Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Gandhi accepts responsibility for deaths in Partition as per SV principles

Recently during an offbeat tweet on asking Ms. Sagarika Ghose to produce some facts on a Modi quote(which has not yet done at the time of this post), Mr. S. Varadarajan pointed out an obscure statement "made in an interview" by Gujarat CM Narendra Modi as proof of some form of culpability in the Godhra riots. There have been several "quotes" by Modi, most famously the so-called "action reaction"  quote which have been liberally used by "journalists" like SV and Ms. Ghose which lead me to this line of research. Godhra is not the first time an Indian leader has been accused of being responsible for causing deaths of people in riots. One of the most infamous incidents were the Partition riots in India and Pakistan which claimed lakhs of lives.
The British had announced that they were leaving India, as per the decrees of the Labour Party which was in power. They were in a caretaker mode with Lord Mountbatten being the titular Viceroy with Congress, Muslim League and other parties working in close conjunction to transition power after Independence.
SV Principle #1 - Tie any link however obscure from the past to future events. 
Leveraging principles used by SV and other similar writers in their articles we come up with this analysis.
M.K. Gandhi aka Mahatma Gandhi leader of the Indian Independence Movement hated violence to the effect that he would subject an entire nation to decades of slavery if he felt that they did not follow his principles. Case in point the Chauri Chaura incident, after which Gandhi claimed that God told him to subject Indians to slavery under the British yoke,
God has been abundantly kind to me. He had warned me that there is not yet in India that truthful and non-violent atmosphere which can justify mass disobedience which can be described as civil, which means gentle, truthful, humble, knowing, wilful yet loving, never criminal and hateful. God spoke clearly through Chauri Chaura.

SV Principle #2 - Misuse quotes from similar incidents to suit interests
During World War 2 when Jews were faced with the prospect of genocide, Gandhi emailed his friend Hitler and told him,
We have no doubt about your bravery or devotion to your fatherland, nor do we believe that you are the monster described by your opponents.

While there was news all around the world about the concentration camps setup to exterminate Jews, Gandhi on his principles of non-violence would want them dead than fight the oppressors. This was stooping to the level that he would not involve the British Govt. in his discussions with Hitler.
Again clearly exhibiting his desire to see mass murders happen as per SV's principles.

SV Principle #3 - Take a quote made around the time of the incident and modify to suit your purposes
India and Pakistan were in flux around the time of Partitions, the states were being created, power was not fully transitioned and there was a large movement of people. There were many organizations like the Muslim League tacitly involved in the execution of mass violence against groups of people migrating to and from India. And this led to retaliatory violence. In the midst of all this Gandhi had an opportunity to deploy the Army to ensure that there was order in the migration and the elements causing the violence be put down.
What did Gandhi say when asked about using British Force to prevent riots?
"The Congress cannot afford to impose its will on warring elements in India through the use of British arms" (August 25, 1946).

As per SV principles, since the participants "enjoyed" violence, Gandhi wanted them to be taught a lesson and let them self destruct in the orgy of massacres, conclusively proving that he "accepted responsibility" for those who died during the Partition violence.

Footnote: This writer and this blog do not imply in any way Gandhi was responsible in any of the afore mentioned tragedies, but uses the principles of selective quotes and analysis by writers like SV to emphasize that any theory can be written if there are a few facts around it. We do feel that the media should take a responsible unbiased stand towards investigating such incidents and not be lead by petty agendas to highlight story angles of their choice.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

When speaking about riots one central theme of the Communalist party which has been branded "Secular" through Mass Media is the Babri Masjid. The contention is that all the people who did not do anything to prevent the demolition were responsible for the insult of Islam - with a race to villify them to the extent of Count Dracula. What these would-be genociders within the Communalist Party and their information disseminators conveniently forget is that Kashmiri Pandits were genocided and removed from their home state. The Communal Congress silently watched - they chose inaction. This situation is different from Gujarat - where the people acted in what they percieved as Self Defense in response to the Burning of Pilgrims alive. The Pilgrim burning (Godhra Carnage) bears striking resemblance to the 1984 Sikh Carnage in Delhi as in both instances they choose the painful and prolonged way of killing their victims by burning them to death. What ensued were riots - which happened through a community's instincts of self preservation. The people who benefited most were Pakistani's since not everyone takes this into the equation - the Indian army was in a position to attack Pakistan and due to the Gujarat Riots had to be pulled into Gujarat to bring the situation into order. The Gujarat Riots saved Pakistan.

theprudentindian said...

Excellent one and yes the above one too.

People like SV and other pseudo secular jihadis have benefited from the Gujarat riots both in terms of rewards and awards. It is high time they are exposed. Your this post is a great way to expose this syndicate who masquerade as 'Liberal-Social- Secular' gang.

Kudos,
PI.

Dirt Digger said...

Anonymous,
Thanks for the comment. The plight of Kashmiri Pandits is one of the long line of injustices meted out to Hindus. The difference between Godhra and Sikh carnage was the Godhra victims did not incite their killers to attack them.
Not sure that India would've attacked Pakistan at that time.
Please elaborate on your theory.

Dirt Digger said...

PI,
Thanks for your comments. Really means a lot coming from an accomplished blogger like yourself.
will try to stick it to morons like Sidd as and when possible.