RSS, Tricolor flag & Patriotism

• One fact is certain: the organization (RSS), which runs the party (BJP) that runs the regime (Modi led NDA) cannot just appropriate the 'Indian national movement' as its own.
• RSS had refused to participate in the freedom struggle. It has, therefore, no right to claim its glory even though the Congress cannot also monopolize on any 'sole heir status' for various reasons.
• K.B. Hedgewar, who founded the RSS in 1925, did have some initial loose association with the freedom struggle. But from the 1930s, he ensured that his boys in khaki shorts stayed away from this historic movement. He said "Patriotism is not only going to prison. It is not correct to be carried away by such superficial patriotism." 
• The Hindu Mahasabha's V.D. Savarkar, who is another cherished role model of the current dispensation, had been active long before Hedgewar but he was rather mercurial. He did lead strident anti-British agitations and was jailed, but he also signed multiple clemency petitions to the colonial government, promising total cooperation if he was released. The Congress retaliated in 1934 and banned its members from joining communal organizations like the Hindu Mahasabha, the RSS and the Muslim League. 
• In any case, during the critical phase of the Quit India movement and other agitations, not only was the RSS missing but we also have British reports of the 'good conduct' and the law-abiding nature of its members, while thousands of women, children and men all over India braved the onslaught of imperial repression.
• Nana Deshmukh in his book, RSS: Victim of Slander (1979): "One might well ask: why did the RSS not take part in the liberation struggle as an organisation? The question arose for the first time when Gandhiji launched his movement in 1929-30. It was decided that the members of the RSS were free to take part in their individual capacity". Fine. But it may be instructive to know which particular RSS member actually took part and what suffering he went through for it. 
• It is only logical that the RSS and its dedicated cadre that run the government should come clear on this phase of history before attempting to snatch credit in this new version of ultra-nationalism.
• On the eve of Independence, when much of the nation was preparing to celebrate freedom, the RSS's mouthpiece, Organiser, declared that the Indian tricolour will "never be respected and owned by the Hindus. The word three is in itself an evil, and a flag having three colours will certainly produce a very bad psychological effect and is injurious to a country." 
• Second head of the RSS, M.S. Golwalkar lamented that "our leaders have set up a new flag for the country. Why did they do so? It is just a case of drifting and imitating... Ours is an ancient and great nation with a glorious past. Then, had we no flag of our own? Had we no national emblem at all these thousands of years? Undoubtedly we had. Then why this utter void, this utter vacuum in our minds?" 

Gandhi's assassination on January 30, 1948, however, changed the political chessboard of India decisively. The government banned the RSS and the then deputy prime minister, Patel, declared quite unequivocally that though "the RSS was not involved... his assassination was welcomed by those of the RSS and the [Hindu] Mahasabha who were strongly opposed to his way of thinking and to his policy." Golwalkar repeatedly pleaded with Patel, but the leader, whom the current regime seeks to appropriate, remained firm. He lifted the ban on July 11, 1949, only after the RSS pledged to stay away from politics, not be secretive and abjure violence. More important, it had to profess "loyalty to the Constitution of India and the National Flag". After removal of ban, RSS hoisted the flag at their headquarters on 26th January 1950. Sardar Patel died on 15th December that year, and RSS never hoisted the flag in their headquarters after that until 2002.