Blame it on Gandhi and Nehru

I have noticed it has become quite fashionable to blame all the ills plaguing India on Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi, both migrated to heavenly aboad more than 50 years ago. Some even fantasize of India being a Superpower if were not there at the helm of affairs. Hindsight is always 20/20. So blaming both is not only preposterous, often hovers at the edge of being delusional.

Let's take look at Mahatma Gandhi who was the senior of the duo and died soon after India's independence. Many from the current generation question his non violent struggle against the British, rather than leading a violent uprising. For their kind information - India was not a Nuclear power when Gandhi arrived in India from South Africa, it was an English Colony. We were not Germany or Japan - we did not have a trained military force to take on British (in fact British ruled us with the support the majority of Indians, an overwhelming majority serving the British Army were Indian recruits).

Except a few patriots like Saheed Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Chandrasekhar Azad and Khudiram Bose who sporadically threw bombs, ambushed and killed some Englishmen, there was hardly any organized resistance to oust the British from our homeland. The Sepoy Mutiny was more of a surprise attack on the unprepared English which had some temporary and limited success. But the shrewed British successfully pitted the Punjabi Muslims against the Hindu Sepoys from the Cowbelt and Sikh mercenaries against the Muslims of Delhi whom they considered as children of the Mughals. 

The Sardars harbored hatred against the Muslims as Mughal emperors killed the Sikh Gurus after torturing them. They were also motivated by a desire to enjoy Muslims women as victory prizes of pleasure from the spoils of war. (There was this unfounded rumor amongst the Sikhs that the Muslim women were extra hot. It fueled their desire to fight for the British who nodded their approval when Sikh soldiers who like hungry, bearded lions going for a kill of hapless deers were seen taking away Muslim women as the British recaptured Delhi from the rebels in 1857).

Even it won't have been easy for Netaji Subash Bose, no doubt a great patriot to take on the might of British Army with his band of POW (Prisoners of War), especially when both Germany and Japan who backed him were on a losing wicket. So, in this context the decision taken by Mahatma Gandhi to fight for freedom was pragmatic - the right decision at the right time. (A Note to our RSS fans - the organization existed prior to our independence, but it then hardly put any dent on the British rule, via violence or otherwise).

Now lets talk about Jawaharlal Nehru, who is also dead more than half a century ago, before most of his critics were born. I am now reminded of Satyajit Ray's classic Bengali movie "AKAALER SANDHANE" (In Search of Famine) which aptly depicts the milieu during the famous Bengal famine which coincided with the World War II, close to when India got its freedom. In this scene as war planes criss crossed the blue Bengal sky a famished woman runs across the dusty, parched fields shouting at top of her voice - "UDOJAHAAJ, UDOJAHAAJ" (Airplane, Airplane).

When British and Germans were flying airplanes we were clapping and chasing those objects like mirage, ecstatic at the mere sight of them. This was when Jawaharlal Nehru became India's first Prime minister. 

Whatever flaws he had, Nehru was a free thinker with civilized views, a modern approach towards education, hated superstitions and stereotype dogmas. He was the architect of building dams, IITs and Steel plants which was much needed then to boost employment and a sagging economy. India whom British left in penury needed a dosage of socialism (post war Britain preferred Labor Party instead of their war hero Churchill for the same reason). 

An open and free market economy at that juncture arguably could have been suicidal, taking us in the path of some Latin American Banana republics now plauged with 1000% inflation. (However we should have jettisoned socialism a la the Chinese in 1970s but Nehru wasn't there at that time and his insecure daughter lacked vision to liberalize when many Asian nations did).

In this context, both Bapu Gandhi and Nehru did the right thing at the right juncture. Both had their shortcomings, but who doesn't. The current leadership could have done pretty much the same in 1947, and Gandhi and Nehru might have done it different in the year 2018 if they were alive today. History is a function of time, with an empirical formula History = function (time).  Let's move on and let both Gandhi and Nehru alone to rest in peace.