Latest Indian politics is divided on hate and trying to temper the history according to their ideology. Social Media witnesses the same heated argument and debate on Veer Savarkar’s 50th Death Anniversary on Sunday.
Nowadays, political parties are hell bent on changing the history, whereas BJP and right wing supporters are blamed for tarnishing the image of Jawaharlal Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi, the pseudo-seculars are maligning the image of Savarkar. Yesterday was Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s golden jubilee death anniversary, i.e. he died on 26 February 1966. He is popularly also known as Swatantra Veer Savarkar and was a freedom fighter. Savarkar was an atheist and a staunch rationalist who disapproved of orthodox Hindu belief, dismissing cow worship as superstitious. On his 50th death anniversary; the social media is divided on calling him a brave leader, while some questioning his contribution to the Independence movement of India.
In a latest speech delivered by Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi, he said to BJP, “Gandhiji is ours and Savarkar yours”. Congress didn’t let Savarkar live in peace even after independence. He was falsely accused of role in Gandhi’s assassination and arrested under preventive detention even when there wasn’t any evidence to even speculate about his role. He was acquitted by the court, as the allegations of his involvement were baseless. Then Nehru government even refused to accept Savarkar as a freedom fighter. After Nehru’s death, it was Lal Bahadur Shastri who started paying him pension, which freedom fighters are supposed to receive.
During UPA reign senior Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar had erased the verses written by Savarkar in his Andaman Cell which is seen as an insult to the Savarkar. Indira Gandhi was a bit fair towards Veer Savarkar, as compared to other Congress leaders. She said “Savarkar’s defiance of the British government has its own place in the freedom struggle.” But today’s leaders and their supporters are very unkind to the history and the contribution that they made in freedom struggle.
We spoke to netizens who are active on social network about Savarkar, Nehru and Gandhiji, and politics behind these names. We received various opinions from netizens and their political parties stand on these personalities.
Husain Abidi a (student) said, “Savarkar not only pleaded for mercy, but went on to add in his petition, ”Moreover, my conversion to the constitutional line would bring back all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide. I am ready to serve the government in any capacity they like, for as my conversion is conscientious so I hope my future conduct would be. By keeping me in jail, nothing can be got in comparison to what would be otherwise. The Mighty alone can afford to be merciful and, therefore, where else can the prodigal son return but to the parental doors of the government.” How come such a timid and slavish mentality person had been/is being considered as a patriot and freedom fighter? Be it Savarkar during British rule or the RSS during emergency why are all Hindutva proponents such cowards?
Abdulla Madumoole wrote from his twitter handle (@AMadumoole): “Savarkar is the “Father of Hatred” – who sowed, cultivated and distributed seeds of hatred freely in India.”
Sandeep Rauzi a facebook user posted, “What is Savarkar’s single contribution in National Movement? Do you know? But nation knows his treason activity well.It is well known fact that Savarkar wrote at least three letters to British India apologizing for his conduct and pledged to not indulge in anti-British movement on any form. It is documented. He was not ‘veer’ but most ‘bhiru’ of his time. Later he joined RSS, who stage managed to kill our beloved leader Mahatma Gandhi. After releasing from jail, what kind of activity he indulged in?”
Vibhuti Bharati said, “Those who hate Savarkar are Congress supporters the most, and because either they haven’t seen cellular jail or blinded by loyalty to Congress as none of the party members have spent even a day there. No wonder…for them life is just too easy and they are no ashamed in abusing the secularism.”
After release from the Andaman, Savarkar was kept under House arrest in Ratnagiri. He was under constant watch of C.I.D. and Police. Whenever any fire broke out anywhere in India, Savarkar’s residence was raided. Could this be the effect of Savarkar’s surrender to British, as is held by the opponents and critics?
In 1934 Savarkar was arrested again in connection with the shots fired at some Military Officer by Shri Wamanrao Chavan. The British Government went on increasing the period of Savarkar’s internment from 1929 to 1937, considering him dangerous to the peace in India. The District Magistrate Mr. D. Simington, when asked by the British Govt. to report whether Savarkar’s restrictions be withdrawn partly or wholly, Simington reported that in the then state of politics Savarkar should not be released. Was this the effect of his apology?
In 1934, Mr. R. M. Maxwell, Secretary to the Govt. of Bombay declined Savarkar’s request to go to Bombay. Whenever he was allowed to go out of Ratnagiri, wires were sent to all police head quarters. Every District Magistrate tried his utmost to avoid Savarkar’s presence in his district by complaining to the Home Department that Savarkar’s presence would tremendously increase the work of police. Do all these facts suggest that Savarkar really wanted to prostrate before the British?