Comparing VS with Adi Sankaracharya – What’s Common between ‘CHALK & CHEESE’ ??

via H Balakrishnan published on March 22, 2011

LETTER TO TNIE

Dear Sir,

This being the cricket season, I was ‘ yorked lock-stock and barrel ‘ by the ‘ reverse [ LEFT ] swing ‘ in the title : The Last Red Shankaracharya ” – (TNIE – 20 Mar).

Flummoxed also !!

A ‘Red comrade’ and the revered sage ‘Adi Shankaracharya and Advaita philosophy’ are as far apart as chalk and cheese !! And yet, in these ‘secular’ and ‘ liberal times ‘ , human stupidity appears to be limitless !! But I digress !!

To understand V.S. & Co. , we have to turn to the scholar, (late) Sita Ram Goel, who has done a perfect ‘Grey’s Anatomical Dissection ‘ of our ‘ Comrades ‘ !! He ought to know them well, as he was a primary member of the then ‘ undivided ‘ CPI, in 1946. But soon, in 1948, he realised his ‘ folly ‘ and resigned from the CPI !! In his excellent treatise – ‘Perversion of India‘s Political Parlance’, Voice of India (1984) , he wrote :

” The most significant contribution made to India’s politics and public life by the language of Leftism is character assassination. Most of the time, the Leftists are poor in facts and logic but prolific in foul language. It has opened the floodgates for all sorts of questionable characters to come forward and occupy the front seats on the public stage. The full harvest of the seeds sown in the years before Independence has been reaped in the post-Independence period when politics and public life have become progressively a safe haven for all sorts of scoundrels masquerading as servants of the people”.

‘Prolific in foul language’ eh !! Comrade V.S., after he was shown the door at Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan’s parents house – post 26/11 – in Bengaluru, the Times of India reported on 02 Dec 2008, as follows : ” If the loss of their only son was not enough, the family of slain NSG commando Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan now has insult to add to it — courtesy Kerala chief minister V S Achuthanandan. A day after Sandeep’s father heaped scorn on the chief minister and Kerala’s home minister Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, who visited his Bangalore home on Sunday, Achuthanandan retorted that “not even a dog would have visited the house” had it not been the martyr’s. ‘Is there a rule that the chief ministers of Kerala and Karnataka should visit together. Not even a dog would have looked that way had it not been Sandeep’s house. Our attachment to Sandeep’s family is special. Should not Mr Unnikrishnan, a soldier’s father, understand this,’ the Kerala chief minister told a news channel “.

As for V.S. & Co’s ‘spirit of Nationalism’, the same TOI stated : ” The decision to travel to Bangalore came following criticism from parties like the BJP which accused the state of insulting the martyr — a Keralite — by not sending anyone to attend his funeral.There was a partial hartal in parts of Kerala when even former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein died, the party pointed out “. And yet, ‘The Last Red Shankaracharya’ – – – !!! Tcchhh !!!

(REF:http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2008-12-02/india/27904555_1_achuthanandan-kodiyeri-balakrishnan-major-sandeep-unnikrishnan)

But then, V.S. was only following traditions and in the footsteps of the ‘comrades’, set in motion by M.N. Roy, the founder of the CPI in 1926!!

The book : ‘ DOCUMENTS OF THE HISTORY OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF INDIA‘ ,G. ADHIKARI (ed), NEW DELHI, 1971, ‘educates’ the reader on some ‘pearls of swearology ‘ from M.N. Roy, whom the writer calls ‘Old Marxist Gods’!! :

– At the time of the British conquest, that is, towards the middle of the 18th century, the economic and political evolution of India was such that her people could be called ‘RATHER A NUMBER OF NATIONALITIES INHABITING A CONTINENT THAN A COMPOSITE NATIONAL UNIT. [!!]

– The Revolt of 1857 was a ‘reactionary flare-up of ‘decadent feudalism. Socially it was a ‘reactionary movement’ because it wanted to replace British Rule by the revival of ‘FEUDAL IMPERIALISM’ EITHER OF THE MOGHULS OR THE MARATHAS. (pp 383.)

– The overwhelming majority of the population lived in villages, steeped in ignorance and submerged in social stagnation. Politics, forms of government, National subjugation or freedom remained outside their concern and beyond their comprehension. (pp 383.)

– THE ONLY SECTION OF THE PEOPLE SHOWING ANY SIGN OF LIFE WAS THE MODERN INTELLECTUALS EDUCATED IN WESTERN METHODS AND THOUGHTS. THESE ‘DENATIONALISED’ INTELLECTUALS WERE INSTRUEMENTAL IN BRINGING TO INDIA, ‘FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HER LONG EVENTFUL HISTORY, POLITICAL PATRIOTISM. (pp 383-384)

– The constitutional democracy or the ‘EVOLUTIONARY NATIONALISM’ advocated by the ‘LIBERAL BOURGEOISE’ led by the intellectuals spelled doom to the old social heritage and religious orthodoxy. And these ‘REVOLUTIONARY FORCES’ were crystallizing in the Congress under ‘radical leaders’ whose programme was NOT to revive the India of the ‘rishis’ with its contented handicraft workers saturated with ignorance and dosed in the name of ‘religion’, but to build a ‘NEW SOCIETY’ on the ‘RUINS OF THE OLD’. (pp 389-390).

– The struggle of the ‘RADICAL INTELLIGENTSIA’ was not against an effete and antiquated political institution but for the ‘DEMOCRATISATION OF THE EXISTING GOVERNMENT WHICH’- – – was the ‘MOST ADVANCED THE COUNTRY HAD TILL THEN. (pp 384)

‘ORTHODOX NATIONALISM’, in the social sense, ‘WAS THE RESISTANCE OF FORCES OF REACTION AGAINST THE OMINOUS RADICALISM OF THE DENATIONALISED INTELLECTUALS WHO LED THE CONGRESS’. The same forces whose military explosion was the Mutiny of 1857, ‘COULD BE DISCOVERED BEHIND THE POLITICAL THEORIES OF THE ORTHODOX NATIONALISM OF HALF A CENTURY LATER. (pp 390)

Although its political philosopher and leader were found subsequently in the persons of AUROBINDO GHOSE and BIPIN CHANDRA PAL, respectively,‘ITS FUNDAMENTAL IDEOLOGY WAS CONCEIVED BY A YOUNG INTELLECTUAL OF PETIT-BOURGEOIS ORIGIN. HE WAS NARENDRA NATH DUTT SUBSEQUENTLY KNOWN BY THE RELIGIOUS NOMENCLATURE OF SWAMI VIVEKANANDA – – -. LIKE TILAK, DUTT WAS ALSO A PROPHET OF HINDU NATIONALISM. HE WAS ALSO A BELIEVER IN THE CULTURAL SUPERIORITY OF THE INDIAN PEOPLE, AND HELD THAT ON THIS CULTURAL BASIS SHOULD BE BUILT THE FUTURE INDIAN NATION.’ ‘HE PREACHED THAT HINDUISM, NOT INDIAN NATIONALISM, SHOULD BE AGGRESSIVE. HIS NATIONALISM WAS A SPIRITUAL IMPERIALISM’. (pp 391-392)

– Thus an intelligently rebellious element which otherwise would have been the vanguard of the ‘exploited class’ in a social struggle, had to give in to national pre-occupations and contribute itself to a movement for the immediate overthrow of foreign rule, NOT FOR PROGRESS FORWARD, BUT IN ORDER TO GO BACK TO AN IMAGINARY GOLDEN AGE, THE FOUNTAIN-HEAD OF INDIA’S SPIRITUAL HERITAGE.’ ‘IN THEIR RELIGIOUSNESS AND WILD SPIRITUAL IMPERIALISM, THEY EMBODIED THE REACTIONARY SOCIAL FORCES.’
(pp 393)

– The ‘extremists’, now called ‘NON-COOPERATORS’, have had better success than the ‘MODERATES’ in drawing the masses under the influence of NATIONALISM—. But they could not develop the potentiality of the mass movement by leading it in accordance with the economic urges and social tendencies. Their tactics was to strengthen the nationalist movement by the
questionable method of ‘exploiting’ the ignorance of the masses. AND THE


BEST WAY


OF EXPLOITING THE IGNORANCE OF THE MASSES WAS TO MAKE A RELIGION OF ‘NATIONALISM’. ‘THIS TACTICS LED TO THE APPEARANCE OF MOHAN DAS KARAMCHAND GANDHI ON THE POLITICAL HORIZON, AND THE ECLIPSE OF ALL OTHER POLITICO-SOCIAL TENDENCIES IN THE SHADE OF GANDHISM’.
(pp 394)

– ‘IN GANDHISM CULMINATE ALL THE SOCIAL TENDENCIES THAT HAVE ALWAYS DIFFERENTIATED THE PRINCIPAL TENDENCIES OF INDIAN NATIONALISM. IN FACT, GANDHISM IS THE ACUTEST AND MOST DESPERATE MANIFESTATION OF THE FORCES OF REACTION TRYING TO HOLD THEIR OWN AGAINST THE OBJECTIVELY REVOLUTIONARY TENDENCIES CONTAINED IN THE LIBERAL BOURGEOIS NATIONALISM. THE IMPENDING WANE OF GANDHISM SIGNIFIES THE COLLAPSE OF THE REACTIONARY FORCES AND THEIR TOTAL ELIMINATION FROM THE POLITICAL MOVEMENT’.
(pp 394-395)

ALTHOUGH SOMEWHAT UNIQUE IN ITS IDIOSYNCRASIES AND FANATICISM, THE GANDHI CULT IS NOT AN INNOVATION. DIVESTED OF THE REBELLIOUS SPIRIT AND THE SHREWD POLITICIAN IN HIM, TILAKWOULD RESEMBLE GANDHI IN SO FAR AS RELIGIOUS BELIEF AND SPIRITUAL PREJUDICES ARE CONCERNED. BUT FOR HIS VERSATALITY IN MODERN THOUGHT AND CHARACTERISTIC LOOSENESS OF CONVICTION, BIPIN CHANDRA PALWOULD PERCHANCE JOIN THE MAHATMA IN THE PASSIONATE DENUNCIATION OF EVERYTHING THAT ADDS TO THE MATERIAL COMFORT OF MAN.’ HAD HE BEEN MORE OF A MONOMANIAC THAN A PROFOUND THINKER WITH METAPHYSICAL PREOCCUPATIONS, AUROBINDO GHOSE WOULD SUBSCRIBE TO GANDHI’S PHILOSOPHY.’
( pp 396-397)

WOW !! What ‘Nationalistic Outpourings’ !!

If that was not enough, Arun Shourie, in his ‘rip-off’ of the ‘comrades’, in his –” The Only Fatherland : Communists, Quit India and the Soviet Union ” ASA Publications (1991), gives us some more examples of not only ‘Red Swearology’, but also their ‘Jaichand ‘ activities during the Quit India Movement !! Here are some ‘Red Perals’ :

“ THE BLIND MESSIAHS– In a typical pamphlet of this period, ‘unmasked parties and politics’, they declared the Congress represents the bourgeoisie, Gandhiji being merely the ‘astute leader of the bourgeoisie’; that the bourgeoisie ‘ fears the masses more than it hates the imperialists; that it is afraid of launching a struggle involving the masses against the British because it apprehends that a struggle started against the British will eventually turn against itself; that therefore on its behalf Gandhiji’s sole objective and that of the Congress is to curb the masses, to ensure that no struggle broke out”.

” Terming Gandhiji and Subhas Bose as the ‘blind messiahs’, the CPI accused Gandhiji of ‘accepting the enemy’s thesis, shedding tears over its fate’. ‘ could there be a more ignominious sight?’ it asked. It accused Gandhiji of BETRAYING THE CAUSE OF THE COUNTRY, of ‘crossing the barricades’. ‘Gandhism’, it declared, ‘has entered into its decadent phase. At the most critical time of our national history it is acting as a fetter on the national struggle. It is acting as a disintegrating force in the mighty national organization which was its own handiwork’—. ‘ No longer’, its spokesman said, ‘ is Gandhiji’s leadership, in even a restricted sense a unifier of people’s movement, no longer has it ANY progressive role whatsoever. Compromise on the issue of war is the biggest danger that faces the national movement, and, GANDHISM TODAY MEANS THE LINE OF THAT COMPROMISE. Compromise with imperialism and disruption of the Congress are today politically synonymous terms and Gandhism, which stands for compromise, is the most disruptive force in national politics’. Therefore, they said, the task is ‘relentless struggle against and exposure of Gandhism—— the sharpest opposition to Gandhian leadership—- the isolation of that leadership and determined effort to SMASH THE INFLUENCE’.”


– ” INVECTIVES AT SUBHAS BOSE.
This is how the CPI’s official weekly- PEOPLE’S WAR- LAMPOONED Bose. ‘This black crew’, ‘the agent’s of Bose, the hirelings of the Axis’, The Boseite Traitor’s’, ‘ the traitor Bose’, ‘ the paid agents of the enemy’, ‘the advance guard of Hitler and Tojo’, ‘ political pests’, ‘agents of the foreign invader who have to be hounded out of political life and treated as traitors’, ‘ a diseased limb tht must be amputated’, ‘ the diabolical activities— the nests of treachery, of fifth columnists–‘.”


Shourie then goes on to expose the ‘Comrades’ Trojan Horse activities during the Quit
IndiaMovement as follows:

” COLLABORATORS PAR EXCELLENCE!! The NATIONAL ARCHIVES OF INDIAis now in INDIAN HANDS!! And what does it have to show?

‘Files upon files in the Archives testify to:

– Secret approaches by the CPI to the British Govt. with offers of ‘ASSISTANCE’

– Secret meetings of the Communist leaders with Sir Reginald Maxwell, the Home Member of the Viceroy’s Council, with intelligence officers and with several others:

– Exchange of information at these meetings and in memoranda about activities, about the real motives, as distinct from what the Party was compelled to say in public because of the pressure of nationalist opinion- exchanges of a kind that one encounters ONLY among PARTNERS, and information exchanged of a kind that was CERTAINLY NEVER MADE AVAILABLE BY THE COMMUNISTS TO THE NATIONAL MOVEMENT AND THE ORGANIZATION-CONGRESS- OF WHICH THEY CLAIMED TO BE A PART, INDEED, INFORMATION THAT WAS CLEARLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE MOVEMENT AND THAT ORGANIZATION.

– A working relationship that was clearly perceived as ‘AN NDERSTANDING’ between the British Govt. and the CPI.

– A working relationship that even covered ways of assisting in ‘INTELLIGENCE WORK’.

– SECRET PROGRESS REPORTS submitted by the CPI to the British Govt. about the excellent work it had done in ‘SABOTAGING THE 1942 QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT’-so good in its view was the work it had done and was doing in this regard that the Party henceforth asked that concessions and facilities be given to it solely on the basis of its performance

– A deliberate and well planned effort to mislead the people so that they would acquire no inkling of the ‘secret liaison’ that had been established.

” “ By the end NOV 1941, as noted earlier, the CPI had decided that its duty now lay not ‘in opposing but assisting the war-effort’. The Party now ‘started making secret approaches’ to the British Govt. It chose as its intermediary NM Joshi, a member of the Legislative Assembly and General Secy of the All India Trade Union Congress . On 16 Dec 1941, NM Joshi sent Sir Reginald Maxwell, the Home Member, documents certifying inter alia that the CPI would now like to offer its ‘UNCONDITIONAL SUPPORT’ to the Govt’s war-effort. He requested Maxwell to ensure that the Communists in detention were released swiftly ‘ so that they could press their changed point of view at the forthcoming meeting of the AICC”.

” The CPI submitted to the “imperialist” British Govt. a ‘confidential’- NOT FOR PUBLICATION- “MEMORANDUM on COMMUNISTS’ POLICY AND PLAN OF WORK”. This elaborate ten page memo of 23 APR 1942 , was submitted to the Govt. through ‘several channels’. This is what the PLAN stated: CONFIDENTIAL-NOT FOR PUBLICATION. MEMORANDUM ON COMMUNIST PARTY AND PLAN OF WORK.

– We consider this war to be a people’s war, a war of world liberation in which the Indian people in their own interest must participate to win their own liberation

– We agree with the leadership of the Congress and the general patriotic opinion in the country that no effective national resistance is possible except under a truly national govt. We disagree with them when they say that the nation should not cooperate with the existing war efforts because the present govt. is foreign and not national. We think such an attitude boils down to cutting our own throats. It weakens the defence of the country against the aggressors and makes the task of the fascist invader easier.

– We differ with the policy of the British Govt. that a purely military defence of India is possible and all that the Indian people have to do is to let the existing Govt. to carry on. We are convinced that a total war on Indian soil cannot be successfully conducted except under the leadership of the nation’s trusted leaders, except through the agency of a National Govt. which will symbolize the unity of the people with the Govt. and conduct the war as a real ‘People’s War’.

– Today the danger to our country is great and imminent. Today it is no more enough to have a general political policy and agitate for it among the people and ‘our’ fellow patriots. Today all the Indian Communists whether inside jails or outside, whether free or underground, ARE BURNING WITH AN ARDENT DESIRE TO DO ALL THEY CAN TO COOPERATE WITH THE EXISTING WAR EFFORTS EVEN UNDER THE PRESENT GOVT., IF WE CAN DO SO IN AN HONOURABLE AND EFFECTIVE MANNER. We know that a large mass of our fellow patriots consider such a course of action anti-national. We differ with them and we are convinced that the most patriotic duty today is to do all we can to halt the fascist invaders, whatever the political conditions be. We realize that one of the most effective ways in which this could be done is to give our cooperation to existing war efforts if we are enabled to render it. This is our policy and our burning desire, yet in practice we are unable to implement it. What stands in our way is the policy of the Govt. towards us- the continuance of its repressive policy against us — ”

” The CPI pointman PC Joshi ‘secretly’ meets Sir Reginald Maxwell as also officials of the Intelligence set up!!The understanding with the British Govt. was that they should turn a ‘blind eye’ to the Communists railing against the Govt. as it was purely for ‘public consumption’ and, unsaid, ‘defrauding the masses’!! Naturally, the British Govt. ‘played along’!!”

And then the ‘clincher’ !! ” Apart from railing at Gandhiji and the Congress for leaving the people leaderless by ‘escaping into jails’, for creating by their satyagrahas the atmosphere in which ‘ the advance guard of Hitler and Tojo’ could function, the CPI now turned on the Congress, and on Gandhiji in particular for another crime: they were accused of disrupting national unity by not conceding ‘ the essence of the demand for PAKISTAN’. WHILE JINNAH WAS ADVISED BY THE CPI FROM TIME TO TIME TO PURSUE HIS OBJECTIVE IN A DIFFERENT WAY, THE ONUS FOR DOING SOMETHING AND THE BLAME FOR NOT DOING IT WAS PLACED SQUARELY ON THE CONGRESS, AND ON GANDHIJI IN PARTICULAR. Accordingly the Congress, it was said, must concede to the Muslims ‘the right to self-determination’, ‘ the right of autonomous state of existence- ACCOMPANIED BY THE UNCONDITIONAL RIGHT TO POLITICAL SECESSION’. THESE NEW PROPOSITIONS WERE JUSTIFIED BY ONE PRACTICAL EXAMPLE AND BY ‘THEORY’. THE PRACTICAL PROOF CONSISTED IN ‘THE SHINING EXAMPLE’, ‘ THE GLORIOUS EXAMPLE’ OF THE ONE COUNTRY WHICH WAS SAID TO HAVE ‘SOLVED’ ITS NATIONALITIES’ PROBLEM BY GRANTING TO THEM THE RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION TO THE POINT OF SECESSION” – THE UNION OF THE SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS!!”

That Sir, is the ‘lineage’ of the EMS, V.S. et al & Co !!
But Lo & Behold !! ‘Shankaracharya’ it must be !!How come its not the ‘Last Red Pope’ or ‘The Last Red Mullah’ ?? Delve into ‘Nehruvian Secularism’ and presto !! ‘The Shining Beacon Lights Up’ !! Cheers !!

A small ‘unwarranted’ advice to the writer of the Article : Do please read the book : “Breaking India : Western Interventions in Dravidian and Dalit Faultlines”. May help in ‘seeing light’ please !!

VANDE MATARAM

Paste your document here

Dear Sir,

This being the cricket season, I was ‘ yorked lock-stock and barrel ‘ by the ‘ reverse [ LEFT ] swing ‘ in the title : ” The Last Red Shankaracharya ” – (TNSE – 20 Mar).

Flummoxed also !!

A ‘Red comrade’ and the revered sage ‘Adi Shankaracharya and Advaita philosophy’ are as far apart as chalk and cheese !!  And yet, in these ‘secular’ and ‘ liberal times ‘ , human stupidity appears to be limitless !! But I digress !!

To understand V.S. & Co. , we have to turn to the scholar, (late) Sita Ram Goel, who has done a perfect  ‘Grey’s  Anatomical Dissection ‘ of our ‘ Comrades ‘ !! He ought to know them well, as he was a primary member of the then ‘ undivided ‘ CPI, in 1946. But soon, in 1948, he realised his ‘ folly ‘ and resigned from the CPI !! In his excellent treatise – ‘Perversion of India‘s Political Parlance’, Voice of India (1984) , he wrote :

” The most significant contribution made to India‘s politics and public life by the language of Leftism is character assassination. Most of the time, the Leftists are poor in facts and logic but prolific in foul language. It has opened the floodgates for all sorts of questionable characters to come forward and occupy the front seats on the public stage. The full harvest of the seeds sown in the years before Independence has been reaped in the post-Independence period when politics and public life have become progressively a safe haven for all sorts of scoundrels masquerading as servants of the people”.

‘Prolific in foul language’ eh !! Comrade V.S., after he was shown the door at Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan’s parents house – post 26/11 – in Bengaluru, the Times of India reported on 02 Dec 2008, as follows : ” If the loss of their only son was not enough, the family of slain NSG commando Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan now has insult to add to it — courtesy Kerala chief minister V S Achuthanandan. A day after Sandeep’s father heaped scorn on the chief minister and Kerala’s home minister Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, who visited his Bangalore home on Sunday, Achuthanandan retorted that “not even a dog would have visited the house” had it not been the martyr’s. ‘Is there a rule that the chief ministers of Kerala and Karnataka should visit  together. Not even a dog would have looked that way had it not been Sandeep’s house. Our attachment to Sandeep’s family is special. Should not Mr Unnikrishnan, a soldier’s father, understand this,’ the Kerala chief minister told a news channel “.

As for V.S. & Co’s ‘spirit of Nationalism’, the same TOI stated : ” The decision to travel to Bangalore came following criticism from parties like the BJP which accused the state of insulting the martyr — a Keralite — by not sending anyone to attend his funeral. There was a partial hartal in parts of Kerala when even former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein died, the party pointed out “. And yet, ‘The Last Red Shankaracharya’ – – – !!! Tcchhh !!!

(REF:  http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2008-12-02/india/27904555_1_achuthanandan-kodiyeri-balakrishnan-major-sandeep-unnikrishnan)

But then, V.S. was only following traditions and in the footsteps of the ‘comrades’, set in motion by M.N. Roy, the founder of the CPI in 1926!!

The book : ‘ DOCUMENTS OF THE HISTORY OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF INDIA‘ ,G. ADHIKARI (ed),NEW DELHI, 1971, ‘educates’ the reader on some  ‘pearls of swearology ‘ from M.N. Roy,  whom the writer calls ‘Old Marxist Gods’!! :

– At the time of the British conquest, that is, towards the middle of the 18th century, the economic and political evolution of India was such that her people could be called ‘RATHER A NUMBER OF NATIONALITIES INHABITING A CONTINENT THAN A COMPOSITE NATIONAL UNIT. [!!]
– The Revolt of 1857 was a ‘reactionary flare-up of ‘decadent feudalism. Socially it was a ‘reactionary movement’ because it wanted to replace British Rule by the revival of ‘FEUDAL IMPERIALISM’ EITHER OF THE MOGHULS OR THE MARATHAS. (pp 383.)

– The overwhelming majority of the population lived in villages, steeped in ignorance and submerged in social stagnation. Politics, forms of government, National subjugation or freedom remained outside their concern and beyond their comprehension. (pp 383.)

– THE ONLY SECTION OF THE PEOPLE SHOWING ANY SIGN OF LIFE WAS THE MODERN INTELLECTUALS EDUCATED IN WESTERN  METHODS AND THOUGHTS. THESE ‘DENATIONALISED’ INTELLECTUALS WERE INSTRUEMENTAL IN BRINGING TO INDIA, ‘FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HER LONG EVENTFUL HISTORY, POLITICAL PATRIOTISM. (pp 383-384)

– The constitutional democracy or the ‘EVOLUTIONARY NATIONALISM’ advocated by the ‘LIBERAL BOURGEOISE’ led by the intellectuals spelled doom to the old social heritage and religious orthodoxy. And these ‘REVOLUTIONARY FORCES’ were crystallizing in the Congress under ‘radical leaders’ whose programme was NOT to revive the India of the ‘rishis’ with its contented handicraft workers saturated with ignorance and dosed in the name of ‘religion’, but to build a ‘NEW SOCIETY’ on the ‘RUINS OF THE OLD’. (pp 389-390).

– The struggle of the ‘RADICAL INTELLIGENTSIA’ was not against an effete and antiquated political institution but for the ‘DEMOCRATISATION OF THE EXISTING GOVERNMENT WHICH’- – – was the ‘MOST ADVANCED THE COUNTRY HAD TILL THEN. (pp 384)

‘ORTHODOX NATIONALISM’, in the social sense, ‘WAS THE RESISTANCE OF FORCES OF REACTION AGAINST THE OMINOUS RADICALISM OF THE DENATIONALISED INTELLECTUALS WHO LED THE CONGRESS’. The same forces whose military explosion was the Mutiny of 1857, ‘COULD BE DISCOVERED BEHIND THE POLITICAL THEORIES OF THE ORTHODOX NATIONALISM OF HALF A CENTURY LATER. (pp 390)

Although its political philosopher and leader were found subsequently in the persons of AUROBINDO GHOSE and BIPIN CHANDRA PAL, respectively,‘ITS FUNDAMENTAL IDEOLOGY WAS CONCEIVED BY A YOUNG INTELLECTUAL OF PETIT-BOURGEOIS ORIGIN. HE WAS NARENDRA NATH DUTT SUBSEQUENTLY KNOWN BY THE RELIGIOUS NOMENCLATURE OF SWAMI VIVEKANANDA– – -. LIKE TILAK, DUTT WAS ALSO A PROPHET OF HINDU NATIONALISM. HE WAS ALSO A BELIEVER IN THE CULTURAL SUPERIORITY OF THE INDIAN PEOPLE, AND HELD THAT ON THIS CULTURAL BASIS SHOULD BE BUILT THE FUTURE INDIAN NATION.’ ‘HE PREACHED THAT HINDUISM, NOT INDIAN NATIONALISM, SHOULD BE AGGRESSIVE. HIS NATIONALISM WAS A SPIRITUAL IMPERIALISM’. (pp 391-392)

– Thus an intelligently rebellious element which otherwise would have been the vanguard of the ‘exploited class’ in a social struggle, had to give in to national pre-occupations and contribute itself to a movement for the immediate overthrow of foreign rule, NOT FOR PROGRESS FORWARD, BUT IN ORDER TO GO BACK TO AN IMAGINARY GOLDEN AGE, THE FOUNTAIN-HEAD OF INDIA’S SPIRITUAL HERITAGE.’ ‘IN THEIR RELIGIOUSNESS AND WILD SPIRITUAL IMPERIALISM, THEY EMBODIED THE REACTIONARY SOCIAL FORCES.’
(pp 393)

– The ‘extremists’, now called ‘NON-COOPERATORS’, have had better success than the ‘MODERATES’ in drawing the masses under the influence of NATIONALISM—. But they could not develop the potentiality of the mass movement by leading it in accordance with the economic urges and social tendencies. Their tactics was to strengthen the nationalist movement by the
questionable method of ‘exploiting’ the ignorance of the masses. AND THE BEST WAY OF EXPLOITING THE IGNORANCE OF THE MASSES WAS TO MAKE A RELIGION OF ‘NATIONALISM’. ‘THIS TACTICS LED TO THE APPEARANCE OF MOHAN DAS KARAMCHAND GANDHI ON THE POLITICAL HORIZON, AND THE ECLIPSE OF ALL OTHER POLITICO-SOCIAL TENDENCIES IN THE SHADE OF GANDHISM’. (pp 394)

– ‘IN GANDHISM CULMINATE ALL THE SOCIAL TENDENCIES THAT HAVE ALWAYS DIFFERENTIATED THE PRINCIPAL TENDENCIES OF INDIAN NATIONALISM. IN FACT, GANDHISM IS THE ACUTEST AND MOST DESPERATE MANIFESTATION OF THE FORCES OF REACTION TRYING TO HOLD THEIR OWN AGAINST THE OBJECTIVELY REVOLUTIONARY TENDENCIES CONTAINED IN THE LIBERAL BOURGEOIS NATIONALISM. THE IMPENDING WANE OF GANDHISM SIGNIFIES THE COLLAPSE OF THE REACTIONARY FORCES AND THEIR TOTAL ELIMINATION FROM THE POLITICAL MOVEMENT’.
(pp 394-395)

ALTHOUGH SOMEWHAT UNIQUE IN ITS IDIOSYNCRASIES AND FANATICISM, THE GANDHI CULT IS NOT AN INNOVATION. DIVESTED OF THE REBELLIOUS SPIRIT  AND THE SHREWD POLITICIAN IN HIM,TILAKWOULD RESEMBLE GANDHI IN SO FAR AS RELIGIOUS BELIEF AND SPIRITUAL PREJUDICES ARE CONCERNED. BUT FOR HIS VERSATALITY IN MODERN THOUGHT AND CHARACTERISTIC LOOSENESS OF CONVICTION,BIPIN CHANDRA PALWOULD PERCHANCE JOIN THE MAHATMA IN THE PASSIONATE DENUNCIATION OF EVERYTHING THAT ADDS TO THE MATERIAL COMFORT OF MAN.’ HAD HE BEEN MORE OF A MONOMANIAC THAN A PROFOUND THINKER WITH METAPHYSICAL PREOCCUPATIONS,AUROBINDO GHOSE WOULD SUBSCRIBE TO GANDHI’S PHILOSOPHY.’
( pp 396-397)

WOW !! What ‘Nationalistic Outpourings’ !!

If that was not enough, Arun Shourie, in his ‘rip-off’ of the ‘comrades’, in his – ” The Only Fatherland : Communists, Quit India and the Soviet Union ” ASA Publications (1991), gives us some more examples of not only ‘Red Swearology’, but also their  ‘Jaichand ‘

Welcome to Haindava Keralam! Register for Free or Login as a privileged HK member to enjoy auto-approval of your comments and to receive periodic updates.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

 characters available

Responses

Latest Articles from Media Watch

Did You Know?