Risky Routes and Rootless People

#209
``the Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi is a VERY good source``

fyi, the Gandhi quote you mention is not in The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi.

Re: # 210

Manto
I want the source that Ajeet Javed quotes. It is not in Gandhi`s collected works. Secondly you did not answer soysauce` s question. You pointed out passages in Freedom at midnight that made no mention of performing excretory functions in the same room etc. So you are also pushing the envelope.

I don`t care what Gandhi wrote in his collected works. I am free to disagree with anything he says. After all I could say the Congress party used him as a tool too. I could be right. I could be wrong. It would be entirely my surmise.

So when you extract his sayings and quote them it doesn`t mean anything. He could have equally well changed his mind later. Just as Jinnah did when he felt that having his own nation under his belt was preferable to being completely secular and staying on in India. Again this is my interpretation. Jinnah could have had a thousand other reasons.

I am not demonising Jinnah or sanctifying Gandhi.

Re: # 200
Bharath
I am afraid I have very little to offer on grievances against Gandhi and my reading on this matter is not a lot either. However to some extent I am coloured by my father`s perceptions. He was a Hindu Mahasabha supporter and was not in favour of the Congress party. So while trying to understand my father`s political views (he never pushed it on us) , I started reading up on something about the freedom struggle. At that point I realised that there was a lot of political manoeuvring in the Congress, some orchestrated by Gandhi etc., which made me think a bit.

Now, to weld a disparate bunch of people, especially people with strong opinions, together you do need to be a very political animal to survive, if you do not wield force. I see that in the large corporations I have worked, and I see no reason why it is different elsewhere. This is why I believe neither Jinnah nor Gandhi were pure as driven snow. Each one saw what he had to do and did it. That is the extent of my belief or interest.
I shall however pursue this a little later when time permits.

In fact to be honest I knew very little about Jinnah either. Growing up in India in the late 60s and 70s one hardly cared about Pakistan (except for the 1971 war). It`s existence came into prominence only when the cricket matches were resumed. So I am sure that a lot of us who were not affected by the partition had no radical views on Pakistan. I grew up in a partitioned India and we accepted our boundaries as such.

Even now, when I go home to India and talk to my nephews nieces etc , I see them being far more interested in Indian issues than Pakistan. The only blip is when there is some mention of the Jihadists. I would like to know what they think now.

One more thing. The moment you align yourself with any religious group politically, I do not think you can be wholly secular. I mean secularism here as it really is defined, i.e. not concerned with religion. I am a Hindu but I prefer to keep my beliefs at home. But this belief will not help at all in politics. That is what Gandhi knew and Jinnah realised later perhaps. The complete separation of church and state is impossible to achieve in areas that are poor and are willing t to look at providence for the justificaion of their existence.

So all that hogwash about secularism in sub-continental politics is only for people like some of us who live a little beyond the subsistence level. The rest need their gods.

Sorry for the long rant.

PS: I just came across your claim that you never said ``Hindu cultural life was the central motif of Indian nationalism``...

If I recall correctly, you were caught on unplugged and it was a matter of some controversey for a good four or five weeks... Could you please tell me what you exactly said if you didn`t say the above mentioned?

Sadna...

Not just one Gandhi quote. Please visit my ilogs.. and you will find that I have quoted half the Collected Works of Mahatma gandhi... even I am bored now. That you and Soyasauce deny the fact that I have quoted nothing but Gandhi himself, is an indication of the dishonesty I spoke about earlier.

BTW... the Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi is a VERY good source. Perhaps you will enlighten us on the ``wider implications`` of declaring the entire western civilisation as Ravanna Raj, women`s liberation as the work of the Satan and the wider implication of rejecting modern medicine... not to mention the wider implication of declaring ``I am experimenting with myself and my friends by introducing religion into politics`` ...

Instead of telling us of the wider implications of these great quotes... you keep harping about identity.

But rest assure I don`t blame Gandhi for anything post-partition Pakistan. That is our own doing ... but I see you stuck in the rutt where you must prove that we blame you ... when in actual reality, you are obsessed with us.

Mantolives#whichever
Keep parroting that one spurious Gandhi quote (which neither you are able to source nor is anyone else ) as the explanation of everything pre-partition and post-partition in Pakistan - Pakistan`s enemies will be really happy to see so much intellectual rigor.

PS to Sadna: I am still unsure how by pointing out the obvious contradiction in your claim that it is we PAKISTANIS who are obsessed with India and not the other way around when you live and breathe on an irrational hatred of Pakistanis ... is abusing you?

Again... I fully agree that chowkies taken in by your lies and distortions fully deserve it but facts will be facts.

Soyasauce,

Lets be fair...

The book ``Freedom at Midnight`` was one of the several books I cited on the issue you raised... I quoted it because it was a pro-Gandhi pro-India hogwash and yet it was forced to take up the subject of Gandhi`s sexual behavior. Your 169 is a poor attempt at trying to prove that you were right. My arguments on Gandhi are not dependant on one book.. and my comments wholely prove the point that I was making. I think anyone who reads the chapter that I have quoted can see what the authors are getting at.

In any event... answer this ... Did he or did he not sleep naked with young girls especially his grand niece Manu? Does the chapter not prove that conclusively. Tell me why one Tagore (not Rabindranath but Gandhi`s assistant) resigned in protest to Gandhi`s odd behavior? As for posting citations- the behavior you`ve ascribed to me may be true of Sadna but not me... My citations are always on the point and prove clearly the point I am making.

As with the other board.. I must point out that gandhi`s personal life is not really the point... it becomes a point only when people try to present him as some sort of infallible god which he was not.


Sadna ...

The Muslim League also adopted universal adult franchise as an ideal in 1932... so lets not jump up and down and claim something about Pakistanis that is just not true.

The question was of wider implications ... what do you think wider implications were of Gandhi`s declaration of being a Hindu first and therefore a true Indian... or forget that... what do you think are the wider implications of Gandhi championing the caste system and racism against black people?



Bharath mian,

I look forward to a fruitful exchange of views and internet friendship.

soysauce
I fail to see the whole point. Perhaps some of his Indian friends have been misinforming him. Universal franchise might have become a central part of the Indian nationalist creed in the early 1920s only after the advent of Gandhi and thereby rearranged the Hindu-Muslim equation to many Muslim leaders` dismay. But however many Indians you rally to denounce Gandhi and Nehru today, and however dysfunctional Indian democracy is, India is not going to retract the constitutional right to universal franchise granted to all Indians for any reason, much less to fulfil the unrealistic expectations of Pakistanis or pre-partition Muslim League.

Some Pakistanis seem to think it better to abuse Gandhi (in the hope that Indians will be shamed into surrendering their one-man one-vote system) than to recognise the urgent need to expand the scope of power-sharing in their own country to include more of their own fellow Pakistanis.

Ooops, I meant 197. Mea culpa.
Here we have had Yasser expounding on various topics for years - but it`s the same old same old. He makes up quotes to suit his prejudices and when asked to post from his specific citations, he pulls up something tangential. It`s funny to see him questioning other people`s honesty.

soysauce
#191 is my post. I wasn`t aware you were asking me a question - what is it?

#191 Before you question the honesty of others, please answer my question honestly in #169

#193
Mantolives says ``I can well understand why you say what you say... because you believe that ``Hindu cultural identity is the central motif of Indian nationalism.````

I have never said such a thing, and pointed this out the instant he began repeating it many months ago. Mantolives in particular and his friends in general appear to think that real world`s realities can be evaded by badmouthing me and spreading lies about me. As I said on UP these hazrats personify the saying `mullah ki dauD masjid tak`.

Re: # 188

{{{{I hold no brief for Gandhi or Jinnah. I just see them as individuals. And I do not believe that either of them stood for , justice , fair play etc. all the time.}}}}}

SWARRIER,
You are a rare specimen , a gentleman in this insane board.......


I am aware of Manto`s grievances against Gandhi. What are yours? can you comment?
honestly I am ignorant... I am aware of Indian right-wing anger that he was too much pro-muslim/ pro-pakistan towards the end... and I don`t think you are referring to this.

Regards,

Re: # 176
#176 by Mantolives on May 31, 2006 5:17am PT
{{{{Bharath,
This is not the only speech Jinnah made... Furthermore Sadna`s economical with the truth. For example she forgets that Jinnah held through out his life that a Non-Muslim could represent Muslims ... You can believe whatever you wish ... but facts will be facts..}}}}


Manto Mian,
Why do you criticize Sadna here? I did not make any conclusion from her commentary.
I tried to interpret that speech of Jinnah MYSELF ..and I was disappointed .......since it did diminish some of the positive image of Jinnah that you had built in my mind. I did not try to imply that he was actually Mullaish ...I did not mean to imply that Jinnah only prtended.
I have told you this many times....I DON`T HAVE EVEN 1% OF YOUR HOSTILITY AGAINST GANDHI WHEN IT COMES TO ANY ANTI-JINNAH FEELINGS I MAY HAVE.


``You can believe whatever you wish ... but facts will be facts``

I have asked you beofre not to say this....I respect your scholarship and your secular
progressive ideals. If ``facts are facts`` why do we have so much problems in this world? Our perception differ.


Here are my perceptions ..(.not ``facts``:-))
You had written somewhere that you continue to learn and understand Indian history (think in ur article on Ranade).......hope we can learn from each other...

#196
I will not be providing answers to your wilful lies about myself and my family. It is my experience on chowk that when you (and many of your compatriots) have no answers, you begin to make wild personal accusations about me and demand explanations from me for your wild accusations. Sorry I am not playing your game.

If you think by doing so, you can erase my arguments or the public record that I quote on Indian history, you are greatly mistaken. As I said those dumb chowkies who are taken in by your lies, fully deserve to be taken in.