‘Dalit panchayat chief prevented from hoisting the tricolour’

A National Shame

 A. Kalaimani, a Dalit woman village panchayat president of Karu Vadatheru village panchayat near Vadakadu, was allegedly prevented from hoisting the tricolour on the Republic Day by a group of caste Hindus. The group belonging to the Kallar community, led by Kumar, son of Rangammal, who is the vice-president of the village panchayat, allegedly pushed aside Ms. Kalaimani when she was about to hoist the national flag on the village panchayat office campus.

The village panchayat president told The Hindu on Saturday that she planned to hoist the tricolour at three places – the village panchayat office campus; Raja Kudiyiruppu, a residential colony; and the panchayat union primary school at Kanniyankollai. But, in view of the problem at the village panchayat office, she allowed the group to hoist the flag at the school and cancelled her programme at the residential colony. She has lodged a complaint with the Vadakadu police and submitted petitions to District Collector B. Maheswari and Superintendent of Police R. Tamil Chandran. Ms. Kalaimani said that she had alerted the police a week ago, seeking protection for the smooth conduct of the celebrations. To her surprise, no police personnel were deployed in time. (The Hindu 29-01-2012)

In the 65th year of our Independence, a Dalit woman’s plight that she was not allowed to hoist the tricolour for coming from a Dalit community is very sad and shameful indeed and shocks us if we are truly free. Even after 64 years of becoming independent, certain sections in Indian society continue to suffer from segregation. If the incident of a dalit woman Panchayat chief being prevented from hoisting the national flag couldn't raise ripples in Tamilnadu ruled by Dravidian parties, it clearly exposes the anti-Dalit sentiments of the upper castes and the official machinery. It is the duty of the government to ensure that weaker section is not deprived of their rights to hoist the national flag. Caste Hindus with muscle power and political power should not affect the morale of police.

The continued denial of basic rights to Dalits makes a complete mockery of the Indian state’s much-vaunted claims of being democratic and secular. Thousands of cases of atrocities against the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes are found to be unreported & unregistered due to political clot of the upper castes who exercise money power as well muscle power to nip such cases in the bud. Republic day celebrations have no meaning when a particular section of the society such as the downtrodden are socially & economically segregated from the mainstream.

Panchayat presidents belonging to Dalit communities and women in particular are still being discriminated against. State and district administration should intervene immediately and provide non-discriminatory and atrocity-free political environment for the Dalit chiefs to function independently and effectively. The State Government should ensure legal and administrative safeguards and guarantees enshrined in the Constitution by booking the accused under the provisions of the Prevention of Atrocities against SC/ST Act, 1989.

Privatization of Water- Question of affordability.

Water Policy draft favours privatization of services and calls for abolition of subsidies to agricultural, domestic sector

The Union government has begun consultations on a new National Water Policy that calls for privatization of water-delivery services and suggests that water be priced so as to “fully recover” the costs of operation and administration of water-resources projects. Recently circulated to water experts for consultations, the 15-page draft National Water Policy suggests that the government withdraw from its role as a service provider in the water sector. Instead, it says, communities and the private sector should be encouraged to play this role. The proposals could mean sharp rises in the cost of water for both rural and urban users — an outcome the policy suggests will help curtail misuse of a precious but scarce resource. The draft policy calls for the abolition of all forms of water subsidies to the agricultural and domestic sectors, but says “subsidies and incentives” should be provided to private industry for recycling and reusing treated effluents. It also proposes that subsidy to agricultural electricity users be curtailed, saying it leads to a “wasteful use of both electricity and water.” (Source: The Hindu 21-01-2012)

Water privatization in India will make things worse for common men if we fail to learn from the nations where water is already privatized. Water privatization will invariably lead to price hikes because there are considerable costs involved in upgrading water harnessing, purification and distribution systems. The private companies will recover their costs and expenses by charging the consumer. Increased consumer fees for water can make safe water unaffordable for the impoverished and vulnerable populations. There is a threat of the unsustainable water mining by the private water corporations in an effort to maximize profits. Once water becomes a marketable commodity and a corporation is given sole rights to a body of water, then it is within corporations' rights to mine as much water as possible. Furthermore in an effort to maximize profits, if the corporation may mine an environmentally unsustainable amount of water and deplete the water body at a rate faster than it is replenished.

Water is synonymous with life. Water corporations through world bodies such as the World Bank and IMF, are influencing third world governments to push privatization and commoditization of water as ‘the chosen’ alternative to manage the growth in water consumption and the severe water scarcity. As the United Nations has recognized access to water as a basic human right, stating that water is a social and cultural good, not merely an economic commodity, public control of water is essential not only because water is necessary for survival and human fulfillment, but also because of the ever worsening water crisis that India is faced with. Water is a natural resource and every citizen deserves it and it is the duty of the government to ensure every citizen access to potable water. If the government thinks handing over it to private sector will bring in efficiency it must rethink about it. If the government implements privatization of water then it will be a betrayal to millions of common men.

Facebook & Google Censored

Facebook, Google face prosecution

 

The Indian government has garnered media attention for prosecuting social networking sites by enforcing censorship of content identified as controversial. Government censorship of content that is considered offensive or may injure a particular audience or materials that present a cultural threat is a welcome step. Government has every right to block such websites if they cause personal discomfort or have the potential to incite conflict between different racial, ethnic, religious, political and gender groups. Indian society is concerned about online victimization of children through websites that aren't specifically designed for children containing sexually-oriented advertisements and links that misdirect users towards pornographic content.

Though censoring the content is a welcome  decision, the government, at times,  is seemingly unaware of significant unintended consequences, such as the blocking of content that was never intended to be blocked. Once a filtering system is in place, the government may be tempted to use it as a tool of political censorship. There is a possibility to use Internet filtering to control the environment of political speech in fundamental opposition to civil liberties, freedom of speech, and free expression. The consequences of political filtering directly impact democratic practices and can be considered a violation of human rights.

No doubt, social networking sites are a relevant part of the everyday lives of people and have impact not only in terms of personal relationships, but also as tools for staying connected in official lives. But like all worthwhile technology, this too comes with pitfalls. It is also the responsibility of the government to take care of its citizens from not accessing a site that may harbor some malicious content. While content such as pornography and hate speech like obvious choices for Internet censorship, it is also necessary to block social networking sites and other Web pages that are causing distraction.

The decision to prosecute websites centers on protecting the morals or cultural standards of the Community. The Internet offers a broad array of information that is readily and freely available, much of which can trigger moral outrage and sometimes fear psychosis in certain viewers. It is natural for the government to seek to protect community standards by removing or blocking access to content they consider detrimental to the culture of their citizens. In many instances, this concern is expressed most acutely with respect to children. Other key topic areas that are targeted for filtering include gambling sites, provocative attire, hate speech etc. The Government may ask the websites to screen the content but without making them victims of political gimmicks.

Open Letter on Mullaperiyar Dam Issue

Mullaperiyar Imbroglio -Question of safety or control?

 

Being lop-sided and thoroughly opinionated, inflammatory articles published by Malayalam media stoke passions against Tamilnadu over the controversial Mullaperiyar Dam by hoodwinking the people of Kerala as well. The Malayalam media has taken a great opportunity to blow the issue beyond the safety, livelihood of the people in two states and turned into a frantic gathering just for vote-bank politics.

The statement that the Mullaperiyar row between Kerala and Tamil Nadu should be settled out of court implies that the Kerala government disregards opinion of the apex court and the points made were unwarranted when matter is sub-judice. As the sovereign owner of the Mullaperiyar, Kerala has a right to dictate what it wants to do with the dam. Yet, on the Tamil Nadu side, the issue is really the proposed breach of a corporate contract – not sovereign right over the dam and its water. Under the long lease agreement on Mullaperiyar, Tamil Nadu not only gets the water, but also the right to operate and maintain the dam – in other words, it controls the dam. While Kerala maintains that the amount of water that Tamil Nadu receives will be maintained, there is obviously a trust deficit. After repeated failures to resolve the issue at the state level necessitated the entry of Union Ministry of Water Resources and the Central Water Commission under it, into the resolution process, the states are now entangled in a legal battle, with Kerala challenging the certification by the Central Water Commission. In February 2006, the Supreme Court passed a judgment based on the CWC’s report that the water level in the dam could be raised to 142 feet. But the Kerala assembly, in a special session, passed a law that it should not exceed 136 feet. Tamil Nadu responded with a suit in the Supreme Court under Article 131 of the Constitution.

Kerala’s demand for a new dam defying the SC verdict, disregarding the dam panel technical members’ report underestimate the competence of the supreme technical authority of the country to decide over dam safety and poses a serious threat to interstate relations which are already tainted. If safety is the only issue, there are easy solutions but if Kerala is miffed about losing control of a dam on its soil, the solutions remain remote. Kerala’s adamancy on a new dam is based on perceived threats rather than any real danger. A perceived fear has no scientific basis or theoretical backing. If at all an earthquake above 6.5 on the Richter scale hits Kerala or Tamil Nadu, since South India does not fall on any fault line there are other dams, too, which might develop cracks.  The agitation to rebuild the 100-year-old dam started after some newspapers put out alarmist reports about earthquakes far away in the Indian Ocean. Minor earthquakes of less than 4 on the Richter scale keep happening and a region which has had no earthquakes is quite unlikely to break apart at the prospect of bringing down a 100-year-old dam.

The argument that Tamil Nadu's rights in this case are not riparian rights as in the Cauvery case, but arise out of an agreement is highly prejudiced. The lease between Travancore and Madras presidency was for 999 years, and hence has not expired. If the agreement between Travancore and Madras presidency were invalid, the dam and its catchment area should have been handed over to TN when the new states were created. It was only after the creation of Kerala, in 1956, that the state raised objections that the old agreement had become invalid. Kerala even challenged it in the Supreme Court, but the court ruled that the agreement would hold. With the Kerala government’s threat that Mullaperiyar is not an inter-state river and TN has no right to water from it, it is absurd for TN to believe Kerala’s assurances. TN is unlikely to believe Kerala’s protestations that it will provide the same amount of water to TN after a new dam is built because, in an earlier submission to the Supreme Court, Kerala had said Tamil Nadu has no right to the dam and the water as the catchment area and the dam lie within Kerala.

The argument that ecology is at risk in the downstream areas is also erroneous as people were allowed freely to settle in these eco-sensitive areas. The statement that since the dam  is unsafe, it must be demolished is also fallacious as it doesn’t give attention to the fate that will befall two lakh acres of cultivable land in Tamil Nadu. The article tries to undermine the fact that being a water scarce State with its agriculture crucially dependent on irrigation water, and therefore drought prone, the water issue is a highly emotional issue in Tamil Nadu. If Tamil Nadu farmers and farm workers are dependent on the Kerala market as a dependable and sure outlet for their farm products, Kerala is equally dependent on Tamil Nadu for a significant part of its food requirements. The statement that as the dam is nearing the end of its useful life, it will have to be gradually phased out over a period of time is again bigoted. More than 500 dams in India are too old and have been constructed during the British times and some 115 of them, are more than a century old and all of these dams are still very much in use with the oldest being the Thonnur Tank in Karnataka which dates back to 1000 AD.

It’s clear that there’s a concerted effort on the part of the media, government, politicians and social networks to exaggerate the fears over Mullaperiyar dam. The comparison between Koodankulam  Nuclear power plant issue and Mullaperiyar is totally irrelevant. The tones of all the political parties in Tamil Nadu and Kerala are acrimonious and strident, not giving a very congenial atmosphere for an amicable settlement of the issue. With the Centre’s stoic silence and inaction and failing to rein in Kerala for not honouring the Supreme Court verdict on the Dam issue, the possibility for tri-partite talks is remote and will prove futile. First and foremost, both the Tamils and the Malayalis should stop demonizing each other falling into the traps of politicians with vested interests.    

My Letter to The Hindu dated 04-01-2012

This refers to the report “New dam is the only solution, says Kerala” and the article, “The case for a new Mullaperiyar dam” (Op-ed, Jan. 3). As the owner of Mullaperiyar, Kerala has every right to decide what it wants to do with the dam. But, on the Tamil Nadu side, the issue is the proposed breach of a contract — not the right over the dam and its waters. Under the agreement, Tamil Nadu gets not only water but also the right to operate and maintain the dam. Although Kerala maintains that the quantum of water Tamil Nadu receives will be maintained after a new dam is constructed, there is obviously a trust deficit. Kerala's insistence on a new dam poses a serious threat to inter-State relations, which are already under strain.

Police brutality! Down!! Down!!

Paramakudi firing clearly shows the ugly truth that the administration and the Police force instead of being an instrument to enforce the rule of law, is increasingly seen as a pliable tool in the hands of the dominant caste Hindus. The police firing on Dalits at Paramakudi who gathered to attend the guru puja of Dalit leader Immanuel Sekaran was an indication of a sinister design to put down any Dalit attempt at political mobilisation. One cannot forget the way riots were engineered when the then TN govt created the Transport Corporation in the name of Veeran SundaraLingam, a Dalit warrior. Whenever the Dalits raised their voice, they were silenced brutally. With widening social inequalities and a section desirous of seeking their rights guaranteed under the Constitution, this sort of tensions are likely to increase. The depth of emotion invested in Immanuel Sekaran memorial explains the history of violence attached to them. When John Pandian was denied entry to attend Immanuel’s Anniversary, dalit retaliation was a sign of self-assertion. They retaliate because of the confidence Immanuel has given them. When they were expected to be sub-human, it was Immanuel who taught them they are as human as everybody else. Police firing is not an attempt to contain violence but to escalate violence terrorizing the entire Dalit community with a veiled threat that glorifying Immanuel Sekaran would be disastrous. 

The Tamilnadu Police has a long tradition of being a partisan instrument in the hands of the caste Hindus. Law enforcers across the state have shown a remarkable reluctance to use the SC/ST Act to protect Dalits from upper-caste violence. At the heart of the problem is the fact that a section of police officers instead of fighting violence resort to violence showing their ugly casteist face. Even after 65 years of independence, Dalits do not file complaints against the dominant communities fearing reprisal, as they depend mostly on the landholders for their livelihood. In most cases, the SC/ST Act remains largely un-enforced due to both ignorance and active obstruction on the part of Tamil Nadu’s law enforcement. Even when they lodge a complaint under the SC/ST Act, the police ask the caste Hindus to lodge a counter complaint so that a criminal case is filed against the economically impoverished Dalits. Witnesses in such cases are terrorized and forced to retract.The negligible conviction rate in cases under the SC/ST Act also demoralises the oppressed sections.

It is also appaling to know that the Chief Minister defends the police firing at Paramakudi. The process of social democratisation, which is taking place in the southern districts, is being retarded. The state administration itself acts in a biased manner against the dalits and is fully complicit in the discriminatory practices. Police firing and atrocities have already occurred in Nalumoolaikinaru, Kodiyankulam, Sankaralingapuram, Uthapuram and Manjolai. Constituting an enquiry committee is not a solution for the insoluble internal conflicts in our society. Erring police officials should be booked under SC/ST Act.  In a democratic nation, no caste Hindu community can insist that the security of Dalits depends on the goodwill of the dominant community. The Government should adhere strictly to the constitutional laws and undo casteism from the law enforcing machinery. The rising tide of casteism in the police force can be stemmed only by an uncompromising stand.

A brief History of Immanuel Sekaran-the champion of social justice

To most readers in this nation starved of authentic information by the imperialist news agencies, the name of Immanuel Sekaran is either unfamiliar or just a name. Fondly remembered today by the Dalits as Immanuel Devendrar, Sekaran is a rebel whose greatness the rest of India is still struggling to understand. Dalits must understand how Immanuel accomplished extraordinary things, rising to the challenge when they were needed to ensure independence for the oppressed castes. He discovered that caste need not be a badge of servility but rather could be a banner for uncompromising revolutionary struggle. He was murdered because he was doing too much to pass this attitude on to his caste people. He died at the hands of the enemy. What remains is to go beyond the generalities and to understand the most significant elements attached to Immanuel’s life and death.

Born on 10^th October 1924 in Sellur near Muthukulathoorr, Immanuel Sekaran was an average student and could study only upto the higher secondary. As a teenager, Immanuel grew up in the highly stratified society, with two major handicaps, his caste and class.

To read the full biography written and published by Dr.T.Marx… contact drtmarx@gmail.com

Reliable History on Mohammed Ali Jinnah by R.S.Thangasamy

முகமது அலி ஜின்னா பற்றிய இருட்டடிப்புச் செய்யப்பட்ட வரலாற்றையும், காந்தியின் மறுபக்கத்தையும் அறிய உதவும் அரிய நூல்:

இரா. சி. தங்கசாமி எழுதிய மாமனிதர் ஜின்னா:

அணிந்துரை:

முனைவர் நா. அரணமுறுவல்

04-10-2007

உதவி இயக்குநர்,

தமிழ் வளர்ச்சித் துறை,

திருநெல்வேலி மாவட்டம்.

     முகமது அலி சின்னா, பெயரைக் கேட்டதும் பாகித்தானைத் தனியே பிரித்த தலைவர் என்பதுதான் அனைவருக்கும் நினைவுக்கு வரும்.

     வெள்ளை வல்லரசிடமிருந்து இந்தியா விடுதலை பெற வேண்டும். இந்துக்களும் இகலாமியர்களும் இணைந்து போராடி வெற்றி பெற வேண்டும் என்ற எண்ணம் கொண்டவர் சின்னா. இந்தியாவின் பேராயக் கட்சி மட்டும்தான் விடுதலைக்குப் போராடுகிறது என்று காந்தியும் நேருவும் திரும்பத் திரும்பக் கூறியபோது, இல்லை. முசுலிம் லீக்கும் அதற்காகத்தான் போராடுகிறது என்று அவர்களோடு வழக்காடியவர் சின்னா.

     இசுலாமியர் தலைமை இந்திய விடுதலைக்கு அமைந்துவிடக் கூடாதென்று கருதியவர்கள். இந்தியப் பேராயக்கட்சி இசுலாமியர் தலைமையில் இந்திய விடுதலையை வென்றெடுத்துவிடக்கூடாதென்று கருதியர்வர்கள் மத அடிப்படையில் நாட்டைப் பிளவுபடுத்த தூண்டினார்கள். இந்துத்துவத் தலைமையில் பேராயக் கட்சி வரும் வரை காத்திருந்து நாட்டை இந்து நாடென்றும் இசுலாமியர் நாடென்றும் இரண்டாகப் பிரித்தார்கள். இந்து மத இசுலாமிய மதக் கும்பல்களிடம் மாட்டிக் கொண்ட காந்தியும், சின்னாவும் காலத்தால் அழிக்கப்பட்டார்கள். காந்தியின் இராமராச்சியம் கடைசியில் அவரது உயிரைப் பலிவாங்கியது. சின்னா பாகித்தானில் புறக்கணிக்கப்பட்டு நோயில் விழுந்து மடிந்தார். இரண்டு மதவாதக் கும்பல்களும் இரண்டு தலைமையையும் நன்கு பயன்படுத்திக் கொண்டன.

     இளமைக் காலம் தொட்டு பாகித்தானில் சின்னா இறக்கும்வரை 15 இயல்களாகப் பிரித்து இந்த நூலை வழக்கறிஞர் இரா. சி. தங்கசாமி எழுதியுள்ளார்.

     1893ஆம் ஆண்டு இலண்டன் இலிங்கன்சு இன் சட்டக்கல்லூரியில் சேர்ந்த சின்னா இலண்டனில் தாதாபாய் நவரோசி தொடங்கிய இந்தியர் சங்கத்தில் இணைந்து அவரைத் தன்வழிகாட்டியாகத் தேர்ந்தெடுத்துக்கொண்டார். சாண் மார்லே எழுதிய சமரசம் என்ற நூல் சின்னாவை மிகவும் கவர்ந்தது. அவருடைய கொள்கையைச் சின்னா பின்பற்றினார். தனிமாந்த மனசாட்சி, மனசாட்சி உரிமை, அனைவருக்கும் சமஉரிமை என்பன மார்லேயின் கருத்துக்கள்.

     1897இல் வழக்கறிஞர் தொழில் செய்ய மும்பை சென்ற சின்னாவிற்கு ஐரோப்பியத் தலைவர்களுக்குக் கூட கிடைக்காத வாய்ப்பாகிய வழக்கறிஞர் நாயகம் சர் மக்பர்சன் உதவியால் சின்னா குற்றவியல் நடுவர் ஆகும் வாய்ப்பையும் பெற்றார்.

     இந்தியத் தேசிய மென்போக்கு அரசியலாருடன் கொண்ட தொடர்பால் கோகலேயின் ஊழியராகி முகலிம்லீக் வேட்பாளரைத் தேர்தலில் தோற்கடித்தார்.

     1910ஆம் ஆண்டிற்குப் பிறகு சின்னா அரசியலில் மதம் கலப்பதை விரும்பாது முகலிம் லீகை - பேராயக்கட்சியுடன் நல்லிணக்கம் கொள்ளச்செய்தார்.

     சின்னா பற்றி அண்ணல் அம்பேத்கார் சொல்கிறார்: “சிந்தனை மாற்றத்தின் காரணமாக சின்னா பிரிட்டீசாரின் கைப்பாவையாகச் செயல்பட்டார் என்று அவரது மிக மோசமான எதிரிகள் கூட ஒருபோதும் சந்தேகிக்க முடியாது. அவர் தனது சொந்தக் கருத்தில் உறுதியுடயவராக , ஒளிவுமறைவற்ற தற்பெருமை உடையவராக இருந்திருக்கலாம்... இந்தியாவில் ஊழலற்ற அரசியல்வாதி என்று ஒருவர் இருந்தால் அந்தச் சொல் அவருக்கே பொருந்தும். சின்னாவை யாரும் விலைக்கு வாங்க முடியாது. அவர் ஒருபோதும் வாய்ப்பைத் தேடிச் சென்றதில்லை என்பதே அவருக்குக் கிடைத்த பெருமையாகும். சின்னாவின் மாற்றத்திற்கான காரணத்தை இந்து மரபுவழிச் சிந்தனையாளர்கள் புரிந்துகொள்ளவில்லை.”

     இதன் பின்பே சின்னா முசுலிம் மக்களின் எதிர்காலத்தைக் கணக்கில் கொண்டு பாகித்தனை அடைய முசுலிம் மக்களை வழிநடத்தத் தொடங்கினார்.

     முதலில் நான் ஒரு இந்து, எனவே நான் உண்மையான இந்தியன் என்றார் காந்தி.

     முதலில் நான் ஒரு இந்தியன், அதன் பிறகுதான் நான் ஒரு முசுலிம் என்றார் சின்னா.

     ஆனால் இந்து மதவாதிகளின் வளர்ச்சி, தீவிரவாதப் போக்கு ஆகியவை இந்திய நாடு பிளவுபடுவதற்கு வழிவகுத்துவிட்டன. சின்னா மேற்கொண்ட முயற்சிகள் தோல்வியைத் தழுவின.

     1948இல்  அரசியல் அமைப்புச் சட்டம் பற்றிப் பேசிய சின்னா, “எக்காரணத்தைக் கொண்டும் பாகித்தான் மத குருமார்களின் அரசாக இருக்காது. நம் நாட்டில் முசுலிம்  அல்லாதவர்கலாகிய இந்துக்கள், கிருத்துவர்கள், பார்சிகள் ஆகியோரைக் கொண்டிருக்கிறோம். அவர்கள் அனைவரும் பாகித்தானியர். பாகித்தானில் அவர்கள் அனைவரும் மற்ற குடிமக்களைப் போல் சமப் பங்களிப்பைச் செலுத்திச் சமஉரிமையாளர்களாக விளங்குவார்கள்” என்று குறிப்பிட்டார்.

     சின்னா பற்றிய இவ்வாறான கருத்துக்களைப் பல நூல்கள் வாயிலாகத் திரட்டி இந்நூலை ஆசிரியர் திறம்பட இயற்றியுள்ளார். நூலை உருவாக்க பெரிய முயற்சி மேற்கொண்டு அதில் வெற்றி பெற்றுள்ளார். சின்னாவின் வாழ்க்கை வரலாற்றோடு சென்ற நூற்றாண்டின் இந்திய அரசியல் வரலாற்றையும் இதன் மூலம் நாம் தெரிந்து கொள்ள வாய்ப்பளித்துள்ளார் ஆசிரியர்.

     தமிழ்நாட்டு இன்றைய சூழல் முசுலிம் மக்கள் மீது          சுமத்திவரும் பொய்க்குற்றச்சாட்டுகளை  அம்பலப்படுத்த இந்த நூல் தமிழ் மக்களுக்கு உதவும் என்பது உறுதி.

என்னுரை- இரா. சி. தங்கசாமி.

     ஒரு நாட்டில் நிகழ்ந்த விடுதலைப் போராட்டங்களை ஆதிக்க வர்க்கம் அவர்களது நலனை முன்னிறுத்தி உண்மையை  மறைத்தும், திரித்தும், திருத்தியும் எழுதி வரலாறு என்று காட்டுவதை நாம் கண்கூடாகக் காண்கிறோம். இந்தியச் சுதந்திரப் போராட்ட வரலாற்றில் சில முகாமையான தலைவர்களின் பங்களிப்பைத் திட்டமிட்டு உள்நோக்குடன் மறைத்தும், திரித்தும், திருத்தியும்  தவறான தகவல்களைத் தந்து ஒரு மாயத்தோற்றத்தையும் ஒருவித அறிவு மயக்கத்தையும் ஏற்ப்படுத்தி வருவது தொடர் செயல்பாடாக உள்ளது.

     இந்தியாவின் தலைவிதியை தீர்மானிப்பதற்கான சிக்கலான பணியில் இரண்டு மிக முக்கியமான அரசியல்வாதிகளான காந்தியும், ஜின்னாவும் ஈடுபட்டனர். அவர்கள் இருவரும் சிந்தனையில், தோற்றத்தில், கண்ணோட்டத்தில், செயல்பாடுகளில் இருவேறு துருவங்கலாகவே இருந்தனர். இந்தியச் சுதந்திரப் போராட்ட இயக்கத்தில் முன்னோடித் தலைவர்களான தாதாபாய் நவ்ரோஜி, பெரோசா மேத்தா, கோகலே ஆகியோரது அருந்தொண்டரான ஜின்னா, சுரேந்திரநாத் பானர்ஜியின் அடிச்சுவட்டில் தனது அரசியல் பயணத்தைத் தொடங்கினார். முஸ்லிம் கோகலேவாகத் திகழ விரும்பிய ஜின்னா தன் வாழ்வையே இந்திய தேசிய விடுதலைக்காகவும், இந்து முஸ்லீம் ஒற்றுமைக்காகவும் அர்ப்பணித்தார். அண்ணல் டாக்டர் அம்பேத்கர் அவர்களால் நேர்மையான, விலைபோகாத, ஊழலற்ற அரசியல்வாதி என்றும் பிரிப்டீசு இந்தியாவின் ஆளுநர் வெலிங்டன் பிரபுவால் போல்ஷ்விக் என்றும் ஆர்.ஆர். நந்தாவால் முஸ்லிம் மாஜினி என்றும் கவிக்குயில் சரோஜினி நாயிடுவாள் இந்து முஸ்லீம் தூதர் என்றும் புகழாரம் சூட்டப்பட்டார். சமூகச் சீர்திருத்தங்களுக்காகவும், மதச்சார்பின்மையாளராகவும் திகழ்ந்தார். காங்கிரசு பேராயக் கட்சியினரால் அரசியல் மோசக்காரரென்றும் இந்து வகுப்புவாதிகளால் காபிர் (நாத்திகன்), காங்கிரசு அடியாள் என்றும் தூற்றப்பட்ட அஞ்சா நெஞ்சன் ஜின்னா இந்து மகாசபை ஆதரவாளரும் கீதையின் பற்றாலருமான காந்தியின் மத அரசியலைத் தோலுரித்துக் காட்டியதுடன், அரசியல் பண்பாலர்களின் விளையாட்டு என்று தெளிவு படுத்தினார். சினாவின் சாதனைகள் அளவிடற்க்கரியவை.

     இந்தியச் சுதந்திரப் போராட்ட இயக்கத்தில் ஜின்னா ஆற்றிய பங்களிப்பை நடுநிலை நின்று நாடடு மக்களுக்கு எடுத்த்துரைக்கும் எனது முயர்ச்சியே அவரது வாழ்க்கை வரலாறாக அமைந்துவிட்டது.

இரா. சி. தங்கசாமி.

முழு புத்தகத்தையும் வாசிக்கத் தொடர்புகொள்ளவும்:

drtmarx@gmail.com

Periyar on Bhagat Singh

It is unfortunate that in the absence of alternate historical understanding of Indian situation, revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh are grossly under evaluated and misrepresented. If Gandhi was the all-too-well-accepted side of the freedom movement, Bhagat Singh was the other side of it. He was no less patriotic than the Mahatma, but languished from the lack of recognition for his cause. Unfortunately, the ruling elite of the country reduced Bhagat Singh into a 'terrorist,' an image he got initially was thrust upon him more by the Congress, than the British themselves. The Congress took the cue from the Mahatma, and succeeded in making him appear irrelevant. Even in imprisonment, his hunger strike in the prison to get better conditions for the prisoners is one of the most memorable events in the history of Indian freedom struggle.

Standing in league with Dr Ambedkar, Bhagat Singh supported the untouchables’ demands for separate electorate system. Both Ambedkar and Bhagat Singh shared similar feelings towards the Brahmin dominated Indian society in which they lived. Though Ambedkar and Bhagat Singh differed in their approach to attaining liberty for Dalits, and non-Brahmins, their critique of caste system, caste ridden society, and Hinduism worked synergistically to break the sanctified religious hold of Brahmin supremacy on Indian society while at the same time transforming Dalits and other non- Brahmins into a dynamic force for social change. No doubt, Bhagat Singh will always remain a hope for all those who believe in secular socialist values and reject the caste based hierarchical system. After all, he was practicing what Gandhi and the Congress were preaching all along. While Congress grew stubborn as the day when Bhagat Singh would be hanged approached, Periyar began to love him more. Most possibly, he could have been saved with an effort by the Congress and the Mahatma. In his article The Functioning of Caste System published in Kudiarasu dated 28-07-1935,  Periyar goes to the extent of dispelling the myth ‘Mahatma is the saviour of the untouchables’: “In order to abolish untouchability our friend Gandhi has shouted as much as possible. Collected many lakhs of rupees to achieve that end and handed them over to higher caste or varna people. Otherwise, he was not able to bring about the slightest change. On the other hand, he also supports Gita, Manu code, Varna system and caste. [...] Friend Gandhi is an ardent religionist and not a deep humanist. He has been saying that untouchability must be abolished only to save Hindusim; otherwise he is not having his principle objective of the abolition of atrocities perpetrated against you [untouchables]”  Even today, Bhagat Singh remains the potent symbol of rebellion and the alluring zeal of revolution. This article would do good to the current generation to know of a man, who lived by his ideals till he breathed his last.

We offer our readers the pleasure of reading the words of Periyar about Bhagat Singh:

Article written by Periyar On the Execution of Bhagat Singh on March 29, 1931 (The Modern Rationalist November 2006)

"The aim of life is no more to control the mind, but to develop it harmoniously: not to achieve salvation here after, but to make the best use of life here below; and not to realise truth, beauty and good only in contemplation, but also in the actual experience of daily life: social progress depends not upon the ennoblement of the few but on the enrichment of democracy; universal brotherhood can be achieved only when there is an equality of opportunity – of opportunity in the social, political and individual life."

[The following is the editorial Periyar E.V. Ramasami wrote in his Tamil Weekly Kudi Arasu dated 29th March 1931. Translation by Aasaan.

The editorial highlights the point that Bhagat Singh’s outspoken progressive views and supreme sacrifice have disabused the minds of the people and made them realise the retrograde nature of the ideals and methods of Mahatma Gandhi.]

Periyar’s Editorial dated 29th March, 1931:

There is no one who has not condoled the death of Mr. Bhagat Singh by hanging. There is none who has not condemned the government for hanging him. Besides, we now see several people known as patriots and national heroes scolding Mr. Gandhi for the happening of this event.

While this happens in one place, let us see what the same group of people do in another place. They congratulate Lord Irwin, the Vice-roy. They praise Mr. Gandhi for coming to an agreement with him. They are not only satisfied that the agreement has been reached without laying down the condition of not to hang Bhagat Singh, but also consider the signing of such an agreement as a great victory and celebrate the same. In addition, Mr. Gandhi says that Lord Irwin is a Mahatma (great soul), and has ordered the common people of the country to address the Vice-roy the same way. Lord Irwin publicises Mr. Gandhi among divinity.

The same people who have been hailing Mr. Gandhi as a great leader are now shouting ‘down with Gandhi’ and ‘down with congress.’ They show black flags wherever he goes, and disturb the meetings he addresses. These things have become common.

When we witness these things we are at a loss to find out either the opinion of the public or the principle they entertain regarding political affairs. We also doubt if they really adhere to any principle.

Whatever be the position of the public, even when Gandhi started the agitation of Salt Satyagraha, we explained elaborately that it would not only be of no use to the people, but also hostile to the progress of the country and to the liberation of the suffering class.

Even Gandhi has said clearly and openly admitting that the reason for starting the agitation had been to spoil and undo the work done by persons like Bhagat Singh.

To supplement (these things), the real socialists among the neighbours have been proclaiming loudly: "Mr. Gandhi bas betrayed the poor. He does these things to eradicate the socialist principles. Down with Gandhi, down with Congress." But our known national heroes and patriots never cared for these reactions. They did not realise the pros and cons of anything. Like those who fall into the well holding the lamp, like those who clash against the rock accepting the challenge, they were blindly and wildly enthusiastic (about the Salt Agitation). They went to prison and returned ‘triumphantly’. They accepted the honour connected with it. And now after finding Bhagat Singh hanged, they also shout, ‘Down with Gandhi’, ‘Down with Congress’. We do not understand what benefit will ensue due to such behaviour.

As far as we are concerned, let us tell the truth: There are idiots and fools in this land. They do not think of the pros and cons of a course of action, but selfishly seek their own honour. Had Bhagat Singh lived long, he would have to suffer of such people. Instead, it is good that Bhagat Singh is dead and has found ‘peace’. I am sad that I cannot get such a great rare chance (paeru).

The issue is whether a man has done his duty or not. The issue is not whether the action has borne fruit. Yet we agree that we should do our duty, taking into account the time and place. We are sure that time, place and the general trend are not hostile to the principle upheld by Bhagat Singh. Though it occurs to our mind that he has erred a little in choosing the means to translate his principle into practice, we will never at any time be emboldened to say that his principle is a flawed one. It alone will make peace prevail in this world.

If Bhagat Singh had came to the firm and sincere conclusion that all his principles were correct, and that the methods he had used were the just ones, then he should have definitely conducted himself only in the way he had done. If he had not so conducted himself, we could not say he was an honest person. So we now say that he is a true man. It is our strong view that only Bhagat Singh’s principle is needed to India.

As far as we know, Bhagat Singh’s principle represented socialism and communism. As an evidence in this view, we find the following lines in the letter he wrote to the governor of the province of the Punjab:

"Till Communist Party comes to power and people live without unequal status, our struggle will continue: It cannot be brought to an end by killing us: it will continue openly and secretly:"

Further, we think that Bhagat Singh had no faith in god and in divine dispensation, but was a man of self-confidence. Holding such views is not a crime under any law. Even if it is considered to be against any law, no one need to be afraid of it because, we are sure, that following those principles (that Bhagat Singh upheld) will not do any harm or cause any loss to the public. If by chance any harm or loss takes place, it will be unintentional. We endeavour to put the principle into practice wholeheartedly, without entertaining personal hatred towards individuals or towards communities or towards the people of any other land. We do our work without causing injury to any person, but we are ready to undergo extreme suffering for the cause we espouse. So we need not worry about or be afraid of anything.

The same philosophy that underlies our endeavour to eradicate untouchability also forms the basis of the efforts to remove poverty. To abolish untouchability we have to abolish the principle of upper and lower castes. In the same manner, to remove poverty we have to do away with the principle of capitalists and wage-earners. So socialism and communism are nothing but getting rid of these concepts and systems. These are the principles Bhagat Singh stood for. It is no wonder that those who consider them just and necessary call for the downfall of Gandhi and Congress. What is very strange is that those who advocate these principles hail Gandhi and Congress.

The day when Gandhi said that god alone guides him, that Varnashrama Dharma is a superior system fit to govern the affairs of the world, and that everything happens according to god’s will, we came to the conclusion that there is no difference between Gandhism and Brahmanism. We also concluded that unless the Congress Party that subscribes to such philosophy and principle is abolished, it will not be good to the country. But now this fact has been found out at least by some of the people. They have gained the wisdom and courage to call for the downfall of Gandhism. This is a great victory to our cause. If Bhagat Singh had not died by being hanged, there would not have been any chance for this victory to take place in such a popular manner. We even venture to say that Gandhism would have gained more ground if Bhagat Singh had not been hanged.

Bhagat Singh had not fallen sick, suffered and died as it normally happens with people. He gave his life for the noble cause of showing to India, nay to the world, the path of real equality and peace. He has reached a great height, a feat never achieved normally by any one else. We applaud and sing of his martyrdom from the depth of our heart. At the same time, we request those in our government to find out and hang four true persons like Bhagat Singh in each of the provinces.