Now you can Subscribe using RSS

Submit your Email

Monday, October 1, 2012

Why I Don't Aspire To Be A Mahatma

Team Being Cynical

I admit, I am no saint or have done any sacrifice for anyone, let alone the nation. I admit I have flaws easily outnumbering my minimal good qualities. I admit I am no match by any stretch of imagination with a certain Mohandas karamchand Gandhi in terms of qualities. But yet, I would be the last person in this planet who would want to be a Mahatma in his life. And I will tell you why.
In a life very ordinary like mine, one thing that I always stuck to as part of my philosophy is to be straightforward in my approach in whatever I do. Seldom have I gone out of this philosophy of mine to adore situations which are highly favorable. I always loved calling a spade a spade, even if that was hurting my own ego. This is the sole reason why I hate to be in the shoes of the father of the nation ever because neither I am a hypocrite nor I condone hypocrisy. With due respect to the great man, I find him no mahatma, at least to the tune which we project him or our text books picture him. For me Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi always stood as a perpetual example of hypocrisy and hypocritical avatar.
A close inspection of the era that was overshadowed by handful of personalities and their good or bad approach towards the nation and its citizens, it is only evident that we had more greedy and self-serving personas than freedom fighters that time. And certainly Mohondas Gandhi led the pack of entities who were hypocrites of highest grade with actions which were out rightly deplorable. In collusion with power hungry clowns like Nehru, our Mahatma did more damage to the nation than otherwise and without any hesitation I feel I owe a lot to Nathuram Godse for his service to the nation. Had Gandhi been alive for another decade, I am sure we would have been a completely different nation with more number of crooks, thugs, corrupts and greedy entities roaming our streets.
For starters, our Mahatma went to South Africa to earn since he did badly here as a lawyer. Let’s get that straight. He hasn’t gone there for charity as we want to believe since going there to defend notorious entities like Abdullah & Co, whose primary business was of smuggling is certainly ain’t an act of charity at all. He stayed there at the posh areas of Johannesburg and travelled first class till he was thrown out of the train somewhere in Pretoria. Now if the claim of the Gandhians that the Abdullahs are something which isn’t documented anywhere, then let me assure you, the famous train incident of Mahatma isn’t either. After that he was touted to have got inspired from such blatant discrimination and started his movement against the white. Could be a possibility and I see no greatness here since any self-respecting entity would pretty much do the same. So Gandhi here stands no different or unique. And for those who claim, he left a luxurious life to do something for the people back home; I have a jolter for you. At his touchdown, he first decided to elevate the stature of the Dalits by teaching them cleanliness. That would have been considered a judicious move provided the Dalits were never asked to come and work towards cleanliness at his Ashram but rather should have been educated to make their existing surroundings more hygiene. While the family members were still languishing in the same hell, only few were handpicked and taken along to work for Gandhi to build his Ashram for free. I know for a fact, around 1700 Dalits were asked to evacuate his Ashram; no sooner the structure was ready. Where was the core idea of teaching them hygienic life gone there? Gandhi wanted some cheap or free labor hence devised a mechanism to get that by making false promises of good life, where in realty did nothing for the people who believed his words.
Along with the promise of a hygienic life Gandhi also promised a lot to the untouchables. As a fashion statement he announced it to be the biggest bane on our country and then conveniently slept over his own statement for the rest of his life doing nothing for the untouchables. His work for the untouchables and the significance of the same is only proved by the fact that he couldn’t managed to open a single Hindu temple for the untouchables in his own state Gujarat. How big an impact his work or words would have been in elevating the Dalits elsewhere is anybody’s guess. His work for the Dalits is established beyond doubts if one looks at his gimmicks of 1932. In the name of ‘Tilak Swaraj’ fund accumulated via donations for the so called upliftment of the Dalits he pocketed 1 crore 36 lakhs but there is no evidence or auditing report available to justify even a penny of the collected amount is used for the cause. An attempt by the British to unearth this truth in the form of an auditing was pictured as a movement against the Dalits and the truth was buried forever in connivance with the crooks of that time.  
Gandhi’s actions or the lack of it vis-à-vis Subash Bose is anything but transparent. Though he blew his trumpet of love for Netaji, in reality he did exactly opposite to that. And all this because, the ideologies of Netaji were no doubt far superior and exactly opposite to what Gandhi stood for. His greed knew no boundaries when he went on a hunger strike till Netaji left the position he was occupying in Congress. Not satisfied with this Gandhi went ahead and promised the British to handover Subash Bose to them if he happens to meet him someday. Even if we give benefit of doubt to him in case of Netaji, his actions in the case of Bhagat Singh are clearly suspicious. If anything, Gandhi kept the entire nation in the dark with respect to Bhagat Singh and his imminent execution till the last minute. While he pretended to save his life, in reality have never even contacted the viceroy on this. This case is well documented since a close confidant of the viceroy himself who spilled the bean for Gandhi and the entire Congress in exposing the double standard of the lot. Bhagat Singh’s reputation was making people like Gandhi and Nehru so nervous that they did nothing to stop his unethical execution at all. From naming him Manmath Nath to keeping silent on the whole issue, they did their best to expedite the execution. I won’t be surprised if the hand of Gandhi and Nehru was found behind the one day early execution of Bhagat Singh and his friends.
Committing the mobilisation potential of the freedom movement to the Khilâfat agitation in 1920-22, again a non-negotiated unilateral gift. The Khilafat movement was a tragicomical mistake, aiming at the restoration of the Ottoman Caliphate against which the Arabs had risen in revolt and which the Turks were dissolving, a process completed with the final abolition of the institution of the Caliphate in 1924. It was a purely retrograde and reactionary movement, and more importantly for Indian nationalism, it was an intrinsically anti-nationalist movement pitting specifically Islamic interests against secular and non-Muslim interests. Gandhi made the mistake of hubris by thinking he could reconcile Khilafatism and Indian nationalism, and he also offended his Muslim allies (who didn't share his commitment to non-violence) by calling off the agitation when it turned violent. The result was even more violence, with massive Hindu-Muslim riots replacing the limited instances of anti-British attacks, just as many level-headed freedom fighters had predicted. Gandhiji failed to take the Khilafat movement seriously whether at the level of principle or of practical politics, and substituted his own imagined and idealized reading of the Khilafat doctrine for reality.
Taking a confused and wavering position vis-à-vis India's involvement in World War 2. His initial refusal to commit India to the war effort could have been justified on grounds of pacifist principle as well as national pride (the Viceroy had committed India without consulting the native leadership), but it was a failure because his followers weren't following. Indian recruits and business suppliers of the Army eagerly joined hands with the British rulers, thus sidelining Gandhi into political irrelevance. By contrast, the Muslim League greatly improved its bargaining positions by joining the war effort, an effect not counterbalanced by the small Hindu Mahasabha's similar strategy. The pro-Partition case which the Muslim League advocated was bolstered while Gandhi's opposition to the imminent Partition was badly weakened. Gandhi was humiliated by his impotence before the degeneration of his "Quit India" agitation into violence and by ultimately having to come around to a collaborationist position himself.
Establishing a muddled and wavering position with respect to the Partition plan, including false promises to the Hindus of the designated Pakistani areas to prevent Partition or at least to prevent their violent expulsion. He chose not to use his weapon of a fast unto death to force Mohammed Ali Jinnah into backing down from Partition, a move which cast doubt on the much-touted bravery of all his other fasts "unto death" performed to pressurize more malleable opponents. If acquiescing in the Partition could still be justified as a matter of inevitability, there was no excuse for his insistence on half measures, viz. his rejecting plans for an organized exchange of population, certainly a lesser evil when compared to the bloody religious cleansing that actually took place. Gentle surgeons make stinking wounds. Refusing to acknowledge that Pakistan had become an enemy state after its invasion of Kashmir, by undertaking a fast unto death in order to force the Indian government to pay Pakistan 55 crore rupees from the British-Indian treasury. Pakistan was entitled to this money, but given its aggression, it would have been normal to set the termination of its aggression, including the withdrawal of its invading troops, as a condition for the payment. Indeed, that would have been a sterling contribution to the cause of enduring peace, saving the lives of the many thousands who fell in subsequent decades because of the festering wound which Kashmir has remained under partial Pakistani occupation. Coming on top of Gandhi's abandonment of the Hindus trapped in Pakistan in August 1947, it was this pro-Pakistani demand, as well as his use of his choice moral weapon (left unused to save India's unity or the persecuted Hindus in Pakistan) in the service of an enemy state's treasury, that angered a few Hindu activists to the point of plotting his murder.
Did anyone remember the double standard exhibited by Gandhi in Round table Conference? While the entire nation was expecting a lot from him on that particular visit, he failed miserably, with many claiming it to be more intentional than compulsion. Our case was badly tabled intentionally since according to unconfirmed sources, Gandhi was promised of the whole sole authority of the nation to the Congress stooges post-independence in exchange of some last second favors. Outright sweeping of 72000 crore by the British from the treasury as part of their exit money is clearly an example of what we have lost for the greed of our father of the nation.
But one thing where I agree to what Mohandas Gandhi has to advise the crooked Congress clowns to refrain from getting into politics if they don’t want people to throw stones at them in future. But overall, my disliking for the father of the nation is impounded because of the hypocrisy a single man carried all through his life and used it to hamper the nation and more specifically to hurt the Hindus most. And as it is, I hate when I am forced to let go my evening drink for someone whom I care least if he is good, bad or ugly. Dry-day in honor of the father of the nation? Seriously? Heavens!!

12 comments:

  1. Same here dude.

    Babpu did a lot of damage to the nation being father of the nation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Interesting facts! One should also not forget how he made Nehru ( the scoundrel / womenizer) the PM after he lost to Sardar Patel for PM post. Under Gandhi's pressure, Sardar Patel had to back out. No wonder because of this one man (Nehru - BTW, his grand father is Moghul , converted to Hindu fearing persecution from British) thecountry is in a great mess now. Besides that, the brilliant move he made by naming Feroz XXX to Feroz Gandhi and eventually giving the licence to the family in his name to loot India....Hope this family is wiped out from the face of this earth and the glorious past returns back to our great nation ..Bharatha Varsha.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi,
    Punch into google search
    BRAINWASHING PROCESS OF GANDHI- VADAKAYIL.
    Wake up Indians !
    Know your heroes!!
    Do not worship false gods!!!.
    Capt ajit vadakayil
    ..

    ReplyDelete
  4. www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Lucknow/who-named-mahatma-gandhi-father-of-nation-govt-foxed/Article1-834824.aspx

    ReplyDelete
  5. While you have the right to express your personal opinions, it is unfortunate that you choose to do so without adequate research. Gandhi is not a Mahatma for his political activities. Gandhi is not Mahatma for leading India to independence. Gandhi is not Mahatma for working to abolish untouchability in India. Gandhi is Mahatma because of the personal sacrifices he made.
    Let us compare him to another great Mahatma that comes to my mind - Gautam Buddha. Without offending anyone's religious sensibilities, I would like to mention that Gautam was prince in India. He was fairly well to do and far removed from reality. It was an incident in his life that changed his understanding of reality. Gautam Buddha is known less for his life prior to this incident, than for his life after. Using the same yardstick, being thrown out of the 1st class compartment was Gandhi's defining moment.
    Gautam Buddha left his family in his search for truth. He was fairly selfish in his approach as well. So was Gandhi, in his search for truth. While one attained nirvana under a tree, the other gained that knowledge through service of his people.
    Not everyone liked what Gautam Buddha preached during his time; however he is revered as God today. Not everyone will appreciate what Gandhi provided to this world, however his teachings were reformist and still applicable in this day and age.
    The process of becoming a Mahatma is neither easy nor a pleasure trip. It involves sacrifice and an unparalleled urge to search for the truth. It is not about how you lead your life, but what you can change in the world around you.
    For all the reasons listed above, I am not surprised why Gandhi is 'Mahatma' and why you don't aspire to be one.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Gandhi had his own dilemnas, played politics, kept Subhash Bose out of his way, had never liked others to lead the movement other than self and Nehru, had favoured Nehru to lead the country than Patel even though majority of congress leaders felt Patel is better, had shown liniency towards muslims, was instrumental in Pakistan getting lot of moolah for its survival after 1947;

    But inspite of all the above, he was the only person to get hold of psyche of majority Indians during those times and could command such unparallel trust from his country men from then Pushtoons to madrassis. Otherwise British India with its diverse cultural, religious, caste, regional disparities saw only one dream - Freedom. So Gandhi was unique and numerouno in the world history to achieve what he believed thru 'Satyagraha' and hence 'Mahatma'.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Further I would like to add during freedom struggle many well to do families, leading comfortable life had sacrificed life for freedom, saw Gandhis vision of free Inida as theirs, and even women used to donate their ornaments to regional Congress leaders so as to run the mill of struggle. Many men sold their lands, left their hi paying jobs to freedom which many of us today take lite. There are many such freedom fighters whom we the Nation comfortably forgotten. We observe Gandhi and Nehru Jayanthi, but nation is not knowing when is Patel Jayanthi or vardhanti.

    One such forgotten freedom fighter is Pingali Venkaiah who designed our national flag. Not even congress party remember him. This is the party which claim to have brought independence to this country and hence has a right to rule!

    ReplyDelete
  8. There r million other things on which a highly capable person like u can write & open the eyes of people,may b a handful,doesnt matter & help upliftment of narrow minded thinking of our society. Ask urself ,does this writeup on gandhi will serve any practical purpose except a debate & clicks for ur blog.NO.

    On gandhi , remember that in scientifc world nothing is perfect , nothing is 100%,we can only get closer to a set reference point.Without that reference point there would b only confusion.To run a nation ,to stabalise a nation,to bring order ,reference point is must.And in the absence of Bhagat singh,Bose and many others who sacrificed their life what could have been a better way than setting a reference point as gandhi & move the independence process.At least when new generations read anything about gandhi in books today it may not make them good or great but for sure it wont make them bad.
    Who is & how was our father of nation doesnt matter.What matters is that we pass on the sense of logic,scientific intelligence & scientific thinking to the coming generations for making a strong nation. Rather than some sensational information about the dark side of our history.

    ReplyDelete
  9. There are strong indicators in many history books including some by Britishers, that India could have got freedom earlier to 1947 after First world war. But Gandhi and co made intentional delay by diverting attention of Indian public to 'receive punishment by breaking laws' and many Indians who couldn't fight invading muslims earlier took to this theorapy as we are good at being silent sufferers.

    Else India could have got Independence in 1930s itself.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well written! This man damaged India more than any other person and left his stooge and his family to screw us further. We are grateful to Godse and wish he had acted 10 years earlier, we would have had lesser problems in our hand.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @VK let me answer on behalf of writer. Because certain historical facts does not suit your ideology you are suggesting to blogger "Ask urself ,does this writeup on gandhi will serve any practical purpose except a debate & clicks for ur blog.NO."
    Remember history is taught in every society and every education system because if you know history you can make a better future as well. The writer is just doing the service to the nation by making people aware of hidden facts, which are beautifully covered by Kangress for so many years to make use of Gandhi! have a a happy gandhi jayanti!!!!

    ReplyDelete

Coprights @ 2016, Blogger Templates Designed By Templateism | Templatelib