Thread by @ArunKrishnan_

Continuing my reading. Savarkar took in Gandhi's studird silence in Jati Das' death during a hunger strike in jail. Nor did he support Bhagat Singh's hunger strike. He had however called a murderer, A full Rashid as his "Dear Brother"

This I shall leave without comment.

Read Gandhiji's words on his decision to support the British during WW1.
Does this even sound lucid?

Since the Moplah rebellion and the Khilafat movement is in the news, here is what Muhammad Ali of the Ali Brothers game said:

"Gandhi was the best policeman the British had in India"

Said by Ellen Willinson, a former British MP!!

What the....

Nothing much has changed in the Congress. The CWC acts as a rubber stamp for the Gandhi sitting on top.

Even Nehru was apprehensive of Gandhi's arbitrariness.

Netaji's take on the failure of the Round Table Conference. On how Gandhiji's Mahatma-ness, was ill suited for realpolitik.

Bhagat Singh and the HSRA revolutionaries were much influenced by Savarkar, with his biography, a recommended reading for recruits.

Good enough for Bhagat Singh? Good enough for me!

Even Nehruji was frustrated with Gandhiji, his flip flops, irrational decision making etc.

And a scathing critique by KF Nariman of Gandhiji's "perpetual blundering, blending of religion and politics "
He calls Motilal Nehru and his ilk, "lip-sealed mummies who shake their heads like spring dolls"

Savarkar on why he was so insistent on Hindu Dharma
"If the world will move towards the end of all religions, I too will stop advocating Hinduism, but I'll that day dawns,I will continue to advocate my religion "

With all the vitriol directed at Savarkarji by the Congress today, let's hear what his contemporaries in the Congress, had to say about him after he was set free in 1937.

And here is what the founder of the Communist Parry of India, Manvendranath Roy has to say about him.

Which right thinking, rational person can disagree with his?

Savarkar was often attacked by Congressmen. They even hired a ruffian who had been imprisoned in the Andamans to attack him. Hearing who he was supposed the attack, the ruffian became Savarkar's bodyguard. Read what Savarkar has to say to all this:

Rash Behari Bose doesnt seem to have a high opinion of the Congress and contends that independence cannot be achieved using the Congress' methods. Remember he was writing this in late 1937 from Japan.

Savarkar's response to the "communal tag" against the Hindu Mahasabha. Well worth a read!

Savarkar's take on what sort of an Indian state he envisioned.

Continuing this series. The media seems to have been very similar even 80 years ago. See what Savarkar has to say about it..

Hard to believe that this was the state of the Hindus in Nizam ruled Hyderabad a scant 100 years ago.

Read and think.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

Savarkar's castigation of the Congress on its selectivity in espousing causes surely finds parallels today.

Savarkar reiterated that the "Hibdu Naion" did not wish to trample on the legitimate rights of any community. It did not seek any preferential treatment. It also abhorred preferential treatment to other communities. One Man, One Vote and no enhanced weightage based on religion

Savarkar on the Congress' divisiveness during elections and the need to consolidate Hindus across the spectrum. This is exactly what the BJP has done.

Ambedkar expressing concern about the composition of the British Army with the Muslims of NWFP and western Punjab dominating.

The Hindu Mahasabha and its leaders were enamoured by the a strongman leader as epitomised by Hitler, Mussolini at al.,at the beginning of the 2nd world war. Their views were to change once the ethnic cleansing became clearer.

Interesting reactions from Gandhi, Nehru, Rajaji on whether to support the Brita or not. Gandhiji was his vacillating self. Nehru was the Englishman. Rajaji was the one looking out for India's interests.

Tje Congress sis eventually come up with ge position that Indian independence was a prerequisite for support to the British.

Savarkar was pro technology as opposed to the fanciful and idealistic and somewhat naive charkha ideas of Gandhi.

His ideas on nationalization and private ownership seem fairly modern. Although he was protectionist as well. Reading his, I feel that the whole Atma Nirbhar Bharat move is very much along the lines thought of by Savarkar.

Savarkar is categorical that the whole, Hindu Muslim rivalry being due to the Britiah policy of divide and rule, was a myth that the Congress was pro pounding. Surprisingly Ambedkar says something very similar!

Ambedkar's views on the theological basis for the Hindu-Myslim divide. Very stark and trenchant. Even in PC and direct, in this day and age. It is still worth reading what a luminary such as he thought at that time about his issue.

Ambedkar does disagree with Savarkar's view of having both groups within a single nation!

Ambedkar seemed to have been more for a complete separation of the two communities. Somehing we are never taught. We have heard that he wanted a complete exchange of populations. Here is where it begins.

Bose calls for a nationwide agitation and Gandhi and Nehru make their weak wooly headed denunciations of it.

Savarkar advised Bose to flee India and raise an army made up of captured Indian soldiers. It looks like the foundations of the INA were laid at the Savarkar-Bose meeting.

Savarkar was deeply critical of Nehru's arrest and had a deep appreciation of Nehru 's patriotism.

Savarkar says that while relative ahimsa is a good concept, Gandhi's total ahimsa was a crime that had a moral perversity to it