Link to Article on Chandrashekhar Azad by Saswati Sarkar, Shanmukh and Dikgaj

In this article, we focus on the martyrdom of the great revolutionary, Chandrashekhar Azad and the strange behaviour of Nehru concerning this death.  We show that Azad had met Nehru a few days before his death, and that Nehru has (falsely) damned Azad & his colleagues as fascists after his meeting.  We show Nehru’s antipathy to fascism and the extent to which he was willing to go to uproot.   We also show how Nehru had falsely disavowed all knowledge of Azad, despite his father funding the defence of Azad in the Kakori case and he himself being a member of Kakori defence committee.  We speculate on who might have betrayed Azad to the British, given the incongruities of Nehru’s behaviour and using material from intelligence officers who were involved in the case.


Link to articles on Rashbehari Bose by Saswati Sarkar, Shanmukh and Dikgaj

In the first part of the series of articles, we examine the role of Rashbehari Bose in the forgotten Hindu German conspiracy.  We reflect on the doomed valour and commitment of Rashbehari and his associates in the Hindu German conspiracy and the attempt to seed a revolt on the scale of the 1857 revolt in north India.  We expound on the forgotten heroes alongside Rashbehari and how they desperately resisted the British & how they were brutally treated, to the indifference of the then Congress.

In the second part of the series, we narrate the tale of Rashbehari Bose as he daringly escaped from the shores of India and managed to get into Japan.  From the shores of Japan, even with no knowledge of the Japanese language, he tried to further the cause of the Revolution by trying to send arms & ammunition to his Revolutionary colleagues in India.  When the plot was foiled & British hunted him in Japan, he went underground with the help of Japanese pan-Asianists and hid out with a Japanese family, that kindly gave him shelter.  He utilised this enforced confinement to familiarise himself with the Japanese language.

In the third part of the series, we narrate the saga of Rashbehari Bose as he found love in Japan with a traditional samurai lady, who understood his predicament & love him in despite of it.  He then naturalised in Japan & became a Japanese citizen, evading the British agents who were constantly on the hunt for him.  We narrate his saga as he lost his possessions in the great Kanto earthquake & struggled desperately for a living in Japan, with his new wife & child.  We narrate how India failed him at that point & only Rabindranath Tagore helped him any.  Then personal tragedy in the form of the death of his wife struck him.  Despite all these travails, he never faltered in his struggle for Indian independence.

In the fourth part of the article, we narrate the work of Rashbehari as he realised the importance of British propaganda against the Indians and India & worked to counter it from the shores of Japan.  In this article, we focus on his work in Japan, & his cultivating the highest figures in both the Japanese military & government to be sympathetic to the Indian cause.  We narrate how he worked on both positive & negative propaganda – talking up Indian strengths & virtues & pointing to British brutalities & discrimination.  He wrote several books in Japanese & translated, among other things, the Bhagavadgita into Japanese.  His works ranged from as far as Humour in India to translations of the Bhagavadgita & Rabindranath’s poetry.

In the fifth part of the article, we narrate the work of Rashbehari as he functioned as the unofficial ambassador at large of India in Japan.  We focus on how he worked to organise the Indians in Japan for the coming struggle against the British.  He also cultivated the high Japanese officials, both civilian & military and sowed the idea of a free India being in the interests of Japan. Ceaselessly, tirelessly, Rashbehari worked to strengthen Indian interests among the Japanese.

In the sixth part of the  article, we examine the mindset of the Revolutionaries, and Rashbehari in particular as an example of the generic mindset.  We examine how they braved terrible odds, huge disparity in resources & weapons, contempt & derision of their own countrymen, betrayers & spies, & few resources, even to keep themselves alive.  However, the Revolutionary bond held, they helped each other desperately to stay alive & ahead of the British Raj & they competed with each other to fight the British.  In contrast, the Congress even betrayed its own to curry favour with the British.

In the seventh part of the series, we show free India has mistreated the legacy of Rashbehari.  We show the misery suffered by his immediate family & contrast it with the way India has treated the kith and kin of Nehru & Gandhi.  We also show how Japan showed him greater respect, while India has treated him shabbily.  Only the current government seems to be making a few amends in the Indian treatment of Rashbehari’s legacy.

In the eighth part of the series, we examine the similarity in mindset between the two Boses – Rashbehari & Subhas.  We observe how they had similar ideas about what constituted freedom, & how India needed to be liberated from the British.  We also contrast their ideas of freedom against the idea of freedom and methods of liberation advocated by Gandhi.

In the ninth part of the article, we contrast the attitudes of Nehru and Gandhi on one side and Rashbehari and Subhas on the other, towards the war.  We also examine how the two Boses were ready to do whatever it took to win freedom for India.  Finally, we show how Subhas was ready to confront the strongmen of the Congress even during the war, if necessary.

In the tenth part of the article, we show how the two Boses repeatedly deceived the British intelligence and effected grand escapes.  We show how they were willing to take huge risks, & play hide-and-seek games (both mentally and physically) with the British intelligence to get what they wanted to achieve Indian freedom.

Links to articles on Subhas Chandra Bose by Saswati Sarkar, Shanmukh and Dikgaj

In this article, we examine the common myths around Bose, using primary sources, including Bose’s own writings.  We refute three important myths concerning Bose.  The first myth we dispel is that Bose was a Communist. The second myth we expose is that Bose was an atheist.  Finally, we refute the allegation that Bose indulged in rampant ethnic/religious discrimination, as part of his politics.  The article was written as a correction of the rampant myths on internet regarding Bose.


In the second part of the article on the myths concerning Bose, we examine the reasons for the myths around Bose and expose the shoddy scholarship they are constructed on. Further, we examine the politicisation of history and the damage it has wrought, both online and off it, in terms of genuine scholarship.

Link to An Open Letter to Begum Ayesha Sultana nee Sharmila Tagore by Saswati Sarkar, Shanmukh and Dikgaj

An open letter to Begum Ayesha Sultana, once known as Sharmila Tagore.  In the article, we question the veracity, timing and motivations of the actress in taking on the `rise of intolerance’ in India.  We point out the studied, stoic silence of the actress and others of the secular club in remaining silent when certain communities are at the receiving end of the intolerance.

Links to Articles on Durga Pooja by Shanmukh, Saswati Sarkar and Dikgaj

Ban on Durga Puja – An Assault on the Core of our Civilization:
Part I:
We show that it is Shakti Puja that has bound civilisational India  across times, locations and groups (tribals included). It is Shakti Puja that inspired defense against invaders. Indian women have a long tradition of taking up arms whenever civilization has been threatened. This is perhaps a direct fallout of the Indic worship of Shakti as the feminine.
Part II:
In contrast to Indic civilization,  a deep aversion to the worship of the divinity as feminine is rooted in Abrahamic traditions. There is also a long history of attacks on public worship by infidels.
Part II:
Part III:
Both Parts I and II together provide a civilizational context to  the recent attacks
on Durga Puja and hindu public worship. We chronicle such attacks in the last five years. The phenomenon is pandemic in the entire subcontinent. West Bengal no doubt is in the forefront. but the attacks are not limited to West bengal by any means.
Part III:
Part IV:
Part IV argues that the right of the Hindus to practise religion is being violated due to a unholy matrimony between fundamentalist religious minority groups and political parties of different hues. This is where we discuss in detail as to how Durga Puja has been banned in some villages of West Bengal with direct connivance from politicians, severe restrictions have been imposed by the administration on Durga Puja processions throughout India (not just West Bengal). Political parties either take stances actively opposed to Hindus, or do not reverse the same adopted by their predecessors.
This was however not the India that the genuine freedom fighters envisioned. The stances of Veer Savarkar and Shyamaprasad Mookerjee are well-known with respect to Hindu rights. We therefore dwell on the positions that Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, who even the leftists and Islamists have not accused of religious bias, had adopted with respect to the rights of the Hindus to practice their public worships (a bit of that is in Part II too).
Finally, we dwell on the consequences of the decided anti-Hindu shift in our polity.
In Part IV, we have made the point that the anti-Hindu nature of our polity is a direct consequence, or  the cause, or perhaps both, of the anti-Hindu nature of our media. We have documented religious bias against Hindus in public discourse, focusing on media below:
Part IV:

Links to articles on Gandhi by Saswati Sarkar, Shanmukh, Dikgaj & others

1) We show an unhealthy nexus between Gandhi and top industrialists which the British cleverly exploited to undermine India’s freedom struggle. They helped to build the personality cult around Gandhi as it suited them, and Gandhi on his part played divisive politics to the hilt using the same cult and money power to further the cult,  Among other things, British were regularly providing intelligence info to Gandhi, including on Bose, while he was the Congress President. Gandhi received the same without any fuss as to why his party President was being snooped upon. We have documented our claims from writings of the protagonists Bose, Gandhi, Nehru, Azad, Birla.

2) We have contrasted the protagonists views on independence and the country they envisioned post independence, relying on their speeches and writings. Gandhi’s stated vision was a Spiritual Swaraj whereby the British can continue to rule India provided it helps India get rid of industry, machines, railways, doctors, lawyers, hospitals, medicines, contraceptives. His comments on railways, doctors and hospitals are particularly illuminating 🙂 He also saw no utility in education for peasants as that would not increase their happiness.
  Bose on the other hand sought a complete severance from the British and envisioned large scale industrialization whereby a section of the agricultural workforce would move to manufacturing. He also wanted a national research institute to be set up, close connection between science and politics, and divorce scientific research from government control. Unlike what is commonly known, he had explicitly disassociated himself from communism, and had ridiculed its class war and internationalism.
3) Subhas Bose’s association with  Indian revolutionaries starting long before he lead the INA. He was seeking to operate like Sinn Fein of Ireland who provided political cover to the militant wing of freedom struggle.
4) We strike at the root of the Gandhian myth that he had a doctrinaire opposition to violence. He sought to enlist soldiers in the thousands to fight for the British during the first world war. While supporting the Khilafat agitation, he said that he was duty-bound to  help a just cause even when it involved violence. Yet, he persistently and sternly opposed the Indian revolutionaries, while observing neutrality while Hindu victims were being butchered during Moplah riots in 1921 and partition riots in 1946-47. He felt the most noble course of action for Hindus was to die without any resistance whatsoever in both of these. It becomes apparent that his stand on violence depended on the race and religions of the perpetrator and victims.
(Did the Mahatma really oppose violence?)
5) The legend of Gandhi’s insistence on truth, and nothing but the absolute truth,  perhaps only equals  his ostensible attachment to non-violence. In his own words, “My love for non-violence is superior to every other thing mundane or supermundane. It is equalled only by my love for truth which is to me synonymous with non-violence through which and which alone I can see and reach Truth.’’ . But, contrary to what is generally believed, and what Gandhi had himself professed in multiple instances, non-violence did not constitute an article of faith for him, as we have argued in the prequel. Through a microscopic examination of the first decade of Gandhi’s political sojourn in India, 1920-1931, we show that he took multiple liberties with truth, which was exposed by Indian revolutionaries who had debated him during this period. 
Gandhi announced two nation-wide mass movements during this period, which lead to large scale repressions on the masses, and yet, both were abruptly terminated without any tangible gain. One was withdrawn on a flimsy pretext, and the other ended with an abject surrender. This would be the pattern for his subsequent mass movements as well. During this period, he repeatedly allured Congress and the nation into pursuing his agenda by promising them Dominion Status in a year, when the deliverable was clearly infeasible. Again, multiple times, he rescinded his promises and resolutions through artificial distinctions in terminology introduced post facto and repeated shifting of goal posts.  He and his disciples would frequently resort to emotional blackmail threatening that he would retire should he be questioned on his failings, or his agenda not be accepted in its entirety.  Last, but not the least, he did not even honor his promise to the fallen martyr, Sukhdev Thapar, who was hanged along with Bhagat Singh and Rajguru.

6) Focusing on a debate between Gandhi and revolutionaries,

We show in these pieces that the essence of Gandhi’s thoughts were derived from Christianity in general and Tolstoy in particular (at least parts directly follow from Tolstoy) and are in conflict with core principles of Indic theology, spanning from Sanatan Dharma to Jainism (which is closest among the Indic schools to Gandhi). The revolutionaries were instead, knowingly or unknowingly, rooted in Hindu foundation and ethos. Many of Gandhi’s contemporaries, both Hindus (revolutionaries like Sachin Sanyal, philosophers like Aurobindo Ghosh and masses) and Christians, saw him more as a Christian than a Hindu. We also show that he seriously pondered upon converting to Christianity, and rejected the consideration ostensibly because he believed that he could follow Jesus Christ’s teachings in Hinduism and that he could be a good Christian while being a good Hindu. We show that he was wrong there as core Christian doctrines have significant differences with Christian theology. We conjecture that he did not convert because he did not want to alienate the bulk of India, which was practising Hindu during his times. At any rate, we show that he facilitated proselytizing contrary to his stated opposition to the same.

7) In this article, we show that Gandhi had committed himself to helping the oppressed fight against their injustice, even if they did not follow his path of non-violence.  Yet, in practice, while Gandhi had few problems accepting British violence against Indians in general & Revolutionaries in particular, he had a deep seated loathing for the Revolutionaries & sought to undermine them by every means.  In deals that the Congress made with the British, Gandhi left the Revolutionaries to dry.  He introduced Congress resolutions condemning the Revolutionaries, personally condemned the Revolutionaries & actively sympathised with the targets of the Revolutionaries.  He & his colleagues (Nehru, Patel, and Rajagopalachari being prominent among them) actively collaborated with the British in suppressing the Revolutionaries.  Gandhi & his colleagues never formally moved against any capital sentence for the Revolutionaries either.  Among those he & his colleagues condemned & tried to erase & banish from public memory were the finest of our Revolutionaries including Bhagat Singh, Sukh Dev, Chandrasekhar Azad, Gopinath Saha, Shanti Chowdhary, Suniti Ghosh, and Vasudev Gogte, among others. (added on 02/08/2015)
8) In this article, we show that the top leaders of the Congress (Patel, Nehru, Azad and Gandhi) colluded with the British to suppress the naval mutiny.  When the people of Bombay fought & died in the streets for the naval ratings, the Congress offered support to the British to suppress it.  Patel promised to protect the mutinous naval ratings from victimisation if they surrendered, and then promptly, he & Nehru threw them to the wolves, while Gandhi condemned the ratings.  The army mutiny of Jabalpur & air mutinies were treated similarly.  Free India consigned the military mutineers to oblivion and refused them status as freedom fighters However, the effect of the mutinies on the British decision to quit India was enormous.
9) In this article, we focus on the actual position taken by Gandhi with respect to cow protection.  Gandhi opposed legislation banning cow slaughter and we document why he did so, in his own words.  The purpose of the article is to faithfully reproduce Gandhi’s position on cow slaughter legislation.
10) In this article, we point out that Gandhi’s cow protection consisted of appeasing Muslims and bullying Dalits.  Gandhi repeatedly appeased Muslims and defended their right to slaughter cows.  He strongly opposed any attempt by Hindus to infringe upon their right to slaughter cows and demanded that Hindus die to save cows, without opposing Muslim rights in any way.  At the same time, he bullied Dalits and demanded that they stop eating beef.  He made their participation in the freedom struggle contingent upon their giving up beef.  We examine in detail the position taken by Gandhi and why he took up such a position.
11) In this article, we point out that far from getting us freedom `bina khadak, bina dhaal’, Gandhi never even wanted freedom.   He gave multiple definitions of Swaraj, depending on the day of the week.  Throughout his career, except for a few months in 1942, Gandhi desperately tried to stop freedom, calling off mass movements and seeking only minor concessions for his party.  We examine his definitions of Swaraj and his career of seeking `Swaraj’
12) In two parts, we point out how Gandhi, Nehru and the other honourable Congress leaders used, abused and destroyed a peasant revolt in Awadh and crushed its leader, Baba Ramachandra.  Baba Ramachandra was a progressive leader who led the Awadhi peasants against the zamindars and their British enablers.  Baba Ramachandra linked the Awadhi peasant demands to Swarajya.  However, the emergence of this peasant leader was deeply displeasing to the powers that be and he was quickly destroyed by Nehrus and Gandhi, working in tandem with the Islamist Khilafatists and the British, and the peasants he led were massacred.
In addition to these, there was an introductory article by Saswati which initiated the entire series on Gandhi.
Fundamental Conflicts in Indian Nationhood – Gandhi vs Revolutionaries
The question then that remains to be answered is if the insistence on passive submission to violent intrusion was somehow intrinsic to Indian ethos, or is it that the revolutionaries internalised the essence of Indian nationhood?
A critical examination of the actions of Gandhi & Nehru concerning the revolutionaries.  We also examine the portrayal of their actions by professional historians & record their lapses, omissions & hiding of history.