01-25-2006, 04:25 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Jan 25 2006, 09:38 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Jan 25 2006, 09:38 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->bose was not a right wing extremist, but a left winger (in this he had nehru for company - both were socialist) who took to extremist/millitary tactics, cos the time was ripe for it and india needed freedom asap.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
it was fashion to be a "socialist" in those days, which was basically same as being for rapid industrialization . any two bit could understand the need for factories, for infrastructure, as against Gandhi's village industry fantasy.. my question is what was bose's understanding of the muslim problem. was he a leftist with regard to the muslim problem. savarkar's militarization was aimed at both muslims and british..
[right][snapback]45530[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yes right. a sort of fashion - all over the world, including amongst labour circles of capitalistic/colonial countries.
and yes... the real reason was the chance of rapid grassroot level-up industrialisation that it afforded. by 1960, ussr had more villaged electrified than usa. socialism is good up to a point, especially when a country is starting from scratch.
you point out correctly about the need for industrialisation. a stand netaji is seldom given credit for - yet only nehru, despite his million short commings was the only other dude who believed in dams and factories.
the other reason why netaji had a soft corner for socialism - was control. he liked the idea of him being in total control of things if only for a little time window.
as for muslims - bose put independence above everything. one of his right hand men was muslim when he went in a jerry submarine to meet the japs. i do not know if he was for or anti muslim, but know for a fact that he had enough charisma to make even the muslims join his azad hind fauz. the numbers prove it.
he wasnt a marxist kind of leftist - ie. muslim genocide of hindus didnt happen - type, if thats what you are asking. but as i said, he was not much into religion like say a vivekananda, not much into socio-religious issues like a sarvarkjar or aurobindo - just had a one point agenda.
as for a question you asked me earlier - what was netaji's relation with sarvarkar.
so far i know they come from different sources - sarvarkar's stand derived from a hindu (both hindu ethnicity and hindu religion) pov and then he started believing in extremism against poms.
netaji's stand was political, first like the rest of inc and then laced with socialistic ideals ands objectives - after which he also like sarvarkar started believing in millitary action against the poms.
different routes, same destination.
it was fashion to be a "socialist" in those days, which was basically same as being for rapid industrialization . any two bit could understand the need for factories, for infrastructure, as against Gandhi's village industry fantasy.. my question is what was bose's understanding of the muslim problem. was he a leftist with regard to the muslim problem. savarkar's militarization was aimed at both muslims and british..
[right][snapback]45530[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yes right. a sort of fashion - all over the world, including amongst labour circles of capitalistic/colonial countries.
and yes... the real reason was the chance of rapid grassroot level-up industrialisation that it afforded. by 1960, ussr had more villaged electrified than usa. socialism is good up to a point, especially when a country is starting from scratch.
you point out correctly about the need for industrialisation. a stand netaji is seldom given credit for - yet only nehru, despite his million short commings was the only other dude who believed in dams and factories.
the other reason why netaji had a soft corner for socialism - was control. he liked the idea of him being in total control of things if only for a little time window.
as for muslims - bose put independence above everything. one of his right hand men was muslim when he went in a jerry submarine to meet the japs. i do not know if he was for or anti muslim, but know for a fact that he had enough charisma to make even the muslims join his azad hind fauz. the numbers prove it.
he wasnt a marxist kind of leftist - ie. muslim genocide of hindus didnt happen - type, if thats what you are asking. but as i said, he was not much into religion like say a vivekananda, not much into socio-religious issues like a sarvarkjar or aurobindo - just had a one point agenda.
as for a question you asked me earlier - what was netaji's relation with sarvarkar.
so far i know they come from different sources - sarvarkar's stand derived from a hindu (both hindu ethnicity and hindu religion) pov and then he started believing in extremism against poms.
netaji's stand was political, first like the rest of inc and then laced with socialistic ideals ands objectives - after which he also like sarvarkar started believing in millitary action against the poms.
different routes, same destination.