Are PM Modi’s statements about Nehru in the Indian parliament true?

By Sunil Kumar

With due respect to PM Modi; his opinions are partially true. So;yes and no.We know that jihadi toadies and their media outlets have an oversized impact in India with their own blinkered self-serving version of history; and Indian people are easily swayed on language, politics, caste and religion.

In the Lok Sabha; Congress dynasty sycophant Mallikarjun Kharge arrogantly claimed that Nehru and the Congress gave democracy to India. This is a totally erroneous notion and arrogant which was countered by Modi.

Politics is like a daily chess game; and it is good for the BJP that they have an adept player to counter checkmate moves from a black opposition which likes to play dirty very often.

As for Sardar Patel; he was a Congress minister with sympathy for the RSS. Also; in plain words; Modi likes him a lot due to Patel being a fellow Gujarati.

In fact; at the time of Partition; Patel even praised the RSS. Nehru and Patel did not get along and worked together only at the behest of Gandhi; their mentor.

RSS, Lies and the Secular tales of Chacha Nehru, #LohPurush Sardar Patel …

Obviously; when Nathuram Vinayak Godse and Narayan Apte were implicated in Gandhi’s assassination; Patel had to distance him from all right-wing organizations.

A Maharashtrian Brahmin established organization with dreams of re-establishing a Peshwa raj across India; it is true that in its early years it was inspired by fascist ideologues like Hitler and Mussolini. But given the fascination with them all across the world(democratic Britain, France, the US etc) which persists to the present day; it would be stupid to tar everybody with the same brush.

But unlike the Communists who openly colluded with the British against the freedom-era Congress; the RSS and its later offshoots have been integral to the integration story of India. They have contributed many times in social efforts across the nation. Comparable statistics for the leftists would only reveal a legacy of murder; failed economic growth(eg. West Bengal); and for a group that’s supposed to be atheist; kowtowing to a single faith.(a “red” ISIS).

Nehru was not universally popular in the Congress either; and accounts of differences between him and Bose, Jinnah and Patel are numerous. In fact internal Congress party documents reveal that 12 out of 15 committees opted for Patel. He was believed to be a great organizer and leader.

It was only due to the fact that Gandhi found Nehru “glamorous”(India’s first president Rajendra Prasad’s words, not mine); that Nehru superseded Patel to become the PM.

With his aristocratic bent and Anglicized leanings; Nehru was bound to create a national framework according to his whims and fancies. (Full credit to him for CSIR, IITs etc)Note; that I respect the first PM for building some of the scaffolding for modern India; but the building is now creaky due to many critical “mistakes” made by him.

Jawaharlal Nehru’s Election as India’s first Prime Minister wasn’t unanimous

In the debate; it was mentioned that if Patel was the PM; we would have all of Kashmir.

This is wishful thinking because the Sardar was a very pragmatic and busy man at the time of Partition and the integration of India’s princely states along with V.P Menon. He was willing to let go of Kashmir due to its dithering and philandering “Raja” and Muslim majority in the valley; but wanted Hyderabad and Junagadh as they were both Hindu majority states ruled over by tyrants. But; when push came to shove; Patel went the whole hog and airlifted Sikh troops into Srinagar airport and ordered one of India’s greatest generals Manekshaw into action.

Further Reading: An interview with Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw

http://www.dailypioneer.com/colu…

PM Modi obviously wanted to score some political brownie points; but with a noisy disruptive opposition lacking in civility; I don’t think we can grudge him that. Also; Modi correctly said that Gandhi wanted the Congress to be disbanded after independence. Keeping in line with his ideology of “service” to the nation; he assumed that the perceived “idealistic” bunch of Congressmen pre-independence would follow.

Reality; as we all know is a different affair; and sanctimonious hypocritical preaching now by both sides(left and right) is utter nonsense; but that is what passes for governance in India. Crores of taxpayer money is wasted on Parliament and state assemblies; but what we get is daily disruption and irrelevant debates and frequent adjournments. If this was a private company; all of the MPs, MLAs, corporators etc. would have been fired for lack of work.

In public interest; if we had a real opposition that gives credible, constructive criticism and does not indulge in political hooliganism; our interests as citizens would be better served.

The government of the day can be countered on issues such as flawed implementation of AADHAR; falling interest rates, rising petrol prices and failure to maintain law and order when groups across the country indulge in arson and looting; also bad infrastructure etc. Cheap potshots like the “acche din”, 15 lacs(did anybody in their right mind not understand that this was an election “jumla”) and intolerance etc are obviously manufactured by a vindictive opposition whose only purpose is to dethrone the present triumvirate. If that’s the case; everything is fair in love and war.

This entry was posted in Books, Cinema, Culture, History and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *