NEHRU IN OUR EYES - A TRUE PATRIOT


Mukesh Devrari

Surely, many of us are not agree with many of the decisions and policies of Nehru. Some of us might have the notion that India would have done better without the socialist bias in the policies of the Nehru government immediately after independence. Few of us hate Nehru’s commitment to the idea of ‘socialist pattern of society’. Others hate him as he was not socialist enough. Hindu nationalist despise Nehru as he was committed to the idea of secularism.
Nehru with Edwina Mountbatten
Hindu nationalists feel Nehru should have learned from Pakistan how to treat religious minorities. They still want Muslims should be treated similarly as Hindus are being treated in Pakistan. Ultra Hindu nationalists outrightly reject the partition of India on religious lines, but they also claim that once it was accepted it should have been absolute. No Muslim should have been allowed to stay here, no Hindu needed to stay in Pakistan.

The list of grievances against Nehru does not end here. He is also considered responsible for Kashmir dispute. He is also responsible for the defeat in the 1962 war when India was thrashed by China in the northeast. He is also accused of being in love with the wife of Lord Mountbatten. There can be plenty of other reasons to hate Nehru. He may have committed several errors. One may have many disagreements with his vision and idea of India.

Still, one may question the prudence of his political decisions, but it would be a gross injustice to the man; in fact, no one can question the commitment of our first prime minister to the welfare of this country and its people. He was a highly intelligent man who had been exposed to modern western ideas for a fairly long time. He wanted to create modern India with scientific advancement and temper. He was one of the great author, thinker and politician India has ever produced.  

Perhaps his commitment to socialist ideas also saved Indian democracy. If he would have propagated or practised anything other than socialism, communists would have come to the power long ago. Nehru also understood, better than most of us that great nations could not build on hatred. Hindus may have many grievances against Islam, but people of this independent nation must rise above their religious identity and commit themselves for a better tomorrow. Amazingly he did it amid the tense communal atmosphere after of partition.

Nehru was aware India is a Hindu majority; it will remain a Hindu majority country in the foreseeable future. Hinduism is not going anywhere. People of this country must not be ruled in the name of religion. The government must not withdraw legitimacy to their rule from their adherence to any religion. It is even senseless to think this way.

In the foreign policy front, Nehru was a realist, not an idealist. On the one hand, he supported the Chinese aspiration in the form of ‘One China’ policy, at the same time he supported the Tibetan uprising and freedom movement. It is evident as he allowed the passage of Dalai Lama with his thousands to followers to move to India. It enraged China and subsequently Chinese punished India.

India is fortunate to have someone like Jawahar Lal Nehru as first prime minister. No matter how hard right-wing forces try, it will be impossible to erase the imprint of Nehru and his ideas from the national psyche of this nation. It will also be impossible to dismiss his commitment to make India a modern nation.

end. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

TRANSNATIONAL MEDIA OWNERSHIP AND ISSUES OF SOVEREIGNTY AND SECURITY

Image
Mukesh Devrari  Transnational media ownership means ownership of media assets by global corporate houses around the world. The word 'transnational' can easily be easily replaced with the term multinational. In other words, when a multinational company owns media companies around the globe that company can be described as a transnational media organization. There are plenty of such organizations, but most vilified among all is owned by Rupert Murdoch.  The nature of media is very different. As you all know media is a plural form of the medium. Production of films, TV serials, drama, theatre and other wings of the cultural industry are also owned by western media companies. Here, the meaning of the word transnational can be extended. Not necessarily western media companies own assets in the third world countries. They create their work in the west and sell it around the world.   It has long been a complaint against western media companies that wherever they go, they dev
Read more

BANNING TIKTOK SENDS RIGHT MESSAGE TO CHINA

Image
Mukesh Devrari   Banning Tiktok in India is without a doubt a great decision by BJP government after the killing of 20 Indian soldiers at the Line of Actual Control at Union Territory of Ladakh. Globally the Tiktok has been downloaded by more than 2 billion smartphone users and 30 per cent of its customers are in India. If the Tiktok will be replaced by an Indian company, only then this ban is worth it, other it is immaterial from India’s point of view. Otherwise, it makes no difference to our national interest whether the parent company is from the United States or China or Congo. Indian companies must intervene and capture the vacated market. They must offer similar apps to users. The Communist Party of China’s (CPC) aggression at the border gave this once in a lifetime opportunity for India’s businesses to capture the vacated spaces. The CPC is responsible for the global downfall of Tiktok & Huawei. First of all, China should use the opportunity of BJP havin
Read more

­Dawn’s discourses on perpetual Indo-Pakistan enmity

Mukesh Devrari  Abstract   This study is a thematic analysis of columns and editorials published in the opinion pages of Dawn during India’s general elections 2019 to find out how Pakistan’s elite media represents India as a perpetual adversary. It finds out that Dawn’s op-ed pages characterize India as a permanent security threat, destabilizing force, propagandist state, and dominating power conspiring with the United States to harm the interests of Pakistan and China. It also reveals that news columns and editorials consistently claim that Indian media indulges in warmongering, rising Hindu nationalism, and non-state actors contribute to the hostility in both nations. Finally, it notes that Dawn’s Op-ed pages describe India with the state lens in geopolitics and global power structure, mostly magnifying the state’s perspective instituted mainly by the security establishment.   (Keywords –Indo-Pakistan enmity, Dawn , media representation, media & conflict, thematic analysis)   In
Read more