Persecution and pampering

 The saga of two eminent personalities of our history - Chhatrapati Shivaji and Subash Chandra Bose whom our Right wingers treat as their idols. Both were undoubtedly great patriots who fought for the freedom from occupation. Shivaji built the Maratha empire from scratch, strived for independence from Mughals, troubling Aurangzeb to no end to earn the sobriquet "Mountain Rat". The eloquent and charismatic Subash Bose was a perennial throne to the British Raj. Like Shivaji, Subash escaped from the clutch of the mighty ruler to organize resistance from outside.

Yet both were smart unlike their current Right wing eulogizers not to antagonize the minority community by playing  divisive politics. Both ran their Military not based on a Hindu fanaticism platform. They had Muslim soldiers and Generals in their armies (Bose had his Azad Hind Fauz) who served with extreme dedication, loyalty and professionalism.

Why were both successful ? Because both leaders realized the value of secularism. Both knew very well that persecution and pampering of minorities can backfire. Subas Bose recruited POW (Prisoners of War) from the British Army which included good number of Sikhs and Muslims. He treated them professionally - neither pampering them or making them dwell in fear of getting persecuted. Shivaji Maharaj never destroyed any Mosque he captured, nor mistreated any Muslims, their women folks included. By doing so he just neutralized any Jihad (Holy war) card by the contemporary Muslim Kings to be used against him, for he was surrounded by multiple kingdoms ruled by Sultanates. He treated all his subjects, Civilian or Military equally, without any fear or favor, pamper or persecution, irrespective of caste, creed or religious. Being just, his strategy paid well.

In contrast the unjust Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb followed both principles of Persecution and Pampering. He established Zizia (Religion) Tax on Hindus and Sikhs. During his tenure many temples were destroyed, Hindus were persecuted, the Sikh Gurus were brutally tortured and killed. He overturned the long time secular policies of his predecessors. Akbar treated Hindu scholars highly, had many friends including Birbal, the witty close to his heart. Jahangir preferred wine, women and opium to sermons from Mullahs, keeping them at bay. Sah Jahan maintained the status quo. The fanatic Aurangzeb changed that policy, as an end result only to oversee the beginning of the end of his empire.

In modern days, blatant minority (aka Muslim) pamperism by Congress at the national level and Mulayam, Laloo etc at local level led to the rise of BJP. More recently, the abject pampering by Mamata Banerjee in Bengal has led to a spectacular rise of BJP in that state where it was virtually a non entity not so long ago. But a growing BJP hasn't learnt any lesson from the past. Its divisive policy of pampering one community versus persecuting the other is going to backfire sooner or later.

Moral of the story - a balanced, secular approach has led to building of nations. A parochial, right wing with Fascist, supremacy attitude may have led to temporary success but ultimately led to failure. Best examples are Hitler and Mussolini who pampered a section and persecuted another, leading their nations to gotterdammerung. The end - Hitler committed suicide and Mussolini was killed.

History vindicates that neither Persecution nor Pampering a section of society has succeeded on the long run. It's a lesson History has taught us over centuries. No wonder those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.