Skip to main content

Recalling his role in 2002 riots, Economist says Modi is follower of Savarkar, an "immensely divisive" figure

By A Representative
In a scathing attack on Prime Minister Narendra Modi after a gap of about six months, top British journal, The Economist’s latest issue (December 20) has once again reminded its readers that Modi remains a controversial leader for his “failure” in 2002, when as chief minister of Gujarat, he failed to “avert a massacre of Muslims.” Insisting that the hostility is born of the ideology that militant freedom fighter Vinayak Savarkar "spawned”, the influential British journal says, Modi “has never apologised for the massacre.” Taking a dig at Modi, the journal recalls how he sought to “regret” the riots once – telling a news agency interviewer that he is as sorry for the killings as he is while “seeing a puppy run over in the street”.
Pointing out that Modi is inspired by Savarkar, the journal suggests, after Modi came to power, RSS supremo Mohan Bhagwat has become more aggressive by increasingly referring to Savarkar for inspiration. Like Savarkar, Bhagwat now says that “all who live in Hindustan are in fact Hindus, whatever Muslims, Christians or secular Hindus might say”, the journal says, underlining, “The group has become an enthusiastic and effective actor within (the BJP). The RSS’s millions of members and volunteers played a big role in electing the BJP by a landslide in 2014. At least 19 ministers in government, including Modi, have a background in the RSS.”
Even as saying that Modi is “India’s strongest leader since Indira Gandhi”, the journal contends, the Prime Minister has made no attempt to “distance himself from the RSS”. It adds, “Those who promote Hindutva and echo Savarkar whip up stories of ‘love jihad’, alleging, Muslim men convert large numbers of Hindu women by seducing them.” Pointing out how earlier this month “a BJP parliamentarian praised Godse as a ‘patriot’ equal to Gandhi”, it says, things have gone so far now that “members of the increasingly influential RSS feel emboldened” and are promoting “majoritarian politics” in order to “absorb or flatten a minority” in “utterly destructive” way.
Pointing out that “India’s tolerance and moderation” may be “at risk”, the journal notes, this is clear the way Modi has been promoting Savarkar. “In 2008 Modi, then chief minister of Gujarat, inaugurated a website (savarkar.org) that promotes a man ‘largely unknown to the masses because of the vicious propaganda against him and misunderstanding around him that has been created over several decades’.” While a “previous BJP-led government put Savarkar’s portrait in parliament… on Savarkar’s birthday this year, May 28, the Prime Minister paid homage to him there. Modi tweeted about Savarkar’s ‘tireless efforts towards the regeneration of our motherland’.”
While calling Modi a firm follower of Savarkar, the journal refers to how Savarkar and Mahatma Gandhi differed from each other ever since they met for a meal in England in 19065. “Savarkar offered Gandhi some of his meal; Gandhi, a vegetarian, refused. Savarkar allegedly retorted that only a fool would attempt to resist the British without being fortified by animal protein”, The Economist says, adding, “The meeting is said to have begun hostilities between the two young Indian nationalists. Gandhi was a pacifist with an inclusive attitude towards Muslims and Christians. Savarkar, who would lead the Hindu Mahasabha, was a right-wing majoritarian who spawned the idea of Hindutva, or Hindu-ness...”
Pointing towards how “Savarkar remains immensely divisive”, the journal recalls how he called Gandhi a weak, a “sissy”, and far too willing to collaborate with Britain. “Gandhian talk of man’s common humanity he regarded as utopian to the point of naivety. In articles from the 1920s to the 1940s Savarkar lambasted Gandhi as a ‘crazy lunatic’ who ‘happens to babble...[about] compassion, forgiveness’, yet ‘notwithstanding his sublime and broad heart, the Mahatma has a very narrow and immature head’. Gandhi promoted ahimsa, a Buddhist rejection of violence which Savarkar called “mealy-mouthed”.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Are you a fool, no - no need to ask.

If 1857 was not a fight of independence then the stealing, thieveing British were natural owners of the world.

You should rot in hell for reproducing the so called "top" biased newspapers views on 1857.
Rajendra Barve said…
Who is this ediot spreading unnecessary rumors ....don't waste your time sir ..do u work...ppl of India will never believe in this rumors
Anonymous said…
Savarkar was right about Gandhi. Britain and other allies should have sat for fast until death when hitler invaded their countries and thats how you would have followed Gandhi's path.
Raghu said…
Reconversions are pinching your heart,Savakar is hero as much as Churchill
Anonymous said…
Sorry but the Economist is not an influential journal. I am not very familiar with the internal politics of India, but the article wreaks of a political agenda.
Savarkar was not a militant, he was freedom fighter, Britishers tortured him in jail. What is your view about the Jaliavala genocide. England never say sorry on the atrocities on Indians. Britishers murdered more then one million Indians- please say some thing on this aspect also. Do not blame Modi.Pakistan is your's brain child and see what he is doing, he is exporting terrorism
Jag Jivan said…
While what Economist says is a typical influential British viewpoint, what shouldn't forget the type of animosity which Savarkar displayed for Gandhi calling him weak, sissy and so on. And, unfortunately our India's No 1 is a follower of Savarkar, even as paying lipservice to Gandhiji.

TRENDING

Delhi Jal Board under fire as CAG finds 55% groundwater unfit for consumption

By A Representative   A Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India audit report tabled in the Delhi Legislative Assembly on 7 January 2026 has revealed alarming lapses in the quality and safety of drinking water supplied by the Delhi Jal Board (DJB), raising serious public health concerns for residents of the capital. 

Advocacy group decries 'hyper-centralization' as States’ share of health funds plummets

By A Representative   In a major pre-budget mobilization, the Jan Swasthya Abhiyan (JSA), India’s leading public health advocacy network, has issued a sharp critique of the Union government’s health spending and demanded a doubling of the health budget for the upcoming 2026-27 fiscal year. 

Iswar Chandra Vidyasagar’s views on religion as Tagore’s saw them

By Harasankar Adhikari   Religion has become a visible subject in India’s public discourse, particularly where it intersects with political debate. Recent events, including a mass Gita chanting programme in Kolkata and other incidents involving public expressions of faith, have drawn attention to how religion features in everyday life. These developments have raised questions about the relationship between modern technological progress and traditional religious practice.

Stands 'exposed': Cavalier attitude towards rushed construction of Char Dham project

By Bharat Dogra*  The nation heaved a big sigh of relief when the 41 workers trapped in the under-construction Silkyara-Barkot tunnel (Uttarkashi district of Uttarakhand) were finally rescued on November 28 after a 17-day rescue effort. All those involved in the rescue effort deserve a big thanks of the entire country. The government deserves appreciation for providing all-round support.

Pairing not with law but with perpetrators: Pavlovian response to lynchings in India

By Vikash Narain Rai* Lynch-law owes its name to James Lynch, the legendary Warden of Galway, Ireland, who tried, condemned and executed his own son in 1493 for defrauding and killing strangers. But, today, what kind of a person will justify the lynching for any reason whatsoever? Will perhaps resemble the proverbial ‘wrong man to meet at wrong road at night!’

Jayanthi Natarajan "never stood by tribals' rights" in MNC Vedanta's move to mine Niyamigiri Hills in Odisha

By A Representative The Odisha Chapter of the Campaign for Survival and Dignity (CSD), which played a vital role in the struggle for the enactment of historic Forest Rights Act, 2006 has blamed former Union environment minister Jaynaynthi Natarjan for failing to play any vital role to defend the tribals' rights in the forest areas during her tenure under the former UPA government. Countering her recent statement that she rejected environmental clearance to Vendanta, the top UK-based NMC, despite tremendous pressure from her colleagues in Cabinet and huge criticism from industry, and the claim that her decision was “upheld by the Supreme Court”, the CSD said this is simply not true, and actually she "disrespected" FRA.

Zhou Enlai: The enigmatic premier who stabilized chaos—at what cost?

By Harsh Thakor*  Zhou Enlai (1898–1976) served as the first Premier of the People's Republic of China (PRC) from 1949 until his death and as Foreign Minister from 1949 to 1958. He played a central role in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) for over five decades, contributing to its organization, military efforts, diplomacy, and governance. His tenure spanned key events including the Long March, World War II alliances, the founding of the PRC, the Korean War, and the Cultural Revolution. 

Uttarakhand tunnel disaster: 'Question mark' on rescue plan, appraisal, construction

By Bhim Singh Rawat*  As many as 40 workers were trapped inside Barkot-Silkyara tunnel in Uttarkashi after a portion of the 4.5 km long, supposedly completed portion of the tunnel, collapsed early morning on Sunday, Nov 12, 2023. The incident has once again raised several questions over negligence in planning, appraisal and construction, absence of emergency rescue plan, violations of labour laws and environmental norms resulting in this avoidable accident.

'Threat to farmers’ rights': New seeds Bill sparks fears of rising corporate control

By Bharat Dogra  As debate intensifies over a new seeds bill, groups working on farmers’ seed rights, seed sovereignty and rural self-reliance have raised serious concerns about the proposed legislation. To understand these anxieties, it is important to recognise a global trend: growing control of the seed sector by a handful of multinational companies. This trend risks extending corporate dominance across food and farming systems, jeopardising the livelihoods and rights of small farmers and raising serious ecological and health concerns. The pending bill must be assessed within this broader context.