RSS at 100: Between Misconceptions and the Philosophy of ‘Nation First’

As the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) completes a century of its establishment this year, the debate around its role, philosophy, and relevance in India’s democracy has once again come into sharp focus. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, while attending the centenary event, underlined the demographic challenges facing the nation and acknowledged the RSS’s long journey of discipline, service, and nation-building. Critics have often attacked the Sangh for its ideology, while supporters highlight its deep grassroots presence and remarkable service during crises. The truth, as always, lies somewhere in between the rhetoric and reality.
Founded on September 27, 1925, in Nagpur by Dr. Keshav Baliram Hedgewar, the RSS was envisioned as an organization to instill cultural consciousness, self-discipline, and social responsibility among ordinary citizens. It started with just 17 members but has today grown into a mammoth network of more than 83,000 shakhas across India. The core guiding principle has remained unchanged for a century: “Nation First.” Whether one agrees with its worldview or not, the sheer organizational discipline and mass outreach of the Sangh are unparalleled in modern India.

One criticism often repeated is that the RSS had “no role” in the independence movement. While that may hold some truth in terms of direct political involvement, dismissing its contribution entirely would be unfair. The Sangh’s emphasis was not on political agitation but on nation-building through character formation. Over the decades, its volunteers have consistently played an active role in relief during natural calamities—be it earthquakes, floods, cyclones, or pandemics. In times of crisis, the spirit of service and nationalism within the RSS cadre has been undeniable.
It is also important to draw a line of distinction. The RSS cannot be equated with radical Islamic organizations that thrive on violence and exclusivity. The Sangh’s philosophy, however controversial at times, is rooted in cultural nationalism and not in militancy. Its critics may disagree with the idea of a “Hindu Rashtra,” but the organization itself repeatedly asserts that its nationalism is inclusive. In fact, Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat has many times openly stated that Muslims and other minorities are equally vital stakeholders in the making of India. His acknowledgment of the role of Muslims in India’s development is a signal that the Sangh does not see national progress through the lens of religious exclusion.
The real question, therefore, is: can an organization with “Nation First” as its guiding philosophy automatically be branded as communal or exclusivist? The answer is not so simple. Much of the perception around the RSS has been shaped by politics, ideological clashes, and historical narratives. What remains undeniable, however, is the Sangh’s ability to build an unmatched network of disciplined citizens committed to social service, cultural pride, and national unity.
At 100, the RSS stands at a crossroads. On the one hand, it carries the burden of past criticisms and fears of majoritarian dominance. On the other, it holds the potential to reshape its narrative by embracing inclusivity and reinforcing its philosophy of “Nation First” in action, not just words. If the RSS succeeds in balancing cultural pride with social harmony, its next century could be less about controversy and more about constructive nation-building.
India’s democratic journey is incomplete without debate, dissent, and dialogue. As the RSS enters its second century, the challenge is not whether it will remain relevant, but whether it can evolve to reflect the plural spirit of the nation it claims to serve.