IT IS NOT BAD, BUT IT IS HURTING
“MAHATMA GANDHI BROUGHT FREEDOM” IS VERY WRONG.
Major General G. D. Bakshi has shown his terrible reactive anger on the above conclusion. He says with evidence that it was not Mahatma Gandhi who brought freedom for India but it was Subhash Chandra Bose who brought the freedom for India.
It is difficult to understand as to why does Major General G. D. Bakshi put Gandhi and Subhash against each other?
To have a difference of opinion between two persons is natural. Both the persons could be correct under their logic. Whose logic is true and whose logic was wrong depends upon a lot of prevailing factors at that time. The point is whether the persons are sincere on their thoughts and actions or not? Yes. Subhash was sincere in his thoughts. Gandhi was also sincere in his thoughts. There was no confusion between them. Both the great persons had respect for each other.
So far I deeply felt that Gandhians have most respect for Subhas Chandra Bose. But unfortunately some ill-informed persons who deliberately does not read Gandhi, put Gandhi as an enemy of Subhash Chandra Bose.
“GANDHI REMOVED SUBHASH FROM CONGRESS” G. D. BAKSHI SHOUTS
A political party is supposed to have its principles and line of actions in concurrence with its principles. Congress had decided to proceed with freedom struggle on the line of non-violence. The activities of Subhash had generated a doubt on his faith towards principle of non-violence. Thereby MK Gandhi had put a candidate against Subhash in party’s presidential election. This is permissible in every Democratic Party. There is nothing wrong in it. There is no reason that every election should go uncontested. G. D. Bakshi should understand this.
Subhash won the election. Gandhi congratulated Subhash Chandra Bose. He advised him to select his own working committee members. He also accepted that the victory of Subhash was his defeat. He said that since the elected working body members are committed to non-violence and the elected president’s integrity on the party’s principle is not beyond doubt, the elected working committee members should resign. All the members of central working committee resigned. Gandhi was an ordinary citizen. He was not even an ordinary member of the Congress. It was up to the members of working committee to resign or not to resign. How Gandhi can be prevented for his expression of his opinion?
LOOK AT THIS. WHAT INDIRA GANDHI DID IN 1968?
She had no majority in working committee when her suggested person was rejected by the other members of working committee. She called an extraordinary meeting without the permission of the then party president, though there was no justification for calling emergency general body meeting because the general body meeting was due in next few months. Prime Mister is not supreme in his party. Working Committee is the supreme in a party.
Indira Gandhi prepared bogus lists of provincial members and the delegates were sent to general body meeting. The delegates dismissed all existing members of central working committee and a new working committee was formed and a new president was elected. Consequently Indira’s process of calling for general body meeting and conducting party’s election was challenged in the SC. Meanwhile general elections were conducted and the Congress of Indira won the election, and because she had majority elected members on her side, her party was recognized as the original Congress by the Supreme Court.
This was absolutely a wrong judgement.
HOW WAS THE JUDGEMENT WRONG?
Now suppose Congress (O) would have not been dissolved in 1977. And it would have remained as a part of Janata Party, and suppose now had it been a major part of BJP lead alliance, and had acquired more than 50 seats in Lok Sabha, then what would remain the value of the verdict of the SUPREME COURT ?
Now Congress (Indira or Nehruvian) has only 45 seats in L.S. Would the decision of SUPREME COURT could be reversed? Yes. It has to be reversed to maintain the spirit of the judgement of the Supreme Court. This way the then SUPREME COURT’s decision was ridiculous. This situation was pointed out by Piloo Modi a prominent leader of Congress (O).
SUBHAS WAS NOT HUNGRY OF POWER
Now let us examine the Case of Subhash Chandra Bose for academic reason. Suppose Subhash would have taken a risk. And he would have called general body meeting. He could have done this lawfully, unlike Indira Gandhi, because here, Subhash was already the president of the party. Subhash could have tried to take full confidence of the members of Congress. But he did not acted like that. Viz. Calling of emergency general body meeting.
There were two reasons. First, that working committee members were likely to get re-elected. Subhash Chandra Bose could have NOT been in position to get new working committee members of his choice get elected, and he could have been put to a situation to not take decisions at his choice and will. This is because all the decisions in working committee are taken by the majority of the members. Second. Subhash was not ready to give a chance to public to feel that he was hungry of power.
NOW LET US DISCUSS FOR ACADEMIC INTEREST AS TO WHO BROUGHT THE FREEDOM
What does Major General Bakshi quotes in support of the freedom brought by Mahatma Gandhi? And how he disapprove the same?
He quotes a song title of Ramachandra Narayanji Dwivedi alias Pradeepji (प्रदीपजी).
Pradeepji was a great poet of the time. He had glorified even Subhash too, in his many poems.
But here Major General G. D. Bakshi quotes
Viz.
दे दी हमें आज़ादी बिना खडग बिना ढाल,
साबरमतीके संत तूने कर दिया कमाल.
On this he shouts and tells in very loud voice, THIS IS VERY WRONG. He further shouts;
“Gandhi’s movement was totally failed. All the leaders had confirmed that the struggle of Congress for independence was failed. Quit India movement was failed. British government was determined to make it failed. British arrested all the leaders of Congress and thrown them into jails for indefinite period. All the leaders were tired and all of them were frustrated.”
Then he narrates the glory of Subhash Chandra Bose.
There is nothing wrong in glorifying Subhash Chandra Bose for the path he chose to achieve the freedom. Subhash Chandra Bose is worth to get the glory. Nobody have and nobody can have any objection to it.
IS IT A BURNING CONTROVERSY OR IS IT A CONTROVERSY AT ALL?
Is it a burning issue to simply prove the negation on the Gandhi’s “quit India movement’ and it had no role in toto, in bringing the freedom for India?
Simply some poet has written a poem and he said the Gandhi’s war with the weapon of non-violence was victorious. “QED” added by Major General G. D. Bakshi and then he rejects it.
NO VICTORY OR NO DEFEAT CAN BE DUE TO SINGLE REASON
Major General G. D. Bakshi was born in 1950. No person can have first-hand information when he was not available at the time and at the spot where and when event/s occurred. He does not know what was the atmosphere prevailing at that time.
I AM OLDER TO HIM BY TEN YEARS.
My information after reading Gandhi and others observations and feelings;
(1) Cripps mission was failed because it had pre-conditions that the limited freedom would be considered only after the World War II finished.
(2) Gandhi’s opposition led the Indian National Congress to reject the British offer.
(3) Cripps’ modification of the original British offer, which provided for no real transfer of power.
(4) Behind-the-scenes efforts of the Viceroy and Secretary of State for India to sabotage the mission.
(5) Gandhi was of the opinion that it was simply a trap. Gandhi believed this, on the basis of past experience of World War-I, when the British had strengthened the slavery rules, disregarding its previous commitments.
Impact of Cripps Mission.
The long-term significance of the Cripps Mission really became apparent only in the aftermath of the war, as troops were demobilized and sent back home.
(1) As for the “quit India” could get launched, all the leaders were arrested. Not only leaders but a lot public figures were also arrested.
(2) Some of the leaders who were supporters of “Quit India movement” went underground. These were beyond the control of British.
(3) It was asked by Mahatma Gandhi that there would be full scope of mass arrests, and thereby every person had to continue his fight for freedom in his own leadership.
(4) Since there was no leader to guide the people, wide spread violence had occurred. The British Government was not able to control the violence. MK Gandhi said, it was the failure of British, as it had no faith in non-violence.
But the Quit India movement was not a dismal failure; rather the movement of 1942 gave the death blow to the British rule. India’s march towards freedom was hastened. This movement sparked off an aggressive national consciousness. Many people sacrificed their careers, property and even lives. Many freedom fighters’ families’ lives were paralyzed because earning members were arrested.
It can be a failure of both the ways. The way that Subhash chose, and the way that Gandhi chose.
Mass awareness decides the fate of Government. Mass awareness had generated the revolt of Indian Navy.
Aurabindo Ghosh was of the opinion that if all people of India would deeply think with their strength of inner conscious for the freedom of India that force would act on British conscious to decide to leave India.
Even Churchill recognized that there could be no retraction of the offer of independence which Cripps had made, but by the end of the war, Churchill was out of power and could do nothing but watch as the new Labor government gave India independence. This confidence that the British would soon leave was reflected in the readiness with which Congress politicians stood in the elections of 1945–1946 and formed provincial governments.
A HUMAN FIGHTS WITH ANOTHER HUMAN
We should not forget that “A human fights with another human” cannot be a supportive to the eternal truth for mankind, and it could not be advisable to follow it. Even this principle applies to ecological balance of the mother Earth, then how could it not be applied to human?
YES. CONDITIONS APPLIES
Yes the conditions are; Are you democratic? Do you have respect for each other, list out injustice, communicate, be logical, do peaceful protest, while protesting continue communication…
Mahatma Gandhi believed that protest with non-violence against British Government was suitable and it can work. Probably Major General G. D. Bakshi has not read the principles of non-violent protest … e.g. public participation at a large, awareness at a large, dialogue, stepping up, protests with responsibilities, strike, hunger strike, hunger strike on to death, civil disobedience, do not go on bails, be ready for punishment, prison, self-improvement while in prison and all the time be ready for dialogue.
NOW LOOK AT THIS. FORGET MAHATMA GANDHI.
Remember MK Gandhi is dead. Hindu Maha Sabha is dead. But Nehruvian Congress is alive. Communists are alive.
Who remembers Captain Lakshmi?
She was Presidential Candidate in 2002. She suffered only because she was a member of communist party. Otherwise she was a great lady.
All Non-Congress parties had supported British Government baring Indian National Army of Subhash. But the position of Subhash had become awkward when Russia supported British against Germany. There was a lot of diversity among the leaders of Indian National army.
Now let us not blame anybody or let us not abuse any freedom fighter and let us not put them against each other. They were all gallant gentlemen and gallant women who had sacrifice their lives.
UNDERSTAND THE COURAGE
There are two types of courage. One is Physical courage and the other is moral courage. One has not to select option. It is natural. But few people have both. Gandhi had both. He was ready to die for his principles. Subhash had also both the courage. Both died on unnatural death. There were others too on both the sides. Let us not devaluate them to satisfy our ego of righteousness.
WHO WAS HE?
Who fought for democracy against Indira Gandhi when she imposed emergency to save her own chair for which she was disqualified? This was the exhibition of her craze of power.
It was Jai Prakash Narayan who led the people of India and he integrated all political parties. Who was he? He was veteran Gandhian. But he was not alone. He took people with him. Indira Gandhi was miserably defeated in election. She herself was defeated by 55000 votes. But the dream of Jai Prakash Narayan was vanished under his own eyes. He was a failure. So what?
Political Gandhi is a small element. Gandhi had struggled a lot. Gandhi and Self-reliance, Gandhi and Swadeshi, Gandhi and appropriate Technology, Gandhi and Cleanliness, Gandhi and naturopathy, Gandhi and health, Gandhi and duties of peoples representatives inclusive of Governors and President, Gandhi and Civic Sense, Gandhi and Hindu Religion, Gandhi and religious conversion, Gandhi and democracy inclusive of Ram-Rajya, Gandhi and inter relation between Bureaucracy and people. Gandhi and education…. All these are put together, Gandhi is a very big entity of India. Major General G.D. Bakshi should read “Collected works of Mahatma Gandhi”, or at least “Gandhi in Delhi” which is the daily diary of Mahatma Gandhi of his last 3 months in Delhi.
Shirish Mohanlal Dave
Third Eye (ત્રીજી આંખ) 