A fresh look at Gandhi and Jinna

GandhiHere is a different point of view, far removed from what has been drummed into our ears over the whole generation!

  1. Jinna was earlier a proponent of Nationalism. He was a supporter of Lokamanya Tilak and even accepted Namdar Gokhale as his Guru.
  2. Jinna wanted to bring the muslims into the modern mainstream society minus their fundamentalist ideology. For the same he took the lead in Lucknow pact of 1916.
  3. In 1920 Jinna was the only Nationalist Muslim who opposed the Khilafat Movement
  4. Gandhi did not give the leadership of Muslim League to Jinna who was senior to even Gandhi himself; instead he made Mohammed Ali
  5. Jinna who was angered therefore demanded Pakistan in 1940.

I don’t know how much of it is true, but nevertheless it makes an interesting reading.

A detailed essay on this subject and on why Mohandas Gandhi was killed can be found here.

Tagged on: , , , ,

3 thoughts on “A fresh look at Gandhi and Jinna

  1. Zahid

    I agree with you that — British divide and rule policy was one of the key instrument behind the division of subcontinent. This is clear from many things e.g. The founder of Congress was Englishman and later on after the division both the chiefs of the Army in India and Pak were Englishmen. Hence the issue must not be looked devoid of the role of the colonialist i.e. British and their divide and rule policy.

    best wishes from Pakistan

  2. S.K Post author

    Zahid,

    Thanks a zillion!

    I dream of a day when we exist as friendly neighbours and enjoy the best things in both countries. After all, we share the same culture, habits and language.

    Together, we can make giant strides in the field of technical, scientific and economic growth and become a super-power!

    How I wish we, the ordinary people from both countries travel freely and exchange our gifts!

    May my dream come true!

    Regards,

    S.K

  3. Zahid

    Hi again,

    Absolutely – lot of the mantra that goes on now about hindu/muslims division etc is down to colonialist putting one against the other and then use them to strengthen the empire and plunder subcontinent. One do not need to be a historian to find similar trends in other parts of the world they colonized e.g. Tutsis and Tutus in Rwanda genocide. The people in the subcontinent were living largely peacefully and whatever confrontation wars etc they had with others were never systematic they never based on putting on against the other. I am for the unity – but i can also appreciate nationalists on both side do not appreciate this and for this to ever be realized first and foremost both countries need to get out of western intervention in the subcontinent – something which applies to Pakistan more.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.