Recently a subject close to my heart was opened up. The partition of India in 1947.
Unlikely of unlikely Mr. Jaswant Singh wrote a book on it. Two days later before the weekend came up so that I can check out the book price the party BJP fired him from party membership and then was reasoned that it was against the idealogies of the party!
I beg your pardon, what? Idealogy?
A great man called Issac Newton designed certain theory that said light was nothing but wave. There is nothing in it. An idealogy sure and definitive truth perhaps not said another man. Holy hell, how do you disagree to Newton? He should be either nuts or he should have been Albert Einstein to say light has something in it. It carries its weight with it!
Oh! yes! Add another factor to it. India! Look at these compilation.
In 17th century an idealogy was followed where a women might have to be burned alive with her husband! Individual birth place was a more relevent bench mark for his future livelihood. Wearning shirts and blouses were an idealogical issue and some vetoed against foreign products being sold in the country as opposed to the home made product!
Werent these idealogies debated and removed and deemed irrelevent in the greater context with time?
Now the Issue of Mr. Jaswant Singh. It doesnt bother me a dime whether he stays or quits BJP. What matters more to me is Indian context to it. 62 years after it was all over, today a first alternate political view of the partition of the country is being putforth and it is seen as anti-something.
I dont know what thing but surely it isnt anti-national as Mr. Singh would have now been behind bars if it was so. There might be other anti-s to it that are political and thats not our terittory!
Lets discuss that idealogical question raised!
Its 2009 and the decision makers of 1947 have definitely left a lot to be desired in today's context. Yes! It does in hindsight doesnt it?
This is more about whether the centralized governance for the nation (the current setup of India) or a federal republic system (as in the US and other nations)was required at that time or not? That was the idealogical difference that led to partition.
The debate was concluded by the wise men, however rather controversially and painfully the argument lingers on! Therefore the decision taken based on the idealogy wasn't so correct. As we can see it. Or else how could you justify a partition when over 1 million people were killed. Talk of holocaust which happened for about 15 years; the partition riots happened over just 60 days!!
I can see the cries and protests of the farmers in this country for building industries over their agricultural land. Thinking of 1947.
On the other hand, the federal system might have been a big failure . It would have lead to internal wars and greater chaos; Just like the Soviet Union. Or may be, you know, just may be, India could have succeeded as a Federal republic rather a democratic nation. The centralized system could have created a peaceful province of the islamist population and there wouldnt have been fightings and bomb blasts every few months in the country.
Ideas make up a society. Accepted ideas and alternate ideas make up the crux of the society! Ideas emerge, merge and change. They contradict, contest and culminate. It reappear, reinvent or totally reverse based on parameters. It drives a society and gets driven by it. Sticking to an idea? ignores reasoning, belittles intelligence stamps out necessity to reinvent.
If a progressive nation like ours, have a political agenda of NOT to reinvent and not letting to challenge the unchallengable, then the question is not
"Where are we going" it is " Why did we stay back?"
P.S : Oh well, concluding on idealogies, the RSS's idea of the Akand Bharat is one that should have been eradicated with Sati. Wonder why it is still getting mentioned every full moon day?
P.P.S: These ideas of mine got posted in the Hindu newspaper!!!
P.P.P.S: I am reading the book by Mr. Jaswant Singh whose review will be posted very very shortly!
I'm just curious :)
1 year ago