If you flip a coin then there equal probability of getting heads or tails. So, if there are two sides even to trivial matter like coin flipping then, why can’t there be two ways of attaining independence? Pretty long shot to compare coin flipping to independence struggle but as the Mr. Savarkar controversy continue to rage I realized that Savarkar hating is much more than just dirty politics. I am not concerned about Mani Shankar Aiyar because he is one of the pathetic creatures who always grow on the side wall of sewage pipe. But even Mr. Nehru was a Savarkar hater and we can certainly say that Mr. M. K. Gandhi wasn’t in much favor of Mr. Savarkar. I do not understand the reason behind it.
Let’s put it this way. Mr. Savarkar was staunch nationalist, indeed a Hindu nationalist. He loved his country more than his life and worked relentlessly to achieve independence. He been to jail numerous jail and one thing is sure that his jail terms were not like pleasure trips, as in case of Gandhi’s jail terms. A normal human being would break down if he were in Savarkar shoes. But only because of strong will power and fierce nationalism, Savarkar survived. I am not going in Mr. Savarkars life here. And I am not comparing Gandhi or Savarkar here. But my point is that only difference between them is there thinking line regarding to
Gandhi was fanatically non violent, while for Savarkar, violence is necessary if situation demands. If Savarkar was proponent of Hindutva ideology then same can be said about Gandhi. Gandhi used to call himself Sanatan Hindu. Both of them were against Hindu untouchabilty and both of them wanted to revive Hinduism. Again, Gandhi wanted to do that peacefully and Savarkars approach was more masculine. Masculine in the sense, he wanted young men to be physically strong.
Given all these things what is reason behind all these generations of Savarkar hating? Gandhi didn’t like Savarkars way of struggle but he accepted it because according to him it a ‘different’ way to achieve independence. So why can’t all these Savarkar hating people understand this?
One argument is that he plotted to kill Gandhi, which is completely false. It was proven even in Indian court. Another argument is that he collaborated with British government. But all he did is to ask youth to join Army, so that they will gain access to arms and ammunition. And if situation arises then they will be able to fight with British army. What is wrong in that? It was a pragmatic move. And didn’t Gandhi stop Asahakaar movement of 1921 only because mob killed British soldiers. One can say that Gandhi was more concerned about British soldiers than Indian people. He wanted to British people to leave
I think for people like Nehru, it was just impossible to understand a person like Mr. Savarkars. He was too bright, too intelligent and too pragmatic for them. Continuing Savarkar bashing proves that the short sightedness, dumbness, selfishness of Mr. Nehru continues to this date.
1 comment:
Your comments about Savarkar are ditto to mine.
And i Am no anti-gandhi either, but i won't walk his way.
I read ur post about mani "ass" aiyar and my blood boils when i even see him on tele, On the other hand i think he just needs help.
Cheers.
Post a Comment