Jump to content

Gandhi Jayanti - Too early to evaluate Bapu ?

ravishingravi

By ravishingravi
in Chit Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

ravishingravi Grand Master

ravishingravi

Posted
Posted

I think not. Perhaps the greatest disservice we have done to this nation is creating demagogues who cannot be questioned. Especially when you grow up in that environment, you are involuntarily in a state obeisance to those personalities. Tomorrow a Modi"ji" will be built up in same manner. 

 

Gandhi"ji" is certainly one of them. History is brutal. And a great political tool to mould the minds of future generations. Gandhi perhaps represents pinnacle of this tendency. I believe it's time scrutinize his life and some basic unanswered questions. 

 

He was a complex man and his motives are sure not clear for me. In a biblical sense, he seems like a wannabe Christ virulently fighting his temptations. Some questions that remain curiously unanswered for me :- 

 

1) How did he become so famous and influential in INC ? The simple narrative of his success in south Africa and INC lapping him up as a leader in India doesn't add up. 

 

2) Why did he prop up religion in politics especially "Ummah" during the khilafat movement ? What was he thinking will happen if he is also speaking of Ram Raksha and merits of caste system. 

 

3) Why did he ask Hindus getting killed in moplah riots to take it for the team ?

 

4) How was it that his treatment of women and young girls not used by British to defame him. This was public knowledge at the time. 

 

And many more. Seems amazing that after being most figure of this nation, we know so little about him apart from what few Marxist historians and British let us know. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Khota Veteran

Khota

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

I think not. Perhaps the greatest disservice we have done to this nation is creating demagogues who cannot be questioned. Especially when you grow up in that environment, you are involuntarily in a state obeisance to those personalities. Tomorrow a Modi"ji" will be built up in same manner. 

 

Gandhi"ji" is certainly one of them. History is brutal. And a great political tool to mould the minds of future generations. Gandhi perhaps represents pinnacle of this tendency. I believe it's time scrutinize his life and some basic unanswered questions. 

 

He was a complex man and his motives are sure not clear for me. In a biblical sense, he seems like a wannabe Christ virulently fighting his temptations. Some questions that remain curiously unanswered for me :- 

 

1) How did he become so famous and influential in INC ? The simple narrative of his success in south Africa and INC lapping him up as a leader in India doesn't add up. 

 

2) Why did he prop up religion in politics especially "Ummah" during the khilafat movement ? What was he thinking will happen if he is also speaking of Ram Raksha and merits of caste system. 

 

3) Why did he ask Hindus getting killed in moplah riots to take it for the team ?

 

4) How was it that his treatment of women and young girls not used by British to defame him. This was public knowledge at the time. 

 

And many more. Seems amazing that after being most figure of this nation, we know so little about him apart from what few Marxist historians and British let us know. 

 

Is this a project to rewrite history and make Savarkar the father of nation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vayuu1 Mentor

vayuu1

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

I think not. Perhaps the greatest disservice we have done to this nation is creating demagogues who cannot be questioned. Especially when you grow up in that environment, you are involuntarily in a state obeisance to those personalities. Tomorrow a Modi"ji" will be built up in same manner. 

 

Gandhi"ji" is certainly one of them. History is brutal. And a great political tool to mould the minds of future generations. Gandhi perhaps represents pinnacle of this tendency. I believe it's time scrutinize his life and some basic unanswered questions. 

 

He was a complex man and his motives are sure not clear for me. In a biblical sense, he seems like a wannabe Christ virulently fighting his temptations. Some questions that remain curiously unanswered for me :- 

 

1) How did he become so famous and influential in INC ? The simple narrative of his success in south Africa and INC lapping him up as a leader in India doesn't add up. 

 

2) Why did he prop up religion in politics especially "Ummah" during the khilafat movement ? What was he thinking will happen if he is also speaking of Ram Raksha and merits of caste system. 

 

3) Why did he ask Hindus getting killed in moplah riots to take it for the team ?

 

4) How was it that his treatment of women and young girls not used by British to defame him. This was public knowledge at the time. 

 

And many more. Seems amazing that after being most figure of this nation, we know so little about him apart from what few Marxist historians and British let us know. 

 

 

Watch from 12:00 onwards 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coffee_rules Grand Master

coffee_rules

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

I think not. Perhaps the greatest disservice we have done to this nation is creating demagogues who cannot be questioned. Especially when you grow up in that environment, you are involuntarily in a state obeisance to those personalities. Tomorrow a Modi"ji" will be built up in same manner. 

 

Gandhi"ji" is certainly one of them. History is brutal. And a great political tool to mould the minds of future generations. Gandhi perhaps represents pinnacle of this tendency. I believe it's time scrutinize his life and some basic unanswered questions. 

 

He was a complex man and his motives are sure not clear for me. In a biblical sense, he seems like a wannabe Christ virulently fighting his temptations. Some questions that remain curiously unanswered for me :- 

 

1) How did he become so famous and influential in INC ? The simple narrative of his success in south Africa and INC lapping him up as a leader in India doesn't add up. 
 

 

Congress had split into two factions before Gandhi arrived from SA. Garam Dal (extremist) lead by Tilak, Lala, BP Pal etc. who wanted to muscle out freedom, later inspired revolutionary movement from CAzad, Aurobindo, Savarkar etc. 
The Naram Dal (moderates) was led by GK Gokhale wanted just autonomous rule, a dominion status in the British Raj in peaceful terms like Canada/Australia and many British colonies. Tilak was sidelined by jail  and his influence decreased in Congress. Gokhale was Gandhi’s guru and influenced him with his ahimsa and satya ka paath. When Gandhi came to India, the British and media had already propped him up about his struggle against racism in SA. With Tilak and Gokhale gone, Gandhi was seen as firebrand with the Congressi like Nehru,  AK Azad Jinnah followed him. With his ahimsa satyagrah, unified H&M struggle and also Dalits too, Gandhi took it to the street and hence widely popular. . Hence his Mahatma status attributed by Guruji Tagore , Gokhale and even Tilak. Basically, Gandhi became popular with an ideological divide in freedom movement. 
 

4 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

 

2) Why did he prop up religion in politics especially "Ummah" during the khilafat movement ? What was he thinking will happen if he is also speaking of Ram Raksha and merits of caste system. 
 

He had thought that by unifying Hindus and Muslims the swaraaj movement will be strengthened further. Fell into the hands of AK Azad and Jinnah and other M leaders. Mahatma jo banna tha. Even Nehru was against K movement. I feel MKG was weak with ambition with the world at his feet . The K movement caused the Muslim league to be created separate from Congress and eventually caused partition. In a way, MKG was partly responsible for Pakistan. 

4 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

 

3) Why did he ask Hindus getting killed in moplah riots to take it for the team ?

I had read somewhere that he thought Hindus believed in re-incarnation and when they get killed by Muslims, they will be reborn as Muslims and then there will be no divisions and we will be unified in freedom struggle. Bizarre, but could be true. His other ventures are as bizarre, so it can’t be ruled out. Like his refusal to administer penicillin to his wife as it was alien!

 

4 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

 

4) How was it that his treatment of women and young girls not used by British to defame him. This was public knowledge at the time. 


 

This is unexplainable. His aura was too big for people to fight back. He did what he pleased in the end. There were no feminism movements at that time. But even after his own admission in his book, people should’ve called out. Very few read in English in India at that time. He had a god-like status created by Congress around him. Even Bose relented to his whims and resigned from Congress presidency. Looks like Nehru had a strange stranglehold on MKG

 

4 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

And many more. Seems amazing that after being most figure of this nation, we know so little about him apart from what few Marxist historians and British let us know. 

 

 

This book is highly recommended:

 

https://books.google.com/books/about/Why_I_Killed_the_Mahatma.html?id=lYjSswEACAAJ&source=kp_book_description

Edited by coffee_rules
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lone Wolf Grand Master

Lone Wolf

Posted
Posted

I am seeing people on SM unilaterally bashing Bapu/MKG...  Also what is this that Bhagat Singh,  Rajguru,  Azaad were responsible for freedom like British really couldn't care less about them.  They sure were inspirational figures & just like other freedom fighters before them.  All had a role to play.   Alone they would be just as helpless as others. 

 

Another gem I saw was one g***du saying Gandhi recruited Indians to fight for British in WW2 completely ignoring if not for that India won't get Independent that soon..  Atlantic charter,  Gandhi's letter to Roosevelt etc people don't even know about Roosevelt Churchill deal even though Churchill was a real D Bag & wasn't giving any quarter. 

Also problem is Indian history books really don't highlight these critical events & INC & SC Bose glorifying takes over all the plaudits. 

 

Say whatever Gandhi's propaganda was top tier & dude had enormous reach & capability.   Sure he was a racist prick & had controversial opinions but his contribution is undeniable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vayuu1 Mentor

vayuu1

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

 

Congress had split into two factions before Gandhi arrived from SA. Garam Dal (extremist) lead by Tilak, Lala, BP Pal etc. who wanted to muscle out freedom, later inspired revolutionary movement from CAzad, Aurobindo, Savarkar etc. 
The Naram Dal (moderates) was led by GK Gokhale wanted just autonomous rule, a dominion status in the British Raj in peaceful terms like Canada/Australia and many British colonies. Tilak was sidelined by jail  and his influence decreased in Congress. Gokhale was Gandhi’s guru and influenced him with his ahimsa and satya ka paath. When Gandhi came to India, the British and media had already propped him up about his struggle against racism in SA. With Tilak and Gokhale gone, Gandhi was seen as firebrand with the Congressi like Nehru,  AK Azad Jinnah followed him. With his ahimsa satyagrah, unified H&M struggle and also Dalits too, Gandhi took it to the street and hence widely popular. . Hence his Mahatma status attributed by Guruji Tagore , Gokhale and even Tilak. Basically, Gandhi became popular with an ideological divide in freedom movement. 
 

He had thought that by unifying Hindus and Muslims the swaraaj movement will be strengthened further. Fell into the hands of AK Azad and Jinnah and other M leaders. Mahatma jo banna tha. Even Nehru was against K movement. I feel MKG was weak with ambition with the world at his feet . The K movement caused the Muslim league to be created separate from Congress and eventually caused partition. In a way, MKG was partly responsible for Pakistan. 

I had read somewhere that he thought Hindus believed in re-incarnation and when they get killed by Muslims, they will be reborn as Muslims and then there will be no divisions and we will be unified in freedom struggle. Bizarre, but could be true. His other ventures are as bizarre, so it can’t be ruled out. Like his refusal to administer penicillin to his wife as it was alien!

 

This is unexplainable. His aura was too big for people to fight back. He did what he pleased in the end. There were no feminism movements at that time. But even after his own admission in his book, people should’ve called out. Very few read in English in India at that time. He had a god-like status created by Congress around him. Even Bose relented to his whims and resigned from Congress presidency. Looks like Nehru had a strange stranglehold on MKG

 

 

This book is highly recommended:

 

https://books.google.com/books/about/Why_I_Killed_the_Mahatma.html?id=lYjSswEACAAJ&source=kp_book_description

I have read it Gandhi vadh kyun 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vayuu1 Mentor

vayuu1

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Lone Wolf said:

I am seeing people on SM unilaterally bashing Bapu/MKG...  Also what is this that Bhagat Singh,  Rajguru,  Azaad were responsible for freedom like British really couldn't care less about them.  They sure were inspirational figures & just like other freedom fighters before them.  All had a role to play.   Alone they would be just as helpless as others. 

 

Another gem I saw was one g***du saying Gandhi recruited Indians to fight for British in WW2 completely ignoring if not for that India won't get Independent that soon..  Atlantic charter,  Gandhi's letter to Roosevelt etc people don't even know about Roosevelt Churchill deal even though Churchill was a real D Bag & wasn't giving any quarter. 

Also problem is Indian history books really don't highlight these critical events & INC & SC Bose glorifying takes over all the plaudits. 

 

Say whatever Gandhi's propaganda was top tier & dude had enormous reach & capability.   Sure he was a racist prick & had controversial opinions but his contribution is undeniable. 

In short i would say that Gandhi was anna hazare of that time with Nehru being kejriwal 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lord Grand Master

Lord

Posted
Posted

I agree about first line of OP, individual worship is big problem in India, whether its calling Sachin God, or making temples of Rajnikanth( two non political figures).It does lot of damage in long run.In politics its most prevalent though.

 

However other extreme is true too.People just don't accept that one person can have pros and cons

 

On topic, MK Gandhi might have all the fallacies mentioned or even more, but still did lot of good that needs to be remembered/respected atleast on this day. We can save such discussions for later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BacktoCricaddict Grand Master

BacktoCricaddict

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Lone Wolf said:

 All had a role to play.

Golden sentence. 

 

Often people have a hard time letting go of the "us" vs "them" attitudes. Praise and criticisms are not zero-sum propositions. Acknowledging MKG's contributions does not mean one is minimizing the others' roles and vice versa. Everyone moved the needle a little bit in their own ways and eventually it ended the 200-yr torture. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lone Wolf Grand Master

Lone Wolf

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

Golden sentence. 

 

Often people have a hard time letting go of the "us" vs "them" attitudes. Praise and criticisms are not zero-sum propositions. Acknowledging MKG's contributions does not mean one is minimizing the others' roles and vice versa. Everyone moved the needle a little bit in their own ways and eventually it ended the 200-yr torture. 

Absolutely it's hilarious to think people believe those people would single handedly free India from a World conquering Super power of that time.   Even SC Bose AHF aided by Imperial Japan got a real hiding by British Indian Army in Myanmar & NE. 

So those were the odds. 

People don't see the situations &,  thanks to Bollywood & our insufficient school History books we have been spoon fed with alternate history. 

If not for WW2 India won't be getting Independence at least until 1960 no matter what anyone would have done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zen Grand Master

zen

Posted
Posted

What I like about Gandhiji is that when he saw poverty in India including people not having enough clothes, he actually discarded his normal attire to dress up as the naked fakir ... India is more accustomed to leaders improving their lifestyle first. 

 

hats off to Gandhiji for that :hatsoff:

 

 

Also Sept 30 to Oct 3 is a birthday period in my family:

 

Sept 30 - a family member

Oct 2 - a family member

Oct 3 - yours truly 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Khota Veteran

Khota

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, zen said:

What I like about Gandhiji is that when he saw poverty in India including people not having enough clothes, he actually discarded his normal attire to dress up as the naked fakir ... India is more accustomed to leaders improving their lifestyle first. 

 

hats off to Gandhiji for that :hatsoff:

 

 

Also Sept 30 to Oct 3 is a birthday period in my family:

 

Sept 30 - a family member

Oct 2 - a family member

Oct 3 - yours truly 

 

 

Most of the desis are leaving India at the first opportunity they get.

A man as qualified as Mahatma haqd a law degree and could have made money for self-gain but gave all that up.

This is active rewriting of history going on, on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...