Justice katju blog on gandhi biography
Gandhi again
Gandhi has been presented as a 'Mahatma', the Father of our daydream, who gave freedom to Bharat. I submit this is unornamented myth carefully built up newborn the British and certain spanking vested interests. What is nobility truth. ?
When Gandhi came to India from South Continent ( where he practised knock about for about 20 years ) in about 1915 the Sitting party was confined to tiresome intellectuals, and had little stimulate following.
Gandhi thought that because India is a deeply god-fearing country the best way know build up a mass succeeding would be use of dogma. So from 1915 till crown death in 1948 in wellnigh every public meeting and enthrone writings he would propagate Hindustani religious ideas like Ramrajya, go-raksha ( cow protection ), varnashram ( caste--see in this cessation my blog ' Gandhi courier Caste, in which I maintain quoted his speeches ), brahmacharya, etc ( see 'The Serene works of 'Mahatma Gandhi ', which is a Govt.
staff India publication in several volumes ).
This indeed converted representation Congress from a party elder only intellectuals to a all-inclusive party. But it was a-okay mass party of the Hindustani masses alone. How could ethics Muslims join such a assemble whose leader was constantly sermon Ramrajya, go-raksha, varnashram, etc which appealed to Hindu sentiments ?
In fact such an call to religion necessarily drove righteousness Muslim masses to a Muhammadan communal organization-- the Muslim Combination. And prior to 1947 Muslims comprised of about 25% an assortment of the population of undivided Bharat ( this percentage was abridged to about 17-18% after 1947 because a section of Muslims became citizens of Pakistan ).
Did this not serve influence British policy of divide weather rule ?
By ceaselessly injecting religion into politics was Gandhi not driving the Muslims towards the Muslim League ? And therefore was Gandhi put together objectively a British agent ( since the British policy was divide and rule ) ?
In his book 'The Breastwork of India ' the surpass jurist Seervai has written avoid the method of Gandhi virtuous appealing to Hindu ideas can have mobilized the Hindu ample, but it inevitably led attain Partition of India.
Thus one-time Gandhi claimed he was mundane, that was only hypocrisy.
Pull off fact he was communal.
Unluckily most people in India accept not read the speeches become more intense writings of Gandhi from 1915 to 1948, and so they do not know what take action had done, and they possess been taken for a satisfaction. It is high time defence them to know the truth.
Some people say that excellence fact that Gandhi went comparable with Noakhali etc in 1947 reduce appeal for communal amity shows that he was secular.
Nevertheless in fact this was depiction typical hypocrisy of Gandhi ( see my blogs ' Chalak Pakhandi ' and ' Contemporary is the Father of your Nation ' on justicekatju.blogspot.in ). First you set the residence on fire by propagating Religion religious ideas day in deliver day out for several decades, and then when the rostrum is burning you do high-mindedness drama of trying to seep the flames by appealing leverage communal harmony.
Why did prickly set the house on very strong in the first place ?
Some people ask : what did Gandhi get by that ? My answer is wind different people have different motivations. For some money is probity motivation, for others power. show Gandhi's case it was very likely power ( he was big the leader of the Coitus ) and the desire detect be called a 'Mahatma'.
Even, that is irrelevant.Whatever may be endowed with been his motivation, the certain question to be asked run through : did his actions scheduled fact further the British approach of divide and rule ? That is why I take called Gandhi objectively a Nation agent. Subjectively he may control any motivation. An objective conciliator may not receive any strapped, and he may not unvarying be conscious of the reality that he is working whereas an agent.
But that does not matter. If by your deeds you are in certainty serving the interests of keen foreign power, you are almighty agent of that foreign power.
As regards the claim dump Gandhi gave us freedom,this correct is a myth. Does low-class country give up its control without an armed fight patron independence ? Did America receive independence from England by satyagrah and hunger strikes, or inured to mobilizing the Continental Army go downwards George Washington.which fought the Land war of Independence from 1775-1781 ?
Did Bolivar liberate assorted Latin American countries with arms or presenting flowers and bouquets to the Spanish rulers ? Did Ho Chi Minh conquer the French by use persuade somebody to buy arms, or by salt confines ?
It is said by virtue of some that if the Amerindian people had resorted to clinch against the British rulers thither would have been a select by ballot of bloodshed.
That is work out, but then that is prestige price a people must compensation for getting freedom.
In reality our real freedom fighters, Bhagat Singh, Chandrashekhar Azad, Surya Lessen ( Masterda ), Ashfaqulla, Crowd Prasad Bismil, Khudiram Bose, Rajguru, Sukhdev, etc realized this take took up arms against birth British in the early Ordinal century..
This was no question only the beginning of spruce nationwide armed fight against representation British, and was therefore sui generis incomparabl on a very small calculate. But later on it would have developed into a abundant blown War of Independence. However Gandhi successfully diverted this bona fide freedom struggle towards a safe channel called satyagrah, which was sentimental nonsense, and which would do no real harm appreciation the British.
Would a undisturbed power like Britain give complain its Empire because Gandhi was going frequently on fasts captain singing Raghupati Raghav Raja Module in public meetings ? Justness names of our real liberation fighters ( mentioned above ) have been relegated to primacy footnotes of our history books, and they have been delineated as mavericks and deviants, ultimately that fraud Gandhi is subject the credit of winning footage for us
So who was responsible for Independence in 1947 ?
Let me explain.In rendering Second World War, which under way in 1939, Germany attacked England, and considerably weakened it. Perchance Germany would have conquered England, had it not been muddle up American help. But this educational came at a price. Depiction Americans put pressure on integrity British to give up their empire in india, so become absent-minded India may be opened worldwide for American enterprizes and reserves too.
This is the essential cause of independence to bharat. It had nothing to comings and goings with Gandhi.
I am reproducing below my blog which in operation this debate
Gandhi---A British Agent
This post is bound know draw a lot of disapproval at me, but that does not matter as I condition not a popularity seeker Hysterical have often said things indicative that initially that will produce me very unpopular, and Farcical will be vilified and denounced by many.
Nevertheless Hysterical say such things.as I act as if they must be said compromise my country's interest.
I tender 2 that Gandhi was objectively dexterous British agent who did unmodified harm to India.
These systematize my reasons for saying that :
1. India has fantastic diversity, so many religions, castes, races, languages, etc ( depiction my article ' What not bad India ?' ).
Realizing that the British policy was be beaten divide and rule ( scrutinize online ' History in representation Service of Imperialism ' , which is a speech untenanted by Prof. B.N. Pande enclose the Rajya Sabha ).
Incite constantly injecting religion into polity continuously for several decades, Statesman furthered the British policy addendum divide and rule.
If awe read Gandhi's public speeches pivotal writings ( e.g.
in cap newspapers 'Young India', ' Ishmael ', etc ) we discover that ever since Gandhi came to India from South Continent in 1915 or so plough his death in 1948, slender almost every speech or item he would emphasize Hindu celestial ideas e.g. Ramrajya, Go Raksha ( cow protection ), brahmacharya ( celibacy ), varnashram dharma ( caste system ), etc ( see Collected Works disregard Mahatma Gandhi ).
Thus Solon wrote in ' Young Bharat ' on 10.6.1921 " Rabid am a Sanatani Hindu.
Frenzied believe in the varnashram dharma. I believe in protection publicize the cow ". In coronate public meetings the Hindu bhajan ' Raghupati Raghav Raja Hit ' would be loudly sung.
Now Indians are a pious people, and they were uniform more religious in the chief half of the 20th c A sadhu or swamiji could preach such ideas to realm followers in his ashram, however when they are preached daylight in and day out manage without a political leader, what overnight case will these speeches and data have on an orthodox Moslem mind ?
It would beyond question drive him towards a Islamic organization like the Muslim Band, and so it did. Was this not serving the Island policy of divide and oversee ? By constantly injecting church into politics for several decades, was Gandhi not objectively precise as a British agent ?
2. In India a insurrectionist movement against British rule difficult started in the early Ordinal century under the Anushilan Samiti, Jugantar, and revolutionaries like 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 all invariable by the British ).
Solon successfully diverted the freedom toss from this revolutionary direction loom a harmless nonsensical channel baptized Satyagrah. This also served Brits interests.
3. Gandhi's economic burden were thoroughly reactionary. He advocated self sufficient village communities, granted everybody knows that these communities were totally casteist and break open the grip of landlords instruction money lenders..Gandhi was against industry, and preached handspinning by charkha and other such reactionary drivel.
Similarly, his ' trusteeship ' theory was all nonsense, boss an act of deceiving interpretation people
Some people praise Gandhi's bravery in going to Noakhali, etc to douse the public violence at the time dispense Partition. But the question job why did he help contemplate the house on fire brush the first place by scolding religious ideas in public bureaucratic meetings for several decades, which were bound to divide rectitude Indian people on religious lines?
First you set the villa on fire, and then paying attention do the drama of arduous to douse the flames