Talk:Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Restrictions placed: 18 April 2021

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 90 days

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

India: History / Politics Top‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article was last assessed in July 2020.

Hinduism Top‑importance

	Hinduism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Top‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discrimination Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Organizations Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conservatism Top‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Corinne, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 31 May 2017.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS[edit]

"During the colonial period, the RSS collaborated with the British Raj and played no role in the Indian independence movement."

Why is this mentioned in the lede? Why is a negative fact important. Well RSS didn't play any role in the Russian Revolution either for all that matters, so why mention its (lack of) role in the Indian Independence movement. Seems like a thinly-veiled statement aimed at equating the RSS with the Colonial British. LΞVIXIUS💬 20:55, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It needs mentioning as it's a part of the organisation's historical political profile, but I agree it should not be in the lead. Feel free to move it to the body. — kashmīrī ^TALK 20:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree; that fact is mentioned in prominent histories of the Hindu nationalist movement, and as such belongs in a summary of the RSS's history. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:36, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but not sure it helps the reader understand what the article subject is at present. — kashmīrī ^TALK 21:54, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In enhancing the lede of the Wikipedia article, the inclusion of the statement "During the colonial period, the RSS collaborated with the British Raj and played no role in the Indian independence movement" serves to uphold historical accuracy and offer readers a nuanced perspective on the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's (RSS) role during a pivotal era in India's history.

By explicitly noting the organization's lack of involvement in the armed struggle against British colonial rule, the lede provides crucial context, preventing potential misinterpretations and fostering a more precise understanding of the RSS's historical position.

This addition highlights the diversity of approaches within the Indian independence movement, acknowledging the varied strategies and ideologies employed by different groups. Furthermore, it contextualizes the RSS's founding principles, emphasizing its focus on cultural and social revitalization rather than direct engagement in armed resistance.

Ultimately, this addition encourages readers to engage in a more nuanced analysis of the RSS's historical role, prompting exploration into the organization's philosophy, objectives, and the reasons behind its decision not to actively participate in the struggle for Indian independence. 94.205.38.119 (talk) 07:34, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most of this artivlr over simplifies the complex situation of the time and leads to one sided negative perspective on RSS.

This looks to be written by people with a specific agenda.

If the purpose of the this narration was to convey this fact that RSS had a different focus then there is a much better neutral way to communicate this. a much better alternative narration to communicate the same fact can be as dollows

RSS was focused on cultural and moral strengthening of India going at grassroot level by organising simple dailly training programs ( called Shakha's) focusing on instilling moral, patriotic and cultural values. RSS not being a political organization did not participate in resistance against British colonial rule as a organisation. There are however number of known incidents of RSS members participating in various movements against British in individual capacity.

As to collaboration with British is referred it is incorrect to say this in isolation. Many many organisation were working at the time which were not resisting British rule. That does not mean they were actively assisting British. Also many statements and steps taken by leaders of the time were meant to stop India going into a Caliphate / Muslim colonialism when British would leave or go into a partition. However did these leaders try Congress as the defacto representative of people of India agreed to partition bowing down to violence and loss of life of Hindus resulting from direct action call of Muslim league. Abhay.ch77 (talk) 06:01, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 April 2024[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit extended-protected is being considered for merging. ›

~~

I want to update the about the internal conflict of rss due to gujrati lobby of modi and amit shah

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 15:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 May 2024[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit extended-protected is being considered for merging. ›

Vinaysk03 (talk) 18:11, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on RSS supporting British govt is wrong...here is the history

Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh is a Bhartiya organisation made up of Indian male volunteers dedicated to establishment of the supremacy of Indian cultural Ethos in Indian consciousness.

It is determined to nurturing a nationalistic outlook among its volunteers and to forge a character of service before self.

As volunteers of the RSS , the members work during natural calamities, pandemics etc. offering free service as part of their civic / national duty.

However, the RSS is strictly an apolitical organisation that goes to any length to ensure that it does not take up political issues and does not allow any political discussions on any of its fora.

During the Indian Freedom Struggle the RSS volunteers were not allowed to represent the RSS in the freedom movement or contribute to the freedom struggle on behalf of the RSS; but they were free to participate, wholeheartedly, in their individual capacity or even as members of any other organisation.

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 18:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 May 2024[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit extended-protected is being considered for merging. ›

change "the initial impetus of the organisation was to provide character training and instil "Hindu discipline" in order to unite the Hindu community and establish a Hindu Rashtra (Hindu nation).[16][17] The organisation aims to spread the ideology of Hindutva to "strengthen" the Hindu community and promotes an ideal of upholding an Indian culture and its civilizational values.[2][18] On the other hand, the RSS has been described as "founded on the premise of Hindu supremacy",[19] and has been accused of an intolerance of minorities, in particular anti-Muslim activities.[20]" to "the initial impetus of the organisation was for the welfare of entire mankind, Bharath must stand before the world as a self-confident, resurgent and mighty nation. Even at the inception, the Sangh was viewed by its founder not as a sectoral activity, but as a dynamic power-house energizing every field of national activity.Expressed in the simplest terms, the ideal of the Sangh is to carry the nation to the pinnacle of glory through organizing the entire society. Verily this is the one real national as well as global mission." 106.222.222.246 (talk) 03:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 10:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paramilitary?[edit]

By Wikipedia's own definition "A paramilitary is a military that is not part of a country's official or legitimate armed forces." RSS is not a social and cultural organization, it's not an armed paramilitary organization. This is totally bizarre and misleading characterization. It is a legal organization within India and they're not armed or trained like soldiers. Yasarhossain07 (talk) 16:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]