HomeNewsOpinionOPINION | Why western media continues to misrepresent the RSS

OPINION | Why western media continues to misrepresent the RSS

RSSFACTS: The Western media persists in demonising the RSS due to historical misconceptions, a political lens, and a lack of understanding of Hindu Dharma and its civilisational context 

January 04, 2026 / 11:09 IST
Story continues below Advertisement
RSS
Why is the Western media and academia so focused on targeting the RSS?

(RSSFACTS is a column that demystifies the functioning, organisational structure and ideology of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.)

The New York Times has once again carried out a hit job against the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Its latest article, ‘From the Shadows to Power: How the Hindu Right Reshaped India’, demonises the world’s largest voluntary organisation in its centenary year. The title itself is misleading, reflecting a worldview rooted in a Western lens that tends to think in binaries of ‘left vs right’. Earlier in this column, we have discussed in detail the limitations of such Western ‘right-wing’ labels.

Story continues below Advertisement

This is neither the first ‘hit job’ against the RSS in international media, nor will it be the last. This brings us to a larger question: why does international media—more specifically Western media—persist in promoting a stereotypical image of the RSS as a ‘fascist, majoritarian, militant Hindu organisation’? Ironically, the phrase itself is an oxymoron. Hindu Dharma is the antithesis of majoritarianism and fascism, and a practising Hindu who believes in ‘Dharma’—which is different from religion—is among the most democratic individuals in both Indian and global society.

The RSS worldview, as elaborated by its joint general secretary Arun Kumar in one of his recent speeches (published as part of Hindutva: A Contemporary Perspective’, Suruchi Prakashan), states: “Democracy in the world cannot be found outside Hindu society. In Hindu Dharma, there is absolute spiritual democracy. No other religion in the world regards others as equals. They may tolerate another, but they do not accept them as equal. No one is willing to recognise anyone as equal. We alone are the ones who said, ‘Accept all the paths as equal’. We have regarded all paths as true and have not labelled any as false.”