking of Dominion Status at the end of the war.”

Later, in August 1942 when Gandhi launched the Quit India movement and asked Indians to renounce their government jobs, Savarkar instead said:
“I issue this definite instruction to all Hindu Sanghatanists in general holding any post or position of vantage in the government services, should stick to them and continue to perform their regular duties.”

When India finally threw off the British yoke, Savarkar did not celebrate. Instead, “the Hindu Mahasabha declared August 15, 1947, as a day of mourning,” write historians Aditya Mukherjee, Mridula Mukherjee and Sucheta Mahajan, in The Hindu Communal Project. “It refused to accept the national flag, upholding the bhagwa jhanda as the only flag worthy of veneration. The Congress, as the ruling party, was repeatedly pressurised to declare the state a Hindu rashtra .”