RSS/BJP Emergency Myth EXPOSED: 7 Shocking Truths That Rewrite History

Fifty years after India’s Emergency, the BJP-RSS narrative celebrating their “heroic resistance” is contradicted by documented evidence. Historical records, including testimonies from journalists like Prabhash Joshi and BJP figures like Subramanian Swamy, reveal RSS leader Balasaheb Deoras wrote apology letters to Indira Gandhi from jail, disavowing the opposition movement and offering support for her regime’s agenda. Eyewitness accounts confirm RSS cadres sought release by submitting similar apologies, citing V.D. Savarkar’s strategy of compromise.

Simultaneously, the current BJP government’s forceful condemnation of the 1975 Emergency rings hollow. Senior BJP leader L.K. Advani himself warned of an “undeclared emergency” under Modi’s rule, a view echoed by critics pointing to the systematic jailing of dissenters, targeting of minorities, erosion of press freedom, and bypassing of judicial due process. The commemoration exposes a stark irony: appropriating past resistance while enabling present-day repression.

RSS/BJP Emergency Myth EXPOSED: 7 Shocking Truths That Rewrite History

Fifty years after Indira Gandhi plunged India into the darkness of the Emergency (1975-1977), the political landscape echoes with commemorations and condemnations. The current BJP-led government has passed resolutions lauding the “sacrifices” of those who resisted, positioning itself and its ideological parent, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), as the vanguard of that opposition. However, a closer examination of historical records and testimonies reveals a narrative far more complex and contradictory than the triumphant claims suggest—a narrative with unsettling echoes in contemporary India. 

The Official Narrative vs. Documented History 

The BJP and RSS consistently portray themselves as the primary, organized resistance force against the Emergency. They emphasize the incarceration of thousands of their workers. Yet, the accounts of journalists, participants, and even some within the Sangh Parivar paint a different picture: 

• The Apology Letters: Multiple credible sources, including veteran journalist Prabhash Joshi, former Governor T.V. Rajeswar, and BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, have documented a troubling pattern. They report that RSS chief Balasaheb Deoras, while imprisoned in Yerawada jail, wrote multiple letters to Indira Gandhi. These letters allegedly disassociated the RSS from Jayaprakash Narayan’s movement and offered cooperation in implementing Sanjay Gandhi’s controversial 20-Point Programme – the very programme cited to justify the Emergency’s repression. Indira Gandhi reportedly ignored these overtures. 

• Vajpayee’s Disassociation: Similarly, accounts from the Quit India Movement resurface. When arrested in 1942 for participating in an act of defiance (lowering the Union Jack), a young Atal Bihari Vajpayee reportedly wrote a letter disavowing involvement in the Quit India Movement, leading to his swift release. This pattern of strategic retreat, rather than confrontation, is noted by critics. 

• The “Mafinama” Phenomenon: Suresh Khairnar, an ex-president of the Rashtra Seva Dal jailed alongside RSS workers, recounted witnessing RSS cadres signing “mafinamas” (apology letters) to secure release. When confronted, they reportedly justified it as following the path of V.D. Savarkar, known for his petitions for release from British imprisonment. This stands in stark contrast to the prolonged incarceration endured by many socialists, communists, and other activists who refused to compromise. 

Prabhash Joshi’s assessment cuts to the core: “The RSS did not fight the Emergency… They are not a fighting force, and they are never keen to fight. They are basically a compromising lot. They are never genuinely against the government.” Rajeswar corroborated the RSS’s attempts to establish contact not just with Indira Gandhi but also with Sanjay Gandhi. 

Appropriating a Struggle, Ignoring Nuance 

The BJP’s current commemoration focuses solely on condemning the Congress and appropriating the entire legacy of Emergency resistance. This deliberately ignores: 

• The Diverse Resistance: The actual fight against the Emergency was a broad-based effort involving socialists, communists, trade unionists, student activists, journalists, and civil liberties groups, alongside some sections of the Jana Sangh/RSS. The BJP narrative erases this plurality. 

• Dalit Perspectives: As the article notes, some Dalit leaders view the Emergency era differently, recalling Indira Gandhi’s earlier radical measures like bank nationalization and abolition of privy purses, which they saw as beneficial. A purely BJP-centric condemnation dismisses these complex historical viewpoints. 

• The RSS’s Documented Accommodation: The historical evidence of the RSS leadership seeking accommodation undermines their current claim of being the “major force” of principled opposition. 

The Unsettling Parallel: The “Undeclared Emergency” 

Perhaps the most potent insight arising from revisiting this history is the parallel drawn to the present. Critics argue that while the 1975 Emergency was a constitutionally declared (though brutally misused) suspension of rights, India today grapples with an “Undeclared Emergency”: 

• L.K. Advani’s Warning: In 2015, BJP stalwart L.K. Advani himself stated, “Today it has been 40 years since the declaration of Emergency at that time. But for the last one year, an undeclared Emergency has been going on in India.” This observation, made under the Modi government, carries significant weight. 

• Contemporary Manifestations: Critics point to: 

• The widespread incarceration of dissenters, journalists, and activists (e.g., Bhima Koregaon accused, Umar Khalid, Gulfisha Fatima) often under stringent laws, with prolonged pre-trial detention. 

• Systematic intimidation and violence against minorities under pretexts like “love jihad” and cow protection. 

• The alarming rise of “bulldozer justice” bypassing due process. 

• A significant erosion of media independence and the stifling of critical voices. 

• Documented declines in global democracy and freedom indices. 

• The Irony of Commemoration: The Union Cabinet’s resolution condemning the past Emergency, while the government it leads stands accused of fostering a climate mirroring its repressive aspects, presents a profound irony. It highlights the gap between proclaimed values and actual governance. 

The Enduring Insight: Accountability and Vigilance 

The 50th anniversary of the Emergency is not merely about condemning the past. It’s a crucial moment for examining how historical narratives are constructed and weaponized. The evidence challenging the RSS/BJP’s self-proclaimed heroic role during the Emergency demands historical accountability. It reveals a propensity for strategic compromise with power, even authoritarian power, when deemed necessary for organizational survival or future gain. 

More importantly, this historical lens forces a critical examination of the present. Advani’s “undeclared emergency” remark, echoed by numerous civil society voices and international observers, underscores that the erosion of democratic norms and institutions can occur without a formal proclamation. The aggressive rhetoric condemning the 1975 Emergency rings hollow if the tools of repression – incarceration of dissent, targeting minorities, undermining media freedom, and bypassing judicial process – are actively employed today. 

The real commemoration should lie not in political point-scoring, but in a renewed commitment to defending the fundamental rights and pluralistic democracy that the genuine resisters of 1975-77 fought to restore. It requires constant vigilance against the encroachment of state power, regardless of which party wields it, and an unwavering defense of the constitutional spirit that both the declared Emergency and its alleged undeclared successor seek to subvert. The historical record, when examined honestly, offers not just lessons about the past, but a stark warning for the present.