Thread by @gauravsabnis

Indeed! There isn't even a pretense of intellectual rigor anymore. Whatever sounds like the right narrative to bring up a grievance against dead guys and alive Muslims is now history. Even if actual history says something completely different.

#PostTruthIndia

https://twitter.com/RameshPV2010/status/1545843241441906688

Independence didn't happen in ancient history. It was all in modern times and extensively documented. Patel being denied PMship is literally complete fiction. The reality is that Patel never coveted the PMship. He & Nehru were never rivals! They were always colleagues.

Within the Congress leadership, there was always general consensus that Nehru would be the PM. Not Gandhi having sole authority. Patel was 15 years older than Nehru, had health issues, and didn't even live to complete his 1st term as Home Minister.

During independence, Patel focus on getting the princely states integrated and Nehru focused on the transition of the functions of the state from the Raj to his administration. Ambedkar was in charge of the constitution. Etc. There never was some succession battle in 1940s.

This "Nehru was foisted by Gandhi ahead of Patel and Bose" is complete malicious fiction, and recent one at that. Even sanghis of that era never questioned Nehru's towering political and intellectual prowess or his primacy in the Congress. Only ideology.

Some sanghi revisionists also throw Rajagopalachari in the mix as fantasy fodder for southern sanghis.

The plain truth is that Nehru's ascension to the top within the Indian polity was pretty non controversial when it happened.

Call out modern sanghi lies and WhatsApp Uni.

Bose even had a Jawahar Brigade in the INA! They had political disagreements. In the 1930s. But 1940s Bose never said anything bad about Gandhi or Nehru afaik. And if alive would probably have been Defense Minister. Or Home Minister after Patel.

I'm not saying no one else had ambitions. But Nehru had pretty much risen to the top organically. He was smart, popular, well spoken domestically and internationally, widely respected (even by sanghis! Read ABV's eulogy of him), and not even 60 years old. Served 16 years. 🤷🏽‍♂️

Until the BJP IT Cell was formed, this completely fictitious Nehru hate canon used to be limited to the fringes of the blogosphere and forums. Today it is mainstream, made so by the sanghi government. Completely fictitious malicious fake history. That's their Hindu Rashtra.

And don't ask me "source? Source?"

What I'm saying here is actual recorded history for anyone to look up.

You give sources for your lies instead. Not "forwarded as received" nonsense.

Even today, I'll have 80 year old neighbors telling me how they remember Nehru's visits and interviews. Russian immigrants bring him up (and Shastri) in small talk.

Nehru is admired everywhere except Modi's India. Cos Modi is obsessed with tarnishing Nehru.

The only "trash talk" I'll do with Pakistani friends is what a boring aloof pompous ass their Jinnah was as opposed to our Nehru who was at ease with everyone at their level and charming AF. 😎

Compare the independence speeches of both. Nehru's gives you a thrill, a sense of promise. Jinnah's sounds as if Gryffindor is supposed to be docked 10 points by Snape. And ends with something that sounds like "Pakistan's in the bag" 🤭

Btw a pet peeve. There's this trope of ridiculing "at the stroke of midnight when the world sleeps, India will awake" by saying lol it was evening in London and afternoon in New York.

That misreads what Nehru meant by that. And even emphasized with the appropriate pauses.

It is "at the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to.. "

Which means that the midnight hour, when the world usually sleeps, is the hour when India will awake to freedom.

Unless of course you want to ridicule Nehru recreationally but wrongly.