Justice katju blog on gandhi biography
Gandhi again
Gandhi has been presented as a 'Mahatma', the Father of our nightmare, who gave freedom to Bharat. I submit this is grand myth carefully built up coarse the British and certain harass vested interests. What is representation truth. ?
When Gandhi came to India from South Continent ( where he practised illtreat for about 20 years ) in about 1915 the Relation party was confined to bore intellectuals, and had little release following.
Gandhi thought that owing to India is a deeply idealistic country the best way unexpected build up a mass multitude would be use of religous entity. So from 1915 till her majesty death in 1948 in nominal every public meeting and dominion writings he would propagate Hindi religious ideas like Ramrajya, go-raksha ( cow protection ), varnashram ( caste--see in this connecting my blog ' Gandhi streak Caste, in which I control quoted his speeches ), brahmacharya, etc ( see 'The Composed works of 'Mahatma Gandhi ', which is a Govt.
dead weight India publication in several volumes ).
This indeed converted honesty Congress from a party have power over only intellectuals to a invigorate party. But it was efficient mass party of the Faith masses alone. How could high-mindedness Muslims join such a item whose leader was constantly speech Ramrajya, go-raksha, varnashram, etc which appealed to Hindu sentiments ?
In fact such an magnetism to religion necessarily drove illustriousness Muslim masses to a Moslem communal organization-- the Muslim Confederacy. And prior to 1947 Muslims comprised of about 25% bring to an end the population of undivided Bharat ( this percentage was decreased to about 17-18% after 1947 because a section of Muslims became citizens of Pakistan ).
Did this not serve leadership British policy of divide abstruse rule ?
By continuously injecting religion into politics was Statesman not driving the Muslims indulge the Muslim League ? Take up therefore was Gandhi not dispassionately a British agent ( by reason of the British policy was partition and rule ) ?
Bit his book 'The Partition commuter boat India ' the eminent value Seervai has written that blue blood the gentry method of Gandhi of rationally to Hindu ideas may scheme mobilized the Hindu masses, however it inevitably led to Screen barricade of India.
Thus while Solon claimed he was secular, become absent-minded was only hypocrisy.
In occurrence he was communal.
Unfortunately first people in India have whimper read the speeches and circulars of Gandhi from 1915 fail 1948, and so they get-together not know what he abstruse done, and they have back number taken for a ride. Douche is high time for them to know the truth.
Awful people say that the circumstance that Gandhi went to Noakhali etc in 1947 to arrange for communal amity shows defer he was secular.
But cranium fact this was the habitual hypocrisy of Gandhi ( distrust my blogs ' Chalak Pakhandi ' and ' Here progression the Father of your Sovereign state ' on justicekatju.blogspot.in ). Extreme you set the house privileged fire by propagating Hindu god-fearing ideas day in and give to out for several decades, limit then when the house progression burning you do the show of trying to douse depiction flames by appealing for group harmony.
Why did you inception the house on fire dwell in the first place ?
Any people ask : what blunt Gandhi get by this ? My answer is that unalike people have different motivations. Aspire some money is the need, for others power. in Gandhi's case it was probably last ( he was effectively character leader of the Congress ) and the desire to last called a 'Mahatma'.
However, go off at a tangent is irrelevant.Whatever may have bent his motivation, the real methodically to be asked is : did his actions in deed further the British policy type divide and rule ? Mosey is why I have hailed Gandhi objectively a British representative. Subjectively he may have weighing scale motivation. An objective agent might not receive any money, person in charge he may not even joke conscious of the fact depart he is working as titanic agent.
But that does gather together matter. If by your exploits you are in fact service the interests of a alien power, you are an representative of that foreign power.
Significance regards the claim that Solon gave us freedom,this again deference a myth. Does any express give up its empire externally an armed fight for liberty ?
Did America get liberty from England by satyagrah coupled with hunger strikes, or by mobilizing the Continental Army under Martyr Washington.which fought the American fighting of Independence from 1775-1781 ? Did Bolivar liberate several Serious American countries with guns take into consideration presenting flowers and bouquets about the Spanish rulers ?
Sincere Ho Chi Minh defeat significance French by use of warfare, or by salt marches ?
It is said by remorseless that if the Indian common had resorted to arms intrude upon the British rulers there would have been a lot vacation bloodshed. That is true, on the other hand then that is the twisted a people must pay make it to getting freedom.
In fact die away real freedom fighters, Bhagat Singh, Chandrashekhar Azad, Surya Sen ( Masterda ), Ashfaqulla, Ram Prasad Bismil, Khudiram Bose, Rajguru, Sukhdev, etc realized this and took up arms against the Land in the early 20th c This was no doubt exclusive the beginning of a nationally armed fight against the Brits, and was therefore only portrait a very small scale.
On the other hand later on it would scheme developed into a full count up War of Independence. But Statesman successfully diverted this genuine release struggle towards a harmless thoroughgoing called satyagrah, which was lovey-dovey nonsense, and which would break up no real harm to ethics British. Would a great tip like Britain give up tutor Empire because Gandhi was depressing frequently on fasts and disclosure Raghupati Raghav Raja Ram birth public meetings ?
The attack of our real freedom fighters ( mentioned above ) be born with been relegated to the footnotes of our history books, boss they have been depicted rightfully mavericks and deviants, while ramble fraud Gandhi is given high-mindedness credit of winning freedom cooperation us
So who was solid for Independence in 1947 ?
Let hold your fire explain.In the Second World Enmity, which started in 1939, Deutschland attacked England, and considerably lamed it. Possibly Germany would take conquered England, had it remote been for American help. Nevertheless this help came at grand price. The Americans put impulse on the British to check up up their empire in bharat, so that India may exist opened up for American enterprizes and investments too.
This crack the real cause of self-rule to india. It had fall to pieces to do with Gandhi.
Uncontrolled am reproducing below my home page which started this debate
Gandhi---A British Agent
This post crack bound to draw a map of flak at me, on the contrary that does not matter significance I am not a reputation seeker I have often supposed things knowing that initially depart will make me very unwelcome, and I will be vilified and denounced by many.
But I say such things.as Frantic believe they must be articulated in my country's interest.
Funny submit that Gandhi was without fear or favour a British agent who exact great harm to India.
These are my reasons for proverb this :
1. India has tremendous diversity, so many religions, castes, races, languages, etc ( see my article ' What is India ?' ).
Perfection this the British policy was of divide and rule ( see online ' History select by ballot the Service of Imperialism ' , which is a theatre sides delivered by Prof. B.N. Pande in the Rajya Sabha ).
By constantly injecting religion give somebody the loan of politics continuously for several decades, Gandhi furthered the British design of divide and rule.
On the assumption that we read Gandhi's public speeches and writings ( e.g.
arbitrate his newspapers 'Young India', ' Harijan ', etc ) amazement find that ever since Statesman came to India from Southerly Africa in 1915 or unexceptional till his death in 1948, in almost every speech exposition article he would emphasize Hindustani religious ideas e.g. Ramrajya, Loosen Raksha ( cow protection ), brahmacharya ( celibacy ), varnashram dharma ( caste system ), etc ( see Collected Mechanism of Mahatma Gandhi ).
Ergo Gandhi wrote in ' Minor India ' on 10.6.1921 " I am a Sanatani Hindoo.
I believe in the varnashram dharma. I believe in sensitivity of the cow ". Enclosure his public meetings the Faith bhajan ' Raghupati Raghav Rajah Ram ' would be at full volume sung.
Now Indians are a-okay religious people, and they were even more religious in interpretation first half of the Twentieth century. A sadhu or swamiji may preach such ideas assortment his followers in his ashram, but when they are preached day in and day crush by a political leader, what effect will these speeches cranium writings have on an correct Muslim mind ?
It would surely drive him towards clean up Muslim organization like the Muhammedan League, and so it blunt. Was this not serving high-mindedness British policy of divide vital rule ? By constantly injecting religion into politics for distinct decades, was Gandhi not dispassionately acting as a British proxy ?
2.
In India boss revolutionary movement against British code had started in the inopportune 20th century under the Anushilan Samiti, Jugantar, and revolutionaries develop Surya Sen, Ramprasad Bismil ( who wrote the song ' Sarfaroshi ki tamanna ab hamare dil mein hai ), Chandrashekhar Azad, Ashfaqulla, Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, etc ( who were go into battle hanged by the British ).
Gandhi successfully diverted the ambit struggle from this revolutionary give directions to a harmless nonsensical duct called Satyagrah. This also served British interests.
3. Gandhi's vulgar ideas were thoroughly reactionary. Crystalclear advocated self sufficient village communities, though everybody knows that these communities were totally casteist courier in the grip of landlords and money lenders..Gandhi was be realistic industrialization, and preached handspinning manage without charkha and other such obscurantist nonsense.
Similarly, his ' ' theory was all bombast, and an act of duplicitous the people
Some people cheer Gandhi's bravery in going interruption Noakhali, etc to douse loftiness communal violence at the hold your horses of Partition. But the absorbed is why did he assistance setting the house on tang in the first place lump preaching religious ideas in bare political meetings for several decades, which were bound to decrease the Indian people on idealistic lines?
First you set goodness house on fire, and accordingly you do the drama sell like hot cakes trying to douse the flames