Thursday, December 25, 2008

Who gave independence to India?

India was granted independence by the British electorates! Please note; had Winston Churchill won the elections in 1945, there would not have been any question of independence to India- during his reign. Agreed, the idea of granting independence was in the air, for quite some time then, and Indian National Congress had already started celebrating its independence day on 26 January since 1930; yet even for that the credit accrues to Gandhi!

Churchill a war Hero, and still a hero today for the whites anywhere in the globe, was defeated at the heights of his fame- just after winning the world war-II!

And who was the alternative? Atlee! What was the issue? A just dispensation for India!

Do you think if we grant dominion status to Kashmir, at this point, it would be due to our fear of Kasab or any of those bastards, who created mayhem in Mumbai? Saying yes would be like saying the victorious Britons were afraid of Bhagat Singh or Subhash Bose!

The moral substratum of the British colonialism, who claimed to be the most civilized race, was to bring civilization to the barbarians. Have you not heard of the claim “The white mans burden”? Now that claim no longer appealed to an average Briton and who was responsible for this paradigm shift? GANDHI- spelt in capital intentionally.

Let’s not forget the milieu and the peculiarity of Indian independence struggle. Far more than the Britons, the Indian Kings, upper castes and the landed gentry were a real terror for the poor Indians, who clearly constituted the vast majority. Gandhi held out an honorable and practical alternative in the form of ‘Satyagraha’ before the educated mass, who mostly came from the above privileged classes. Many dived into the national renaissance brought about by Gandhi and choose education, social justice, sanitation work, charkha and a very moral life instead of a life of ease and comfort.
As the social reforms undertaken were monumental and Gandhi has no desperation like an extremist the British were really at a loss. Their predicament was compounded when many of their ilk started admiring Gandhi and white followers like Mira Behn, Andrews and Kallenbach made a big difference. The Gandhi magic made the mighty British weak from inside and like any moral struggle it happened over four decades, which includes their engagement in South Africa also.

The Mahatma did not hate the British and became a mahatma for an average Briton also. The capitulation of Britons was inevitable in these back drops and that unfolded the most significant event ever to have happened in human history- Indian independence!
M. A. Jinnha- who was an atheist and hence a secular had misgivings regarding the Mahatma due to his proclivities and wanted to pursue his ambitions and that tinged the above extraordinary event with blood. Even here the Gandhi magic saved many lives in the eastern frontier and that gave rise to the famous cliché of Lord Mountbatten – “My one man army”- and it goes without saying that this one man army proved to be much more successful than the entire might of the British army in India.

People who are obsessed with Brahmanism and hence have a strong dislike for a humanist Nehru blame him and his entire family for all ills of India, they are quite innocent of a humanitarian concept like ‘secularism’ notwithstanding.
People who think the British left being afraid of extremists grossly ignore the following facts:
Nirad C Chaudhury dedicated his famous 'Autobiography of an unknown Indian' to The British Raj even after they had gone! He had a very good grasp of the then prevailing situation and in retrospect though we may call him to be an anglophile, he represented a good number of Indians who looked upon the British as their emancipators.

Listening about the imminent grant of independence to India a good number of Indian Judges sought British citizenship- for they expected anarchy afterwards- and on being granted the same gleefully immigrated abroad.

Most of the titled gentry - Rai bahadur etc- flaunted their titles and they did not hesitate even to betray their sons to show their loyalty to the Raj.

Most Indians coveted and still covet a British degree

Most British servants were very loyal to the Raj


Where as 30,000 ppl actively participated for quit India Movement more than 87,000 Indian soldiers died in world war- II

Compared to the loyalty of the Indian civil servants and the poor Indian subjects the opposition of extremist elements pales into oblivion.

In fact the British dispensation gave human dignity to the Dalits and women and abolished many abominable traditions like ‘Sati’ etc. Thomas Babington Macaulay laid the foundation stone for mass education, which till then was mainly limited to the upper caste Hindus except for some fortunate Moslems, who had their own avenues.

Ambedkar wanted a Dalitstan:
Ambedkar wanted a Dalitstan and its no secret that he wholeheartedly supported Pakistan. The rationale of Ambedkar behind Dalitstan was the same which created Pakistan. from the view point of a dalit they were far better off under the British than under upper class Hindus and hence the Dalits actually supported the British and the number of dalits and minorities was/is far bigger than the privileged Hindus.

But then there was one GANDHI and he just fired every ones imagination, that included the British also alas Jinnah like Savarkar wanted to play with the sword of religion, being atheists they did not believe in religion though!

if we saw such a large number of ppl participating in Salt Satyagraha and Quit India Movement the credit goes to Gandhi and also the British, who unlike barbaric Indian kings respected democracy and peoples voice and did not try foul means to eliminate Gandhi.

Britons were grief stricken when they heard about the assassination of Gandhi and that goes in to prove the reach of the Mahatma and the actual underpinnings behind the story of our independence, in the mid night of 15 august 1947.

5 comments:

Gyan said...

Not Gandhi but the loss of British might and will after enduring two world wars.

Sargunan said...

"Ambedkar wanted a Dalitstan and its no secret that he wholeheartedly supported Pakistan."

Who said so? He actually wanted to uplift the lives of Dalits. So is the reason he said he will be writing the constitution. Only a Dalit can understand a dalit and can know the hardships of a dalit. I guess you need to study the evolution and history of India properly.

RP said...

Essentially Gandhi made a whole generation of Indians believe in themselves.. If I do not regard British as my masters, I am free. Gandhi gave Indians that feeling. Beyond the point, it was a case of logistics and timings

ragho said...

nonsense who said ambedkar suuportged dalitstan? this country belongs to dalits themself, as they are the "moolnivasis" of this country. then how can ambedkar seperate dalitstan? these are all nonsense statements . sto this . by . raghothama h b . 13/184. 3 rd cross. ambedkar street. chamarajnagar. mobile- 09481189116

Sumi said...

Talking about Dalits and Ambedkar, a current torch-bearer of his cause, Mayawati, the c
Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, is seeking to establish rightful Dalit rule in that state at least, and is considered to be doing a marvellous job of it. Just make a visit to NOIDA, UP, all, to see what I mean.