Patel’s vision forged a nation-Congress’s politics fractured it
October 31 marked the 150th birth anniversary of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel — the “Iron Man of India,” a towering figure in our freedom struggle and the architect of India’s unity. His remarkable leadership during the immediate post-independence period, especially his role in integrating 562 princely states into the newly formed Republic of India, cemented his place in history.
Yet, successive governments and the political ecosystem have failed to honour his legacy, ignoring such great leaders for the sake of vote-bank politics disguised as pseudo-secularism. It is time political parties shed the mindset that secularism means permitting hatred towards Sanatana Dharma or indulging in divisive politics for votes. Professors and spokespersons who appear on television shouting about “secularism” should first understand what it truly means — equality before law and respect for all faiths, not appeasement or vilification.
Gone are the days when India had leaders who had the spine to call a spade a spade, even at the cost of political discomfort. The media too must introspect — instead of hosting ill-informed shouting matches on TV channels, it should play the role of the mythical swan that separates milk from water, focusing on substance, not noise.
True secularism does not mean defying laws framed by an elected government. No country would tolerate citizens breaking rules in the name of religious freedom. If a government passes regulations, they must apply to all without exception. Secularism also does not mean kneeling before those who call Vande Mataram a “religious song,” or staying silent when Sanatana Dharma is insulted and equated with diseases like Covid or Dengue.
It is ironic that politicians who indulge in such appeasement are the first to shower petals on statues of great leaders like Patel and Gandhi — largely for optics. They celebrate anniversaries but ignore the values these leaders stood for: unity, discipline, and integrity. For present-day leaders, symbolism has replaced substance.
In remembering Sardar Patel, one must recall not just the man and his achievements, but the moral and political compass he offered. His legacy must guide action today. As for the Congress — the party that once walked beside him — the task is to realign with that “old guard” vision of national integration, courage, and governance rooted in discipline.
When we examine Patel’s legacy and the role of the Indian National Congress (INC) in carrying it forward, we encounter a disappointing truth: the party whose credentials once rested on Patel’s contributions has failed to uphold his ideals. If Patel had not been India’s first Home Minister and Deputy Prime Minister — uniting princely states through courage and negotiation — India might have remained fragmented, weakened by the very divisions he fought to overcome.
Patel was not an ideologue; he was a man of action — pragmatic, decisive, and deeply patriotic. He believed in negotiation, when possible, firmness when required. The Congress, during its five-decade-long rule, abandoned this pragmatism for populism and politics of convenience. Patel’s vision was clear: unity of purpose, strong public institutions, inclusive nation-building, and pragmatic governance — all of which eroded under later Congress regimes.
After Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination on January 30, 1948, by Nathuram Godse — once associated with Hindu nationalist circles — there was nationwide outrage. Riots erupted and the government feared a collapse of communal order. As Home Minister, Patel received intelligence reports suggesting that while the RSS was not directly involved in the assassination, its aggressive rhetoric had contributed to an atmosphere of hate. Thus, on February 4, 1948, he banned the RSS, accusing it of spreading communal enmity and encouraging subversive activities.
However, Patel’s stand was nuanced. He distinguished between extremists and ordinary nationalist volunteers. He believed the RSS had the potential to reform within democratic norms.
In 1949, after discussions with RSS chief M S Golwalkar, Patel agreed to lift the ban under clear conditions: the RSS must adopt a written constitution committing itself to loyalty to the Indian Constitution, non-involvement in politics, respect for the national flag, and promotion of peace and discipline within democratic bounds. It must operate transparently and refrain from communal activity. Once satisfied, Patel revoked the ban on July 11, 1949.
Patel’s relationship with the RSS was thus neither blind opposition nor unconditional support. He acted as a constitutional guardian — firm when national unity was threatened, fair when reconciliation was possible. He banned the RSS to protect India’s fragile democracy and lifted it to give space for lawful civic participation. His later appreciation was not ideological alignment but a statesman’s recognition of discipline and national service — true to his lifelong mission: to unite, not divide.
Contrast this with the Congress that followed. Instead of strengthening national unity, it encouraged fragmentation. It gave a separate Constitution to Jammu and Kashmir through article 370, tolerated divisive politics, and failed to integrate border regions firmly — leaving India vulnerable, even as Pakistan occupied parts of Kashmir. Patel’s foresight was ignored. The man who secured India’s unity was sidelined in his own party’s history. It also turned blind eye to illegal migrants. who now threaten to alter the demography of our country. Still INDIA bloc supports them. That is their love for the Constitution.
It is indeed unfortunate that Gandhi’s most trusted lieutenant was gradually erased from the Congress narrative.
While the Congress today accuses the BJP of “appropriating” Patel, the fact is that it allowed this space to open by neglecting him. In failing to uphold his ideals, it diluted its moral claim to his legacy. When a party forgets one of its founding pillars, it loses ideological moorings. Patel’s vision of unity in diversity, strong administration, and institutional integrity provided a clear narrative — one that Congress has lost. Without such an anchor, any party risks drift and irrelevance.
As Prime Minister Narendra Modi rightly observed, the Congress never sufficiently honoured Patel after his death. Even in Gujarat, it was only when a rival party invoked his legacy that Patel’s contributions were remembered in public discourse. The Congress, meanwhile, clung to dynastic politics, eroding institutions from within and abandoning Patel’s emphasis on governance, discipline, and accountability. But Congress still seems to believe in Nepal type agitations in India. Gujarat Congress President Amit Chavda on Tuesday issued a two-month ultimatum to the Chief Minister warning of a mass agitation and “Nepalwali” (As happened in Nepal) style revolt if farmers’ demands remain unfulfilled.
In a changing India, Patel’s values — unity, institutional strength, and effective governance — are more relevant than ever. For the Congress, reclaiming his legacy requires more than token gestures and floral tributes. It must embed Patel’s principles into policy, strengthen institutions instead of personalities, and promote integration over identity politics. Only then can the Congress move from merely claiming his legacy to truly living it.
Every state government too should take inspiration from the grand celebrations organised at the Statue of Unity in Kevadia, Gujarat. Similar festivals across the country can help Gen Alpha understand Patel’s real legacy — the true meaning of democracy, unity, and secularism as envisioned by India’s Iron Man.
The 150th anniversary of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel is not just a milestone in memory; it is a mirror for modern India. It reminds us that leadership means courage and conviction, not convenience. It urges political parties to rise above appeasement and rediscover the essence of nationhood Patel fought for — a united India built on discipline, dignity, and duty.
(The author is former Chief Editor of The Hans India)
