“History teaches us not to commit mistakes and yet………history repeats itself”
Every action has a reason and every reason has logic. Irrational as it may be, logic is relative. My sensibilities over the years, have acquired a logic that may seem too extreme to others, but is very reasonable to me. I am an Indian; no part of me denies the fact that this is my motherland. But are these my people? India, according to me, was never a country; it was and is a vision. A vision that borrowed from other ideologies of the world to come up with a new ideology socialism. I am no political expert but just an observant layman; socialism is an idea that propagates the collective functioning of the society as a whole and thus is more progressive, theoretically, than capitalism or communism as the latter two only focus on one particular wing of the society. So, 56 years hence, are we socialists? No, not even to the closest micron, because some where along the way we lost track to individualistic approaches and ideologies. My anguish arises not from what I have endured as a Kashmiri migrant, but by the revelation of the truth…………..
January 30th, 1948, a day no Indian can or will forget as this was the day a bullet seared through the heart of the man whose reference in history is preceded by the word ‘Mahatma’ i.e. ‘high-soul’. Nathuram Godse assassinated the Mahatma, so is Mr. Godse an anti-Indian? Funnily, he is seldom seen as a man whose ashes have yet to be immersed due to the fact that in his will, he has asked for the immersion of his ashes in the waters of the Indus of unified India, but as the demonic harbinger of the Mahatma’s death. Indus of unified India, an anti nationalist thought or a secular outlook, you decide. It pains my heart to see the ignorance of the fact that Nathuram Godse too was an Indian, a true Indian. I do not intend to blacken the Mahatma’s image, just want to point out the flaw of an ideology. M. A. Jinnah requested to become the prime minister of India which was denied, so he demanded a separate state altogether. History that we have read in our schools. But do we know that his intentions were not to harm but to progress? Suffering from cancer, his only outlook was that of a secular state. He resented the ignoring of the minorities from the first cabinet spearheaded by Nehru. So, he demanded either a post or a nation. Irrational to us, but very rational to him. But the decision of handing him a nation still defies my logical reasoning power. He died a few months after the formation of Pakistan, converting his stature to that of a demi-god for Pakistanis; a man who lived for the people and not for the chair. So, Jinnah’s descendants including his immediate family live as mere mortals in India, but his status is equivalent to God in Pakistan………..
Now came the bone of contention- the crown of the geographical outline of the country- Kashmir. Pakistanis invade Kashmir; Hari Singh, the king of Kashmir gives last minute letter of accession to India; Indian army push the Pakistanis back completely and then retreat to a position known as the line of control (LOC). History of school books revisited. But again do we know, that the Mahatma himself approached the U.N and asked for a plebiscite i.e. a vote in Kashmir where the people decide whether to go to Pakistan or stay with India? A vote that has yet to take place, 56 years hence. At that time the idea behind the vote was simple ask the people. But is it that simple? In 1947, it would have been fair but now, after years of insurgency and the spurt of the anti-India fervor in the state of Kashmir, a plebiscite spells doom for India. So much for vision and ideology. I ask you my fellow countrymen, how many wars have been fought for this issue? All the wars had a central issue, why the delay in plebiscite? Pakistan’s ideology may not seem so irrational now; a vote was promised and it did not take place, so they attacked. So, Pakistan is not irrational, we never attacked Pakistan so we were right to defend ourselves, yet millions of lives were lost. So who is to blame? Hindu? Muslim? Politics? Pakistan? India? Think about the answer yourself. A man can be great but that doesn’t mean that his ideology is always rational.
Our very first prime minister showed his immense love for the country by taking up the job that required strength and compassion as needed to nurture a seedling to full bloom. India has gone to war a in total five times. Thrice under his rule. 1947-1966, nineteen years of governance, three wars and a legacy that continues till today. His ideology was to make sure that Jinnah did not blackmail the country to accept him as the prime minister. Correct, as an individual, but principles are seldom put before the nations interest, in my view. Again a great respectable man, but somewhere his ideology was not compatible with the vision of India.
Succeeding him was his daughter( hereditary monarchical type of government in a democracy, poetic). 1971 war, 1975 emergency any anti congress or anti-Indira Gandhi activist was arrested and put in jail! No surprise that she had no competition left after that black period in our brief history. Indira Gandhi was quite literally the mother of Indian politics. Her fierce methodology appealed to the youth at the time. She was hailed as the ‘New Dawn’ in the political system of our country. Her no nonsense attitude left many stunned to actually think logically. She, along with Sanjay Gandhi, proved it once again that the face of the person appealed to our senses more what they think. A majority of the voters did not even know whom they were voting for, what she stood for, all they knew that she was the daughter of their beloved Jawaharlal Nehru. So was our action rational at that time? After all we voted her into power only to be assassinated by her Sikh bodyguards which led to the 1984 Hindu Sikh riots which eventually led to the heightened insurgency in Punjab. She ordered to open fire on the Golden Temple, the right intention at that point of time but with a repercussion that left millions dead thereafter. My brain starts to play tricks with me as I link history. But am I linking history? Or am I linking one individual in history to the plight of our country? Think who gave support and consent to Nehru to be the first prime minister? Indira became the prime minister due to whose demise? Doesn’t it all add up miraculously?
After mother’s assassination a son came along who unleashed his army on his own countrymen sent to Sri Lanka by himself. No wonder he ended up in bits and pieces. Now we have a new mother, another Gandhi, another great person, another ideology but with one little flaw; she is Italian. During this entire saga, who suffered the most? Did we even for a minute stop to think about India? I, ladies and gentlemen, am writing this article away from my home land because I was driven out of there by an extreme but rational ideology that if I and my compatriots are out of Kashmir, the long overdue plebiscite will be more favorable to Pakistan. In Punjab, a friend of mine has lost his entire family to insurgency and down south another one has lost a brother and a father in Lanka. Not to forget the names of all those martyrs etched on India Gate who have died fighting for the ideology of a legacy that still continues. People may be great, but their ideologies aren’t right always. I refuse to accept the ‘Mahatma’ as the father of my nation- so am I an anti-Indian?
Every action has a reason and every reason has logic. Irrational as it may be, logic is relative. My sensibilities over the years, have acquired a logic that may seem too extreme to others, but is very reasonable to me. I am an Indian; no part of me denies the fact that this is my motherland. But are these my people? India, according to me, was never a country; it was and is a vision. A vision that borrowed from other ideologies of the world to come up with a new ideology socialism. I am no political expert but just an observant layman; socialism is an idea that propagates the collective functioning of the society as a whole and thus is more progressive, theoretically, than capitalism or communism as the latter two only focus on one particular wing of the society. So, 56 years hence, are we socialists? No, not even to the closest micron, because some where along the way we lost track to individualistic approaches and ideologies. My anguish arises not from what I have endured as a Kashmiri migrant, but by the revelation of the truth…………..
January 30th, 1948, a day no Indian can or will forget as this was the day a bullet seared through the heart of the man whose reference in history is preceded by the word ‘Mahatma’ i.e. ‘high-soul’. Nathuram Godse assassinated the Mahatma, so is Mr. Godse an anti-Indian? Funnily, he is seldom seen as a man whose ashes have yet to be immersed due to the fact that in his will, he has asked for the immersion of his ashes in the waters of the Indus of unified India, but as the demonic harbinger of the Mahatma’s death. Indus of unified India, an anti nationalist thought or a secular outlook, you decide. It pains my heart to see the ignorance of the fact that Nathuram Godse too was an Indian, a true Indian. I do not intend to blacken the Mahatma’s image, just want to point out the flaw of an ideology. M. A. Jinnah requested to become the prime minister of India which was denied, so he demanded a separate state altogether. History that we have read in our schools. But do we know that his intentions were not to harm but to progress? Suffering from cancer, his only outlook was that of a secular state. He resented the ignoring of the minorities from the first cabinet spearheaded by Nehru. So, he demanded either a post or a nation. Irrational to us, but very rational to him. But the decision of handing him a nation still defies my logical reasoning power. He died a few months after the formation of Pakistan, converting his stature to that of a demi-god for Pakistanis; a man who lived for the people and not for the chair. So, Jinnah’s descendants including his immediate family live as mere mortals in India, but his status is equivalent to God in Pakistan………..
Now came the bone of contention- the crown of the geographical outline of the country- Kashmir. Pakistanis invade Kashmir; Hari Singh, the king of Kashmir gives last minute letter of accession to India; Indian army push the Pakistanis back completely and then retreat to a position known as the line of control (LOC). History of school books revisited. But again do we know, that the Mahatma himself approached the U.N and asked for a plebiscite i.e. a vote in Kashmir where the people decide whether to go to Pakistan or stay with India? A vote that has yet to take place, 56 years hence. At that time the idea behind the vote was simple ask the people. But is it that simple? In 1947, it would have been fair but now, after years of insurgency and the spurt of the anti-India fervor in the state of Kashmir, a plebiscite spells doom for India. So much for vision and ideology. I ask you my fellow countrymen, how many wars have been fought for this issue? All the wars had a central issue, why the delay in plebiscite? Pakistan’s ideology may not seem so irrational now; a vote was promised and it did not take place, so they attacked. So, Pakistan is not irrational, we never attacked Pakistan so we were right to defend ourselves, yet millions of lives were lost. So who is to blame? Hindu? Muslim? Politics? Pakistan? India? Think about the answer yourself. A man can be great but that doesn’t mean that his ideology is always rational.
Our very first prime minister showed his immense love for the country by taking up the job that required strength and compassion as needed to nurture a seedling to full bloom. India has gone to war a in total five times. Thrice under his rule. 1947-1966, nineteen years of governance, three wars and a legacy that continues till today. His ideology was to make sure that Jinnah did not blackmail the country to accept him as the prime minister. Correct, as an individual, but principles are seldom put before the nations interest, in my view. Again a great respectable man, but somewhere his ideology was not compatible with the vision of India.
Succeeding him was his daughter( hereditary monarchical type of government in a democracy, poetic). 1971 war, 1975 emergency any anti congress or anti-Indira Gandhi activist was arrested and put in jail! No surprise that she had no competition left after that black period in our brief history. Indira Gandhi was quite literally the mother of Indian politics. Her fierce methodology appealed to the youth at the time. She was hailed as the ‘New Dawn’ in the political system of our country. Her no nonsense attitude left many stunned to actually think logically. She, along with Sanjay Gandhi, proved it once again that the face of the person appealed to our senses more what they think. A majority of the voters did not even know whom they were voting for, what she stood for, all they knew that she was the daughter of their beloved Jawaharlal Nehru. So was our action rational at that time? After all we voted her into power only to be assassinated by her Sikh bodyguards which led to the 1984 Hindu Sikh riots which eventually led to the heightened insurgency in Punjab. She ordered to open fire on the Golden Temple, the right intention at that point of time but with a repercussion that left millions dead thereafter. My brain starts to play tricks with me as I link history. But am I linking history? Or am I linking one individual in history to the plight of our country? Think who gave support and consent to Nehru to be the first prime minister? Indira became the prime minister due to whose demise? Doesn’t it all add up miraculously?
After mother’s assassination a son came along who unleashed his army on his own countrymen sent to Sri Lanka by himself. No wonder he ended up in bits and pieces. Now we have a new mother, another Gandhi, another great person, another ideology but with one little flaw; she is Italian. During this entire saga, who suffered the most? Did we even for a minute stop to think about India? I, ladies and gentlemen, am writing this article away from my home land because I was driven out of there by an extreme but rational ideology that if I and my compatriots are out of Kashmir, the long overdue plebiscite will be more favorable to Pakistan. In Punjab, a friend of mine has lost his entire family to insurgency and down south another one has lost a brother and a father in Lanka. Not to forget the names of all those martyrs etched on India Gate who have died fighting for the ideology of a legacy that still continues. People may be great, but their ideologies aren’t right always. I refuse to accept the ‘Mahatma’ as the father of my nation- so am I an anti-Indian?
Posts
1 comment:
Well said.
Post a Comment