Frustration with TH : Switched to Indian Express from The Hindu in last 1 year?

Krispy

history books are not to satisfy your infinite inquisitiveness.

Chandrashekhar Azad is one of the foremost freedom fighters. When simple things like 'why a leader died' 'how he died' 'significance of place died' etc. are not even even so much as mentioned in the history textbooks, I reserve my right to call those authors congress stooges.

My curiosity is not infinite. I am not the least bit curious about whether congress party was a safety valve or a lightning conductor. I am not inquisitive to read 'analysis'. I am inquisitive to know the most basic facts about our great leaders.

And before we start any discussion on Mr. Bose, I would like to see all the files declassified. Only then I can comment. For some reason, Mr. Nehru and his decadents never even bothered to get back his 'alleged remains' from Japan. They muffled up all info on him and spied on his family. There must be good reasons why they did that.

Abhishek Singh2

In mooplah riots took place. Both communities involved. That had nothing to do with ncm. In chauri chaura people killed policemen means acting against the state. The british could have easily suppressed voilence from our side. Moreover any movement of such high intensity cant be sustained for long

Krispy

In mooplah riots took place. Both communities involved. That had nothing to do with ncm. In chauri chaura people killed policemen means acting against the state. The british could have easily suppressed voilence from our side. Moreover any movement of such high intensity cant be sustained for long

You are again wrong. Most people who read Bipan Chandra seem to think that Moplah Rebellion started as a riot.

But it happened in my state, so I have access to a little more history Moplah Rebellion was a reaction my muslim populace against the British crackdown on Khilafat movement. In other words, just like how Chauri-Chaura was a reaction against sarkaar, Moplah too began as a reaction against sarkaar.

The 1921 Moplah rebellion began as a reaction against a heavy-handed crackdown on the Khilafat Movement by the British authorities in the Eranad and Valluvanad taluks of Malabar.

The Mappilas attacked and took control of police stations, British government offices, courts and government treasuries.

After this takeover, the Mappilas started butchering jenmi or Hindu landlords.

The largely kudiyaan (tenant) Mappilas also attacked and killed jenmi (landlords) of the Hindu Nair and Brahmin Nambudiri castes.

If this is not violence, Chauri Chaura isn't violence either.

Abhishek Singh2

Yes moplah started as rebellion against british but subsequently took form of riots. Muslims contention was that hindu landlords passed info about their whereabouts to the british. So riots started. Thats another thing that hindus majorly bore the brunt in those riots

Krispy

Yes moplah started as rebellion against british but subsequently took form of riots.

You are making a self-deating argument. If Moplahs lead to killing of policemen, taking over of police stations - and if Gandhi continued to associate with Khilafat movement; why then did he have a problem with Chauri-Chaura?

Why portray Gandhi as totally against any sort of violence when he could carry on supporting khilafat movement despite the violence that was happening in the name of the movement?

This is what Gandhi had to say about Moplah rebellion:

"The brave God fearing Moplahs who were fighting for what they consider as religion, and in a manner which they consider as religious."

I would have respected Mr. Gandhi if he had condemned those attacks and immediately disassociated with khilafat movement. But he never did that These are the facts. Now individual readers can decide whether they want to respect the said leader.

Abhishek Singh2

Infact when malviya etc saw that hindus didnt fare well in those riots they thought of militant form of hinduism call hindutva. Rss was subsequently born in 1925

Krispy

Abhishek Singh2

Again boils down to basic facts:
1) Was Moplah a violent rebellion against police stations and other organs of state? Yes.
2) Was Moplah a violent riot? Yes.
3) What was Moplah associated with? Khalifat movement
4) Did Gandhi CONTINUE TO ASSOCIATE with Khalifat movement? Yes
5) Was Chauri Chaura a violent rebellion against a police station? Yes.
6) Was Chauri Chaura associated with NCM? Yes.
7) Did Gandhi continue to associate with NCM after that? No.

Place these facts and let the readers analyze.

Abhishek Singh2

Gandhi propagated non violence and was committed to its cause. But if people turn violent then what can he do? If he had called up ncm after mooplah that would have been counter productive and lead to more violence. You need to have some practical sense too and gandhi had that. You can't look the things in black and white

Krispy

You need to have some practical sense too and gandhi had that. You can't look the things in black and white

So ignoring Moplah that lead to 1 lakh death+displaced+coverted but withdrawing after chauri chaura that lead to 26 deaths was a practical decision? Okay.

By the way, are you from Northern India? Many people from the North seem to be very practical when it comes to deaths in Southern India, North-East India etc.

Some more questions. Hitler said the following about Jews who got brutalized by Hitler - "The Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher's knife. They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliff" - also a practical decision?

Further, he also said

"Hitler is showing an ability that is amazing and seems to be gaining his victories without much bloodshed."

If you read Bipan Chandra, you get the image that Gandhi is a saint. One cannot imagine a saint saying such things.

sdraju shiva

history books are not to satisfy your infinite inquisitiveness.

@Abhishek_Singh2
You gotto be kidding right. This explains your understanding of the purpose of education. Your arguments hold no water for lack of facts. While you are asking for facts you are conveniently passing opinions