Thursday, March 09, 2006

march 23, 1931

mar 9th

please remember that date.

that is the date on which sukhdev, rajguru and bhagat singh were hanged by the brits for conspiring to gain freedom for india.

exactly 75 years ago.

and they sacrificed themselves for this vile lot we have in power today?

and they sacrificed themselves so that our holiest places are bombed with gay abandon?

today's indians do not deserve it that we had heroes like these, and kartar singh sarabha, and the gadar party members. we have forgotten them in the blind worship of abominable fools.


Kaunteya said...

I guess, in the end, these brave men laid down their lives for the most underserving men on the planet. I know this is the time to pay them tribute and sing praise for their sacrifice. But i just cannot help and wonder, what if these guys had not bothered to care of India and its freedom? India would have anyway got freedom [thanks to world war II].
These brave men died in their early 20s. People don't even know what happened to their families and loved ones. I know that Veer Savarkar's family lives in a small chawl in Pune. Sukhdev's family's fate would not have been too different either.
On the other hand look at what happened with our other "freedom fighter's" family. Nehru's family.Even The Sultan of Brunie will envy their lifestyle and the power it wielded all these years.
So here's my point. These brave men were very very emotional about the country. So much so that they did not care about their loved one's fate. They lost their lives in their prime. OK they got a few handful more young one's motivated. And yes even after 75 years they get tributes from people like us [not even from the government]
But that's it. But look at Rahul Gandhi, who's great grand-father was also officially a 'freedom fighter'. But that clever chap did not get too emotional about his country. He opposed British only to a point where it did not harm him or his family personally. His opposition to Britishers was calculated and well planned. He did only so much to ensure that he stays in the game when Britisher's leave. Even his tenure in jail, they say, was no less than a 5 star adventure.

So here's my point to all the people who want to fight secularists. Fight only to a point where it does not harm you and your family personally. Like Britishers, these secularists will fade away some day. May be due to external circumstances [like in case of British]

Who knows, if Sukhdev would have stayed longer, he would have become a Member of Parliament in India and may have become a great nationalist leader.

I hope i am not sounding too in-senstive or shameless. But i believe in one thing. Nothing is permanent. The secularists may seem very very powerful or un-defeatable. But HE works differently. HE might have a bigger plan in mind. Who knows?

And isn't the RSS , which is a bunch of emotional guys doing the same today. They are fighting for the most undeserving men [like me]. The Hindus, i.e!!

KapiDhwaja said...

I second what you say Kaunteya. Dont feel guilty, and stop your self-flagellation.
What you are saying is essentially, stay alive to fight another day. Thats what clever heroic Generals have always done all throughout history. Chatrapati Shivaji for instance. Also George Patton's well known famous saying, 'I dont want you to die,I want the other SOB to die for his country...'

But as you said, the fight must be kept up against anti-national traitors until they fade away, while we manage to stay around and prevail...

sukracharya said...

That was the time when the circumstances warranted a sacrifice of life to show the others a solid example.... those were the Kshatriyas in the best mould possible... today RSS has another version called the Intellectual Kshatriyas... as intellectual Kshatriyas we need to flood all media with our troops(our writings). Rajeev Srinivasan is one example where he is fighting a grand war and at the same time having a thriving profession. This is the need of the hour, an army of RSS volunteers committed to intellectual warfare and perhaps form a plank to enter politics. The RSS's Milan which is thriving in Bangalore is a good example if this where working professionals meet every sunday for an hour to chart out ways to fight for "real" freedom, freedom from political correctness, freedom from pseudo secularists and freedom from the "Gandhis"

indianpatriot said...

Inspite of gloom and doom including Varnasi Blasts( I feel we have to let down might of Indian air force on Murdike LET headquarters sooner than later), I feel more optimistic about Indias future. See the recent issues of Forbes. India has more billionares than Japan now( Asias richest country). Here follows an article by Swapan Das Gupta (One of my favorite columnists. Others being Bharat Karnad, Brahma Challaney, M.V.Kamath and TVR Shenoy)

- There was no condescension in Bush’s offer of friendship
Swapan Dasgupta

Even after he fell from grace and spent his last years in disgrace, there was one country where Richard Nixon was always welcome. For all its other angularities, China never forgot its indebtedness to the man who in 1971 began the process of extricating the Middle Kingdom from its post-communist isolation.

It is still too early to say whether or not President George W. Bush will enjoy such a lofty status in India during his retirement years. Yet, when future historians chart the course of Indian foreign policy in this century, they will have to acknowledge Bush’s unique contribution to overturning the entrenched assumptions of the Cold War. It is not merely that the controversial president of the United States of America made a special effort to reach out to India. He was the first world leader of consequence who understood the enormous importance of democratic India in the 21st century world order.

In the natural course, the Indo-US understanding on nuclear energy would not have happened. Both countries had too many non-negotiable and conflicting positions. The March 2 separation agreement, which must now await the US Congress’s ratification to be institutionalized and internationally acceptable, would not have happened if Bush hadn’t taken the political decision to accommodate Indian sensitivities. The US president went out of his way to create a special place for India in the five-member nuclear high table.

Thanks to the Congress’s peculiar dependence on the communists and the Muslim vote, this particular facet of the US president’s two-day visit to India has neither been adequately publicized nor appreciated. A nervous Manmohan Singh government lacks the necessary self-confidence to flaunt India’s global coming-of-age as a political and diplomatic success. When it comes to the US, there is just too much historical baggage that the Congress has to carry. But why blame the Congress alone? The Bharatiya Janata Party, which should have shared the credit for a process that culminated in the July 18 and March 2 agreements, has been excessively circumspect — although it has raised a few important points for the government to clarify. Consequently, it has been left to the media and corporate India to celebrate a historic step forward.

India , it would seem, is still mentally unprepared to cope with its new global status. Jawaharlal Nehru and the other eminent Nehruvians such as V.K. Krishna Menon may have been passionately interested in international affairs. Unfortunately, that interest was tempered by what can be best described as a monumental chip on the shoulder. Nehru, who was culturally steeped in Anglo-Saxon mores, was over-anxious to show that his heart went out to all the colonized peoples. Likewise, Menon never got out of the propagandist role he assumed as head of the India League in Britain. In attempting to be a “quality” in world affairs — Menon’s description — India ended up as a preachy, sanctimonious bore. Except with the Mountbattens and the liberal set in Hampstead, the British and American establishments tended to be more at ease with Ayub Khan and John Kotelawala than with earnest Indians who shopped in London but pretended that Moscow was paradise. Despite her fierce espousal of national interests, Indira Gandhi carried this arrogant pretence to macabre heights.

It is not merely the leadership that indulged in this inverted snobbery. Feigned indignation directed at the West became a national philosophy and led to disastrous policy choices. Every failure stemming from sloth and incompetence was laid at the door of the colonial legacy. Excellence and entrepreneurship were shunned and mediocrity was celebrated in the name of self-sufficiency and third worldism. The economists and historians were, predictably, the worst culprits. “It has been well said,” wrote Jagdish Bhagwati, one of the early refugees from India’s socialist conformism, “that any elementary mistake in economics can be turned into a profound truth by ingenuously making the right assumptions to deduce what you want...India suffered the tyranny of anticipated consequences from the wrong premise.”

The problem hasn’t ceased with the onset of market economics and the acquisition of nuclear weapons. Some years ago, V.S. Naipaul faced unwarranted hostility from the champions of political correctness by questioning the relevance of categories like decolonization five decades after the Union Jack was finally lowered. Not that this blunt home truth has forced a re-examination of intellectual assumptions. Last month, the Indian Council for Cultural Relations, a body created by the Nehruvians to shower state patronage on its chosen artistes, held a seminar to link Indian literature to other Third World experiences. At a time when Indian writers are seeking Western markets for the Indian idiom and experience, the sheer absurdity of attempting contrived links with oppressed voices in Egypt and Sierra Leone was too apparent.

Like the elusive New World Information Order whose virtues are still proclaimed by the relics of an earlier era, “official” India hasn’t fully come to terms with the brash, self-confident India of this century. The energy and entrepreneurial dynamism of India which Bush detected quite early on has yet to sink into many critical areas of decision-making.

It is this incomprehension of the New India that is behind the paranoia over interacting with the wider world. The rediscovery of market-oriented economics and deregulation is only 15 years old but even within this brief period, India has experienced one scare after another. The hesitant introduction of rule-based international trade under the aegis of the World Trade Organization was met by the fear of the takeover of the Indian economy by multinational organizations. Cable television triggered fears that the hapless villager in Azamgarh would be exposed to Baywatch and fall prey to an insidious cultural imperialism.

On almost every count these fears have turned out to be misplaced. Indian ingenuity and cultural comfort with itself have led to India dictating the rules of the market. Cricket is a case in point. When socialism prevailed in India, it was the English and the Australians who controlled the game. Today, no major cricketing decision can be taken without factoring Indian interests. In the Seventies, Yorkshireman Fred Trueman taunted Indian cricket as a matter of routine. He never toured India with any MCC side. Today, Geoff Boycott, the other Yorkshire cricketing legend, has to sing for his supper on Indian TV. His accent is regarded by Indians as quaint, just as Peter Sellers’s Indian act drew sniggers in Britain 30 years ago.

The lessons of the past decade are too significant to be brushed aside by insular comrades and uninformed cultural chauvinists. Whenever an economically liberated India has confronted the world, it has always succeeded in turning the balance of power in its own favour. There was not a hint of condescension in Bush’s offer of friendship and neither did he undertake the finger-wagging drill of a big brother — unlike in Pakistan. He wasn’t showering India with aid and freebies. He was imploring India to assume its rightful role in global capitalism and enrich itself. His offer lay in facilitating the removal of irritants created by an earlier generation. Never mind all the lofty talk of democracy — which, like the Americans, Indians take for granted — Bush was speaking the language of a Texan out to cut a mutually beneficial deal.

Nehru, like the protesters who revelled in hateful anger, wouldn’t have comprehended Bush’s logic. That’s because he hated business, entrepreneurship and profit. He epitomized India’s Dark Ages. The country has moved on. And the young generation, unlike the Midnight’s Children, don’t even need to look back in anger at the 50 wasted years. They have nothing to lose but their subordination; they have a world to win.

KapiDhwaja said...

A Funny eye-opening perspective abt different communities in the US..

Kalyani said...

Dear Kaunteya,

I empathise with what you have written.However,passionate people are "touched by fire",self-aggrandizement totally lacking in them.

Is it a flaw or a sterling quality...I leave it to you to ponder over.

I COMpletely agree with your comments about the callous indifference shown to our 'Freedom Fighters' Families.

About the sheer unmerited waste of precious lives of Men like Bhagat Singh,Veer Savarkar,Nathuram Godse,Veera Pandiya Kattabhomman and the Rest.,well,do you really think they are dead and gone?!

Read "Many Lives & Many Masters".

MEN Live In Deeds Not In years!

I recall a statement I read in a novel long forgotten:-

"To Live In The Hearts You Leave Behind Is Not To Die".

iamfordemocracy said...

How can all you intellectuals hold RSS in such high esteem? What is intellectual about RSS? Look at their website. It is dumb. Look up media. There are very few RSS people over there. Check the films and books. RSS/BJP haven't written much interesting stuff for common people. Look up any Hindu organization. There is a perceptible lack of order and purpose. 'Dharanat Dharmaha" , religion is one that holds society. Isn't Hindu religion being proven inadequate somewhere? haveen't RSS/BJP been proven incapable?

My thesis is: Hindus are suffering becuase BJP/RSS are incompetent, not primarily because some external forces are bad.

Kalyani said...

To add to the list above:-

Sri Parameshwaran of IPKF,who was brutally killed by LTTE,by "necklacing"(SIC)a burning tyre.And many such IPKF Personnel were killed likewise.

I DON'T believe,theirs is "not to reason but to die"(SIC).

Sri.Ahuja,who was shot in the eye and back,when He was ejecting from His copter,that had crashed,by pakis,during Kargil war.

Sri.Mehta of Calcutta Port Trust, and his solitary Nepali Gorkha Bodyguard, who were BRUTALLY tortured, by eyes getting gouged out
and mutilated and murdered,at the behest of kalimuddin shams(forward bloc),idrias mian and many more muslim henchmen on a anything but Holy(Holi) day. They were doing their routine duty of cracking down on smugglers.

How do we remember them?By suffering and awarding manirathnams who glorify and justify the very same goondas and smugglers by their *nayakans*&*bombays* and such bilge!

At least some people had the guts and gall to march with broomsticks and chappals towards these *opinion makers,sophists full of pulpit attitude*!!