Nathuram Godse's Defense Speech .....

[CSK Fan]

Offering your other cheek while being slaped is much more difficult than retaliating. Its against human nature. Even the most cowardliest of person retaliates through their body language, eyes or actions when they are no longer threatened. It takes a truly brave man to stand calmly while being attacked

[CSK Fan]

What has this got to do with main topic of Gandhi's ML appeasement ? But FWIW do you know who said these words : " If you dont find untouchability wrong then you wont find anything wrong in the world" ?

I was replying to your point about minority appeasment which has been the theme of most of your post Who said that? Judging from the way you put it, Godse perhaps?

[Guest Gunner]

I was replying to your point about minority appeasment which has been the theme of most of your post Who said that? Judging from the way you put it, Godse perhaps?

I am guessing Veer Savarkar. This is in line with the RSS ideology.

[varun]

Depends on what constitutes self-loathing according to you ... according to me it takes a lot of guts to recognize that there are serious flaws within our own psyche and go about correcting the root cause of our problems than to keep feeding the devil hoping that it lets you live

Sure, analyse your own psyche, but what gives him the right to make a blanket judgement on the psyche of the millions of other hindus (based on his own psyche i'm guessing), and proclaim that hindus, and hence hinduism as we know it has serious inherent flaws ? If you hadn't said it was RSS, it would sound like it came from the House of Saud.

[Guest Gunner]

Not quite. The End of British rule was already a foregone conclusion ... it was not like had our leaders not settled the Hindu-Muslim issue the Brits would have stayed on. Yes MKG was against partition os he even offered Jinnah to become the first leader of united India ... practically begging the bigot. Its a different matter that this horrified the Kangressi Babus but what is astonishing is people considering this a sign of magnanimity and benevolence and mark of a great leader a merchant of peace etc etc etc .... The truth is this : Gandhi came this close to handing the entire country to a bonafide and certified bigot and this is the "Entire Essence of Gandhism" i.e if chivalry fails offer some more chivalry and never ever take it upon you to find out why the heck did your original offer of chivalry got rejected ( and worse yet you got countrywide riots in return). In modern world this is certified lunacy. The bigger problem is this lunacy has now been officially institutionalized.

BB, I have a bone to pick with you on a couple of points there: 1. Jinnah was the top dog in the congress party till Gandhi came back to India from SA. In my opinion Jinnah felt that he was losing both political and power struggle which is why he moved closer to the ML rather than any cognitive ideological platform. I don't think that Jinnah even attended an ML meeting till the mid 1920s. So I tend to disagree that Jinnah was a certified bigot. I see it more as a power struggle between Jinnah and Gandhi (where Jinnah always saw himself as an equal to Gandhi not Nehru), therefore he didn't want to take what was offered to him by Gandhi but rather used the ML's single point agenda to further his own power. I am saying that Pakistan was created by Jinnah to satisfy his ego and not because he was a bigot. This is in essence why he rejected Gandhi's offer. 2. The offer from Gandhi to Jinnah to become PM of India (if this really happened as I am not sure) happened too late. By this time Jinnah was far too committed to the ML and he would have been seen as a traitor if he had accepted Gandhi's offer, there was no chance he could have accepted this offer and survived in the ML. I am afraid Gandhi knew that hence the offer was a mere sleight of hand, Nehru was Gandhi's poster boy. How else can you explain the fact that Nehru who lost the congress internal election to become PM to Patel still managed to get the postion? It was based on Gandhi's request to Patel. So I disagree that Jinnah was solely responsible for the turn of events and that he was a certified bigot. All parties played their roles, largely it came down to a power struggle between Jinnah and Gandhi.

[Guest Gunner]

Sure' date=' analyse your own psyche, but what gives him the right to make a blanket judgement on the psyche of the millions of other hindus (based on his own psyche i'm guessing), and proclaim that hindus, and hence hinduism as we know it has serious inherent flaws ? If you hadn't said it was RSS, it would sound like it came from the House of Saud.[/quote'] Varun, you hit the nail squarely on the head there. Hinduism as an ideology is only as good or strong as the individual who practices its philosophy.

[CSK Fan]

Dont think backward classes are the minorities that we were talking about .

So its ok to appease some minorities and not others?

[Ram]

Read the 'speech', the general theme goes along these lines; - India is for Hindus. - Gandh’s principle of non-violence is flawed, armed resistance to occupation is justified. - Gandhi hijacked the Congress and the freedom movment and made it captive to his eccentricities. - Gandhi went to extreme extents to appease Muslims (the ‘Hindustani’ example), which didn’t work because ultimately we had to partition our motherland. - Gandhi’s non-violence crumbled in the face of Jinnah/Muslim league motivated violence. - I killed Gandhi for Hindustan’s sake, so that the nation can chart a separate course, away from Gandhi’s principles of non-violence and protect herself against aggression in the future. Couple of things here; There’s obviously not a single secular bone in his body, the stand he has taken is a clearly communal one. He first says Hindustan is for Hindus, but also goes on to blame Gandhi for partition. If he think our country is for Hindus, but opposed partition, then what did he think would have happened to then 30-40(?) million Muslims in it? No.2, this notion that Gandhi’s continued presence in India would have led to a weaker, more vulnerable state open to attack from Pakistan in the future is his own. There’s nothing to suggest that this would have been the case.

[Guest Gunner]

- India is for Hindus. - Gandh’s principle of non-violence is flawed, armed resistance to occupation is justified. - Gandhi hijacked the Congress and the freedom movment and made it captive to his eccentricities. - Gandhi went to extreme extents to appease Muslims (the ‘Hindustani’ example), which didn’t work because ultimately we had to partition our motherland. - Gandhi’s non-violence crumbled in the face of Jinnah/Muslim league motivated violence. - I killed Gandhi for Hindustan’s sake, so that the nation can chart a separate course, away from Gandhi’s principles of non-violence and protect herself against aggression in the future. Couple of things here; There’s obviously not a single secular bone in his body, the stand he has taken is a clearly communal one. He first says Hindustan is for Hindus, but also goes on to blame Gandhi for partition. If he think our country is for Hindus then what did he think would have happened to then 30-40 million Muslims in it? No.2, this notion that Gandhi’s continued presence in India would have led to a weaker, more vulnerable state open to attack from Pakistan in the future is his own. There’s nothing to suggest that this would have been the case.

I disagree. Please don't misunderstand waht I am saying as advocating the Mahatma's murder. I am saying that Gandhi's continued presence in India's political sphere would have left us a weak state. Key example being his views on maintenance of a military, he felt that they were of better use cleaning toilets or planting trees (there is a famous quote to that effect). This might work in a world where everyone is equally peace loving, which is simply not the case. This view regarding the military was also held by Nehru which led to our poor ill equipped army being massacred by the Chinese in '62. The only reason we survived the '48 battle against Pakistan was because we had the military hardware left by the british.

[Ram]

I disagree. Please don't misunderstand waht I am saying as advocating the Mahatma's murder. I am saying that Gandhi's continued presence in India's political sphere would have left us a weak state. Key example being his views on maintenance of a military' date=' he felt that they were of better use cleaning toilets or planting trees (there is a famous quote to that effect). This might work in a world where everyone is equally peace loving, which is simply not the case. This view regarding the military was also held by Nehru which led to our poor ill equipped army being massacred by the Chinese in '62. The only reason we survived the '48 battle against Pakistan was because we had the military hardware left by the british.[/quote'] Well, that’s an interesting point, but it all that depends on what constitutes in your opinion as the most effective defence against aggression – You think its military superiority, I think its moral superiority. Don’t get me wrong, in today’s world of nuclear weapons, I am absolutely 100% for a strong military deterrent. But ultimately, what is going to keep our people’s safe is a moral standing that is consistent with the basic principles of human dignity and respect, not Sukhoi 30 MKI fighter and Agni-III missiles. The US spends more money on its military than the rest of the world combined, but that still has not stopped it from becoming the no.1 terror target in the world. Why? Because they lost their position as the Moral leader of the world, with their misguided policies in the middle East and elsewhere. I feel that India is the safest for its citizens by the strength of its morals, not the might of its military.

[CSK Fan]

Who said they appeased minorities ? The RSS is against reservations. And first of all the Backward classes arent really a minority in India (never mind them ever asking for a seperate nation a.k.a the Quaid ).

No, no, I guess we might have to take this into a seperate thread. I was not talking about the RSS but about the fact that allegedly we as a nation and our goverment give special preferences to muslims over hindus

[varun]

See it all comes down to what you consider as a flaw and what you consider as a virtue. Over the last 60 yrs Kaangressi propaganda has succesfully brainwashed a large section of our country into thinking and beleiving that there are no serious problems with Hindus and Muslims.

Are there past wounds ? Yes. Are there differences ? Yes. But are there similarities ? Yes. We know many of the muslims in the subcontinent are converts, and therefore our culture is very similar. What is wrong in trying to build on similarities rather than rub salt on the past woulds by emphasising the differences.

They have been able to do this while we witnessed eviction of our own citizens from our own territoy. That fact never got in the way of our mahan govt embarking on the same route of Gandhis ML appeasement w.r.t Kashmir and this is unfolding live infront of you. Ayodhya is another classic case of this twisted psyche we have.

That is the psyche of the politicians and not "Hindus". Politicians and diplomats, by their nature of being diplomats, try to keep the middle ground in order to garner as many votes as they can.

Next example is that of Shariah in a "Secular Republic" championed by a "Hindu" who is now certified as a "Secular" messiah.

Again, you're trying to apply a "one glove fits all" approach. There are different motivations behind why a particular person takes an approach. Sometimes they think being different would give them more visibility, at other times they try to apply western secular ideals in India which don't always fit properly. Whatever their reason, you cannot (1) judge their real motivation, and (2) attribute those motivations to be the motivations of all "hindus" (or whichever community they belong to)

Whereas the only organisation that opposed Muslim Personal law is now ridiculed as a terrorist organization. None of these things would have been possible but for the glaring flaws in our psyche which was correctly identified by the RSS founder and their stand gets vindicated on a near daily basis. At a personal level you have seen the phorum version of this psyche as well from close quarters. Let me know if you need more examples.

Yes i have. There are mostly NRIs here (including you) who are hardly representative of the average "Hindu" from the motherland.

BTW Hinduism itself doesnt tell you to offer another cheek when you get slapped. Thats another topic for another day :--D

Please don't talk to me about offering cheeks and what not. More than half the men and women in my immediate and extended family have been officers in the armed forces and we're proud of fighting for our country. And yes we're all hindus, sikhs, and a muslim too. That is the India that I am proud of, and you should be too.

[Guest Gunner]

Well' date=' that’s an interesting point, but it all that depends on what constitutes in your opinion as the most effective defence against aggression – [b']You think its military superiority, I think its moral superiority. Don’t get me wrong, in today’s world of nuclear weapons, I am absolutely 100% for a strong military deterrent. But ultimately, what is going to keep our people’s safe is a moral standing that is consistent with the basic principles of human dignity and respect, not Sukhoi 30 MKI fighter and Agni-III missiles. The US spends more money on its military than the rest of the world combined, but that still has not stopped it from becoming the no.1 terror target in the world. Why? Because they lost their position as the Moral leader of the world, with their misguided policies in the middle East and elsewhere. I feel that India is the safest for its citizens by the strength of its morals, not the might of its military.

Actually I am advocating the middle path. One needs to have both the moral and military superiority. The iron fist in a velvet glove if you will as advocated by Chanakya. At all times problems should be resolved by discussions but the opposing party should also be well aware that it is through your strength that you seek dialogue and not due to your weakness. India has sought only moral superiority and the US only military superiority both are failed strategies. An interesting analogy would be the human body where both the physical and mental aspects lead to lasting well being. We must seek both moral and military superiority. I am a strong believer in the gray or the middle path rather than the black or white.

[Ram]

Actually I am advocating the middle path. One needs to have both the moral and military superiority. The iron fist in a velvet glove if you will as advocated by Chanakya. At all times problems should be resolved by discussions but the opposing party should also be well aware that it is through your strength that you seek dialogue and not due to your weakness. India has sought only moral superiority and the US only military superiority both are failed strategies. An interesting analogy would be the human body where both the physical and mental aspects lead to lasting well being. We must seek both moral and military superiority. I am a strong believer in the gray or the middle path rather than the black or white.

I agree with you, pragmatism is the way forward in foreign policy, not idealism. As Barack Obama said in his Nobel Prize acceptance speech, Gandhi’s non-violent movement wouldn’t have stopped Hitler’s marauding armies. Sometimes, war is necessary and just tool to preserve the peace. But I vehemently oppose this notion that presence in post-colonial India would have somehow made us weak and vulnerable. We can argue back and forth as to what course our nation’s defence would have taken post-independence with or without Gandhi, but the best guarantor for long-term peace is not WMDs, but moral superiority. In fact, we don’t have to look far to find proof for this. The reason the west continues to do business with us in sensitive technologies and gives us preferential treatment when it came to the nuclear deal is because of we were able distinguish ourselves from the strength of our morals and our restraint in the face of adverse enemy action. A stable, democratice, secular, progressive, peace-loving India is what makes also us a very unpopular target of war, not just the might of the military.

[Ram]

All this reading and thinking led me to believe it was my first duty to serve Hindudom and Hindus both as a patriot and as a world citizen. To secure the freedom and to safeguard the just interests of some thirty crores (300 million) of Hindus would automatically constitute the freedom and the well being of all India, one fifth of human race. This conviction led me naturally to devote myself to the Hindu Sanghtanist ideology and programme, which alone, I came to believe, could win and preserve the national independence of Hindustan, my Motherland, and enable her to render true service to humanity as well.

This is where Godse loses me big time. There’s a clear indication that somehow, the triumph of ‘Hindudom’ in India would automatically translate into world peace is itself quite flawed. Its also funny how he equates serving the ‘Hindudom and Hindus’ to patriotism, clearing suggesting that he does not consider Muslims as part of the nation. Yet, he loses no opportunity to blame Gandhi for caving in to the Muslim league demands and splitting the country. If he thought Hindustan was for Hindus, what did he think was the fate of the 10s of millions of Muslims who were living in it? Did he think they should all be asked to reconvert, as it has been ludicrously suggested here before? Or did he feel they should all be asked to leave, or worse, if it comes to that, purged? Would that, in his opinion, serve the ‘freedom and wellbeing India’?

[punjabi_khota]

This is Godse's(And BB's :D) Gandhi: QfvLcozLwtE&feature=player_embedded

[varun]

Do you know who was the champion of emphasising the differences .... that man you hail as the secular messaih. This is why it is very difficult for me to debate on this forum because most people simply just dont bother to read the entire story ( never mind the correct story ). Let me know if you want me to elaborate .... I suspect it will get pretty ugly pretty soon.

I'm not aware of whom I hail as the secular messiah. Not sure why anything has to get ugly, but anyway elaborate.

They dont directly drop down from Marsland.... they are born and brought up just like you and me and millions of other Indians. They go to the same schools as we do. And please dont give me the usual 1% excuse. We have been producing these samples from before the times of Brits.

Thing is bossbhai, ignorance begets fear, and fear begets hatred. You cannot expect someone who is has a stubborn ideology to change their opinion of you by magic (and that includes your ideology as well). Ek baar dosti kar ke dekho un logon ke saath jo aapko apne dushman lagte hain. Might change your viewpoint. I can give you an example. The young daughter of our driver in India is very dheet, and is always abusing.. Usko itna maarte peetate hain uske parents, par kuch farak nahi padta. These days my sister is trying a new tactic.. whenever she abuses, my sis asks what it means.. and asks all the kids to tell her anything new they've learnt.. They now trust her much more, and actually listen to her when she says what they should or shouldn't say. You can beat and browbeat a person or their ego into submission, but until you get their trust, voh aapki baat nahi sunenge, aur na hi koi dialogue hoga. That is a very practical idea, that isn't harmful to try out. But if someone takes advantage of your good behaviour, then u make sure they can't hurt you.

I absolutely and squarely blame the Hindus for this ( Muslim Personal Law ) because we keep re-electing the same bozos over and over and over again.

Who is we ? You think the few 5~10 % elites whom u call psecs elect these bozos ? No, it's the vast majority who are poor and will be swayed by daaru, and a meal who vote them in.

And most importantly I dont see any media outfit or social/political org worth its salt opposing what is totally the antithesis of secularism. So if if we have shut up and put up with it ... it quite simply means that there is something inherently wrong in our psyche. Sorry. Dont buy your explanation.

The reason the vast majority doesn't do anything is because they have other stuff to worry about. And I'm not trying to sell you anything :) .. I respect your opinion. I know you're a bit of a purist and a perfectionist (i see how you santiize and double check the stats !), but in reality, things are always going to be murky and you'll get all kinds of lemons in the midst.. gotta make lemonade n not throw them out. Diversity, irrespective of what the chinese would have you believe, in my opinion is always good for building a resilient society.

I was talking about the psyche of those who swoop down at short notice to close threads that dont suit their agenda, make amendments to appease the usual suspects and generally go to extreeme lengths to propagate their version of what we get told is "True secularism". Ever see anyone other than me and couple others stand up and question ? This is the psyche I was refering to.

I agree that some threads are closed rather prematurely, but that is probably done to pre-empt any headaches in the future. A lot of people are lazy and try to avoid too much "jhanjhat", and that trait is truly indian irrespective of the religion :cantstop:

So why do we have Secession Part-3 being played out infront of us ? Why are the who's who of the supposedly by-and-large secular Muslim community openly saying that we have all rights to fight for the Mosq even if it is now proven beyond any shadow of doubt that it stood for everything that is unholy?

There will be no secession. Stop being a wrist slitter.

Iam sorry but Iam incapable of being proud based on fiction.

Are you questioning my veracity here ? What's fictional ?

[dial_100]

I have been a person who has always lived my life being unbiased and all my judgments have been based on facts. I am not saying about Congress party and I hate all present political parties to be frank as they are bastards and I have always said that there is urgent need of an non-votebank and non-corrupt political party which is only interested in development of the nation and nothing else. But here it is about the Father of our Nation and not about Congress party. He is the greatest Indian if not the greatest human ever to have stepped on this earth IMO and I stand by that statement. I am a Muslim but if you ask my personal opinion about who was greater - Prophet Mohammed or Gandhiji then I would say Gandhiji without a tinge of doubt. I can find a lot lesser flaws in Gandhiji than any other human being or even religious figure to have stepped on this earth. Gandhiji was one of the most selfless persons that could have been humanely possible. The only other person whom I could compare to him might be Gautam Buddha. Frankly speaking he and all our freedom fighters stood fearlessly in front of British guns and marched forward and protested without any violence at all.. they did that only for the nation and not for any personal benefit or anything .. you can call yourself Indian because of the so called "coward" which you are referring to .. no offense but I am quite sure that you would never dare to do that even for your own family leave apart the whole nation :winky: .. I dont give much of a damn to Nehru or others as I can see political motivations behind many of the other Congress leaders of that time but as I said Gandhiji was the greatest Indian if not the greatest human ever to have stepped on this earth

:two_thumbs_up:

[varun]

MKG ... ohh wait you dont consider the Father of our Nation as a "secular messaih" :woot:

No

This doesnt work at a National level sarkar ... because replace the abuse with anything that is bleedingly obvious and reprehensive for us but it isnt for the Muslims and see how that works out .... For example try telling them that Idol worship is fine and see what comes back at you. Or that there are other ways to salvation than Allah. These things are hardwired into their mindset and are simply impossible to correct.

I'm talking about personal level. Do you have any muslim friends in real life ? Or just acquaintances that you've say gone for dinner with and had a normal conversation ? Did you form this opinion about mindsets from them or from looking at online forums ?

Things will be murky only if we allow them to be. A great example is how Vallabh bhai dealt with the Somnath temple issue or the Hyderabad issue. Such things require ability to clear thinking. For people in power this ability automatically disappears when they have Zero integrity. Now the critical thing to ask here is how did we manage to produce such a loong list of despicable leaders ? IMO It is because we have this tendency for long term self destruction as long as very short term needs are met.

Agreed that things can get out of hand if we're not careful. That does not however mean having a martial state, or a hindu-only state.

Not Indian but its a copyright of Hindus.

Disagree based on personal experience.

Just look at the amount of territories that we have evacuated from when things get out of hand. Or just look at the no.of Hindus that moved over to ROP to aavoid persecution ... no other religion has contributed to the numbers of ROP than Hindus( and its ofshoots ) .... this is the cold fact. If you keep ignoring this it will quite simply repeat again. Thats the law of history.

What are you saying ? We'll all become muslim if things are left as they are ? Is that what you think you're fighting against (online) ?

These are very very serious problems and are quite simply issues originating from incompatibilities of the two religions. So hence your claim that we are all kool wonly is fictional .. or wishfull thinking at best. There are certainly very little factual grounds to claim that "All Iz Well in the entire country" based on your family and what they do.

Things on the ground are different than what is suggested by events ? By factual grounds, I would mean personal experiences not bookish/online propaganda. Like i said before, there are differences, many of them. But at the end of the day, you me, and rest of humanity isn't much different.. tiny insignificant organisms on a rock hurtling through space.. Stop fearing and start living while you can man. All iz indeed well :winky:

[fineleg]

Live and let live!