|
|
|
Arms consignment being smuggled in a fruit laden truck poses many serious questions regarding efficacy of prevailing checks, nakas and whatnots for spotting terrorists and weapons. The truck carrying at least six mercenaries besides the driver and conductor with large consignment of deadly weapons reached all the way from Kupwara to Patni-Top undetected or unchecked. It could have definitely .....more After P-5, G-8, G-15 it is now the turn of G-20 taking shape. G-20 is a successor to the Willard Group which had 33 members including India. It was organised by the most industrialised nations namely US, Japan, Germany, Britain, France, Italy and Canada but found somewhat unwieldy to push its agenda further. Now the size of the group is attenuated...more |
|
Men, Matters, Memories Indo-Pak Diary
– I Gandhi : Nationalism, Super
Nationalism and Patriotism Lost in the Gandhi's
century!..... |
 |
||
EDITORIAL Arms consignment being smuggled in a fruit laden truck poses many serious questions regarding efficacy of prevailing checks, nakas and whatnots for spotting terrorists and weapons. The truck carrying at least six mercenaries besides the driver and conductor with large consignment of deadly weapons reached all the way from Kupwara to Patni-Top undetected or unchecked. It could have definitely crossed the Lakhanpur barrier as also the Nagrota checkpost but for the chance collision and resultant discovery of large arms cache. Incidentally only arms are seized; the six hardened militants carrying it to blast the national capital have escaped. As usual, there is the news of cordoning off the area and launching search operations for nabbing the ultras. For all one knows, by this time they would have reached safe hideouts of which there is no dearth in this wretched State. On the face of it, there is the clear cut case of serious lapse and gaping holes in the check-posts meant for search and nab operations. If only fool-proof check-posts were fully functional and doing their assigned job meticulously, the truck would have never crossed Banihal tunnel and seized in Qazigund itself. From this many questions naturally crosses one' mind. First, how is it that six ‘extras’ were travelling in a truck meant for goods only. What is the difference between a goods-carrier and a passenger-bus if so many extras become party of the consignment. For all one knows only driver and conductor are supposed to travel in the goods-laden truck or at best an escort to whom the consignment belongs. This is lapse number one ignored all through the militancy infested route right from Kupwara to Patni-Top. The entire route is full of check posts. If only single traffic cop had dutifully acted, he would have not allowed the truck to proceed with extra load of six terrorists. Second, the weapons have been found hidden below the apples in the boxes and the special tool box attached to the truck for the purpose to hide weapons. This is something very serious in that in any militancy infested area, there are special dog squads to smell deadly explosives and narcotics. The security personnel are also free to have a random check of one or two boxes. After all, designs of the enemy are no secret. They are out to spread mayhem and terror all over the country. One really does not know if any special dog squad is deployed for such purposes. If yes, why the explosives could not be detected. Were the dogs ‘obsolete’ having lost their smelling power and yet remaining in service ? If not, why not ? Third, it is only one truck that has been seized by chance carrying deadly consignment of weapons destined for Delhi. There is absolutely no doubt that many similar consignment could have already reached various destination in India to comply with the Jehad call given by master terrorist Osama bin Laden and other ISI sponsored terrorist outfits. Can anyone in the security set up vouch that this was the only truck carrying lethal and deadly weapons ? This looks quite ridiculous affair of having check-posts but either no means or no will to detect the weapons and terrorists load. Fourth, how is it that a circuitous and treacherous route all the way from Kupwara to send consignments to Delhi has been adopted by the terrorists when easier routes are available via Nepal-Bihar border or the porous border in Jammu region. This is precisely meant to avoid suspicions by showing it as apple consignment during the apple season. Here the million dollar question relates to the fact that even those in the apple trade are direct party to the despatch of weapons hidden below the apples. But for their involvement, such packing would not have been possible. Fifth, is it tightening of security at all points or loosening it ? Right now the orders are extra vigil. It seems even simple vigil is conspicuous by its absence. Sixth, just a few months back there were reports that SOS calls have been sent by ultras from Kashmir for replenishment of fast depleting stocks of arms and ammunition. The latest cache proves that enough of arms have landed in the State from across the border so much so that these can now be spared for spreading terror in other State as well. Someone in the power apparatus must give answers to the above posers. Now that modus operandi for smuggling out weapons and mercenaries alike to other States has been exposed, what action is being taken to prevent similar or more innovative means of despatching ‘apple consignments’. There is a saying, "An apple a day keeps the doctor away". But such apple boxes carrying deadly weapons would destroy the health in perpetuity. A very high level probe is called for to establish lapses and plugging the same to prevent disastrous situation in many parts of India. Every one in the political, ruling and security apparatus has to be wide awake and come out of hibernation and complacency that has resulted in resurgence of militancy in the State which now tends to spill over to other parts of the country as well. After P-5, G-8, G-15 it is now the turn of G-20 taking shape. G-20 is a successor to the Willard Group which had 33 members including India. It was organised by the most industrialised nations namely US, Japan, Germany, Britain, France, Italy and Canada but found somewhat unwieldy to push its agenda further. Now the size of the group is attenuated to just 20 and it is definitely cohesive and well organised to make its functioning result-oriented. The initiators say that it is not a parallel body to Bretton Woods Institution but can supplement the efforts of this group to many topics particularly economic interaction between the developed and developing nations besides evolution of consensus on many global issues. This group of G-20 is slated to be launched in Berlin in December and will have its first meeting under the Chairmanship of Canada for deciding upon the contours and agendas for improving world economic order and cooperation in particular. As far as this country is concerned, it finds its name in the G-20 to which India has readily agreed. This is a tribute to the resilience of Indian economy that has withstood trials and tribulations of the recent past to which many world economies remained exposed during the last two years. It is also the recognition of the buoyancy of the Indian economy which is slated to go for quantum jump and play pivotal role in maintaining delicate balance between the haves and have-nots. It is also the belated recognition for this country for its massive contribution to the evolution of international thinking and concerns on many global issues that remain source of trouble. India has participated in many peace keeping missions in Korea, Congo, Somalia etc by sending its forces for diffusing tensions. India has faithfully pursued the goal of total nuclear disarmament and even after attaining nuclear power status it continues to advocate sincere approach for gradual but total disarmament. India is one of the recipient country which has religiously paid back all loans to World Bank and IMF that has earned it appreciation of these world bodies. One expects that entry into G-20 Group would prove to be harbinger of finding similar support for permanent membership of reorganised Security Council. |
||
|
||
Men,
Matters, Memories Tiring times these have been, these months and weeks after the Vajpayee government fell. That the government fell was in retrospect the least bothersome part of it. Governments do fall and we have seen how. What made this one seem odd - apart from how it was manoeuvred - is that the Election Commission choe to take its own time to announce fresh elections and when it finally did, the polls were stretched over a five-week period. That made the agony unbearable. Someone even had the gall to say that Indonesia took even longer and that Combodia's lasted even longer than that. Yes, it was said by a worthy in full view of millions of TV viewers and may be he even expected a pat on the back for the comparison. Never mind Indonesia and Combodia, we seem at last to have entered the final phase of the poll, ending next week, and the nation has every reason to heave a sigh of relief, and hope that the 1999 poll will give us a semblance of stability. Relief it undoubtedly will be from the tortuous election process, made worse by an issueless campaign, which, at its peak, turned out to be no more than an endeavour in mud-slinging on a scale hitherto unknown. The one-day or two-day polls of not many years ago seemed such a distant memory as the combatants this time over went on and on with their self-destructive endeavours. The Election Commission had no doubt its own reasons to make the 1999 election a tiring, annoyingly so, exercise, given its concerns, including availability of security forces and, of course, its worry that a June-July election would be disrupted by the monsoon. In the event, we had a war-like war between the months the government fell and the time the poll were conducted. The war, though, was not a creation of the Election Commission. But then during the very first two phases of the polls we did witness two score and ten Indians, a dozen or so from amongst the security forces, dying in Bihar alone. Madhya Pradesh, Assam, even parts of Uttar Pradesh did have their share of floods regardless of the post-monsoon timing of the election. It is one of those things, it will be said, which even the almighty Election Commission cannot help. Forget the coarseness of the political debate, made worse on occasions by the indiscretions of people responsible for ensuring a free and fair poll. The debate, if any, was indeed tragi-comic. It was tragic for the sheer lack of issue; nobody obviously had time for issues. It was comic for the twists and turns which the combatants made as they went along the long and arduous road. A shortened time-frame for the elections would perhaps have spared us of some of it. Politicians, will be politicians. Name-calling comes to them like the next breath to you and me. These were the names they called each other by : "Liar", "traitor", "fascist" and worse, Character assassination was very much the name of the game. The presence of TV cameras round the clock made things look more tasteless than they may otherwise have been. Sadly, even the Election Commission was bitten by the ugly bug. So much so that one of the Election Commissioners, hurt by some allegations made by a candidate, who also happens to be the Defence Minister, made the extraordinary observation that politicians "who are economical with the truth should not make such allegations, particularly when they know that they are losing the elections". A preposterous statement to be made by a man whose constitutional job it is to ensure free and fair elections and not to predict the outcome. Politicians, even ministers, will in the heat of the battle make allegations, but for an Election Commissioner to pronounce a candidate a loser even before the ballots have been cast is shocking. If this was an indiscretion, the Election Commission on occasions seemed willing to go beyond its constitutional brief. Witness the desperate attempt it made to gag the Press by imposing a ban on exit polls. So sure was the EC of its position that it even tried, unsuccessfully though, to embroil the Supreme Court in its controversial order, only to be told by the Court that the CEC better mind his business. Then we had the odd spectacle of the Haryana Chief Minister being asked to stay put wherever he was and not to campaign for his son who was contesting for one of the parliamentary seats. We also saw the Acting Bihar Governor, who is still the Chief Justice of the Bihar High Court, urging the Chief Electoral Officer of the State to seriously inquire into the existence of duplicate ballot boxes. (The recovered boxes were extensively displayed on most TV channels). We saw two Bihar Ministers being arrested for allegedly trying to take over polling booths. We also saw candidates in Srinagar constituency in Kashmir begging the EC to ask security personnel to make a show of their presence, if only to assure the voters of their safety in case they wished to defy the Hurriyat Conference boycott. In Kashmir again we saw the Chief Minister campaigning, of all things, in a police boat for his son in the Dal Lake area. The Election Commission had nothing to say. Not surprising, when one of the Election Commissioners is willing to pronounce a particular candidate as a loser even before the first ballot has been cast. The Chief Election Commissioner would have us believe that the allegations made by several Bihar candidates had been looked into and found baseless. How come then that in Bihar alone some 800 odd booths have had a repoll. That's fairness, the CEC will say, forgetting that hoodlums were let loose to interfere with the process. And was it right for the CEC and his colleagues to join issue publicly, at a Press Conference, with the Defence Minister who had merely drawn the EC's attention to some alleged irregularities. The only course open to the EC was to conduct an investigation and not to rebuke George Fernandes and certainly not to describe him as "losing candidate". The CEC is perhaps seeing himself in a role that goes well beyond the one granted to him by the Constitution. Like, he appeared to be viewing the 1999 poll as "my elections". I want "my elections" to be free and fair. Or something to that effect, I heard him saying on the TV. I am not quibbling over the use of language but it betrays a certain mind-set. Like, when someone drew his attention to Kapil Sibal, the Congress Party spokesman, having been hired by the EC as its counsel in one of the cases. The CEC's not-so-funny answer was that the next time he would hire a BJP lawyer. One does not associate such frivolousness with someone holding a high constitutional office. If that was a case of frayed nerves one can understand it. The CEC after all is human like you and me. May be the long drawn out poll process was finally telling on his nerves, in which case we should try to forget the whole thing. The problem arises when you consider the key role the CEC plays in the life of our democracy.Since he has never lost an opportunity to remind us that he is a simple Jat farmer, one feels justified in asking him that if that really be the case, he should try to be as straightforward as only a simple Jat farmer can be. Shades of Seshan, did you say ? The other thing remarkable about the 1999 election has been the monotonous recurrence of the dynastic impulse throughout the length and breadth of our land. From Kerala to Kashmir, from Madhya Pradesh to Rajasthan and Bihar sons, daughters, daughter-in-law and widows have taken over from their peers. As an essayist has put it "a nation can abolish monarchy as America did with zest in 1776. But it cannot so easily abolish the dynastic impuse. The American fascination with royalty shows itself most flagrantly in the American obsession with the Kennedys, but familial succession permeates political life". Independent India may have got rid of its 600 odd royals but a new royalty (including some old blue blooded ones) appears to have emerged in the form of the offspring of the politicians, royal and plebian, representing the political elite of the past six decades or so. If you have a Priyanka Vadra preferring to be called Priyanka Gandhi, the reason is not far to seek. A cachet surrounds the name Gandhi. And if you are not convinced try to recall the number of times fawning TV crew men have recorded for posterity Priyanka's "common touch" during the Amethi campaign. Remind yourself of the eulogy which a respected magazine has written (supported by a huge spread of colour pictures) hailing Priyanka as "The Queen of Hearts", a la Princess Diana. Or, the doting mother, an independent candidate, Menaka Gandhi praising her son, Feroz Varun, the whole of 19 years-old, for his campaign style and hoping that he will be the next graduate in the Nehru-Gandhi parivar, the first and the fast being great grandfather Jawaharlal Nehru. You have other sons and daughters representing political families like the Chautalas, the Bansilals, the Karunakarans, the Rais, the Scindias et al. It's an endless list, fired by the dynastic impulse. Charles Krauthamer's Time essay deals with the American version of the dynastic impulse but even he has not been able to resist the temptation to allude to the Gandhi phenomenon in India. Says he and I conclude with it : "In India, an Italian woman who did not even become an Indian citizen until her mid-30s has suddenly been elevated to head of the Congress Party and leading candidate for Prime Minister. Yet Sonia Gandhi is not even a member of Parliament. Her chief qualification ? Choice of spouse. Her late husband was Rajiv Gandhi, slain Prime Minister, himself the most recent example of India's experiment in monarchical rule with a democratic shell. The line is almost unbroken. The first Prime Minister (Nehru) begat a Prime Minister (daughter Indira) who begat another (son Rajiv). His children being too young to reign, India's Congress Party is proposing what in the Middle Ages was called a regency : let the widow rule for now". |
||
|
|
Gandhi : Nationalism, Super
Nationalism and Patriotism Gandhi has, in a way, become icon of Indian patriotism. As it was under his leadership that the country achieved independence, he deserved this status. But there were many who condemned his views and even his motives when he was alive, for a variety of reasons. After from those who disagreed with him on the question of means and tactics, his bitterest critics were those who could not reconcile to his concept of nationalism. A large body of Muslims, particularly educated and modernised, nursed serious doubts about their future in a Hindu majority independent India. Hindu extremists reacted very bitterly to his efforts to allay Muslim misgivings. His Muslim critics were almost completely won over by him in the last phase of his life; after partition and independence of the country. The way he stood against the riot wave, that swept the subcontinent, like an unshakable rock, was a superhuman feat and indeed most glorious part of his great life. What was left unachieved during that period, he achieve through his martyrdom. The communal conflagration was quenched by his sacred blood. The anti-Muslim hysteria thus abated. It is irrelevant whether Nathuram Godse was a formal member of the RSS when he shot Bapu dead. But it was not an individual who committed this crime. It was an ideology that both shared which sought to kill another ideology. To be sure the difference between the two ideologies was not on the question of nationalism as such. But more on an attitude towards those whom Hindu nationalists considered were anti-national, or less nationalists; particularly Muslims, a majority of whom had demanded and achieved partition of the Mother India. According to this view neither they nor the new homeland they had asked for deserved love but hatred and, if possible, annihilation. Earlier also Gandhi was accused of being a soft nationalist, not by Hindu nationalists, who never hated British Raj with the same intensity, but by violent revolatonaries like Bhagat Singh and Subash Chander Bose. But his greater success is mobilising and enlisting the involvement of the mass of Indian people in the freedom struggle and eventually achieving independence established superiority of his moral based nationalism and in a way subsumed the anti-British and hatred based nationalism of the extremist nationalists. The distinction he drew between British imperialism and British people, won many valuable friends British friends for the freedom movement of India. Similarly Hindu nationalists could not match his moral and spiritual strength. After all ''the spiritual ethos that came to fruition in the work of Gandhi was a thousand years in the making of the great Indian subcontinent. ....''Heritage of Gandhi.....alone can save this threatened and sorely tried planet.. Without (that) there would be considerably less hope in the world than there is today.'' (Vaclav Havel. Towards a civil society). His growing world stature which elevated him to the level of almost a prophet, after called the Christ of the 20th century, and his veneration by the people of India made the Mahatma the supreme symbol of Indian nationalism. Nobody who claimed to be a nationalist dare disown him. Yesteryears deviant nationalists became Supreme nationalists, arguing that as nobody can attain the spiritual and moral heights of the father of the nation, he should be kept at a high pedestal as an ideal which in practice can and need never be followed. The attempts to appropriate and coopt Gandhi won them wider acceptability. It must, however, be conceded that, in the process, they had to drop some of the more fanatic package from their ideological baggage which some call only tactical and hypocritical. L K Advani, for instance, admitted that Indians liked moderate nationalism of Gandhi and not aggressive nationalism of Savarkar. /The RSS chief Rajendra Singh, though did not disprove the motives of Godse, disapproved his action. Gandhi has, in any case, been included in the celebrated names whom the RSS pays observance in its daily morning prayer. The BJP, its political front, and Atal Behari Vajpayee, its ''mukhota'', have made many compromises to retain leadership of the ''Secular'' colleagues of the National Democratic Alliance. Meanwhile Sangh brand of nationalism has also influenced, to an extent the ''Secular nationalism''. Its jingoist expression, during Kargil crisis, was an eloquent instance of it. In fact in order to proved its Super nationalism, the secular opposition tried to be more anti-Pakistan than the BJP and ridiculed Prime Minister's peace intiative in the form of the Bus Yatra. Notwithstanding schizophrenic cracks occasionally visible in the hitherto rigid structure of the Sangh Pariwar, the boundaries between the different ideological camps have been blurred thanks to decline of ideology in general and stagnation of the Gandhian thought and movement in particular. Jayaprakash Narayan did make some valiant effort to apply a dynamic concept of Gandhism to the contemporary politics. His policy on Kashmir, Pakistan China and Soviet attacks on Hungary and Czekoslavokia sharply challenged the nationalist thinking on these subjects. In fact he was able to bring out the contrest between patriotism and nationalism. But he ended his extraordinary career by trying to bring together almost the entire ideological spectrum of India under his umbrella, including the Jana Sangh, Jamait-e-Islami, communists socialist and liberals. He tried hard, though in vain, to rope in the RSS in the Janata Party or get its doors open to non-Hindus. The collapse of that experiment was a further blow to any efforts for a creative interpretation of Gandhian thought, without which it cannot grow. Two principal weaknesses of Indian nationalism, which even Gandhi could not correct or he did not need to have corrected due to his pre-occupation of creating a mass movement for freedom of the country, have to be taken. Note of for any creative evolution of Gandhian thought Firstly every nationalism seeks its roots in the past. As a reaction to the British rule and due to the work of the western scholars. India discovered its past and drew upon ancient scriptures, philosophies, mythology, epics, heroes and history which also became the sum total of Hinduism as also of Indian nationalism. This synonymity has been used to define Hindutva, as cultural nationalism of India. Secondly, the massification of Indian politics which was a necessity in Gandhi's time meant glorification of what is called Large Tradition at the cost of Small Traditions. Uniforms concept of nationalism which does not recognise and respect vast diversities in which this country abounds trains its unity and democratic temper. Tagore gave very friendly but prophetic warnings to Gandhi against consequences of nationalism. India had survived, according to him, on the basis of a civilisational unity which might not survive if it was based on nationalism. Gandhi took very sympathetic and respectful note of Gurudev's warning and was hopeful to accommodate his views. Gandhi-Tagore correspondence on the subject of Indian nationalism and the latter's views on nationalism provide some of the clue to further develop Gandhian approach to nationalism. To conclude and sum up nationalism based on crude national interest and so called real politik as also on hatred of ''an enemy'' (which most often is Pakistan) and divorced of morality does not suit the genius of India. Secondly nobody-party or community can arrogate to itself the right to prescribe the norms of patriotism and to issue a certificate of patriotism. Thirdly, diversity ethnic, religious and political is the greatest asset of India and respect for minorities-the most sacred minority is the minority of one-is the measure of democracy. Lastly nationalism as an ideology is a threat to the most Cherished values of Indian civilisation. Hence as Don Luig Strurzo observed ''to confound patriotism with nationalism is to err not only linguistically but also politically'' (Nationalism as an ism in Dynamics of Nationalism). Much of these conclusions can be traced to basics of Gandhian thought and reading in between its lines or by logically and creatively extending it. The spirit of Gandhism demands even a review of it, if need be, to make it more consistent with itself. Otherwise decline in ethical foundations of Indian nationalism would continue. Already the Sangh Parivar has not only coopted Gandhi but is also claiming to be the real heir of the freedom movement by owning almost all of its leaders except Nehru. This exception is too significant to be ignored by Gandhian scholars. For he drew the sharpest dividing line between Gandhi's concept of composite and tolerant nationalism and aggressive Hindu nationalism. |
|
Lost in the Gandhi's
century!..... "It is our pride," said Radhakrishanan, "that one of the greatest figures of history lived in our generation, walked with us, spoke to us and taught us the way of civilized living." It is an equal pride that he lived in our century, and though he did not exactly walk with us or speak to us, he did lay the essentials of civilized living before us. To live up to them was a prerogative that was entirely ours, as must the blame for failing to follow him through lie entirely with us. Us. Each one of us, in our private personas, must share this blame; shifting the blame would be as un-Gandhian as shrouding the earthly Gandhi in ephemerality of defication, during this last half-a-century, has been a negation of Gandhi's creed. People have, over these years, wondered why Gandhi was not followed, was not lived and enlivened in the common life. They have come by no answer, because Gandhi was never a question and answer thing. He was an action, to be acted and lived through. We kept questioning and got lost in the foggy lanes of wonderment. Gandhi never wondered. Nor did he wander into the avenues of futility. Gandhi's greatest gift was not the hefty tomes which the Government of India bound up and brought out as the Indian 'tribute' to the greatest of the men of history. Hardly anybody, except the sundry proof-readers, has gone through those hundred volumes called the Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi. Few can. Nor should, for the essence of Gandhi does not lie within those heavy covers. It lay in his simple life. In his ample life. Probably, in the goat whose milk he drank, whom he fed and watered with a farmers' devotion. There is a scene in Attenborough's Gandhi, where Bapu is shown to break up an important meeting to take his goat to graze." .... because it is time for its feed" says the surrogate Gandhi of the film, beaming the easy sincerity that the Mahatma always wore. Nothing, you see, to warrant Sarojini Naidu's pipsqueak that it cost 'them' a lot to keep him in poverty. Naidu herself, cost India a governorship she neither needed nor deserved, yet demanded and got. Did we start losing Gandhi with that departure from right? Right. And truth. That was what made Gandhi of a Mohan Das. And action. Action for its truth, unweavering, uncompromising. That was also the meaning of Karma before the concept got befuddled in the sea of predetermination and destiny. Karma was a call to action, the pristine duty of man. It was action of honour. It came to be perceived as a convoluted thread zig-zagging through countless turns in the past, present and into future, till neither its length, nor its span was seen. All that was left was a knotty jumble. That confused entanglement brought Bharata once to a devastating war. That same tangled web threw India into centuries of despondancy ending finaly in the clamps of British Raj. Gandhi untangled that web with his simple, straightforward philosophy of action. For a brief span, the line and length were clearly seen. India rose and shook off her shackles. Only, it now appears, to wrap herself in new twists and turns as the nightingalean savants of India started stitching philosophies with Gandhi's clean yarn. Gandhi did not disdain philosophies, and that includes 'isms' too. His life was the outcome of a clear philosophy. But he adhored philosophising that substituted action and took men and women away from living. That was exactly what India embarked upon on Gandhi's death. For Wardah huts, vishal Bhavans came up; instead of living a Gandhian way we had a grand centenary for him. And, his karmic khadi became the holiest of protected cows. His clear actions came to be interpreted as subtle prevarications even as his life was frozen into a frame, separating it from a spirit that cared only for living. His chastisement of Chaura Chori was one with his chagrin at Naokhali, but in neither did his vision of India, that was Bharata, suffer. He was as sincere in advocating 'Go Raksha' as he was in calling for aid to Pakistan. He, incidentally, was the last person to agree to the hammered accession of Kashmir. Instead of seeing Bapu's truth, India rushed to two opposite extremes. One end saw in his action a betrayal its narrowed down conception of India and Indianness. The other took from it a lesson in fondling of factious fragments, as the framework for nation building. One lead to intolerance, another fed intolerance; and found a philosophy in reactionism, the other floundered the nation with over-protectionism of castes, colours and creeds, as the legitimate philosophy. Both were untrue. Both were adharmic. Both were wrong. Both have lead India away from Gandhi, Dharma and India. Gandhi's karma became a legacy to anchor inaction, untruth, adharma. It is hardly enough to be proud that one of the greatest figures of history lived in our century, without going where he walked, without hearing what he spoke, without living as he did. Already, those who lived with him are dead. And, his century is also drawing to a close. |
|
|
