Savarkar’s Radical Vision for Social Reform

Savarkar’s Philosophy & Worldview, Part 13, Savarkar’s Five Philosophical Dimensions (6/6)

In the sixth installment of our exploration of Veer Savarkar’s philosophical foundations, we delve into the core principles that shaped his vision for a reformed and progressive society. Savarkar’s philosophy was a unique blend of classical Indian thought, Western political and social ideas, and his own lived experiences. At its heart lay five key dimensions: utilitarianism, rationalism (positivism), humanism (universalism), pragmatism, and realism. These principles served as the cornerstones for his efforts to modernize Indian society and liberate it from the shackles of outdated traditions and superstitions.

A Complex Political and Ideological Position

Savarkar’s philosophy defies easy classification. He did not fully align with liberals or socialists and did not subscribe to any singular school of thought. His agnosticism and strategic use of religion make it difficult to categorize him as strictly “secular” or “anti-secular” by Western standards. However, his affinity for Western philosophical traditions suggests an underlying humanist influence—one that championed rationalism, scientific materialism, and universal morality.

During his time, his ideas were radical from multiple perspectives. Conservatives and orthodox groups saw him as a dangerous disruptor, while moderates found his views extreme. Even those with “common sense” dismissed his social and political proposals as impractical and destabilizing for Hindu society and India as a whole. His attempts at socio-political reform invited relentless criticism.

The Pillars of Savarkar’s Philosophy

Savarkar’s philosophy was deeply rooted in the belief that society must evolve through rational and pragmatic means. He rejected religious dogma and traditional symbols of religiosity, such as idol worship and the theory of rebirth, viewing them as obstacles to social progress. Instead, he advocated for a secular life philosophy that prioritized scientific inquiry and humanistic values.

1. Utilitarianism: Savarkar believed that the social utility of any thought or action should be assessed based on its tangible benefits. He emphasized the importance of practical outcomes over abstract ideals, arguing that societal progress could only be achieved through actions that served the greater good.
   
2. Rationalism: For Savarkar, reason and logic were paramount. He championed a worldview grounded in scientific reality, rejecting blind faith and superstition. His agnosticism—often described as the “spirit of agnosticism”—was a defining feature of his philosophy, reflecting his commitment to questioning and critical thinking.
   
3. Humanism (Universalism): Savarkar’s humanism emphasized the importance of universal values and a secular worldview. He believed in the potential of humanity to achieve progress through reason, morality, and scientific advancement.
   
4. Pragmatism: Savarkar was a practical thinker who prioritized adaptability and real-world solutions. He argued that societal transformation required a flexible approach, tailored to the specific needs and conditions of Indian society.
   
5. Realism: Savarkar’s realism was evident in his acknowledgment of the competitive nature of the modern world. He believed that India’s survival and prosperity depended on shedding outdated religious and social practices that hindered progress.

Religion and Spirituality: A Personal Matter

Savarkar’s relationship with religion was complex. While he used religious language extensively, he rejected many traditional Hindu beliefs and practices. He viewed religion and spirituality as deeply personal matters, rooted in individual faith and conviction. At the same time, he believed that science and technology should guide societal and national development.

For Savarkar, the survival of the Indian nation in a rapidly changing world required a break from outdated religious concepts and social habits. He advocated for the dissolution of ties between society and forms of religion, spiritualism, and superstition that he believed burdened his countrymen. This perspective made him a controversial figure, as it challenged deeply ingrained cultural and religious norms.

A Radical Vision for Social Reform

Savarkar’s philosophy was radical for its time, earning him criticism from both conservatives and progressives. Conservatives and orthodox groups viewed his ideas as extreme, while moderates and extremists found them either too radical or not radical enough. His emphasis on secularism and rationalism was seen as a threat to the stability of the Hindu community and Indian society at large.

One of the most contentious aspects of Savarkar’s legacy was his alleged involvement in the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. This event led to widespread public condemnation and alienated him from both academic and public circles. Despite this, his philosophical foundations continued to influence political thought in India, particularly through the concept of Hindutva.

Hindutva and Savarkar’s Political Thought

Savarkar’s philosophy was operationalized in his political thought, particularly through the ideology of Hindutva. While his ideas were often labeled as radical, they reflected a pragmatic approach to nation-building and social reform. Savarkar’s vision was not confined to any single ideological framework; he drew inspiration from diverse sources, including Lenin’s thoughts on revolution. However, he cautioned against blindly following foreign models, emphasizing the need to adapt ideas to India’s unique social and cultural context.

Final Thoughts

Savarkar’s philosophical foundations were both revolutionary and contentious and remains a subject of intense debate and analysis. His commitment to utilitarianism, rationalism, humanism, pragmatism, and realism set him apart as a thinker who sought to modernize Indian society while challenging traditional norms. While his ideas were often controversial and polarizing (some viewed his ideas as a much-needed push towards modernity, others saw them as too extreme or impractical), they undeniably contributed to the discourse on social and political reform in India. Subsequently, understanding his legacy requires a nuanced approach—one that acknowledges both the radicalism of his ideas and their enduring impact on India’s socio-political landscape. As we continue to examine Savarkar’s legacy, it is essential to engage with his philosophy critically, recognizing both its strengths and its limitations. By doing so, we can gain a deeper understanding of his vision for a reformed and progressive society—a vision that continues to resonate inIn the sixth installment of our exploration of Veer Savarkar’s philosophical foundations, we turn to the core principles that shaped his vision for a reformed and progressive society. Savarkar’s philosophy was a unique synthesis of classical Indian thought, Western political and social theory, and his own lived experiences as a revolutionary, reformer, and prisoner. At its heart lay five key dimensions: utilitarianism, rationalism, humanism (universalism), pragmatism, and realism. Together, these served as cornerstones for his efforts to modernize Indian society and liberate it from outdated traditions and superstition.

💭 What do you think? Which of Savarkar’s five dimensions—utilitarianism, rationalism, humanism, pragmatism, or realism—do you think is most relevant to India (or the world) today? Why? Savarkar rejected superstition and traditional religious practices but still used religious symbols in politics. Do you see this as a contradiction or a strategic choice? How do you interpret Savarkar’s idea of “Humanism (Universalism)”—was it rooted more in Indian traditions or in Western thought? Do you agree with Savarkar that religion should be treated as a private matter, separate from society’s progress and nation-building? Savarkar emphasized realism in politics, even if it meant setting aside ideals. Do you think pragmatism should outweigh ideals in modern governance? His critics found him too radical, while others thought he wasn’t radical enough. Do you think his reforms were ahead of their time, or simply impractical? How should we assess Savarkar’s controversial legacy today—through his philosophical contributions, his political actions, or both?
👉 Share your thoughts in the comments below!

Sources:

GODBOLE, Vasudev Shankar. 2004. Rationalism of Veer Savarkar. Itihas Patrika Prashan: Thane/Mumbai.

KELKAR, B. K. 1989. „Savarkar: A Thee-dimensional view“, in PHAKE, Sudhir/PURANDARE, B. M. and Bindumadhav JOSHI. (Eds.). 1989. Savarkar. Savarkar Darshan Pratishtnah (Trust): (Bombay) Mumbai, 42-60.

SAVARKAR, Vinayak Damodar. 1971. Six glorious (golden) epochs of Indian history. Savarkar Sadan: Bombay. 1971.

SAVARKAR, Vinayak Damodar. 1924. An Echo from Andamans. Vishvanath Vinayak Kelkar: Nagpur, in GROVER, Verinder. 1998. Vinayak Damodar Savarkar: A biography of his vision and ideas. Deep and Deep: Publications: New Delhi.

VARMA, Vishwanath Prasad. 1985. Modern Indian Political Thought. Volume II. 8. Ed. Lakshmi Narain Agarwal: Agra, 386-391.

Wolf, Siegfried O. 2010. Savarkar’s Strategic Agnosticism. A compilation of his political and economic worldview, in Heidelberg Papers in South Asian Comparative Politics (HPSACP), No. 51, Heidelberg University, Germany.

Wolf, Siegfried O. 2009. Vinayak Damodar Savarkar und sein Hindutva-Konzept. Die Konstruktion einer kollektiven Identität in Indien [“Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and his concept of Hindutva: The construction of a collective identity in India.”]. Online Dissertation: Heidelberg University: Heidelberg.