Ramachandra Guha, historian, author, columnist and member of Ashoka University's Academic Council, discusses the birth of India as a nation and a few remarkable people who shaped the country.
Guha's Lecture is strongly one-sided and verbose. I wish he had also glanced through some Historians of Indian Origin of early Twentieth Century and American Historians.
An EXCELLENT speech - SO VERY WELL ARTICULATED with supporting FACTS & EVIDENCE. I completely agree with Mr. Guha that we Indians have NEVER UNDERSTOOD the PAIN that our Visionary Forefathers suffered, so we enjoy a FREEDOM that we take for GRANTED !!!! I LOVED his reference to C. Rajagoplachari as well - he was UNDOUBTEDLY a TRUE BLUE Indian who translated the Ramayana and Mahabharata into SIMPLE READABLE English and I have copy. IF ONLY we Indians could RALLY together and embrace our DIVERSITY - we could bring back the LOST Glory of a 5000-year-old civilization. Thank you Mr. Guha for your PASSION
A most blatant lie! Gandhi believed in varna. Check Ambedkar statements on Gandhi. Nonsense! Gandhi was more concerned about Muslims than Hindu genocides under Gandhi
Hindusthan was existent as an entity from time immemorial .The difference is that the scattered identity was put under one administrative unit known as India .Let Guha and his ilk try. not to be oversmart
What a great time to be alive and have such thinker as "contemporary". One of the remarkable things about his speeches is, he tries to clear the misunderstandings of people caused by politicisation of history.
Nehru was an Edwardian idiot, who Gandhi was in awe of , because of his brown sahib ways, if Patel was made the PM we would have seen a different confident India, Nehru was this enslaved colonised apologetic ashamed of his identity stupid egoistic man... he is the one reason of all the problems we have.... these sycophants distorians morons like guha claims to be a historian, Nehru was instrumental is creating the echo system here and abroad, his daughter institutionalisation of the suckup's creating this glory story of them with the help of Marxists & evangelist groups, this family has done irreparable damage to this glorious history & civilisation of this country
India did not start in 1947, as Guha and other Gandhians state. India was there, before East India Company came to India. East India Company was named in 1600, before they came to India. All western neighbours call us Hindustan, although we call ourselves Bharat. There was Bharat, since the times of Ramayana and Mahabharata. We start all our prayers with Jambu Dweep and Bharata Khand.
Nehru was a visionary leader..Patel was a great administrator...Ambedkar was a learned and sharp constitutionalist.......and many more.....India was lucky to have them and many more
Nehru was an Edwardian idiot, who Gandhi was in awe of , because of his brown sahib ways, if Patel was made the PM we would have seen a different confident India, Nehru was this enslaved colonised apologetic ashamed of his identity stupid egoistic man... he is the one reason of all the problems we have.... these sycophants distorians morons like guha claims to be a historian, Nehru was instrumental is creating the echo system here and abroad, his daughter institutionalisation of the suckup's creating this glory story of them with the help of Marxists & evangelist groups, this family has done irreparable damage to this glorious history & civilisation of this country
Such moron you are ! I can understand your level of knowledge by your comment. You think Nehru was a visionary leader, I can only say that this is the jock of the decade, the damn truth is Nehru was extremely fool a sex addict he never had the ability to imagine anything good for our nation he was a coward backboneless so called leader. We are ashamed to have him as a PM.
@@rupendra79 Not necessary, after all a name is for identity, the point is that we should not be identified thro the caste name suffixing our names, it would look too digital if we start identifying each other with our Aadhaar numbers
This talk of Prof. Ramachandra Guha is very enlightening and throws a lot of new insights into the lives and work of our great stalwarts of India's freedom struggle. It is to the credit of fearless and passionate leaders of our freedom movement that India was freed from the shackles of colonial rule. It is India's fortune that an erudite scholar, writer and thinker like Nehru ji became the Prime Minister of independent India. His Tryst With Destiny speech made in the wee hours of 15th August 1947 in the Constituent Assembly is a living testimony to the vision of a nascent nation. They were all great men and women, who fought relentlessly for the independence of the country. It was a colossal task to lay down the foundation for a nascent nation. Nehru was a statesman politician and was much respected and admired across the world. His policies have stood the test of times. However, it is painful to see that there is an orchastrared and malicious move in the country now to defame him. Nehruji was a democrat, who showed utmost respect to his political opponents. The present generation has to learn a lot from his life and work. Kind Regards.
Excellent, very clear crystal, impartial analysis without any political inclination. Really a jewel in present india. Pray to God for your mind and health. A macro broaden presentation.
I had seen this book by Dr. Guha in a book shop from which I usually buy books, coincidentally the first of Dr. Guha 's biography on Gandhi. But I am a English literature connoisseur too, & because there were novels of Indians writers in English I chose them.Now hearing Dr. Guha lecturing so eloquently on these makers of Modern India, I feel I have read the bulky book, because he has succinctly gone through the want he has written. This Oratorial power of Dr. Guha is praiseworthy. I am pleased that I saw this video because I hadn't known of Ashoka University for so long until the 2020 controversy.
Lol Guha is a Propagandist for the Gandhi Dynasty. He spreads Delicious Disinformation to gullible audience. He is a Marxist Jihadist Mouthpiece with a pathological hatred for hindus. His Biography should be better called Hagiography of the "Mahatma".
Had heard a lot about Prof. Guha. But watching him and listening to him is altogether a superlative experience……very liberating in many ways!!! 🤩👍🏼👌🏼✅💐👏🏼
Find out the person behind Ashoka Univ and you will get to know their agenda and their mission : fortunately India is in safe hands and future looks bright with current leaders
History is written by winners. In the era of 1910-1920's Britishers captured , sentenced most armed revolutionaries and their supporters . But they were miserably failing in that because lot many started joining armed struggle. That is when Britishers brings a man now known as MK Gandhi from South Africa in 1915 who doesn't approve armed struggle . As soon as he comes to India they provide him curated platform and portrays him as leader of masses allows all his movement public speeches. In just 15 years most revolution is succumbed to this well hatched plan. All the revolutionaries like Bose, Savarakar etc were kept out of history Mr Guha like historians are encouraged to emphasize the history which was written by then winners aka seculars /MK Gandhi/ Britishers
Mr. Guha, when you go back in history,why have you not mentioned Shri Aurobindo who was the biggest threat to the Britishers, also one of the leaders of the Congress. Refer to his works and then talk about,why India survived till today. This is his 150 birth anniversary and his birth date is 15 the August too .
Initially he was active but afterwards he went into the field of spirituality so his contribution to secular foundation of India is not that great that he be mentioned in a lecture like this
He will not mention anyone that cracks his false narrative of history… there are different frauds , Guha is a fraud created by false leftist history’s ..
Ashoka University, congratulations on getting such great panelists and speakers time and again. I have a request - show the audience fewer times during speeches. The perennially disinterested and distracted looks on most faces undermines the speaker and their message. Thanks.
We must at the same time praise Sikhs, who started the custom of Langar, community dining. Where everyone, irrespective of caste, religion, social status, will all sit together and take, same food.
Did you read Chapter 11 of India after Gandhi. He clearly lays down all the facts and then gives his opinion. His opinion may be disputable but not his integrity or intellect.
Because Ambedkar resigned. The Hindu code Bill he designed by him did not pass in the parliament. Because Hindu Brahmins and castists people protested against it. Nehru passed it in pieces.
Alok Biswas , the composite bill in original was not passed by the parliament. Nehru’s opinion was to break it up in 4 parts, to which Babasaheb did not agree, earlier he was frustrated by widespread opposition to his bill by fundamental Hindu organisations, so hr resigned but remained an MP of Rajya Sabha. Then the bill was divided into 4 parts, which was passed by parliament.
Prasanth Valsan 1)India was given freedom as per AGREEMENT ,India Independence Act 1947 settled between Britain and Indian elite class politicians. This act was passed in British Legislation. Funny isn't it. For India's independence Britain passed an act in there own parliament in Britain. What if Britishers repeal this act by passing a legislation in their parliament?? Slaves again?? 2) Why does Article 147 exists till now?? If India independence act 1947 and GOI act 1935 are repealed in article 395, why article 147 is not amended yet? Privy council is abolished but why COUNCIL is mentioned in 147?? intentionally??
Prasanth Valsan 3) Why Nehru agreed for being in COMMONWEALTH NATIONS where Queen Eliza is the supreme? 4) Why Constitution Drafting Committee copied 75% of Indian Constitution from GOI act 1935?? All laws made my Britain like IPC,CRPC,CPC,General clauses act1897 and many more are retained, WHY?
Prasanth Valsan Aim of Independence can't be accomplished on basis on Compromises. It happens with Pride. Obstinate determination for reformation and amendment in constitution is needed.
SIr, I may be late in this post, the Boundaries of the Country Bharat were defined in our culture right from the time when the great epics were written, the Ramayana & the Mahabharata. No one can shake us from the connection that we have to our Mother Land. anyone born and living in Bharat will never give up easily to let our country disintegrate.
@@disliketheclickbaits8858 you are echoing Rahul who said India is not a nation but a union of states Of course it was not India It was Bharat or Hindusthan ,a land mass bounded on the north by the Himalayas ,and Bharat mahasagar (Indian Ocean )to the south ,known since yore by outside world and identified as such by its glorious civilization and an imitable cultural homogeinity
1947 India was decided and Muslims got their demand fulfilled. Many if jot most of the Muslims stated back in India because of practical reasons, not for they believe in secularism or democracy. Now my question is, after getting what hey needed, how come only Muslims had 'wounds of partition' and how come these Makers decide to treat them with kids glove?
I would hope Ashoka University will launch a lecture series on India after and before Gandhi by Dr. Ramachandra Guha. Waiting for its arrival. Really appreciate this work you're doing.
Untouchability as a practice was never sanctioned by the scriptures. The practice became prevalent during the colonization of the true Indian civilisation by both Turkish (who are msitakenly called Mughals) and later the Britishers. The Bharathiya philosophy was never against the acceptance of Muslims, Christains or people belonging to any other religious background. But it is when the come and take over our legitimate system of societal functioning do we see the arisal of problems
Religious texts are NOT literal in meaning. They are allegorical, esoteric, yatharth. They are NOT to be understood by logic and rational thinking or scholarship. They have to be EXPERIENCED, SELF-REALISED. The issue of untouchability has been MISINTERPRETED, totally, by scholars and exploited, totally, by the invaders. It is unfortunate.
Practice of 'untouchability' in Hindu scriptures has been acknowledged by none other than Sri Adi Sankaraacharya, in His commentary of Vrihad-Aranyaka-Upanishad: "tasmanna janamiyannaantyamiyanneptpaapaanam mrityumanvavayaniti (Chapter 1,mBrahmana 3/10)" Sankaraacharya in Mahidhara bhashya writes: tasmat tam antyam janam na gachchet sambhaashana-darshanaadivir na sampeshet. meaning :Therefore the outcaste should not be met or spoke to nor seen or touched" A similar explanation has been given in Mahidhara-bhashya for Yajurveda 1/13.(Reference: Omkarnath Rachanavali, Sitaramdas Omkarnath, Mahamilan Math, Vol.7, page 235-236) Fallen ones are also advised to be avoided in Chandogya-Upanishad(5/10/9) steno hiranyasya suraam pivan cha gurostalpam aabasan brahmahaa/chaite patanti chatvarah panchamasaachan taih meaning one who ssteals gold, drinks wine, enjoys illegal relation with Guru's wife and the one who accompanies them are fallen.(Ibid, page 236). Angira-Smriti says one should not sit beside chandala and other outcastes. if someone eats foods touched by them, they must do santaapana krichchha(austerity).Ibid page 238. Vishnu-Samhita says if someone eats rice given by a chandala, he must hve fasting for three nights and one who eats foods cooked by chandalas should have fasting for twelve days (Ibid page 238).
@@TV-mj5vf in such cases the simplest option is not to judge others intentions but to recognize our own ignorance. Adi Shankaracharya was an exalted sage. He was a GOAT in spirituality. We have to rise to his level in order to "understand " his writings. Because he wrote whatever he EXPERIENCED, SELF-REALISED in a super-conscious state and not normal state. In spirituality a lower caste, a chandala means a person who is convinced that, he is the body. A highest caste is one who has EXPERIENCED, SELF-REALISED that he is not the body, mind or intellect but a soul. Have you read the views of Adi Shankaracharya about the traits of a Brahmin.
@@TV-mj5vf once, Adi Shankaracharya was passing by a village where a holy person had passed away. The villagers asked Shankaracharya whether the body should be cremated or buried ( like a Saint). Shankaracharya asked the villagers to check the belongings of the deceased. It included only a pan and a pail. Shankaracharya asked the villagers to check once more, carefully. This time, the villagers noticed that the deceased man's dhoti was tied in one corner. It contained a little ginger powder, used against asthma. Shankaracharya ordered the deceased to be cremated like an ordinary human. Only one who had EXPERIENCED and lived by the ultimate TRUTH deserved to be buried. Don't confuse the chandala in Shankaracharya writing with the modern meaning.
A deep insight indeed! People of India need to realize that their roots are intricately spread in plurality of caste, gender, language and religion. Fanaticism and nepotism never yield progressive results! Political ideology should be more valid way beyond political personality. The pursuit of equality and equanimity should not be set aside by the feudalistic political parties. Lot of ideological responsibilities lie on the statesmen today! The silly contenders for MLA seats today can not even know what is enormously alerted in this speach. Lot of regards for speaker! Thanks for the upload!
I am yet to lisren to a speech of this kind Very sensitising gripping speech on equality Gender religion and language which not many have realised muchless practised Borne out of years of study let me hug you thru this letter i have heard u in Chennai more than once Greetings for the Year Guhaji
This one hour lecture by Ramchandra Guha, one of the greatest researchers on Gandhi, gives some glimpses of Complex socio- economic situation prevailing (@100years and more) prior to independence and how it progressed few years after independence and developed further thereafter. Those interested in Indian history but blindly follow false claims CREATED by current regime and propagated by paid media should listen to this.
India as startup ! I’m not a scholar like Mr.Guha, but find it difficult to reconcile with with this analogy even for a situation like 1947. A historian wouldn’t do this, I believe !
Prof, Mr. Guha could you just bring some light on the BBC Archive Interview of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar where he has said that he has seen the fangs of the Old man when he gone to meet Gandhi on Gandhi's call from Jail. Further he stated that on one hand Gandhi was discouraging untouchability while simultaneously published article in Gujrati in support of untouchability and classism system of age old Sanatanism Practise.
he noted in a different talk that Ambedkar was very strongly insistent on the dalit cause, which Gandhi originally didn't know equally well, as he was an upper caste hindu himself. but with perpetual communication and disagreements with Ambedkar, who was 20 years his junior, Gandhi came to uphold dalit welfare, even in his own ashram. Ambedkar was an angry young man basically, and guha notes that overall he influenced Gandhi more than Gandhi did him.
Well. British also thought that USA will not survive, and even attacked USA in 1812 to prove it. Great British thinkers are not all that great, and are mostly self congratulatory people.
The cases of United States of America and the independent India was entirely different. By the time us became independent in 1776, they have got single religion and language which partly United the United States. When it comes to India, everything is different including religion language tradition. On top of that, India was never United under any ruler as a single political entity
Mr Guha is author of the most popular history of Contemporary India. That said, I will take some liberty to say: Mr Guha is good when talking about history but confused when talking about current events. RSS and BJP are his blind spots (not covered in this lecture).
He has also gone to great detail on the need and validity of modernising the Hindu Civil law, where I am in full agreement with him and Pt. Nehru. However, the way he glosses over the same thing when talking of Muslim Personal law. If Nehru had kept the same yard-stick for both, many of the issues dividing communities in today's India would never have arisen. There was also no need to term Ramayan and Mahabharata as myths. I am sure C Rajagopalachari did not consider them as such or he would not have bothered to translate them,
Nehru was an Edwardian idiot, who Gandhi was in awe of , because of his brown sahib ways, if Patel was made the PM we would have seen a different confident India, Nehru was this enslaved colonised apologetic ashamed of his identity stupid egoistic man... he is the one reason of all the problems we have.... these sycophants distorians morons like guha claims to be a historian, Nehru was instrumental is creating the echo system here and abroad, his daughter institutionalisation of the suckup's creating this glory story of them with the help of Marxists & evangelist groups, this family has done irreparable damage to this glorious history & civilisation of this country
Yes Gandhiji was the greatest political genius who understood India and its people, a great unifier if not for him India would have been broken to many pieces. Many falsely accuse him for partition it's as good as blaming Krishna for kureshetra war . The only person and the party benefitted from the assassination was nehru and Congress they had free run for many years.
Prof. Guha you missed one important fact that Odisha was formed on linguistic basis well back on 1936, by the visionary leadership of Barrister Madhusudan Das.
And also that, linguistic states were not a vision of Nehru. He and also Patel, in the JVP committee opposed it. It was only after Potti Sriramulu died in the hunger strike that he had to bow down under the pressure and accept the formation of Andhra Pradesh in 1953
Sir, at 19:00 you mentioned Ambedkar was elected 🗳 Minister from being an untouchable. USA 🇺🇸 had African American congressmen and senators long before Obama became the President. India 🇮🇳 still didn’t break that point yet. We have Kovind now but not in the position of Prime Minister.
You cannot compare slavery of blacks to untouchability in India, you have read/watch what the arabs,europeans,americans did with them for over 300+ years and lots of it still remaining in a different very clever way. Don't believe everybody who says he knows everything.
Yes I agree. Law Minister & President are not the same. I'm surprised that learned Guha make such a comparison. It's a grudging comment in my opinion.Would not say it is back-handed.
@@rammohanbabumallavarapu8452: Babu, I’m not comparing Ambedkar with Obama. Ambedkar was one of the founding fathers of India. I am comparing Rammohan Mallavarapu with Obama. When they elected Obama as President, why can’t Indians elect someone from affirmative action as commoner as you are. Hope you got it. Thank you
@@daffodilempire How many governors of state in the US have been Black? Compare that against the rise of people from all different castes to the level of Chief Ministers in India. To become the President of United States, Obama had to rise above a narrow considerations and become a candidate of all people. That's what we need in India too.
@@sairaj8219 Soviet model failed in Soviet itself .copy cat Soviet model in India also failed.Nehru who described himself a Hindu by accident failed to catch the spirit of India
@@sairaj8219 simple , because he had no model of his own which would be cmpatible to our national need and aspirations .Neglect of rural economy with undue stress on industrialisation created massive rural unemployment which various poverty alleviation programmes undertaken by successive later govts could not eliminate .Lack of financial discipline and large scale corruption ,nepotism in core sectors to which Nehru always turned a blind eye , resulted in a drainage of public exchequer .Nehru was a dreamer ,not a pragmatic leader of a newborn state .
you have done great service by uploading this post .. this is the power or service of net neutrality i or many like me have such privledge to listen master piece ..thanks
An unbiased historian of India,who succeeded in putting pre and post independent era in proper perspective and the role played by the great freedom fighters in moulding the modern India.They were a class apart unlike today's self centered politicians!It is unbelievable that India with so much diversity in every sphere is still in one piece as a nation and catching with the rest of the world fast enough!
Ambedkar etc who steered the car in the best direction. My salutes to all of them. Chang Kai Shek, the President of Nationalist China once said, Indian people listen to Nehru, Nehru listens to Gandhi and Gandhi listens to God.
Yet no one listened to Ambedkar ; whole India is being dragged backward because of continuous ill treatment of huge population of India -Dalits As long as long freedom does not come to their doors India shall never be world power Chang Mai shak is no authority on Indian afairs
Dr B R Ambedkar is No 1 scholar in the world , He has and till today is having lot of respect in the World except India.Based on his educational qualification ,Views , concerns , Ideas and experience Constitution is done.If we follow that constitution human rights and law thats more than enough to achieve the growth of the Government .We should all make to sure to follow his principles Even now none of the other ppl dont have best education , Knowledge . It's easy to talk and discuss but hard to achieve " Respect constitution of India " .Always Government should give free education and free hospital service it's their responsibility.But in this government they dont have projections for better Growth.Everything is inter connected it will affect in all the ways .So avoid unwanted things and make Better India
No. Ambedkar was not the No.1 scholor in India. He was proped up by Congress. RCGUHA IS A PSEUDO HISTORISN, PLANTED BY ANTINATIONALS TO SPREAD FALSE HISTORY! HE SPEAKS LIKE A FOREIGN AGENT!
This lecture for understanding our honourable leadership what they have done gooh or bad for whole nation.I appreciate to the professor he explained very nicely thankyou
Biased commentary on india's pre and post independence history. I wish people read other works by American historians, he mixes dr. Ambedkar with Gandhi and Nehru, but forgets to tell people what Gandhi said to Ambedkar during round table conference, please read the book Babasaheb Dr. Babasaheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar by Vasant Moon. another book is "What Congress and Gandhi have done to the untouchables" ISBN 10:8187733993. there is the truth about Gandhi. you can also watch his interviews by BBC (no mediation/moderation/adulteration) of ideas by guys like this. Hear him from him. By the way there was no one better than Ambedkar who had grasp on law and human right, not because Gandhi wanted it , it was not by likeliness but by need. Ambedkar is the real father of nation.
Very true. I would like to go a step further. Who was the most qualified person to lead Indian Government? It is was Ambedkar. He was given a very little task of drafting a constitution from Government of India Act, 1935, enacted by the British Parliament. But, Ambedkar was a Doctorate in Economics and the most educated person of that time and the Gandhi Nehru duo and their Congress chamchas advertised Ambedkar as a Legal person to hide his real qualification to lead this great nation. Had M.K. Gandhi been a bit honest and campaigned for Ambedkar to lead the young nation, our destiny would have been different. The problem with persons like Ramachandra Guha is that they fail to critically analyse our leaders in charge right from 1935, who could have made a difference to our destiny. Rajaji did his best very early, distancing from Congress and started Swatantra Party.
Ramachandran Guha is a very clever person. Nehru would have disliked him if he had praised Patel . If there was one person who is a maker of modern India it is Patel. Guha found a very ingenious idea to exclude Patel from the list of makers of modern India. Patel was a hard worker and concentrated on work alone and he did not find the need for writing articles, books etc on which Nehru spent most of his time. So Guha decided that for inclusion in his book Makers of Modern India the person should have written at least one article. He excluded Patel from his book , an act of intellectual dishonesty.
Perhaps it is because Nehru spent nearly 9 years in prison compared to Patel who spent 9 months in prison.So naturally with nehru's education, and knowledge of the world and India he was able to write book.
First, Guha is making up concocted stories of Gandhi's padayatra. Second, Gandhi using photos of himself, Nehru, Asad, Netaji etc shows how opportunitic he was. Third, Gandhi shifted his focus from freedom of India to harijan upliftment on the orders of the British, as he was a conman of the Britons.
Dr Ambedkar was elected from the undivided Bengal in July1946 as he was opposed by congress to get elected to the cons. assy. Neheru SP Mukherjee Gandhi divides Bengal and gave away Hindu diminated area to Pakistan from where Dr Ambedkar got elected. In fact congress leaders opposed his entry in the beginning but later on realised that without Ambedkar it was not possible for them to give shape to the modern constitution which can be acceptable by all
Undoubtedly nehru and ambethkar were well educated and found a way to work in tandem to create a diverse country like India. Great visionaries, we need to honour and respect.
I have never heard from any quarters that Patel wanted to be the PM however it is known that Congress wanted him to be the PM. There is no evidence to show that Patel would not be accepted by all Indians or that he would not be an all Indian Pm.
Real challenge is our limited identities (of gender, race, religion, nationality, ideology). If we are identified by such limited identities we will exclude others, what we need today is a cosmic identity, in that way we will naturally become inclusive.🙏
Somewhere the very essence of what India was and stood for throughout history - her intrinsic and perennial quest for freedom have been relegated to the bottom of the heap of the modern day discourses. Individuals have been elevated to sometimes unnatural positions of prominence at the cost of her masses and her uniquely emancipating cultural and religious ethos. Entertaining talk but limited in content and context.
Satya Naidu in order to really really appreciate Dr. Guha you must take the time off , have you read his detailed biography on Gandhi? Do. 2 His book 'Patriots & Partisans' is another feather in his cap. To understand all these Makers of Modern India buy the book/ borrow from library & read & you should naturally apprehend India 's intricate intrinsic quality. Since I haven't read that book I listened to him ,I think within the time given, he has covered all aspects, now come your effort to get hold of the book anyway.
@@anuradhainamdar8967 It is fallacious and rather reckless to think that one man, however erudite could encapsulate in his narrative the grandeur of India and her civilization. Each person is offered the opportunity to take from her whatever he or she can and each one will have a different story to tell.
He does the job for money and fame. His comments and thoughts are always to please someone. We should watch the debates of Rajiv Malhotra, a nationalist. These are my views...
It is a great achievement and thanks to providence that you people completely lost your plot. As it stands, India that is Bharat was not founded in 15.08.1947!?
Rahul Shivshankar well notes: Author and historian Ram Guha is foraging for research material in the putrid trough of offensive imperial British generalizations on Indians, in this case, Gujaratis. Guha, no stranger to controversy, tweeted thus: “Gujarat, though economically advanced, is culturally a backward province… Bengal, in contrast, is economically backward but culturally advanced.” These sentiments, he says, were expressed by a Raj-era Briton, Philip Spratt, in a 1939 book he authored, ironically, on one of the greatest Gujaratis, Mahatma Gandhi. Though Ram Guha has failed to elaborate on the motives behind tweeting the quote, it is dismaying that he found it, as he blithely concedes, so utterly ‘’arresting’’. Before we examine the inadequacies of the quote itself, it’s worth a quick reflection on what might have prompted Phillip Spratt to make such a comment. Till the early 1930s, Spratt was an avowed communist. In 1929 he was jailed by the British in the Meerut Conspiracy case for sedition. Being an early founder of the Communist movement in India, Spratt may have been contemptuous of Gujaratis’ adroitness at the capitalist enterprise. The pursuit of lucre for many communist-socialists was an immoral activity, ranking low on the totem pole of civilized conduct and thereby worthy of his contempt. Ironically, Spratt went on to disavow communism entirely during his time in jail. The paradox is compounded when one considers that Spratt described Gujarat as a ‘’culturally backward province’’ even though, as the author of Gandhi’s early life, he would have been well acquainted with the great freedom fighter’s integral humanism and pacifism - attributes that typify a culturally evolved people. Whatever Spratt’s motives, is it possible that Ram Guha has cherry-picked this quote without context to subliminally tie Gujarat’s purported ‘’cultural backwardness’’ to Prime Minister Narendra Modi? Incidentally, ‘‘cultural backwardness’’ was a term used by Soviet ethnographers to describe certain conquered “primitive sub-nationalities” that had to be “re-educated and civilised”. Is Guha then trying to suggest that the Gujarati in Modi places him at odds with “acceptable” modern mores? If so, does Guha think Mr Modi’s alleged cultural primitivism, or to put it bluntly - his supposed lack of sophistication, has a bearing on his decision making or suitability for office? By hiding behind the purported sentiments of Phillip Spratt to condemn all Gujaratis, Guha displays a troubling and deep-seated elitist contempt for a section of his fellow Indians, which chimes with colonialists, like Macaulay, Risely and Churchill. These patricians were given to haughtily drawing lazy and racist caricatures of Indians they were supposedly civilising. Sample this odious comment from Macaulay to justify the enslavement of Bengal. “Whatever the Bengalee does, he does languidly… singularly pernicious in the war of chicane, he seldom… enlists as a soldier. We doubt whether there be a hundred genuine Bengalees in the whole army of the East India Company. There never, perhaps, existed a people so thoroughly fitted by nature and by habit to a foreign yoke.’’ Of course, this observation of Bengalis is just as ridiculous as Spratt’s views on Gujaratis and Churchill’s “coolie” slur on all Indians. At the time Spratt was holding forth on Gujarat it had already been the birthplace of socialist reformer Dayananda Saraswati; Sardar Patel, the architect of a pluralistic India; peace activist Morarji Desai; Homi Jehangir Bhabha, the creator of the renowned cultural hybridity theory; Homi Vyarawalla, the poster girl of female emancipation; and Jhaverchand Meghani, christened “national poet” by the Mahatma himself. There are some who believe that Guha is trying to assail the idea of a united India by picking at some imaginary faultline to pit Bengal against Gujarat. If this is true then Guha would do well to focus on a bit of history that is emblematic of the Bengal-Gujarat connect. Sri Aurobindo, one of India’s greatest philosophers, was from Bengal, but his most famous student KM Munshi was from Gujarat. Sri Aurobindo’s foremost biographer, Ambulai Purani, was also from Gujarat. Chunibhai Patel, the founder of Aurobindo Ashram, was from Anand in Gujarat. And, of course, Sri Aurobindo’s most ardent disciple was the Gujarati poet Sundaram. In the final analysis, even if Guha’s end motive was to mock Modi’s “Gujarati Asmita” card, then the embittered historian has only succeeded in galvanising public opinion in the Prime Minister’s favour. Even his ideological opponent and Gandhi family advisor, Ahmed Patel, has fittingly snubbed Guha with this: “From Kutch to Vapi and from Shyamlaji to Dwarka, Gujarat’s culture is built on striking diversity but united through indomitable entrepreneurial spirit. Every culture has its unique greatness, backwardness is our failure to understand this fact.”
Dr.Guha is not ignorant of women's contribution in India's freedom struggle this is clear from this profiles of Kasturba, Mira Behn, Kamala Nehru,& Sarojini Naidu.
This is Ramchandra Guhas version and you have to be open minded. Patel did not allow his differences to come in open because in his heart he knew for a new born India for its greater good, It was not proper to make the differences come in open. This had was true with many congress leaders who had been dumped to dustbin (Rajendra Parasad, and many others etc).
Rajendra Prasad got a fair share. He was dumped once for being a conservative Hindu with faith in caste system which was contrary to the idea of Nehru and many founding fathers. When Nehru formed a committee to help the musshar community(you can call it the lowest and poorest caste) in Bihar he asked Prasad to be a top member in committee and give directions to uplift the caste. In one of committee lunch meeting Rajendra Prasad asked not to be served rice by the hands of a Yadav, this made many of serious people furious so later Prasad was sidelined.
Absolutely. 👍 Guha owes it to Nehru-Gandhi (fake Gandhi, not mahatma) for all his career. Guha’s grocery supplier also should be indirectly thankful to Nehru family. You won’t be surprised to see Edwina’s photo hidden in the grocer’s attic. These guys are corrupt and perverts totally.
We got a country, that had no education, no finances to administer welfare program,it was the conviction and passion to uplift a nation, which laid the foundation for building India
Ya his constant neglect to Netaji is only reason I have some doubt on him...otherwise he has shown bravery talking against present Congress and Modi govt......though he seems sometime too biased for his Modi virodh....and excessive Gandhi prem....
It was Dr. Ambedkar who gave the rights to women and Dalits through the constitution. Also that if he worked in partnership with Gandhi on Caste matters is something he has never mentioned or I have come across. Both worked on their own.
I request the speaker to set his assumptions upfront. He seems to define India as a group of different political entities those were unified given the difficulty in unifying such disparate groups. If you change this assumption and assume that the nation is unified culturally . Much of what he says does not fit. Also democracy as in a right to choose a ruler does not necessarily give a great ruling system. In fact it may be a good idea to see what are the local democratic system in place through the period.
