Bunty aur Babli: The latest RSS-BJP tango

Now that a few days have passes since my last post (#286) on this article, and having cooled down a bit, I would like to admit that I have used strong words in that post. I am sorry, Farzana, for using those strong words.

As is evident, Farzana never responded to the questions I brought up a couple of interacts ago – except indirectly through an i-log dated June 30, 2005, entitled “Mere ghar ka darwaaza koi nahin hai...”. The following are excerpted from there. Her portions are enclosed within brackets. The rest are my comments on those excerpts.

[Every couple of months or so, there is an attempt made here to ‘expose’ me. How can anyone expose someone who bares herself, whose headlines and blurbs leave no room for any confusion, who has, despite being hauled up for stating certain things, not turned to spineless jelly although that would be so very convenient?]
Ma’m, its true that you have written and continue to write a lot. Thank God for that blessing. And obviously you are anything but spineless – when did ANYBODY say that? However, it IS possible for relative newcomers to remain unfamiliar with some of your older articles and opinions. It’s time-consuming enough for many people just to keep pace with what’s coming from you and others NOW. Besides, many older articles (especially the Civic Center variety) deal with contemporary political topics of their times and there is little reason or interest on the part of some people (like me) in THOSE types. And yes, not every Chowk reader knows an equal amount of information about your own history, etc. There is just no way someone like me would understand your personal sacrifices, travails, etc. (to the same extent as somebody like, let’s say for discussion – “temporal” who has had a longer-term presence) unless they can go back and can read every little post of yours and connect all the dots – somewhat impractical for most people.

[And yet I do not want to be called “spunky”…that is eminently suitable for sophomores, the receivers of such ‘compliments’ and the givers too.]
Those who understand the context of this statement would immediately realize that this statement is eminently unfair – especially with respect to the “receivers”.

[I merely have an opinion (it is never projected as a judgment writ in stone). Others are free (and often wantonly misuse such freedom) to express theirs.]
Considering how little your “opinion” on the plight of Kashmiri Pandits has changed over so many years, I think I could be forgiven for thinking that indeed it WAS a “judgment writ in stone”. Also, I believe you have the same access to resources for expressing YOUR opinions this time around, but have CHOSEN not to use them.

[Later, another person “demands” to know if it is true! I post it myself, I expose myself…and then the person wonders whether I have something to hide]
I guess the “another person” refers to me. I appreciate the fact that you posted that letter from Asian Age – a paper I do NOT read. If you take a minute to go back to my interact #269, I never said that you HAD something to hide – only that THIS discussion should not be hidden by putting it on outdated and deeply-buried pages, unless you want to create the ``hiding`` impression.

[…for god’s sake, the newspaper is an open forum, people do read it…and the fact is that for three days running there were letters responding to me. To a letter, not a column or an article. ]
I’m sorry to say Ma’m, not everybody reads everything (surprise, surprise!) and indeed it’s possible for people to be “absent” (due to travel, etc.) and miss out. I have even known some AUTHORS to do that, even some good ones!

[We have been through this so often…create a demon out of me to come out smelling of roses yourself.]
Ma’m why would I try to create a demon out of you? Did the possibility occur to you that my questions may actually be well-intentioned? As far as the “smelling of roses” is concerned, I KNOW that I stink in most interacts – are you happy now?

[No one remembers what I had to say about the Quran desecration, about Indian POWs in Pakistan…well, if someone can go and post on the page, they obviously know what I have written.]
Although you may react based on your own experiences which may (as I am now finding out) have been bitter, is it not possible that not everything is about “making a demon out of you”? If you indeed YOURSELF go and look at those two spaces that you mention, it may become apparent that at least THIS interactor never made it to them.

[Would Sri Ravi Shankar be called a jihadi? Would it be said he is letting down Kashmir Pandits by hobnobbing with a militant?]
I certainly never said any such thing about him or you, but I did point out that not responding can make you more open to such charges (the “no show” outcome)!

[In my earlier piece when I wrote in my post “This piece is not about Jinnah”, I was told it was a cop-out. The whole article discussed the RSS-BJP link; I wanted people to stop discussing Jinnah, as hero or villain. My views on Jinnah are already there in an article. Nothing hidden. ]
I do believe that Jinnah is a legitimate topic for this forum, since the controversy started with Advani expressing his opinions on the man. As I pointed out in #155, it’s interesting to compare Jinnah and Advani side by side and see the analogy, yet you seem to come to different conclusions with respect to each. This reason of this inconsistency is indeed “hidden” from me, so it’s legitimate for me to ask.

[And then there are people who tell you what you should find funny, what you should think, how you should feel…few go beyond the obvious. So, when I ask questions (with utmost propriety) about the lady writing about the darzi and the shoewalla, I find myself being baited on that board.]
Ma’m you are well aware that the article you refer to was a humor piece and most of the responses (including those that responded to your interact) were done in humor! Isn’t it okay for people to be FUNNY once in a while – even on a humor piece?

[For me it is more important to raise these points out in the open than to wonder about multiple nicks and fight such ‘imaginary demons’…we do not know who most are, so I don’t exercise my mind, though others have their point of view; I let them be, wish they’d leave me be too… I stood my ground where it mattered to me – where I could be seen.]
Ma’m you are very well aware that it’s not possible or practical for every one to use their actual names and that’s why MOST people on this site do use nicks – some perhaps several. I have no problem with multiple nicks as long as these are not used in a dishonest manner by purporting to carry out a conversation with each other. I have NEVER accused you of doing that! And yes, I believe that you DO have more credibility in my eyes because indeed you do stand your ground.

[I am just glad that I do not see Chowk as a playground, or a place to network, or a friendship circle, or a boxing ring…and most certainly not a place to find a soulmate. Yes, for me it is always in the singular.]
Every one has a soul! People who may identify with some of your thoughts and feel an empathy with your soul based on them are not always looking to be a “mate”. Why does it have to be about being one? And you may be right in what you say about playground, network, friendship circle, or boxing ring; however, I am reasonably sure that if one were to dig through some of your responses, they can prove you wrong on ALL of these, especially the last one.

[I just don’t have the ‘talent’ to multitask, or the energy.]
Somehow, I felt that you did NOT believe in reductionism.

[I am happy with the feeble and sometimes febrile connections I might make with a few words.]
Your words do carry a lot of power, ma’m!

[My silences are my own. They are much too precious for public consumption!]
I am unsure if this refers to this article or not. If it does, then I would like to point out that when a question is asked and you chose not to answer it, you essentially let the other side’s point of view stand, except in the eyes of those who already know your track record and history in detail over the longer term and choose to look away from some of the inconsistencies they might think themselves. When they do so, aren’t they being patronizing, and are you comfortable with such patronizaing?

Again, I am sorry about my “janitorial” words. You and other interactors who have watched me over the past few months ought to be able to easily figure out for yourself whether a real “punch” was intended or not. Now, PLEASE stop pretending to reel from them! Thanks.

tahmed32:

``and narrow mindset of the Indian leaders (other than Jinnah,...)

tahmed saheb, I think that this is the upteenth time that you have found it necessary to qualify Jinnah as an exemption. As I said earlier, in the interest of truthful reporting, you should add Sarvarkar and RSS to Jinnah because that was the ``illustrious`` company in which Jinnah found himself at that time.

Mahrana #285 Kindly do not twist everything to suit your imagination. When I said you have a slavish mentality, I said that because you were following the widespread - and as I have explained, totally emotional and ill-informed views in India that the Japanese pawn bose was a hero simply because he was against the brits (regardless of the obvious facts) and that the Quit India movement was anything more than another monument to the parochial and narrow mindset of the Indian leaders (other than Jinnah, and in vast contrast to other world leaders including Asian leaders of the time like Mao Tse Tung and Ho Chi Minh and Soekarno who fought the Japanese tooth and nail rather than being fooled by Japanese and Nazi patronizing of Bose and their sweet talk about freeing Asia from europeans).

If you were to base your views on facts and common sense - in which case you would have had no option other than to agree to thethen I would not have said that you have a slavish mentality.

#270, #272, #276
Anil, Kaal, and Dr. LokRaj.

Thanks for being honest and courageous enough to provide me a response. I really appreciate it. It also helps me identify the few who are NOT members of the herd (or perhaps to put it in more janitorial terms, the male harem)!

I suppose I had been laboring under a certain illusion while (as happens in many detective stories) the truth was right there, staring me in the face all the time! A real eye-opener, this one!

I’ll do my level best to undo the damage that this crowd is so intent on inflicting on innocents – the REAL underdogs! In my view at this time, there are precious few of those poor creatures to be found in this virtual den of Islamist wolves (of all nationalities) who whore their better nature to their religious passions, while coming up with all kinds of euphemisms to cover it up! Well, they look VERY naked to me at this point!

And Anil, I don’t buy your statement that it is “courageous” to side with the devil, all it means that one is either an idiot (which I seriously doubt) or devil incarnate.

Jesus Christ, what a siren! And what a waste of such raw, raw talent! This is one moment I feel glad that the clock IS ticking!

Note: the above are MY personal views and I take full responsibility for them. Those who disagree are welcome to jump into a lake!

Tahmed # 277,

Surprising that people who do not support british are called slaves and the others freedom fighters. Thats the excuse slaves give to justify their boot licking actions every day.

I can understand the logic of pakistani population very well now.

Adios

Tahmed # 277,

Surprising that people who do not support british are called slaves and the others freedom fighters. Thats the excuse slaves give to justify their boot licking actions every day.

I can understand the logic of pakistani population very well now.

Adios

My take at this Pakistani mafiaso-

I would ask all those Indians who have been threatened by this Paki mafiaso to pool in their expected payoff money and give it to some ex-armymen to raise a squad of assasins to exterminate this mafiaso pest from Pakistan-

even if a group of 6-7 Indians could come together and pool in 10 lacs each all that would be sufficient to raise a group of vigilante to exterminate Dawood right in his own pureland............................

Dost-mittar,

“The need of the hour was to treat all religions equally, instead he treated Hindus and Muslims differently in matters of personal law and management of their places of worship and educational institutions.”

I kind of agree with you but I have my own perspective on what Nehru did.

Even before the partition, Congress relied on the most regressive elements of the Muslims community for support. It neglected the educated Muslims who, though less in numbers, were becoming the most vocal group of Muslim community. Muslim League played right for them. The Pakistan’s support mainly came for the educated middle class in UP and Bihar or even in Bengal and all mullah were against it. People, who left India after the partition, were also the most educated Muslims of the minority province.
Nehru and congress’s assessment of the Muslim community was utterly wrong. Muslims were conservative and backwards but they were not about ready to make mullah their leader. Congress continued to rely on the same Mullah’s like Azad and JUI for support after the partition too.

Nehru personally, imo, had a soft corner for Muslims. He had special relations with Muslim Jagirdar families. Nawab Chitari and Raja sahib Mehmoodabad despite their support for Pakistan were also personal friends of Nehru. Nehru never engaged them in the pre-partition politics.
Since Nehru continued to work with Mullahs, he gave in to their regressive politics. He never tried to encourage western educated Muslims to come to the forefront. Imo, Two reasons for that: First Nehru believed that it was his responsibility to provide protection to Muslims after the partition and second he was so much under pressure by Azad and other mullahs that he could not even bring the western educated and somewhat secular Muslims into the Indian politics. He did bring Chaglla as the Kashmir affair minister but that was too late and Chagalla lacked the charisma to take on the leadership mantle.

So I would not blame Nehru entirely on his regressive policies about Muslims. He just continued with pre-partition congress policies and thought that he was helping Muslims in hostile environments after the partition.
Nehru was immensely popular in Muslims in India and especially in UP Muslims. Until date, you will not find Pakistani Mohajir bad mouth Nehru. He fancied himself as the Muslim leader and probably did not think about to bring the western educated Muslims on board after the partition. Nevertheless, he had so many issues after the partition to handle that he missed something right under his nose.

HP:
I have said it before and will say it again. Part of my problem with the Nehru heritage is that I also hold him responsible for the socio-economic backwardness of India`s Muslims and the rise of hindutva.

My years of training as a policy analyst has made me acutely sensitive to the intended and unintended effects of any program or policy. HIndutva practically died with Mahatma Gandhi. There was hardly any sympathiser of the RSS or Savarkar left when an RSS member killed Gandhi and Savarkar was arrested in the murder case. If Nehru had followed sensible policies, the universe would have unfolded quite differently. The need of the hour was to treat all religions equally, instead he treated Hindus and Muslims differently in matters of personal law and management of their places of worship and educational institutions. This created the seeds of a backlash; so when the slogan of pseudo-secularism was raised, the mud stuck. At the same time, Nehru did not do anything to increase the participation of Muslims in places that matter - jobs in police, army and civil service or to support a strong, mobile, multi-religious security force to quell communal trouble wherever it appeared, and it did appear quite regularly during Nehru`s time. Nehru had a soft corner for the likes of Jamiat-ul-ulema and other obscurantists and ignored the advice of progressive Muslims like M.C. Chagla. Thus Deobandis and Madrassas providing education with few job prospects flourished while the common Muslim man and woman was left behind.

#279 that in fact is a perfectly reasonable assumption.

#278 by tahmed32

[What the japs would have been done - assuming they would have treated indians no differently than they treated other countries they occupied - would have been several hundred times worse.]

Enough said.

south asian: I agree that what we did to ourselves (kill half a million innocent people during partition) was bad. What the japs would have been done - assuming they would have treated indians no differently than they treated other countries they occupied - would have been several hundred times worse.

Maharana #266 You write ``People who fought to undermine the british are called freedom fighters. People who support them are called stooges. `` So, what you hear people say is more important than what you would realize if you used a bit of common sense. This is mindset of a slave - a man who cant think for himself, but rather repeats what he hears others say.

Enough said. As you said, ``Adios``.

Re: # 269
BeeJay,
I agree with what Anil has said about the issue of refugee.
Govt. support or no Govt support,the fact remains that Kashmiri Hindus did not leave their homes because of their own free will.The circumstances created in the valley forced them to do so.Even if some of them got assistance,that does not change their status.For how many of them,the state help has been on a countinous basis and how many have gained the same social and financial status which they enjoyed in their home state.
One may have a different view of the role of militants,insurgents and state in creating the circumstances which forced them to leave their homes,but their status of refugees is un-questionable,at least according to my understanding.

It is time a group of NRI pooled in resources to exterminate Dawood and his henchmen from Karachi and Dubai by taking the services of ex-army men...........................................................shame on India for not eliminating this ISI pest for long................................



D-wedding: Love wins over villian ISI
MOHUA CHATTERJEE

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 2005 12:14:30 AM ]

Surf `N` Earn -Sign innow

NEW DELHI: For Dawood Ibrahim`s daughter Mahrukh and Javed Miandad`s son Junaid, engaged to be married in Karachi soon, it was like a script out of Bollywood`s potboilers

Re: # 265 Would Japanese have done to us any worse than we did to ourselves in 1947?

It is time a group of NRI pooled in resources to exterminate Dawood and his henchmen from Karachi and Dubai by taking the services of ex-army men...........................................................shame on India for not eliminating this ISI pest for long................................



D-wedding: Love wins over villian ISI
MOHUA CHATTERJEE

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 2005 12:14:30 AM ]

Surf `N` Earn -Sign innow

NEW DELHI: For Dawood Ibrahim`s daughter Mahrukh and Javed Miandad`s son Junaid, engaged to be married in Karachi soon, it was like a script out of Bollywood`s potboilers

re: BeeJay # 269

Regarding (2), that is my current understanding. A slight possible variation is that Farzana considers that Kashmiri Hindus left their homes, their properties, their professions, and their memories, not because they were being killed by well-armed terrorists, but because they wanted to avail themselves of the free bus tickets (and whatever else) the then governor Jagmohan was giving out.

To be fair to her, Farzana may believe that this is how all human beings behave. She may not believe that Hindus in her country are not the only ones who are blessed with this desire for free buts tickets in exchange for home, properties, profession, and memories. We may be able to get her clarification.



Anil

``independent views``


Good, I thought everyone of us was either a slave or a robot :)

Re: # 269

BeeJay:

``Drs. Gill & LokRaj, Rahul, DM, HN, NHK, T, “Burpinder”, Miriamk, Kaal, Anil, Subroto, and anybody else I missed – your take on (3)? ...``

I had been fortunate to personally come to know Farzana, her independent views and courage, and come to admire these qualities in her. She certainly presents an independent view point on Kashmir, which she and I had an opportunity to discuss. Also, I am equally proud of my Kashmiri brahmin background. I think she has taken a very narrow definition of refugee. I do not take such a narrow definition of refugees, to me refugees also includes those on their own will and out of fear of persecution or loss of life leave their home. Only this definition allows, Russian Jews, to Palestinians, to sub-continents Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims at the time of partition, and many others be called refugees.

Anil

Re: # 269

BeeJay:

``Drs. Gill & LokRaj, Rahul, DM, HN, NHK, T, “Burpinder”, Miriamk, Kaal, Anil, Subroto, and anybody else I missed – your take on (3)? ...``

I had been fortunate to personally come to know Farzana, her independent views and courage, and come to admire these qualities in her. She certainly presents an independent view point on Kashmir, which she and I had an opportunity to discuss. Also, I am equally proud of my Kashmiri brahmin background. I think she has taken a very narrow definition of refugee. I do not take such a narrow definition of refugees, to me refugees also includes those on their own will and out of fear of persecution or loss of life leave their home. Only this definition allows, Russian Jews, to Palestinians, to sub-continents Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims at the time of partition, and many others be called refugees.

Anil

All interactors, including Farzana:

This is important to me! So I need your response.

I have been on travel and just started catching up yesterday. Since this article had the maximum number of interacts, I saved it till the end. I just read FV’s interact #76 and am still trying to figure out what happened here.

I know she does not want it discussed here, but she has no authority to dictate that to anyone. This is an open forum, THIS is her current board and her letter to that newspaper appears to have happened this month. There is no reason to put current discussion on a deeply buried board (which happened long before I joined chowk) if there is no reason to hide something.

And no, I’m not a Kashmiri Pandit masquerading under this nick or that and yes, I consider myself a serious fan of her works (although I have not read everything she has written), some of which has appealed to me and affected me at a very deep, personal, and emotional level.

I realize that some of you have already expressed yourself more verbosely on this. However, please remove your India/Pakistan glasses for just a few minutes and let me know the following with a short answer:

(1) Did Farzana really write that letter as quoted here or was there a longer version which was abridged by an editor? If there was a more comprehensive letter, can she please post it here?

(2) Farzana, do you really believe that people who leave their ancestral homes because they need to save their lives (and loved ones) should not be considered refugees (because they received monetary assistance during escape)? (Don’t fuzz please, I have never known you to do that!)

(3) HP and Tahmed, do you agree with Farzana on (2)?

(4) Drs. Gill & LokRaj, Rahul, DM, HN, NHK, T, “Burpinder”, Miriamk, Kaal, Anil, Subroto, and anybody else I missed – your take on (3)?

Give it to me straight, and give it to me NOW! With all due respects, I DEMAND it!!!

Sincerely,
BeeJay.

HP

Man, you do have a pretty good grasp of the churning that is going on in India currently :)

#263 by dost-mittar

“You do not have to convince me about the saffronisation of the Hindu Middle Class.”

I was merely responding to your wild comment about me. I am glad our conclusions on RSS/VHP influence on the Indian Middleclass are close. I don’t exaggerate, I highlight. I know who is going to destroy the age old Indian society, your cheerful assessment of RSS/VHP notwithstanding!

Sulekha is just one site, I go to many sites and there are some Indian discussions forums where some very enlightened Indians show up. I learn from them. It is unfortunate but chowk seem to attract the worst of India.

“Yes, there is a reappraisal going on about Nehru and Gandhi and some of the things being said about them are the same that the Pakistanis have been saying for a long time.”

Pretty much all Indians believed that Pakistanis have fiddled up or altered the history and now that same history is a piece of inspiration! Hariat main parr giya hoan Ki dinya kia say kia ho gayi.

Isn’t this ironic that Pakistanis who were considered communal and religious bigots are now the messengers of truth in India!

However, AFAIK, a good number of Pakistani intellectuals have totally skewed knowledge of what happened in pre-partition India.

What you are saying is very subjective understanding of the Indian history. I will get into that debate later. But leaders have always been questioned and at times they were thoroughly thrashed but sooner or later they come back because what they did was not based on one or two days or ad hoc politics but was based on substantive intellectual discourse. Lincoln after being an American hero for so long now is being questioned for what he did during the civil war.

Nehru, Gandhi, and Jinnah are no exceptions. They will be thrashed in the light of new politics and newly emerging ideologies but a historical perspective is not based on ten years or twenty years. The process is much longer and being a Nehru follower, I know he will come back to his rightful place in the Indian history and would survive the current virulent attack from the followers of Savarkar.

Tahmed,

``The japanese will treat us Indians differently than they treated others`` way of thinking that led the Indian leaders (other than jinnah) to undermine the british war effort with their irresponsible actions (Quit India and so forth). ``

People who fought to undermine the british are called freedom fighters. People who support them are called stooges. My post does not claim that the japs would have treated indians differently. Merely the fact that iron can be used to cut iron, and there;s nothing wrong with that.
It seems by your logic that we should have supported the british and asked them to use us further. No wonder you guys don`t feel any shame when musharraf is publicly whooped by U.S. I finally understand that pakistan`s present is no anomaly and that it was intentioned to be a ``responsible action`` state under the tutelage and boots of white guys.

Adios

Maharana: So you still insist in ignoring what the japanese would have dont to indians (which, rest assured, would have been no different than what they did to all other nationalities they occupied - namely use them for slave labor, bayonet practice, medical experiments, or else simply kill them in the tens of millions if they had no use for them). That is fine. It is exactly this ``The japanese will treat us Indians differently than they treated others`` way of thinking that led the Indian leaders (other than jinnah) to undermine the british war effort with their irresponsible actions (Quit India and so forth).

Also you write ``to know that Bose planted the information in britsh intelligence circle
about a possible attack by INA paratroopers trained by the germans and
japs in 1945. According to some american historians, this too was
another reason for the brits to hurry up independence of india. ``

Do you seriously think that in 1945 (when the germans and japanese were as good as beaten), the Brits would be concerned about ....... ``INA paratroopers``. ha! ha! Get serious my friend. Do you seriously think that just having beaten the mighty nazi and jap militaries, the allies would have given two hoots about these ``INA paratroopers`` of yours??

Funny how pakis are commenting about the BJP/Congress/CPI...Isn`t half of Pakiland controlled by an ally of the taliban?

Mike:

People vote in an election -any election anywhere- based on a variety of factors: personal, local, provincial, national. Those who voted for the BJP did not all vote because of its hindutva stance. Similarly, someone voting for the Congress does not mean he or she is necessarily against Hindutva. I personally would vote for Jaswant Singh, Manmohan Singh or Brinda Karat even though they belong to the BJP, Congress and CP(M) respectively because I consider them all to be honest and competent people who would engage in a civilized and rigourous debate in the Parliament.

HP:
You do not have to convince me about the saffronisation of the Hindu Middle Class. I wrote an article on the same topic which is still there in the archives. You seem to exaggerate it a lot. Your favourite whipping boy is the sulekha website. I am not a member there and so do not know what goes on their discussion forum. I do however find it to be a rich resource of news of interest to the Indian/Pakistani diaspora and have no problem finding there news both for and against the Hindutva people. Same about Rediff.com.
Yes, there is a reappraisal going on about Nehru and Gandhi and some of the things being said about them are the same that the Pakistanis have been saying for a long time. Some of us are also guilty of agreeing with facts even if they are pointed out by people whose general policies and ideologies we are against. Disagreeing with them on facts will only expose us as dumb and make them stronger. Most of the ire however is reserved for Nehru who most of us believe set India back by several decades with his well-intentioned but ill-thought-out policies. My Personal regret is that Rajaji`s Swatantra Party did not survive in India, otherwise we would have had a truly free-enterprise, non-communal party.

As HP has perceptively understood, India is fundamentally changing (a point I have been trying to make for some time, with not half as much success). HP is also on the money in suggesting that BJP`s loss of power should not be overinterpreted. India has not reverted to the days of Nehru and Gandhi. The reasons for this transformation are too many and too complicated to dig into right now.

---

The hyper-emotional debate about Gandhi-Nehru-Bose seems so un-Indian.

Is there any other Indian who feels the same way? Are there many Indians here who cannot take two contradictory ideas, understand the inherent limitations and mutual oppositions of these ideas, and give both of them their respect when deserved?

I thought that dealing with contradictions nature throws at us was our favorite pastime, a specialty of sorts. :)

Hello Tahmed,


I think a factual reading of Bose`s as given in this journal paper will

tell you about his intentions.
http://www.vho.org/GB/Journals/JHR/3/4/Borra407-439.html

What is lesser known is also the now unclassified documents of the

british intelligence about india`s independence. You will be surprised

to know that Bose planted the information in britsh intelligence circle

about a possible attack by INA paratroopers trained by the germans and

japs in 1945. According to some american historians, this too was

another reason for the brits to hurry up independence of india.

The issue of nazism or japs cruelty or their possible beahviour towards

indians is moot. The british commited acts of violence in their own

way. The americans commited acts of violence too in nagasaki and

hirohima. Its a well known fact that the americans did not want to use

atomic bombs against their own kind ( the germans). I don`t see any

pakistani having qualms about taking help from U.S. from the beginning.

It is a confirmed fact now with Amartya Sen`s work that the british

actually horded foodgrains while bengal starved with millions dying.

The backlash of 1857 revolt by the british was a black chapter in

india`s history. Its the victors who write history. And even the

victors of 2nd world war did not know of the atcocities commited by

hitler until the end of war. How do you expect bose to have known that?

He actually confronted hitler about his views directly. If hitler had

won, you would have been singing paeans about the noblity of germans.

And telling us about, how americans commited genocide against the

native americans, dropped bombs in nagasaki & hiroshima, confined the

japs to concentration camps in US etc. In a war it is the more brutal

who wins. To an indian, no matter who won, we would have had our

freedom irrespective. If the germans had colonised india, you think

Bose would not have seeked britain`s help?
Please don`t bring jinnah into the picture. He never fought against the

british to be remotely compared with bose or other freedom fighters. A

street bum who did nothing would appear wiser then bose at this point

in your eyes.

Due to lack of popular support and the spineless attitude of many

indians the british were able to rule despite all the violence and

deceit. People of indian sub-continent have got into the habit of not

thinking on their own and allowing an outsider to do it for them. Being

ruled happily by outsiders and emulating heir values because lack of

self-belief and in fighting prompts these people to become lackeys of

an outside system(that includes jinnah). People from various corners of

india can tell you proudly how their forefathers served the british.

The new india has evolved out of the shadows of just such a mental

lethargy and hopefully a clean break was made from the past with

respect to deciding one`s own destiny. I`m not surprised that educated

pakistanis think otherwise. For, to appreciate the freedom won the hard

way is to develop the same into one`s on system of governance, culture,

thoughts and everything else. Why else seek freedom if you are happy

with the outsiders system. Its a ridiculous effort and waste of blood.

You metnion about indians being strong supporters of U.S and that it is

good thing. I think not. To play second fiddle to a superpower is in

our blood. And pakistanis have taken a longer lead over us. Developing

a healthy business relationship should not translate to absolute

servility towards the americans. The chinese know how to do just that.

Is it ever possible for indians or pakistanis to get their act together

and decide their destinies by themselves without interference from

outside? How do you manage to swallow pakistani humilation in mukhtaran

mai`s case and appreciate phone calls from U.S to musharraf to do about

turns. It all boils down to not having a local system in place which

could have justly decided a pakistani`s fate in her homeland. The

humilation is a result of mental lethargy and a will to govern one`s

own destiny. Why seek freedom then? People who fought for their freedom

also put a system to preserve it forever. Like they did in India. And

we love Bose for trying for such a freedom. Not to sit and take anyone

else as superior to us. But to believe in ourselves.

Those who wanted to believe in britain`s constitution had the privilige

not to act at all and thus be called wise in hidsight. Those who

thought otherwise did whatever was necessary to get rid of them.
To me his detrmination to fight the brits took him across continenets

and mobilize an army, which by those days standards was extraordinary

in itself.

It is not strange that history in both india and pakistan has been

twisted to suit interests. But I find it ironical that in india ( which

is labeled as hindu india) history was twisted by leftists to not give

due share to freedom fighters like Bose or others who went aganist

Gandhi. Pakistan, which was founded by a person who never fought

against the british was hailed as a great freedom fighter. To me Bose

is a hero unlike jinnah who rocked his own ship without contributing

anything to its formation. Remember, that Bose too differed with

Gandhi, but that did not lead him to demand a separate nation. He

simply went ahead to apply the method he believed in.

A google search will tell you that the best estimate of number of

people killed by japs is 6 millions. Here`s the academic link to that.
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP3.HTM

One last word. While discussing politics like on this board, I hope you

do not take anything personally. Please take everything in the spirit

of discussion.

Adios

drlokraj: greetings. I beg to agree differ, like HP also does, with your thinking that the BJP has been shown the door once and for in India. They remain the second largest opposition party, and can come back to power. The only hope is that they will continue to work within the framework of Indian democracy rather than try to replace it. And thus become more like the german CDU (with ``green`` Andrea Merkel as head) rather than the german Nazi party (with nut case Hitler as head) that the RSS brownshirts were modelled after in the 1930`s.

Also...BJP`s support comes from hindus . Hindus constitute 80% of India`s population. Many Hindus may not vote for BJP for several reasons. But BJP`s anti-muslim stance is certainly not one of them.

docloc.....to say that Indian masses showed BJP the door would be inaccurate. It was a hung assembly in which BJP got only a half a dozen seats less than the winning party - Congress. In India elections are dominated by local , regional issues where concepts like leaking drainages , dry water taps and presence of pot holes are of much greater importance than vague concepts such as secularism/fascism/whatever. So expect no political party to win with a majority. Last time BJP got the boot. Next time it will be Congress` turn.

in #256 the phrase ``(and the British build an empire...`` should read ``(and the British did not build an empire...``.

btw, nice job in maintaining a civilized tone, gb/PewResearch/Mike. Now I am getting worried about what you are up to. :-)

Mike/gb #250 There is certainly no plausible gain the British could have had by creating an artificial famine in Bengal (and the British build an empire and influence every corner of the world for two hundred years by being stupid).

I think there is a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature of the Japanese Empire that would have replaced the British Empire in India if the japs had won the war. The British Empire, even at its worst stage in 1857, never came close to the brutality of the japs. Thus, while sikhs and gurkhas fought bravely against the brits, once defeated the brits sought to be-friend them rather than to annihilate them. The jap philosophy was the opposite - a defeated foe (unless he was already dead) deserved no respect, no dignity - only to be worked as a slave, used for medical experiments, or simply butchered/starved to death if there was no other use for him. If you wish to learn more about what Bose would have brought into India on the same red carpet that you say he would have been welcomed by Indians, I suggest you google on Unit 731 (the infamous japanese ``medical research`` unit in manchuria that dissected humans live in order to ``study`` their live organs; expermented with germ warfare by infecting entire villages from the air; and so forth.

#253 by drlokraj

”HP you are talking about the days when BJP was in power.”

No I am not! Winning and losing elections don’t mean a thing. Indian political scene is still dominated by Hindutva and Congress plays that card too.
BJP may have lost elections one time. They way things are in India; BJP may be in power in the next elections.
When I talk about “New History” I am not talking about the text books. Text books don’t teach History. History is taught and distorted at the other media. People learn stories from the text books, they read history when they are able to understand and analyze it and are inspired by it.

southasian #249 Your post is interesting insofar as it illustrates the way of thinking that misled Bose and the Indian leaders (except Jinnah). Thus:

1. you say ``it was the Chinese resistance that triggered Japanese brutality. `` This is a ``blame the victim`` way of thinking. Do you seriously think that 35,000,000 Chinese were killed merely to suppress Chinese resistance?? The facts are a google away, the books are available, photographs of Chinese men and women being bayonnetted to death. And this is just one country!! What did Mao Tse-tung, Ho Chi Minh, Soekarno, Marcos, all know about the japs that the Indian leadership did not.

2. you say ``With eventual defeat of Japan and Germany, of course, an ideal scenario would have emerged: an Independent India with both Japanese and British nowhere near India. I am sure SC Bose had a plan of this nature up his sleave. ``

If this is what Bose had in mind, then this would certainly re-inforce my point that the man was unltra-stupid. Do you seriously think that, having beaten the nazis and japs, the Brits would have stepped aside to let the INA into India??

Re: # 251
HP you are talking about the days when BJP was in power.Yes they tried to all those things but have they succeeded.Indian masses showed them the door and there is no way for them to come back and BJP knows that.Thats why they are desparately trying to find some issue for the next elections.The history books we read didnot even mention about Savarkar and the Hindutwa ideology and same books are still being taught in schools.

Being a hindu does not mean being RSS/BJP supporter like all muslims are/were not supporters of muslim league.

If definition of hindutva is to mean those voting for BJP , then 36% of the 650 million strong adult Indian electorate can be said to be hindutva-waadis....

#247 by dost-mittar

”For my friend HP who fancies all 800 million Hindus to be members of RSS/VHP”

Unlike you I don’t get my inspiration from Bollywood movies. I can make a clear distinction between who is RSS/VHP and Hindutva-vadi or who is ``soft Hindutva-vadi” and who is for secularism.
I would say nice try but still NO cigar for you!

No two people think alike but they can be inspired by one philosophy. There is an ideological struggle going on in India between the Secularism and the Hindutva. Right now Hindutva is winning the battle and new history is being written in India that is the history of bigotry and the purpose is to bring down the old symbols of secularism and Indian freedom movement and promote icons that were either on the fringe or were communal.

I know who eulogizes Godse and Savarkar and who brings down Nehru and promotes that nincompoop Jaswant Singh for crying out loud!

In my every post I make a clear and conscious attempt to distinguish people based on their political leanings and not on their national or religious beliefs. Contrary to some of your friends, who call every Pakistani a Jihadi or terrorist, I exactly know who is close to RSS/VHP is and who is not.

I know India a whole lot better than you think and I know where people are coming from. So please don’t try pulling a rug over the reality in India. There may be 800 million Hindus in India but there are 1000 millions Indians in India too.
There are many trends and ideologies that play out in the arena but today’s reality is that the Hindutva ideology, which is based on bigotry, communalism, and religious symbolism, dominates the Indian body politics. I don’t think all 800 millions Hindu subscribes to it but I do know that vast majority of Indian middleclass subscribes to it. So a Hindu Majority may be communal but to say that all Hindus are communal would not be accurate and I would not do that.

Tahmed..how about this perspective....the British created artificial food scarcity in India , heavily taxed the poor farmers , starved to death 3 million Indians every year during their 150-200 year rule.

Famines were virtually unheard of in India before the British came , but in 200 years of the Raj , there were 40-50 severe famines resulting in millions of starvation deaths. 80% of India`s population was left below poverty line , i.e. , on the brink of starvation ,by the time the British left. Those who were killed in Jallianwala Bag were lucky in comparison.

Re: # 246 I assume Japanese occupied China and Chinese were trying to resist with violent force. And that followed with violent repression. The kind of repression you are talking about was resorted to by the British around 1857. There were no violent uprisings of any consequence afterwards. If there was any it was crushed.

The point I want to make is simple. Indian style of resistance was civil and peaceful in character and did not lend itself to violent suppression easily. Of course, I don`t want to take anything away from the British and their sense of fair play. One must add that there was a distinct lack of outcry on Jalianwala massacre in Britain .

To sum up what I mean to say is this: Japanese were more brutal but it was the Chinese resistance that triggered Japanese brutality. In case of India a victorious INA would have been accorded a red carpet welcome. Of course British agents would have been severely dealt with. With eventual defeat of Japan and Germany, of course, an ideal scenario would have emerged: an Independent India with both Japanese and British nowhere near India. I am sure SC Bose had a plan of this nature up his sleave.

In my previous post, I forgot to mention that I saw the film `Samadhi` and whenever Bose ``appeared`` in the film, the hall resounded with cheers, and people stood when they played Azad Hind Fauj`s national anthem ``shubh sukh chain ki varsha barse bharat bhagya hai jaaga``. The song had the same rhyme and tune as India`s national anthem. And the national greetings ``Jai Hind`` also started in the Azad Hind Fauj.

``We are taught about Gandhi and Nehru in our school books. Netaji Bose is reduced to a little footnote. Gandhi is lionised by the successive governments while Netaji ignored.``

Some interesting trivia....
One of the popular barometers in any country is the popular culture, such as films. Soon after Independence, two smash hits were produced in India and any Pakistani buzurg, such as teshah would remember, too, as Indian films had not yet been banned there. The first was `Shaheed` which catapulted Dilip Kumar to stardom and started the off-screen romance between Dilip and his heroine, Kamini Kaushal; it was about a revolutionary - someone like Bhagat Singh - who is hanged because of his ``terrorist/freedom fighter`` activities. Some of you may have heard the famous song from the film, ``Watan kee raah mein watan ke naujawaan shahed ho``. The film was also noteworthy for Punjabis as it shot Surinder Kaur to fame as a playback singer for her song, `Bachpan kee yaad dheeray dheeray pyar ban gayee``. The second film was `Samadhi` with Ashok Kumar and Kamini Kaushal (song - ik baar tu mera ban ja oh pardesi, bas phir dekh mazaa`). It was a fiction around two brothers fighting on the opposite side of the war as British and INA officers.

Since then, other films have been made about Bhagat Singh but no film maker saw any potential in making a film about Gandhi or Nehru. The Indian government supported Attenborough`s production of Gandhi with both finances and logistics. The film was a hit abroad but bombed in India. This is not surprising as the concept of non-violence appealed more to the Christian West to than to Hindu India.

For my friend HP who fancies all 800 million Hindus to be members of RSS/VHP, this happened during the time when Nehru was the Prime Minister and even the Jan Sangh was not born. On the other hand, the film on Savarkar made during the BJP rule, completely bombed at the box office. While Bose and Bhagat Singh are heroes in the minds of the people, government`s attempt to revive Savarkar as a hero were as much a flop as the attempts of the earlier govts to marginalise Bose and Bhagat Singh.

southasian #244 You mention jalianwala bagh - the brits killed 480 indians at jallianwala bagh. The japanese killed 35,000,000 chinese during their period of occupation. Think about that then talk to me.

Like I said - desis (indians and pakistanis) have no sense of persepective. Cant see beyond your nose.

Pakis exhibit their love and affection for India >>

Re: # 243 How good was human rights record of the British? On the flip side I can think of only Jalianwala massacre. I can only say that in my part of the country INA seems to have been mighty popular. People considered Hitler also a hero. This means the British were rather unpopular.

stuka:

you write ``Your perspective is based on hindisght.``

True. But that of other Asian leaders of the time (I named a number of them earlier on), it was not. They could read the writing on the wall, while Indian leaders (except Jinnah) could not.

you write ``1. Excluding Bose, no one in the Congress supported Japs. That is a fact. The Quit India Movement was launched THREE years after Britain enjoined India in ww2 and Congress patience to get a specific promise from the Brits ran thin.``

Not true. The Gandhi`s call for Satyagraha (pre-cursor to Quit India resolution) was in October 1940 and specifically designed (at least according to the first source I found on the internet, an Indian website) ``was designed to embarrass Britain`s war efforts by a mass upheaval in India `` Link. The draft Quit India resolution was circulated in April 1942 (and printed in the NYT, so brits were already aware of it) and formally issued later that year.

you write ``2. Jinnah`s reason to not join the Quit India movement had everything to do with trying to cut a deal with the Brits for the Muslim League and nothing to do with fighting Nazis and Japs. ``

That is what I said earlier on that annoyed so many Indians - that the Quit India movement (and Jinnah`s decision not to join it) ensured the creation of Pakistan. As I said, it would be only natural for the british to feel betrayed at the worst possible time (when they were fighting for survival against japs/nazis).

you write ``3. Even if you are to take the example of other Asian nations such as Burmese and Malays, they did fight the English an supported the Japanese. Things turned around after Japanese too commited atrocities, no doubt.``

You keep mentioning Malays and Burmese as being as dumb as the indian leaders - while ignoring the real players in the anti-colonial struggle (Mao Tse Tung, Chiang Kai Shek, Soekarno, Ho Chi Minh). In any case, the japanese mauling of the chinese population had been going on for 10 years (!!) before World War II started. So ``ignorance`` of the true nature of the japanese regime is no excuse.

Re: # 233

That`s why acc. to a state dept. official , India is a `deserving candidate and worthy of US endorsement` for a permanent UNSC seat, and the official went on to add that the final decision rests with Bush.Manmohan is due to visit DC Jul19 and hopefully he`ll take the Pew list and clinch the deal.

``I think RSS and Hindu nationalist love Bose because he went to Hitler and Nazis for help. We all know that RSS and VHP both love Nazis and Hitler. Birds of a feather``

Not really....Hitler would be more of a role model to anti-semetic jew haters like muslims. Hindus have no enemity for jews. Infact hindus , especially RSS type hindus have tremendous admiration for Israel and want India to be like Israel. Hitler would have been a role model for us if he killed muslims instead of jews.

Re: # 236


You are right about sowing the seeds of discord... hence Jinnah`s famous speech and letter to Gandhi in Nagpur Congress session 1920. ``You will turn not just Hindu against Muslim, but Hindu against Hindu and Muslim against Muslim``

I think RSS and Hindu nationalist love Bose because he went to Hitler and Nazis for help. We all know that RSS and VHP both love Nazis and Hitler. Birds of a feather....

Also , for us `right wing hindus` , the greatest god is the motherland - India. Whether Netaji followed conventional hindu rituals or had any devotion for ram, shiv etc. is immaterial , because he certainly was devoted to India. And so he is our leader.

``What is surprising to me however is why Bose, who was secular nationalist to the last bone, is such a revered hero for the right wing Hindus. The great irony is that Gandhi, who was much more obviously and consciously Hindu, is hated by the Hindu right wingers and a secular Indian nationalist who wanted a secular dictator like Kemal Ataturk in India to crush all religious forces, especially that of the majority i.e. Hindu, is such a hero for them?``

Hinduism is not an organised religion like islam or christianity. Each of us have different interpretations of hinduism. For `Right Wing Hindus` like me.....Gandhi was never a hindu to begin with. His concepts of `non-violence` do not have a precendence in hinduism. Non-violence , `show the other cheek` is a christian concept , taken directly from jesus christ . Gandhi gave us a christianised version of hinduism which most us dont agree with. And with every passing generation , Gandhi is loathed by more and more by Indians , while appreciated by non-Indians. So Gandhi today is more of an icon for the Western liberals than he is for India.


And this feeling of contempt for Gandhi , Nehru and their non-violence comes from within , from the heart - a totally spontaneous reaction. We are taught about Gandhi and Nehru in our school books. Netaji Bose is reduced to a little footnote. Gandhi is lionised by the successive governments while Netaji ignored. And yet , its Netaji we care about. Not Gandhi , not Nehru. Netaji is the ONLY freedom fighter Indians love and admire.

TAhmed: Your perspective is based on hindisght. You have to go back in time and imagine how things were then.

1. Excluding Bose, no one in the Congress supported Japs. That is a fact. The Quit India Movement was launched THREE years after Britain enjoined India in ww2 and Congress patience to get a specific promise from the Brits ran thin. At that time, if British rule was to continue, then there was no point in supporting the British war effort.

2. Jinnah`s reason to not join the Quit India movement had everything to do with trying to cut a deal with the Brits for the Muslim League and nothing to do with fighting Nazis and Japs.

3. Even if you are to take the example of other Asian nations such as Burmese and Malays, they did fight the English an supported the Japanese. Things turned around after Japanese too commited atrocities, no doubt. But the key point is that every Asian Nationalist excpet the Chinese (who had been fighting Japan for many years prior) did take advantage of Japanese attacks to fight against the Brits.


YLH

``What is surprising to me however is why Bose, who was secular nationalist to the last bone, is such a revered hero for the right wing Hindus.``

Because you often confuse Right Wing Indians with Right Wing Hindus. Most Nationalist Hindus believe in secularism, ie keeping religion in the private or at best cultural realm and the state to be divorced from Religion.

What we had instead was the Gandhi inspired ``respect for all religions`` which results in the state getting involved in religion (maybe in well meaning way) but pissing off someone or the other.

You yourself talk about Gandhi involving the Mullahs in political life and also talking about Ram Rajya in the same breadth. I feel like telling Gandhi, Ullu key Patthey, u are sowing the seeds of discord right here. Sure, Hindus and Muslims will love each other`s religion for some time but at best it would be a temporary phenomenon. What happens when the good feelings do not last? You can draw a straight line from one Gandhi involving Maulanas to another Gandhi 80 years later going and asking the Mosque Keeper of Jama Masjid for a Fatwa asking Muslims to vote for him.

``The great irony is that Gandhi, who was much more obviously and consciously Hindu, is hated by the Hindu right wingers and a secular Indian nationalist who wanted a secular dictator like Kemal Ataturk in India to crush all religious forces, especially that of the majority i.e. Hindu, is such a hero for them?``

See above. Since the ``secular`` space was occupied by Congress, and the imagery and history of Indian freedom was so completely dominated by Nehruites, where would people like us go?

#233 I realize that many of my fellow Pakistanis have a low opinion of the US. That is a pity, and I dont share it. I think the US is by far the finest country on earth (as I have often discussedon chowk).

Also note, these same Pakistanis who bad-mouth the US would be the first ones to run to the US if they got a US visa. In this sense, I will agree that Indians are indeed more sensible and honest than many Pakistanis - they dont bad mouth the US (per the pew research), while they are as eager to come to the US as Pakistanis.

Finally note that this has largely to do with middle east politics. Otherwise, Pakistanis love to adopt trends started in the US.

dm #232 you say ``my basic point isthat Bose may have made errors of judgement but if you are going to trash an icon of a billion people as ``stupid``, ``low character``, ``willing to ellout``, ``puppet``, ``excusefor a human being``, you should at least read up a little about him before making an unbiased opinion about him. ``

First, while the words I know may seem harsh, please note that these are simple common sense conclusions one would draw from the undeniable facts of history. Since there are obviously individuals on chowk (yourself e.g.) who have greater knowledge of Bose than I do, and they have not been able to deny these facts or provide additional details, I am not sure what I would be able to learn that these people do not already know.

Second, as you may have noticed from discussions on other subjects (religion e.g.) , I dont believe in human icons. No human is a god, or even without human weaknesses and faults (as they used to say, no man is a hero to his valet). Also, please note that very smart people can do very stupid things. Even Hitler himself (Bose`s big brother) made some stupid mistakes (like biting off more than he could chew when he took on Russia, or by letting the british army get away at Dunkirk, and so on), as did the Japs (who vastly underestimated the resilience and resources of the US) when they attacked the US at pearl harbor. Maybe if Bose had kept his ICS job he would have done more for the people of India, instead of merely turning Indian soldiers against their own brothers-in-arms in order to help the japs take over india.

Third, I think it is appalling that we have ``national icons`` who are considered beyond any criticism - even one based on historical facts and common sense. btw, many Pakistanis of course have the same problem too with human icons, but I am not one of them. How can a people be truly free if they are discouraged from looking at historical facts and draw common sense conclusions simply because some individual is an icon? In thise sense both Pakistanis and Indians have a long way to go, I think.

I find it interesting that you say Bose is an icon to a billion indians, while at the same time say that it is Gandhi,. Nehru etc. who are favorably focussed on in indian textbooks. I dont see too many Gandhi supporters here on chowk - which is a pity.

Tahmed #225
``What else do they teach you in India...``
Dunno. Dunno what they teach in Pakistan either. But, the results of all that teaching (Bose or no Bose, Jinnah or no Jinnah) in both countries is now becoming clear:

``The latest survey by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, conducted among nearly 17,000 people in the United States and 15 other countries from April 20-May 31, 2005 finds that America’s image is strongest in India. Fully 71% in India express a positive opinion of the United States, compared with 54% three years ago``. Pakistan ranked at the bottom.

Favorable Opinion of the US held in Country:
US (83%)
India (71%)
Poland (62%)
Canada (59%)
Britain (55%)
Russia (52%)
Netherlands (45%)
France (43%)
China (42%)
Germany (41%)
Spain (41%)
Indonesia (38%)
Turkey (23%)
Pakistan (23%)

http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=247

What gives? What are they teaching in India and Pakistan? Have a nice day.

tahmed32:

``Your basic point now is that it was mere british propoganda and the japs were in fact fine fellows seeking to free the rest of asia from colonial rule.``

If you take this as my basic point, it is no wonder that you are having problem understanding Bose:-)

No sireee...my basic point isthat Bose may have made errors of judgement but if you are going to trash an icon of a billion people as ``stupid``, ``low character``, ``willing to ellout``, ``puppet``, ``excusefor a human being``, you should at least read up a little about him before making an unbiased opinion about him.

And you are wrong about two other things. First, Jinnah was not the only one who supported the British in the war effort; he had the ``illustrious`` company of the the RSS and Hindu nationalist Savarkar in this. As far as I know (Manto, please correct me if I am wrong!), Jinnah never said anything against Bose`s Indian National Army and in fact spoke up in favour of its prisoners of war in 1946.

Secondly, if he is still remembered in India -and I am not sure that he is to the same extent as he was in my generation- it is despite of and not because of what they teach in India. In Indian schools, they give importance only to Gandhi, Nehru and the Congress Party in gaining independence. The Indian history version is the one that you see in the film `Gandhi`.

Manto:
``The great irony is that Gandhi, who was much more obviously and consciously Hindu, is hated by the Hindu right wingers and a secular Indian nationalist who wanted a secular dictator like Kemal Ataturk in India to crush all religious forces, especially that of the majority i.e. Hindu, is such a hero for them?``

Good question, although I do not think that Hindus hated the Mahatama. I think that the reason may be that, contrary to the popular impression, the Hindu religion does not teach non-violence. Like in the Bollywood films, Hindus like their heroes to beat up the bad guys, not the other way round, as Gandhi got beaten by his tormentors. The heroes of Hindus in Ramayana and Mahabharat are all warriors and not banias. But they also give attach piety to personal renunciation (`tyaag`), this is why Gandhi became the Mahatma and Bose became Netaji.

Re: # 229

So you need Pakistan to justify your pride in India?

Maharana #224:

That was an interesting link to Shayam Bengal`s movie. Thanks.

``..Bose (photo), a revolutionary lawyer and leader of the Congress Party in India who stood in direct confrontation with Gandhi’s passive and nonviolent resistance methods against the British, escaped from India in 1941 following British imprisonment and made his way to Berlin, after failing to get himself smuggled to the Soviet Union.``

Bose`s escape from British prison and his determination in getting military help from Soviet Union, Germany or Japan makes an awe-inspiring saga. Imperial spies hounded him every step of his way and it was good willl of fellow `Indians` in Peshawar that covered his final escape. That he could stand up to Hitler and ask for deletion of passages from Mein Kampf puts him way above both `Majboori ka nam` Gandhi and `constitutionalist` lackey Jinnah.

Is this what Pakistan all about?.If so, I AM PROUD TO BE AN INDIAN.

Last Updated: Friday, 24 June, 2005, 15:55 GMT 16:55 UK

E-mail this to a friend Printable version

Thousands at Sunni cleric funeral

The funeral passed peacefully but tension remains high
More than 10,000 mourners have attended the funeral of a Sunni Muslim cleric in the Pakistani city of Karachi amid protests at his murder.
Mufti Attiqur Rahman was shot in his car by unidentified gunmen on Thursday. A second man in the vehicle died later.

Junior minister Amir Liaquat Hussain went to offer condolences at a city mosque but was beaten by a mob, he told the BBC.

Karachi has been Last Updated: Friday, 24 June, 2005, 15:55 GMT 16:55 UK

E-mail this to a friend Printable version

Thousands at Sunni cleric funeral

The funeral passed peacefully but tension remains high
More than 10,000 mourners have attended the funeral of a Sunni Muslim cleric in the Pakistani city of Karachi amid protests at his murder.
Mufti Attiqur Rahman was shot in his car by unidentified gunmen on Thursday. A second man in the vehicle died later.

Junior minister Amir Liaquat Hussain went to offer condolences at a city mosque but was beaten by a mob, he told the BBC.

Karachi has been torn by Sunni-Shia sectarian violence in recent years.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4618311.stm

Re: # 227

PS to confirm my view of Bose, his character and his writing ... please read Sources of Indian tradition volume 2

Mike,

I have no desire to rile up the Indians. My criticism of Gandhi is based on his own writings.
About Bose... I admire the guy despite his obvious mistake in the second world war. In my estimate Bose set out to be another Kemal Ataturk... but ended up being Enver Pasha.

What is surprising to me however is why Bose, who was secular nationalist to the last bone, is such a revered hero for the right wing Hindus. The great irony is that Gandhi, who was much more obviously and consciously Hindu, is hated by the Hindu right wingers and a secular Indian nationalist who wanted a secular dictator like Kemal Ataturk in India to crush all religious forces, especially that of the majority i.e. Hindu, is such a hero for them?

-YLH

#224

This debate really has nothing to do with Pakistani or not. Many Pakistani acknowledge Bose’s contribution and what tahmed is questioning is his role during the second WW. That is a controversial aspect of his political life in India and Tahmed’s questions are legitimate. He is only questioning that particular segment of Bose’s political life and I just don’t see anyone can justify and rationalize his actions during that time. His intentions may be noble but his political judgment and decisions were hugely flawed.

``But the much-awaited meeting on May 27, 1942, ended in disappointment for the Indian revolutionary. ``In that meeting, he [Bose] asked Hitler to cut out passages in ``Mein Kampf`` dealing with Asians and [Hitler said] that it was better for India to remain under British domination. Hitler refused to help him``

This is an interesting quote and if Hitler was so upfront with SC Bose as early as 1942, then what explanation Bose had to continually support the Nazis and then follow that up with supporting Japanese?

Saying that Japanese had soft corner for Indians is hogwash. They may had soft corner for Indian as long as the war was on but what were they going to do once the victory for Japanese was sealed.(lucky for all that did not happen) It is not hard to answer. Japanese conduct with other nations was a good pointer.
Politicians are no saints or holy figures and calling them stupid or other things should not be a problem for anybody.

Maharana: greetings. I have two simple, obvious points, namely that Bose was either (1) incredibly dumb for thinking the japs, if they were victorious over the brits, would treat indians any differently than the rest of the asian nations they over-ran, or (2) he was smart but couldnt care less as long as he got to play puppet for the japanese.

Your post has vague generalities about what all ``educated pakistanis`` think and what not, but fails to address these simple, obvious points I have raised.

Dost Mittar (see below) started with trying to defend Bose with similar generalities, and ended by simply claiming that in fact the japs were fine fellows and would have treated indians differently. Stuka too expressed the view that the japs had nothing against indians and therefore would have treated them nicely. And all this after being reminded of the vast scale at which the japs butchered people after they defeated them.

What else do they teach you in India other than the wonders of your glorious ``netaji``?? :-)

Tahmed,

I`m not surprised that all the educated pakistanis like you think so highly of Bose. Could you tell me which leader apart from Jinnah is admired in pakistan for freedom movement?
You mention Bose, and there`s a pavlovian reaction to his position vis a vis Nazis. His meeting with Hitler and the impression it had on him is well documented. Following passage explains his position well: Here`s an excerpt

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,1564,943230,00.html

``But the much-awaited meeting on May 27, 1942, ended in disappointment for the Indian revolutionary. ``In that meeting, he [Bose] asked Hitler to cut out passages in ``Mein Kampf`` dealing with Asians and [Hitler said] that it was better for India to remain under British domination. Hitler refused to help him``

Tahmed mian, Please understand that the fight for freedom in india was fought on many fronts, including one led by Bose. He was no fool. Your nation stands on a misguided notion that independence was won by jinnah against hindus and british. If the indian freedom fighters had not fought for freedom, jinnah would be practising law in england.

Adios

dost mittar #221 Your basic point now is that it was mere british propoganda and the japs were in fact fine fellows seeking to free the rest of asia from colonial rule.

And you say this after I have referred to more than once to the tens of millions of chinese, philipinos, koreans who were butchered by the japanese and who hate the japs to this very day. So, nothing I say will make you change your mind.

As I said to stuka, ignorance is bliss. Dont let me shake you out of your bliss. Emperor Hirohito loved people like you (until, of course, he saved his own skin by re-incarnating himself as a harmless biologist at the end of the war when he realized that the third atomic bomb could fall on his own head in Tokyo).

stuka #211 here are my comments to the various points you raise.

1. You write ``It was our right to kick them (brits) whenver we chose to. `` I am not saying anything about the ``rights`` of the British. What I am saying is that it was extremely short-sighted of Indian leadership (excluding Jinnah) to not understand that if the nazis/japs won World War II, they would treat India no different than the way they treated other nationalities they overran. And what I am saying is that this short-sightedness was uniquely Indian - Asian leaders who were beholden to no one other than their own people (Mao, Chiang kai shek, Ho chi minh, Soekarno and so forth) all were very clear on their priorities: which was to fight the jap menace. .

2. I do not share your confidence that the japanese would have treated Indians differently than whites. As I keep repeating, go talk to the chinese, koreans, philipinos who were butchered in the tens of millions by the japanese and maybe you will learn something. Japanese were not brutal because they ``liked`` or ``disliked`` any nationality - the Japanese military couldnt give too hoots about Indians or anyone else. Their job was to show the occupied nations who was boss.

But you are welcome to to keep believing that the japanese would have treated indians with kid gloves.

3. Same response as 2.

4. Again. Same response as 1 above. The Indian leaders (excluding Jinnah) were unique in their short-sightedness in thinking that the trade-off was british rule vs. freedom when in fact the rest of the Asian leaders of the time recognized the far bigger menace that the japs presented.

Finally you write ``The Japanese at least paid lip service to Asian Co-Prosperity and nothing in their treatment of Indian POWs or Indian civil populations in Burma, Singapore and Andamans suggested otherwise. ``

I think my friend that you need to educate yourself a bit on japanese treatment of Indian POWs. As I wrote earlier, I have myself seen pictures of a jap soldier doing bayonet practice on a sikh prisoner whose hands were tied behind him, with a bunch of other japs looking on. On the other hand, ignorance is bliss.

Dont let me shake you out of your bliss. keep on believing the rubbish they teach you people in India about ``netaji`` and what not.

tahmed#210
Stuka gave a good reply in #211.

Where is the debate? All you are doing is pointing out to Bose seeking the help against the British. Bose was loved and adored in India more than either Jinnah or Gandhi and by the followers of both of them. He was so popular that he was able to win the presidentship of the Congress party even when Gandhi campaigned against him. There was only one leader in India who was and is called Netaji (The Leader) and it was Bose. His popularity multiplied after his adventures during the war became known.

You have every right to criticise him and say that he made mistakes. But if you are to call him ``stupid``, ``low character``, ``willing to ellout``, ``puppet``, ``excusefor a human being``, you need more than merely say that he sought the help of the Japanese against the British. The British were our enemy, not the Japanese. He simply went to get their help to free his slave country from its masters.

And one should be careful in swallowing everything the British say about the Japanese. From what I have seen, the Japanese people do not seem to me to be savages or ogres, far from it. I would like to read the Japanese side of the history before I make a fair judgement about them. However, I would like to point out to another point in addition to what Stuka stated about Malaysia.

If you had read the history of India during the early 20th century, which I presume you haven`t, you would have known that Japanese were considered heroes in India at that time (Read Nehru`s Discovery of India). When they defeated the Russians, Indians were proud that Asians had defeated Europeans and had proven that they were not inferior to them.

None of the above suggests that the Japanese did not have an axe to grind in India. But it is a far cry from saying that they were out to enslave Indians.

#219


No body ever doubted that Savarker was a british bootlicker and goochatter. (if I may take liberty with echo`s proprietory code words.)