Senior Congress figures Rashid Alvi and V Hanumantha Rao on Thursday mounted a coordinated attack on Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat, accusing him and the Bharatiya Janata Party of advancing a divisive political programme that undermines secular values, promotes the imposition of Hindi, and seeks to dilute the legacy of Mahatma Gandhi. Their remarks followed public comments by Bhagwat that have stirred political debate across party lines.Speaking separately but in a similar vein, the two Congress leaders said Bhagwat’s statements project moderation in words while failing to reflect restraint in action. Alvi argued that repeated assurances from the RSS leadership about inclusivity and social harmony have not translated into policy or conduct, pointing to what he described as a widening gap between rhetoric and practice. He said the ideological direction set by the RSS continues to shape the BJP’s political messaging in ways that sharpen social divisions rather than bridge them.
Hanumantha Rao echoed the criticism, warning that the emphasis on cultural homogeneity and linguistic uniformity threatens the plural character of the country. He said efforts to elevate one language over others risk marginalising non-Hindi-speaking regions and eroding the federal balance embedded in the Constitution. According to him, linguistic diversity has long been a strength that reflects the country’s civilisational breadth, and any attempt to privilege one language for political gain invites resistance.
The Congress leaders also raised concerns about what they described as attempts to recast historical narratives, particularly those centred on Mahatma Gandhi. Alvi said Gandhi’s role in shaping the freedom movement and the moral foundations of the republic cannot be diminished without weakening the ethical compass of public life. He alleged that selective interpretations of history, when amplified through political platforms, aim to sideline Gandhi’s emphasis on non-violence and social harmony.
Hanumantha Rao said Gandhi’s legacy remains inseparable from the idea of a secular republic, arguing that any move to relativise or question his contributions serves a narrow ideological purpose. He added that the Congress would continue to defend constitutional values rooted in pluralism, equality, and freedom of belief.
Bhagwat’s remarks, delivered at public forums, have often been framed by the RSS as calls for social cohesion and cultural confidence. Supporters of the organisation argue that the RSS seeks national integration rather than exclusion and that discussions on language or culture are meant to foster unity. The BJP has frequently maintained that it respects constitutional principles and that allegations of divisiveness are politically motivated.
However, critics within the opposition see a consistent pattern linking statements from the RSS leadership with policy choices and political narratives advanced by the ruling party. Alvi said the influence of the RSS on governance is evident in debates over education, culture, and citizenship, where ideological positions appear to shape administrative priorities. He argued that such influence blurs the line between a socio-cultural organisation and the state.
The controversy has reignited a broader political argument over the place of the RSS in public life and its relationship with the BJP. For decades, opponents have accused the organisation of pursuing a majoritarian worldview, while supporters insist it represents cultural nationalism compatible with democratic norms. This tension has sharpened as political discourse grows more polarised.
Hanumantha Rao said the Congress views the current moment as a test of constitutional resilience. He stressed that safeguarding secularism requires more than declarations; it demands consistent adherence to principles that protect minorities, linguistic diversity, and freedom of expression. He added that political leaders must be judged by outcomes rather than assurances.
Within the Congress, the remarks signal an effort to foreground ideological contrasts ahead of future electoral contests. Party strategists believe that debates over secularism, language, and historical memory resonate with voters concerned about social cohesion. By directly challenging Bhagwat, the party aims to draw attention to what it sees as the ideological roots of the BJP’s governance approach.
The BJP has rejected accusations that it seeks to impose Hindi or weaken secularism, pointing to constitutional provisions and existing linguistic policies. Party leaders argue that promoting Hindi does not negate respect for other languages and that cultural pride can coexist with diversity. They also dismiss claims of diminishing Gandhi’s legacy, noting official commemorations and public tributes.