Bunty aur Babli: The latest RSS-BJP tango

dost mittar #208 Then sir, if that is what you were looking for, I can only say that you are not being serious in this discussion.

Since, if you were being serious, and being the intelligent man that you are, you would realize that one does not need a japanese post-occupation master plan for india to understand what the japanese did in countries they occupied. You would realize that people like Ho Chi Minh, Soekarno, Mao-Tse Tung, Chiang Kai Shek, Marcos (to name just the asian leaders of the time) were not fools and did not need a japanese occupation plan to understand what japanese occupation meant for their people. That is why they all stopped their other struggles (Soekarno against Dutch, Ho Chi Minh against French, Mao/Chiang with one another) to fight the far greater menace that they knew the japanese represented.

Only in India were the leaders (other than Jinnah) too short sighted, and like Bose could not see beyond their nose when they started the Quit India movement (in case of Congress) at a time when the nazi/japanese tide was cresting. You dont like my saying this - but these are the inescapable facts that Indians have been trained to close their eyes to.

``If by documentary evidence you want me to produce a japanese master plan for post-occupation India - I dont have that.``

Yes, this is precisely what I was looking for.

dm: #206 what ``documentary evidence`` are you looking for? Are you really that completely unaware of how the japanese treated the ``inferior races`` they over-ran in WWII?? But since you keep insisting on ``documentary evidence``, I suggest you start with a simple google search using keywords like ``japanese world war II atrocities``. If that isnt enough, you can read any of the countless books documenting japanese treatment of enslaved nations - start by reading the best selling book ``Rape of Nanking``. If by documentary evidence you want me to produce a japanese master plan for post-occupation India - I dont have that. But then, I dont have a copy of a japanese master plan for post-occupation china or phillippines either.

As for comparing me to indians who call jinnah a puppet - I admit to being a nobody, and as such would no doubt find any comparisons with anyone on chowk to be flattering to me. So dont worry about me. Just focus to what I am saying.

On Mao-tse tung, chiang kai shek, de gaulle, soekarno, marcos, british indian army soldiers, you write: ``How can you compare these people with Bose? They fought the Japanese, Bose was their ally. ``

PRECISELY. I am not comparing them to Bose. I am saying they are the OPPOSITE of Bose. They were true patriots who fought (and died in the millions) to save the world from the japanese and nazi dreams of world domination. Bose was either incredibly stupid in not being able to see beyond his nose, or else plain evil who sought to deliver Indians to the tender mercies of the japanese.

I am glad you recognize that Bose underestimated the ``loyalty`` of the British Indian Army troops - those troops fought and died to save Indians from the Japanese. They were the true heroes. Not Bose and the INA who first surrendered to the japs and then took up guns against their fellow Indian soldiers.

tahmed32:

``That would only be true if the japs/nazis would have treated india like a free nation if they had won WWII, rather than enslaved/exterminated them. From the record (mass exterminations of civilian populations that they over-ran in europe and asia) of the japs/nazis in other places, I think sir that your trust in the goodwill of the japs/nazis is misplaced.``

I had asked you to please give me some documentary evidence that they would have treated Indians as slaves. I take it that you have none and are therefore just repeating what you had said earlier.

``btw, your attempts to compare Jinnah (who won freedom from both british domination and from hindu domination for the muslims of india) to bose (who would have put all of indians - hindus, sikhs and muslims - at the tender mercies of the japanese) are a vast stretch of the imagination, to say the least.``

I never compared Jinnah to Bose. That would be like comparing apples and oranges. I had compared you to Indians who call Jinnah a puppet.

``As for other nations ``not having a popular leader`` to stand up to the japanese: how about Mao-tse-tung and Chiang Kai Shek in China who set aside their fundamental differences to fight the mutual enemy (japs)?? How about Soekarno?? Marcos (who survived the Bataan death march)?? even de Gaulle in france forgot his animus to the anglo-saxons and joined hands? or the brave hindu/sikh/muslim soldiers of the British Indian Army?``

How can you compare these people with Bose? They fought the Japanese, Bose was their ally.

I might add that, in my own opinion (without having read too much about the subject but perhaps more than you have) Bose underestimated the loyalty of Indian soldiers -as opposed to POWs- in the British army. If he was expecting them to desert their officers en-masse and defect to his side, it did not happen.

dm #203 So, finally, we have someone trying to tackle the points I raised in #132.

On Bose`s ``alliance`` with japanese/nazis, you say ``It was a mutually beneficial alliance. ``

That would only be true if the japs/nazis would have treated india like a free nation if they had won WWII, rather than enslaved/exterminated them. From the record (mass exterminations of civilian populations that they over-ran in europe and asia) of the japs/nazis in other places, I think sir that your trust in the goodwill of the japs/nazis is misplaced.

btw, your attempts to compare Jinnah (who won freedom from both british domination and from hindu domination for the muslims of india) to bose (who would have put all of indians - hindus, sikhs and muslims - at the tender mercies of the japanese) are a vast stretch of the imagination, to say the least.

As for other nations ``not having a popular leader`` to stand up to the japanese: how about Mao-tse-tung and Chiang Kai Shek in China who set aside their fundamental differences to fight the mutual enemy (japs)?? How about Soekarno?? Marcos (who survived the Bataan death march)?? even de Gaulle in france forgot his animus to the anglo-saxons and joined hands? or the brave hindu/sikh/muslim soldiers of the British Indian Army?

The whole world saw the reality of the evil that the japanese and nazis wanted to inflict on the world.

Except the Indians who cant see beyond their nose when looking at Bose. (excuse the rhyme)

HP#182:

I am glad that you have clarified your position on Bose.

Hindutva-vadi means the same as ``hidutvists``, as Manto calls them.

“What is happening “NOW” is that BJP/RSS and the whole Hindutva crowd is creating images to undermine Gandhi and Nehru’s leadership and struggle for Indian freedom”

BJP/RSS are not creating Bose`e image. Shyam Benegal, who has made this film, Bose, The Forgotten Hero, is a diehard Nehruvian who will fit quite well into the BJP definition of a pseudo-secularist.

You make a big mistake of labelling anyone who is critical of Nehru or Gandhi as hindutva-vadis. By that definition, most Pakistanis and even Maulana Azad will fall in that category. As my friend Feroz Khan has pointed out, in India, as in Pakistan, much of the taught history was myth making. For a long time, there had been a deification of Gandhi and Nehru in India. This has been replaced by a heatlthier, vigorous debate about their strengths and weaknesses. The person who has replaced Gandhi as a hero, at least for a large segment of population, is not Bose or Savarkar, but Ambedkar whose statues are going up all over India.

India cannot be divided into hindutva-vadis and Nehruvians; there are many other shades. Even hindutva was, for a long time, an all encompassing term that included a somewhat benign cultural nationalism to a more virulent communal extremism. This has now changed as hindutva is now clearly identified with Ayodhya-Ahmedabad type of communal madness.

tahmed#186

I do believe that personalities are sometimes quite important. While India would have gotten its freedom with or without Gandhi or Nehru, I do not think that there would have been a Pakistan without Jinnah - come to think of it, there may not have been a Pakistan even without Gandhi and Nehru.

As for your remarks about Bose, ``stupid``, ``low character``, ``willing to ellout``, ``puppet``, ``excusefor a human being``. For a moment, I thought you were talking about some of your favourite characters on chowk. All I can say is that you stand in a splendid isolation, not only here at chowk, but also in all subcontinent.

You keep referring to no one responding to your post# 132. Many of us have. Still, since you insist, here is a clause by clause response.

``Bose was a japanese puppet. The nazis delivered him to the japanese in a submarine. Do you think they went to all this trouble because the nazis and japanese were concerned about introducing democracy in India??``

You are no different from Indians who call Jinnah a British puppet? Did he do anything that he did not want to do? He was using Germans and Japanese just as they were using him. It was a mutually beneficial alliance. I had already responded that this was no different than the Sino-Pak alliance or the Indira-Mujib alliance. People throughout history have entered such alliances and are still doing so. One can call Musharraf an American puppet with much greater justification (I do not!).

``They did this because they saw India as a potential slave state, with Bose serving as a convenient tool to break up the British Indian Army.``

Maybe they did see India as a potential slave state. I haven`t read this anywhere. But you have read a lot more history of WW2 than I have. So, if you can give me some reference (not rhetoric or cicumstantial evidence but some documentary evidence), I would agree with you, otherwise it`s just your ``unbiased`` opinion.

As far as their seeing Bose as a tool to break up the British Indian Army, of course, yes. This was the combined objective of both parties.

``And what would have happened if the japanese had won? do you think the japanese would have given Indians freedom if they had won WWII?? Check with the philippinos and chinese and koreans and other ``lesser races`` that they took over and they will enlighten you of .``

I do not know. Phillipines, Koreans, etc. did not have a highly popular leader, such as Bose, trying to liberate them with the help of the Japanese. Azad Hind Fauj units did not include anyone except Indians.

``This is the reality. You wont like me for presenting it to you, perhaps. But think about it. Dont let the BJP propoganda mislead you.``

It seems that you only read your own posts and simply scan others`. Nor do you seem to know much about what goes on in India other than reading HP and Roamair`s posts. As I have pointed out in several posts, Bose`s party (yes, his party is still alive in Bengal and part of the governing communist coalition) is a mortal enemy of the BJP. You are confusing Bose with Savarkar. Bose is not their hero although they probably admire him as a national icon.

Finally, one could say that Bose made an error in judgement without indulging in character assasination. And you are the sole ``assasin`` in this case.

YLH: Do you think that if Bose had succeeded in his aims, there would have been a free Pakistan? or a free India? Or even Pakistanis and Indians left alive?? Think of the tens of millions of chinese civilians they killed in cold blood after overrunning their country. Look at the cruel medical experiments they did with their prisoners whom were the ``inferior races`` in their view. Do you think they would have treated indians (hindus, muslims, sikhs) any different??

True patriots - like Soekarno, like the philipinos - set aside their differences with the colonial powers and joined hands to beat this evil that Bose joined hands with first.

Then answer these questions.

I saw a picture of a Japanese bayonetting a sikh prisoner who had his hands tied behind his back - and that picture still makes me sick. That would have been the fate of all those (or their parents) if Bose had succeeded.

I am sorry to see that even Subroto - from whom I expected something better - simply ignores the reality I presented in #132 and again in #193, and responds with some meaningless talk about being ``irked`` at these ``insults`` to Bose.

Re: # 200

I see captain hook still trying to redeem himself after being thoroughly discredited on this website.

Re: # 198,

Dear Ranunculus,

If as you claim you have ``always admired Bose``, what do you have to say about the Razakars in Bengal?

(Now again, that`s a deep one with a time-line triple punch . . . so go for it, but answer carefully)

Sincerely,

Bheka

#198 Yasser thanks.

#197 HP - everyone is entitled to their opinion about politicians - if we all agreed with each other Chowk would be a boring place. I agree with you too that maybe Bose should not have gone over to seek help from the Nazis, incidentally where by most accounts he was disillusioned by Hitler. But I disagree with ``dumb RSS-type`` assessment of his personality. In my opinion is that he as a patriot and TAhmed can keep his opinion that he was a Japanese puppet. And we will try to convince each other of our respective viewpoints without the jibes - OK.

That is why I was interested in Yasser`s opinion. You may not always agree with what he says but you cannot deny that he is better informed than most people on this site.

Subroto

Please refer to #194

I have always admired Bose.

#195 by Subroto
“who had passed the ICS in 1920 change his mind and fight against British repression?”

Basically this does not mean any thing.
I think tahmed is not far off the mark too. After all both Gandhi and Nehru strongly disagreed with SC Bose’s politics. They first took away his president-ship of the Congress and then completely sideline him in Congress.

He was primarily a politician and people form their own views about politicians. So there is nothing wrong in tahmed holding his own views about Bose. Remember politicians are no saint. They make mistakes and take wrong decisions and people have every right to interpret those decisions as they like or dislike them.

Correction to my comments in 195 ``If my clever remarks about ``our handsome meat-eating cousins`` can irk you then your words about ``his low character`` can irk those who have more. ``
should be ``If my clever remarks about ``our handsome meat-eating cousins`` can irk you then your words about ``his low character`` can irk those who have more respect for Bose``.

And I am glad to see that I have psychic abilities too, Yasser has posted his comments about Bose as I had wished.

The straight response came from Dost Mittar (#144) ``You have been reading some very biased accounts about Bose. He was a bright, courageous, forward-looking and thoroughly secular person.....``.

If my clever remarks about ``our handsome meat-eating cousins`` can irk you then your words about ``his low character`` can irk those who have more.

Lets agree to leave personal remarks and comments aside and think what made a man who had passed the ICS in 1920 change his mind and fight against British repression?
It would be interesting to know what Yasser`s thoughts are on Bose.

Sorry about the absence.

Subhas Chanderbose did make a mistake in his collaboration with the Nazis but I must disagree with tahmed32 ... he was not a Japanese puppet. I could have said this 2 days ago but I didn`t want to agree with that ignorant Sikh fanatic Kaura.

Bose was inspired, and he wrote extensively about it, by Mustapha Kemal Ataturk... his idea was that India needed a secular benevolent dictator for 20 years who could weld together Hindus and Muslims into one nation. This vision we disagree with ... besides Ataturk came at the head of a homogenously Muslim nation and not multicultural and multireligious peoples like that of India. Flawed vision aside... and we know that in retrospect every vision can argued as flawed... Bose was a man of great character and personal integrity... he was perhaps the only Hindu leader to have the gutts to speak up and against Gandhi...

What is more is that Bose was not anti-Muslim and his relations with Jinnah were quite cordial. He was also one leader Jinnah didn`t mistrust ... perhaps because Bose was a straight talker... it is a great irony that Bose was pushed out of the Congress.

-YLH