Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) – Problem? Solution! Irrelevant?!

It is time that Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) went to the BJP for some lessons in ideology.

RSS has been a favorite whipping boy of the Congress | November 2010 cartoon by R.Prasad

Complete or incomplete, let this 1st step of anti-rape law by Parliament be welcomed. Most important is, men's attitude 2 women shud change

— Ram Madhav (@rammadhavbjp) March 20, 2013

have no idea what kind of people Ram Madhav is hanging around with!

Me and the people I hang around with, seem to have no problems with women – and women who know us and deal with us don’t seem to be having a problem.

Who are the men that Ram Madhav thinks, who need to change that he is talking about?

Now…

So is Ram Madhav talking about?

1. His set of people – of whom I know nothing
2. My set of people – who are not a problem
3. All Indians – in India, which has a low rape percentage by any world standards.
4. Rapists – who are a small minority; and unlikely to affected by such silly statements or silly laws made by Lok Sabha.

Why fault an entire society or a gender for the actions by a few deviants?

BjP has built a comprehensive, consistent agenda | August 2009 cartoon by Unny; source & courtesy – churumuri.wordpress.com

Earlier…

Regular 2ndlookers will recall earlier cases of such obscurantism from Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).

We had Mohan Bhagwat the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)  chief comparing and promoting the British Raj a little over a year ago.

Soon after an ex-editor of Tarun Bharat, the RSS publication, MG Vaidya was pushing Nitin Gadkari as the BJP chief. Why? Because Nitin Gadkari  is a Maharashtrian – and MG Vaidya suspected non-Maharashtrians to be anti-Maharashtrian.

Over the last 3 decades we have had the BJP build an enviable rightist narrative for India – at variance with the rather steamy Congress propaganda – overdone now for 60 years too long.

A geriatric RSS leaderehip with last century’s narrative in an post-modern India

A Past Dead & Gone

RSS with the Western chuddies, (copied  from Nizamshahi police uniform), their pseudo-martial Western marching music, hand half-raised, open-palm salute are all dated and irrelevant.

It is time that RSS went to the BJP for some lessons in building ideology.

Related Articles

• ‘Saffron terror’ remark controversy: BJP, RSS divided over Shinde’s apology? (ndtv.com)
• After strategy session with RSS, BJP core group meets today (ndtv.com)
• BJP’s bumpy entry into post-Advani phase (Comment) (vancouverdesi.com)
• ‘Saffron terror’ clarification works for BJP but not RSS, apparently (ndtv.com)
• RSS-BJP chasm widens (thehindu.com)
• Sangh not convinced by Shinde’s ‘regret’ over Saffron terror remark (dailymail.co.uk)
• Ram Madhav lauds Govt., demands action against Afzal Guru’s supporters (indiavision.com)
• Persecuted Hindus fleeing Pakistan, Bangladesh: RSS (thehindu.com)
• Polls take priority as RSS conclave begins (dailymail.co.uk)
• RSS chief backs VHP’s resolution for building Ram temple (thehindu.com)

---

Gandhiji: Indians Must Be Thankful to Nobel Committee for Not Giving Him the Award

As Euro-power declines and Nobel propaganda becomes less effective, to gain fresh legitimacy, the Nobel Committee may try and foist a posthumous Nobel on Gandhiji.

A portrait of Gandhiji by Illustrator: Alexey Kurbatov Location: Moscow, Russia

Is this true?

British administrators, it is believed, ‘influenced’ the Nobel Committee against a Nobel Prize for Gandhiji. Was the Nobel Committee even close to giving Gandhiji the Peace Prize?

So grateful …

What ever the truth, I am grateful to the British Raj, all the British administrators and bureaucrats, politicians who managed the Nobel award process – to deny Gandhiji the Nobel prize.

Nobel prize, the committee says cannot be awarded posthumously – though some 13 years later, the UN Secretary General, Dag Hammarskjold was given the Nobel 6 months after his death.

Before that, the Nobel prize for Literature was awarded posthumously to Erik Axel Karlfeldt in 1931. Nobel Foundation Statutes were revised in 1974, to create a justification why the award cannot be awarded posthumously – unless death happened after the announcement.

According to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation in force at that time, the Nobel Prize could, under certain circumstances, be awarded posthumously. Thus it was possible to give Gandhi the prize. However, Gandhi did not belong to an organisation.

So silly

It would have been so silly to know Gandhiji as a Nobel prize winner.

Along with terrorist-freedom fighter like Yasser Arafat (1994), terrorist-politician Menachem Begin (1978). Where would Gandhiji be, if he was clubbed with a clown-politician like Jimmy Carter (2002). Imagine Gandhiji rubbing shoulders with Barack Obama (2009), a non-entity when he won the prize. Or a crowning gag like EU (2012), as a peace prize winner. Gandhiji, staunchly against religious-conversions in the company of a do-gooder like Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu (1979) – promoted by the Vatican, as Mother Teresa.

Or a war-monger like Henry Kissinger (1973).

Earlier, in 1945, Cordell Hull, who in 1939, was instrumental in refusing entry to some 950 German-Jewish refugees, was given the Nobel prize in 1945. Hull even co-authored a pamphlet, calling for bar on entry of European-Jews to America.

A Nobel committee member’s expression of regret for repeatedly overlooking Mahatma Gandhi for the Peace Prize has left his grandson Gopalkrishna Gandhi and historians distinctly underwhelmed. “It really does not behove us to be lamenting the absence of a Nobel for Gandhi, when the committee itself has apologised for this so many times and when Mandela, the Dalai Lama and Aung San Suu Kyi have accepted the Peace Prize in his name.”

Nobel committee member and Conservative Norwegian politician Kaci Kullmann was quoted by a TV news channel on Thursday as saying ignoring Gandhi was “one of the greatest mistakes” of the Nobel.

Gandhi was nominated in 1937, 1938, 1939, 1947 and, finally, a few days before his assassination in January 1948 for the Peace Prize.

“What people forget is that at the time, the idea that the Nobel peace prize would go to a non-European was utterly absurd,” said Mihir Bose, author of Raj, Secrets and Revolution, a biography of Subhash Chandra Bose.

“After all, when Tagore was awarded the Nobel, Rudyard Kipling was furious…”

via Nobel apology leaves Bapu’s grandson unimpressed – Hindustan Times.

Related Articles

• Nobel Peace Prize to the EU Is a Farce (cato-at-liberty.org)
• Malala reading in hospital as thousands call for her to get Nobel Peace Prize (standard.co.uk)
• Nobel Peace prize petition for schoolgirl shot by Taliban (thesun.co.uk)

---

The British Raj: Finally Afraid Of Beggars

By 1945, British imperial leadership had taken on air of defeatism and resignation – going by cartoons and documents of the era..

British politicians ‘protesting’ against the ‘dominance’ of the Indian negotiators during the Independence negotiations. People depicted – Musso; (David Low’s dog); Low; David (1891-1963); Pethick-Lawrence; Frederick William (1871-1961); Attlee; C. R. (Clement Richard) (1883-1967); Jinnah; Mahomed Ali (1876-1948); Gandhi; Mahatma (1869-1948)| Artist: David Low (1891-1963) Published: Evening Standard, 26 Sep 1945

As Indian Independence struggle resonated across the world, the Raj found itself isolated. An embattled British Raj, saw ghosts under every bed – and an enemy in every Indian.

More than 5,000 documents and files dated from 1930 to 1991 have been declassified and made accessible as part of a public archive inaugurated last week at Raj Bhavan.

These documents include a treasure of historical oddities, such as a 1943 note from the general administration department to the governor’s secretary, outlining the menace of beggary and emphasising increased punishment for beggars.

“As soon as the beggar profession know that we mean business, it will melt away from Bombay,” the document states.

There are letters from an Indian Mauritian requesting some part of the ashes of Mahatma Gandhi after his death, so that “the Indians of Mauritius may also pay their homage”.

via From the archives: Paranoia of beggars and much more – Hindustan Times.

Related Articles

• India’s Future: Not leaders! Not Institutions! Then How Will India’s Future Emerge? (2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• Koenraad Elst: Singing Bhajans to British Gods to an Indian Audience or The Game Is Over (2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• ‘What if Gandhi had twitter to challenge the British Raj?’ (firstpost.com)
• How Jinnah was made Important; became Somebody & got Pakistan (2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• Dreams and Nightmares (oedeboyz.com)
• Why Schools, Hospitals, Political Parties don’t work in India. At least upto user expectations (2ndlook.wordpress.com)

---

Why Pakistan Never Became Democratic

For every beneficial outcome, modern India’s commentariat, is  in a motivated hurry to credit British (and the West in general) and blame Indian leadership for every injurious development.

Tuesday, April 27, 2004 | Muhammad Zahoor’s CARTOON | via Daily Times | Click for image.

Bad Sector

From August 15th, 1947, till January 26th, 1950, India had no constitution, laws, or an elected government. Thus for a brief period, short of 30 months, India Government ruled by decree.

Consensus prevailed.

Going by contemporary narratives, Nehru drove the pace of constitution building. Known detractors of the Indian nation, like Homi Mody were invited into the Constituent Assembly – itself headed by a leader of the dispossessed, Dr.Ambedkar.

RK Laxman’s cartoon celebrating India’s Constitution writing and implementaion, while the world was busy writing off India …

Talking heads of the Y2K generation claim that the Indian nation, constitution, parliamentary notions, democratic mechanisms were all a gift of the British.

Merits of the British Raj

First, if the British were so good, why have they not been able to save their home economy?

Care to remember that British ideas of democracy, freedom, were all for show to the subject races? Indian subjects had no representation, redress, were inveigled into sham consultations, as the Indian economy sank into a morass of debt, stagnation, poverty, disease and famines.

This was the true inheritance from the British.

Even though some reports suggest that this was a 1950’s cartoon, it was probably before January 26th 1950, when the Indian Constitution was adopted by the Indian Constituent Assembly. ToI suggests that this was a 1948 cartoon. | Copyright – Children’s Book Trust; source and courtesy – outlookindia.com | Click for source image.

KM Munshi, India’s food minister travelled the world over, seeking food aid. In New York, he described India’s precarious situation as ‘ship-to-mouth.’ Indian Railway infrastructure was in tatters. Ghastly accidents occurred with numbing regularity. India built the entire system of Railways that we see today, over the next 40 years.

MN Roy (founder of Indian Communism), Homi Mody (industrialist) represented realism of the time.

At that time in history, it seemed pragmatic to support the Raj.

A little further

While on the subject of British legacies and inheritances, next door Pakistan had exactly the same inheritance as India.

The Pakistani experience on constitution writing is illustrates the ‘value’ of the British legacy.

There will be many commentaries, to explain Pakistan’s lurch from crisis to crisis, dictatorship-to-dictatorship.

A recent article in Pakistan’s The Dawn makes for interesting reading.

Cartoon by Zahoor

Prime Minister Liaqat Ali is accredited with a number of ground breaking contributions. He decided to ally with the US in the Cold War divide; quashed a coup attempt by communists; promoted General Ayub to the highest rank and fought a war with India over Kashmir to name just a select few. His government ruled on ad hoc basis under temporary laws as it could not formulate and build a consensus on a constitution for the country

They could not dig out a monarchy to rule the country nor could they install a Caliph. The constitution has to be based on democracy. But the problem was that Meerut was now in India. The most powerful Prime Minister serving for one of the longest periods in the history of Pakistan had no constituency in the country to contest elections from. A committed democrat and an active parliamentarian, he knew well that he and his political class had no, or at best a very shaky, future under a democracy. In contrast, Bacha Khan’s was a completely secure political position. It was impossible to democratically uproot him from his constituency. He had voters, volunteers and diehard loyalists.

The ad hoc powers were thus used to change the rules of the game.

Six months after the death of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan moved the Objective Resolution in the Constituent Assembly that introduced Islam as the raison d’être of the new country. Religion was pitched against ones linguistic and cultural identity and faith was made to rival political interests. Those loving their culture, defending their language and demanding their democratic and political rights on these bases became heretics conspiring against the last citadel of Islam in the Subcontinent. Ideological boundaries of the country became more important than the limits of electoral constituencies and principles of democracy were contrasted to injunctions of Islam as defined by the select ulema.

Bacha Khan who enjoyed a hard earned and unflinching popular support in a vast constituency went down in our official gazettes as an anti-Pakistan traitor. Red Shirts were hounded and hunted. Politicians were jailed and elections were rigged.

By declaring the entire country as one constituency and setting ones perceived Islamic credentials as the only qualification, Liaqat Ali Khan tried to create a constituency for his class – the politically insecure Muslim elite that had migrated from the Muslim minority provinces of India. But ironically, they could not sustain their hold on this constituency for long. Within a decade they were outdone by the Army in the game they had pioneered. They were declared incapable of defending the citadel of Islam. The army took over the ‘responsibility’ of keeping the country united in the name of Islam and secure from the conspirators who had strong democratic constituencies in the country.

via The Two-Muslim theory | DAWN.COM.

Related Articles

• Pakistan’s foreign policy: Mistaking handshakes for friendship (dawn.com)

Making of the Indian Constitution

The cartoon of BR Ambedkar which created a parliamentary furore was sketched by cartoonist Shankar, as he was popularly called.

Even though some reports suggest that this was a 1950’s cartoon, it was probably before January 26th 1950, when the Indian Constitution was adopted by the Indian Constituent Assembly. ToI suggests that this was a 1948 cartoon. | Copyright – Children’s Book Trust; source and courtesy – outlookindia.com | Click for source image.

The school textbook cartoon of BR Ambedkar which created a furore in parliament on Friday was sketched by cartoonist Keshav Shankar Pillai.

Shankar, as he was popularly called, later founded the publishing house, Children’s Book Trust, in 1957. He made cartoons for newspapers and his magazine, Shankar’s Weekly, started in 1948. The government of India honoured him with Padma Shri in 1956, Padma Bhushan in 1966 and Padma Vibhushan in 1976.

The controversial cartoon was probably first published in 1948 and has been a part of NCERT’s (National Council Of Educational Research And Training) Class XI textbook in Tamil Nadu since 2006. The cartoon is credited to Children’s Book Trust.

It shows Ambedkar, a Dalit leader and creator of the Indian Constitution, seated on a snail with ‘Constitution’ written on it and India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, whipping the snail. (via Shankar made the Ambedkar-Nehru cartoon in 1950s – Hindustan Times).

What would Babasaheb Ambedkar tell his ‘followers’? | Cartoon by Surendra; May 11, 2012; source & courtesy – thehindu.com | Click for larger image.

Up to speed

In a short period of less than 30 months, India wrote and implemented its constitution. It has been been a rather pliable constitution getting amended a number of times – and yet has been upheld and respected by all the extensions of the State.

Unlike Pakistan.

Now … or when?

After the boycott of the Simon Commission, from 1927, and the death of Lala Lajpat Rai (Nov 17, 1928), it was clear (especially to the British) that their days were numbered. Britain enacted The Government of India Act, first in 1919 and then in 1935. Some Indians have claimed the Indian Constitution is nothing original – based on the Government of India Act, 1935, by the British Raj.

This a claim not even worth examining, since this Government of India act, 1935, has been in public domain for more than 75 years. Pakistan had as much right to it as India did.

Why could Pakistan do nothing with it.

Documents do not make a country work! People do!! (Cartoon by Sabir Nazar; Courtesy – http://www.dailytimes.com.pk.).

Get up … and get on!

In fact Pakistan’s Constituent Assembly dragged this Constitution-making exercise till October 1956.

Cut back to 1956 Pakistan.

Remember that 1956 was also the year when Pakistan became a republic – and the first constitution of Pakistan was adopted. Governor General Sahibzada Sayyid Iskander Ali Mirza (a Shia Muslim from Bengal, direct descendant of Mir Jaffer) became the first President of the Pakistani Republic.

Two years later, in October 1958, President Iskander Mirza staged a coup d’état and dismissed the constitution. Shortly afterwards General Ayub Khan deposed Iskandar and declared himself president. These shenanigans started the tradition of Army rule in Pakistan.

To an emerging Pakistan, after a 9 year struggle to write a constitution, two years later, the Army declared that the Constitution was worthless piece of paper. Another Constitution was written in 1962, and then a third.

The Shankar cartoon that was included in school textbooks which raised a furore in the Indian Parliament | Source and courtesy – outlookindia.com | Click for source image.

Looking back

In the last 250 years, just 6 countries succeeded with Republican democracy without a significant breakdown in the first 50 years. Of the six, Sri Lanka (pop. 200 lakhs) Switzerland (pop. 80 lakhs), Israel (pop. 75 lakhs) and Singapore (pop. 50 lakhs) are tiny countries to generate any valuable data, models, norms or precedents. In any other day, age and society, the republican-democracy model would have been laughed off – and not studied by millions.

America became one of the first successful republican democracies – from 1789, when George Washington became the first elected President of USA. 70 years later, the strains were showing – North versus South. America was on the verge of Civil War – the main cause of which was the desire of the Southern states to remain independent (due to tariff issues) or at best as a loose confederation – not a federal union (actually slavery was a side issue).

Israel, (propped up by massive US aid) is another country which has been a republican democracy for more than 50 years. Switzerland (with guaranteed neutrality from the European powers) is another in modern history to survive 50 years of republican democracy.

The reason why India’s Republican Democracy works is because Indian genius has made it work. It is the commitment to make the system work, which is why the system is working.

Though some may cavil about how well (?) it works!

Coming to this cartoon, Shanker’s Weekly was a permanent fixture in subscriptions at my home, till its demise in the 1970s. Though respected in its time, it hardly made money.

---

Related articles

• 10 Companies Decide What We Eat (behind2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• Pakistan: The Hidden Chapter (quicktake.wordpress.com)
• Egypt raids on US NGOs (2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• Land of the Free … Home of the Brave (behind2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• Historian to return coveted Padma Shri award in protest against Gandhi auction (dailymail.co.uk)
• Toon trouble: A 1949 cartoon of Dr Ambedkar raises MPs’ hackles (dailymail.co.uk)
• Unpacking India’s Internet Censorship Debate (kafila.org)

Why Britain lost the Indian jet deal

The British are so busy admiring themselves, that even crucial business is given short shrift.

Is tabloid journalism the only thing that the British excel at? | Cartoonist Patrick Chappatte; source and courtesy – genevalunch.com | Click for image.

Narcissism …?

65 years after British eviction from India, reality has still not sunk into the British minds. Consider the British reportage on the Euro-fighter Typhoon loss to the French Rafale for Indian business

By preferring the French Rafale jet rather than the British-built Typhoon, they rejected, according to the Prime Minister, a “superb aircraft with far better capabilities”.

Mr Lake said: “I would suspect when the Indians probe hard into the French price they will find that it is not satisfactory and hasn’t included things.”

How dare they, asked MPs, snub Britain, which had given them £1.2 billion in aid? One newspaper even blamed the decision on the Gandhi family.

The truth about Britain’s “failure” to land the £6.3 billion Indian military jet deal — and the thousands of jobs it will sustain – is different. The game is not yet over.

But if we do lose, it will have nothing to do with the Gandhis, or the aid — which, as we report today, the Indians simply do not care about either way. It will be because of our own mistakes.

“For the Indians it’s all about credibility,” said Mr Lake. “If they believe what the Typhoon consortium told them, then by 2018 Typhoon will do everything that Rafale does now. But they clearly don’t believe it, and I don’t blame them, given the programme’s history of delays and cost overruns.

The Indian marketing campaign was led by the Germans, a decision which Mr Lake described as “clearly mad” given India’s historic ties with Britain.

The culture and structure of the Indian Air Force is still heavily influenced by its British origins, with identical ranks and near-identical Air Force blue uniforms.

“The Typhoons they sent to India [for evaluation] were German, flown by German aircrew, but the Germans have a completely different culture,” said Mr Lake.

“It was mindblowingly inept.”

The British Typhoon contractor BAE was later brought in to partner the bid in apparent acknowledgement of the mistake.(via Turbulence ahead with Indian jet deal – Telegraph).

Wakey … wakey

Whatever maybe the logic – Indians cannot be logical. Or acting in their self-interest.

Effective ‘marketing’ will do the job. Indians can be managed by using ‘historic ties with Britain’.

The truth?

If at all, Indians hold Germany in higher regard than Britain.

My guess?

Ceteris paribus, Indians will buy German product instead of a British.

And that has been true for the last many decades.

Stupid Indians

It must be the Gandhis.

It assumes that Gandhis have interests different from India’s.  If true, it also assumes that the whole of the government, defence establishment, opposition, vigilance, judicial will be pliable.

If not the Gandhis … the British lost the deal because it is the Indian character.

Ungrateful Indians.

In spite of all the aid that Britain gave to India! Even after this aid, they do business with competitors to the British.

Demmed Indians.

If it is none of the above … corruption is a non-issue.

I am assuming that the French, Swedish, American defence contractors will match bribes given by any competitor. So, that cannot, will not, be the differentiation.

Of course, Indians must be taught how to calculate ‘true’ costs, suggests Mr.Lake.

Smell the coffee

Maybe it is time that people (especially in Britain) did a reality check. Maybe the British need to learn a basic thing about customers.

Such a low opinion of your customer is not likely to win you many customers.

Looking back …

In the last 65 years, India has left behind many countries. Over the next 65 years, while there will be many competitors and challengers, no one seriously doubts that India can handle the future as well as any country.

If not better.

---

Related articles

• France swoops to rob UK of £13bn Indian jet contract (dailymail.co.uk)
• India tells Britain: We don’t want your aid (quicktake.wordpress.com)
• U.K. considering ‘price cut’ to win Indian defence deal (thehindu.com)
• BAE may cut price of Eurofighter to secure deal (ibnlive.in.com)
• BAE Set To Lose £7bn Deal To The French (news.sky.com)
• Cameron leads the attack onIndian decision on Rafale (thehindu.com)
• Cameron opens fire on France’s ‘Asda option’ jet as he vows to do everything he can to persuade India to order British warplane (dailymail.co.uk)
• British foreign aid: India tells Britain ‘we don’t need the peanuts you offer us’ (dailymail.co.uk)
• British PM says he will urge India to change mind on Rafale jets (ndtv.com)

Indian History – Blind At Birth?

Unchallenged rule by Mughals and the British Raj over India, lasted for about 350 years. Cholas ruled longer than that. Why is Modern Indian history so besotted with Mughals and British Raj.

Tandava Nataraja at Rijksmuseum’s Asian Art Collection. The Dancing Shiva – Probably a Chola Bronze. | Image source and courtesy – rijksmuseum.nl

Research recently revealed that the Rijksmuseum’s monumental bronze statue of Shiva was cast in solid bronze. The thousand year-old temple statue was X-rayed, along with the lorry transporting it, in the most powerful X-ray tunnel for containers of the Rotterdam customs authority. It is the first research of its kind on a museological masterpiece.

At 153 cm x 114.5 cm, the Rijksmuseum’s Shiva is the largest known bronze statue from the Chola Dynasty (9th to 12th century) kept in a museological collection outside of India. Given its weight (300 kg), the statue has always been suspected of not being hollow, as has been common practice in Europe since the Greek Antiquity. As part of an earlier investigation, an X-ray was taken of the statue in a Rijksmuseum gallery in 1999 while visitors were evacuated as a precaution against radiation. Unfortunately, the equipment used at the time (280 KeV) was not powerful enough to determine anything definitively. The Rotterdam X-ray tunnel of the Rotterdam customs authority offered a solution.

Complete surprise

The Rijksmuseum renovation project has provided conservators and curators the opportunity to carry out in-depth research on special pieces from the Rijksmuseum collection, including this masterpiece from the Asian Art Collection. The statue was created ca. 1100 in South India. Each temple had its own set of bronze statues which were carried through the city during major temple festivals. This gives the statues their name: utsavamurti, which is Sanskrit for ‘festival images’. Chola bronzes were considered masterpieces of Indian bronze casting.

Anna Ślączka, curator of South Asian Art, comments, ‘We had expected that the statue itself would prove to be solid, but it was a complete surprise to discover that the aureole and the demon under Shiva’s feet are also solid.’ (via Dancing Shiva X Rayed – rijksmuseum.nl.).

Curious … & Interesting

The Mughals from Babur (First Battle of Panipat – 1526) to Aurangzeb (died on 3 March 1707), ruled for less than 200 years. Even with the largest State treasury of its time.

With a fugitive Humayun, deposed by Sher Shah Suri (from 1540-1555) in between.

Within 50 years of Aurangzeb’s death, after the Battle of Plassey (1757), the British gained power. With the Battle of Buxar (1764), the British gained the dewani of Bengal.

For the British, the dewani of Bengal gave untold riches and the start of a global monopoly over gunpowder. Bengal which was the largest manufactory of gunpowder elements in the world was the keys to an Empire. For the British, making money in India was as easy as shaking a pagoda tree.

For India it was ‘hello famines’. A 100 years of wars with the British followed. The Bengal Famine of 1770 (1769-1773) is much written and analysed.

Lost – even before they began

Within 200 years, the British lost India.

British rule really started somewhere between the defeat of Tipu Sultan (1800) and the annexation of Punjab after the death of Ranjit Singh (1840). By 1947, the British story was over – and they were out of India. To be charitable, take it that British misrule lasted from Battle of Plassey (1757) to Indian Independence (1947).

Cholas

But the Cholas ruled over an equally large empire.

Even though Cholas rule started somewhere in 2nd century BC, their peak was  from 940 AD to 1279 AD – nearly 350 years. And what does Modern Indian history know or how important are the Cholas to modern Indian history?

This statue is just a pinhole peek into the technological advancements in the Chola period.

Related articles

• Snapshot of Bengal Partition (quicktake.wordpress.com)
• ‘British Raj was not a vampire empire’ (quicktake.wordpress.com)
• Aging Of The British Empire (behind2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• India’s decline! Nabobs & Nautch Girls? (behind2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• The Caliban of South Asia (rupeenews.com)
• Exposing a multi-decade smuggling operation (thehindu.com)

---

Indian Bania On British Raj Economics

Indian minds decipher Western economic mechanisms.

Vithaldas Thackerdas from the Bhatti community | An illustration of the 1358 Bhatti Parishad meeting | Image source and courtesy - globalbhatia.org

Nearly a 100 years ago, in 1915, even before Keynes’s star had risen, an Indian economist, SV Doraiswami, published his book, Indian Finance, Currency And Banking. Doraiswami’s ideas were opposed to those of Keynes and his views are vindicated by events today.

Doraiswami had already published his views in several outlets like London’s Statist, and his book was reviewed around the world. In the decades that followed, though Doraiswami’s work was known in academic circles, the Keynesian economists who gained control of academia were dismissive of his ideas and relegated him to the footnotes as they were conditioned to believe that governments could solve all problems.

Doraiswami faulted the British economic policies in India and demanded that the central bank be an ‘instrument for allowing and encouraging the free and unfettered inflow of gold into India.’ He wrote that a ‘gold standard without a gold currency is an absurdity’ and wrote in support of a resolution by Vitthaldas Thackersey in the Imperial Legislative Council calling for the opening of mints for the free coinage of gold. (via Special: Economic meltdown vindicates forgotten Indian economist – Analysis – DNA).

In Days Gone By

Some of colonial India’s leaders and activists knew of and believed in भारत-तंत्र Bharat-tantra. For instance, the link between war and gold – forgotten today, but well known then.

One such person was Vithaldas Thackersey. His proposal for setting up a mint at Mumbai received wide attention – and support. The best of British brains were needed to derail and delay the project till such time that all its ‘problems’ for the British Raj were removed.

Keynes himself reviewed this proposal and included this in his tract on Indian currency.

Men and Money

From pre-Gandhiji era, Vithaldas Thackersey (a Gujarathi Bhattia) worked to deliver credit banking to Indians and  in urban and rural areas – at a time when the British Raj was working to extract and fencing access to capital for Indians.

Today India’s ‘intellectuals’ have forgotten both.

भारत-तंत्र Bharat-tantra and gold.

WWII Propaganda: 70 years later

Ceaseless propaganda – the one weapon that the Desert Bloc never tires of using. 70 years after the start of WWII, the propaganda continues.

At least this Nazi was correct about Churchill. The caption: “I am the friend of all the small countries!” Winston Churchill removes his mask. A standard Nazi propaganda argument was that England used smaller nations, tossing them aside when they were no longer useful. Source and courtesy : bytwerk.com). Click for larger image.

Trade wars are, perhaps, the most serious threats to the global economic order. Because of that, they are also the least likely. So, while the current rumblings in Beijing and Washington may lead to increased frictions, even economically ignorant politicians will not do anything drastic.

Both Germany and Japan tried in the 1930s to limit unemployment and political vulnerability by maximising domestic production and restricting imports. But, since World War II, economic activity has increasingly crossed political borders. (via Mutually assured destruction).

Is this plain ignorance?

Given that Reuters is a British news agency, the propaganda motive can never be discounted. The author forgets that Germany, home of the automobile (inventors of petrol and diesel engines, and the motor car itself), Italy and Japan were significantly industrialized countries before WWII. These countries were shut out of colonial markets with high tariff barriers by Britain and France.

In India

Even after crippling tariffs, industry from Germany, Italy and Japan was able to stand up to British and French products. For instance during the Great Depression, the British Raj imposed a towering 75% duty on Japanese mill cloth to India – which was becoming highly popular. In turn the Japanese stopped buying cotton from India. British mills made a killing by then buying Indian cotton at throwaway prices.

What of the Lees-Mody Pact?

While the Churchill Norman extraction of gold continued to bleed the Indian peasant, such trade barriers further damaged the Indian economy. Edward Hadas surely knows this.

Why this propaganda – 70 years after the start of WWII?

Related articles

• The Atlantic’s WWII Photo Series (paul.kedrosky.com)
• Starving India to India Starring (behind2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• Faction Fueds of Desert Bloc – Should India Get Involved? (behind2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• How Did Adolf Hitler Utilize Propaganda as a Tool to Further His Means, and What Different Factors Allowed It to be So Widely Effective? (socyberty.com)
• Who was worse Hitler or Churchill (wiki.answers.com)

Confused Pragmatic

Political commentators are turning amoral and cynical. A prominent tweeter was singing praises of the British – to the extent saying, what if they had massacred people at Jallianwala.

#BritishRajTweets @Troll Why do you keep on talking about Jallianwala Bagh? Look at the non-corrupt governance provided by the British.

— pragmatic_d (@pragmatic_d) October 2, 2011

@Troll #BritishRajTweets @pragmatic_d talks of Non-corrupt governance provided by the British. Is that a fact? Really? http://t.co/cjMd2qSa

— Bharattantra (@Bharattantra) October 2, 2011

Wonder on what basis @pragmatic_d talks of Non-corrupt governance provided by the British. Is that a fact? Really? goo.gl/n5FB9

— Bharattantra (@Bharattantra) October 7, 2011

No reply at all

Why do you keep on talking about Jallianwala Bagh? Look at the non-corrupt governance provided by the British. (from a tweet by @pragmatic_d).

Has @pragmatic_d done any checks on records and reports during the times, when the British were providing clean administration to Indians? Two messages asking him to substantiate his statement got no reply.

Some evidence

The Indian State, on Independence and for at least the previous 20 years, was seriously worried about corruption.

In fact, this anxiety on corruption forced JL Nehru to set up, in the early fifties, a 3-man Corruption Commission – with JB Kripalani, Paul Appleby (a Ford Foundation consultant), AD Gorwala (a retired ICS officer) as members.

Back home

Meanwhile, back in Britain, the British Prime Minister faced a series of scandals.

For instance, between WWI and WWII, many questions were raised in the British Parliament – and outside. About Neville Chamberlain’s holdings in ICI shares estimated at 11,000. His son, Francis Chamberlain, had joined the Kynoch Works, an old firm with which the Chamberlain family was associated. As also with BSA Company (Birmingham Small Arms) in which he was a director.

The base of corruption in India

In fact the British Raj created legislation which directly encouraged corruption. For instance, against money-lenders, in India. But much before this, way back in 1928, then a much-less famous man, wrote

Corruption will be out one day, however much one may try to conceal it; and the public can, as its right and duty, in every case of justifiable suspicion, call its servants to strict account, dismiss them, sue them in a law court or appoint an arbitrator or inspector to scrutinise their conduct, as it likes. – Mahatma Gandhi in Young India (1928).

But then, this is secondary issue.

Cynical, insensitive – and …

Even if the British were able to give a corruption-free rule, would it mean we should accept rogue-rulers, who will corner unarmed people, against a wall and shoot them dead?

Just because you were the one who was not shot, does not mean, you can pragmatic, Shri Desi. This is just like Carnegie Institute suggesting that Genghis Khan’s killings of millions of people, was good for the environment.

Responsibility before … pride

With more than 45,000 tweets to his credit, more than 11,000 followers, featuring on nearly 200 lists, tweeple like Pragmatic Desi (User Name – pragmatic_desi; handle – @pragmatic_d) cannot give gubbish to their followers. A self-described blogger on the Indian National Interest platform; these tweets are ‘personal’.

Whatever that means.

It still makes me question, what kind of Think Tanks India is getting?

Related articles

• Snapshot of Bengal Partition (quicktake.wordpress.com)
• Starving India to India Starring (behind2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• The British Salt Tax. How Damaging? (quicktake.wordpress.com)
• ‘British Raj was not a vampire empire’ (quicktake.wordpress.com)