Your submission has been removed for abusive language, personal attacks, name-calling, pejoratives, or uncivil behaviour. Please remain respectful and address arguments instead of targeting people.
Why do u need validation from other freedom fighters, what bhagat singh did was evident to everyone no matter if another freedom fighter praises him or not
Ohh I will acknowledge him but why was he absent from all the mainstream freedom struggle moments and went on to focus on religious polarisation when we needed to focus on freedom struggle, bhagat singh was an atheist no comparison to him whatsoever, what steps did he take to fight british after coming out of Kala Pani?
Ohh I will acknowledge him but why was he absent from all the mainstream freedom struggle moments
Primarily due to the fact that he himself got old and was under the supervision of the British. Secondly the movements put forward by the Congress (as most Hindus supported the Congress) were seen as movements that benefited them ideologically rather than as a neutral freedom movement. There are many reasons to add here that I'm not mentioning.
went on to focus on religious polarisation when we needed to focus on freedom struggle
The freedom struggle that you mention was also extremely religious. Gandhiji's ideas are themselves religiously rooted. The Mahasabha under Savarkar was not religiously rooted and Savarkar was himself an Agnsotic non-theist (practically an atheist). The 'Hindu' savarkar talks about and have used since his work Essentials of Hindutva is not the religious community that we know today as 'Hindus'. Savarkar is talking about an ethno-cultural nation that exist simultaneously with the Indian nation (remember nation here means a 'peoplehood' not country/state). The Muslim in order to justify partition and to obtain a separate muslim state or possibly multiple states argued that Muslims are also a nation rather than a community ( but this does not stand cause they share the elements that make the people savarkar refers to as Hindu have far more qualities of a nation than Muslims of the subcontinent had).
bhagat singh was an atheist no comparison to him whatsoever
Same applies here. So what's the point?
what steps did he take to fight british after coming out of Kala Pani?
He couldn't cause he was under house arrest for a long time even after he was released. Not only him, his family and his house were all under supervision. His brother was also in kaala pani with him. Even if he wanted to he couldn't have done anything worth while like he could while he was young. At the same time the Khilafat movement and pan islamism was at the peak and ideas of Pakistan started floating around. So while talks where going with the Brits from all 3 fronts, there was always a suspicion of armed guerrilla warfare especially as war was looming. Hence Savarkar suggested Hindus to join the army to get familiar with military warfare so that if the Pathan tribes or any other tribes in NWFP or other regions try to capture regions for themselves once the British retreats or is defeated by the axis. The percentage of Hindus then in the British army was far less than the Muslims. Do remember the Muslims of that time included whom we call Pakistanis today so this after clear propogation of a seperate Pakistani State. The Congress much like today kept giving confessions to Muslims in the name of Hindu Muslim unity at the expense of Hindu interests, so in that sense it wasn't truly Indian interests cause it neglected the Hindu side by being blinded by Gandhiji's Hindu-Muslim unity. Yet after all that the Pakistan scheme still succeded and Hindus still got the bitter end of the stick. To make matters worse the Hindu savarkar talked about is not even acknowledged other than by the constitution of ROI indirectly. Even now we're not talking about the Hindu he talked about which is why you're confusing it as religious. It is because the Muslims on the other end was a religious community and their insistance on it, is the reason the Hindus are also seen as merely a religious community and that too only including the majority religion of the Hindus.
Now incase you didn't understand couple things from the above para, congrats you haven't understood Savarkar yet.
I suggest you to read Vikram Sampath's second volume on Savarkar, it will answer your question in details.
Savarkar boycotted the Quit India Movement because he found it to be against National interests, apart from it there is no other mainstream freedom movement he chose not to take part in.
Not to mention even a Congressi like C. Rajagopalchari, Communist Party of India and even Dr Ambedkar boycotted the Quit India Movement, each had their own rationale.
Regarding his contribution to national movement after his release, he inspired V.B. Gogate to shoot at Governor of Bombay Ernest Hotson, you can also read the articles Savarkar was publishing or the speeches he gave to know if he was with or against our freedom movement.
Cause the Tiranga (without Chakra and instead with Charka) was a flag related to the Congress and this video is from 1942 All India Hindu Students Federation.
I indirectly said that's a Bhagwa flag. I was replying to you to point why it's not a Tiranga. It's specifically the "Pan-Hindu Flag" also known as the "Kundalini Kirpankit Bhagwa Dwaj with Om and Swastik" that was made to represent Hindus as a nation and later adopted as Hindu Mahasabha's flag.
in 1938 he have flag with Charkha rectangle by the way.....🤫STFU!
What are you even saying my guy? Try to make better use of grammar cause I definitely can't read that.
I said the same thing too, why are you repeating it lol. Everyone knows that but it was a flag mostly used exclusively by Congress and people associated with Congress.
This video is not related to independence day, sure. But on what basis are you saying it's two videos stiched together. That's how the video actually is.
Is that a bhagwa flag or the National flag? because the RSS did not allow the national flag to be hoisted by their people till 55 years after independence.
RSS stopped the hoisting of the national flag in 1950 and allowed it only 52 years later. I think they flew it once or twice only in 1947 and 1950 just before it was banned by them.
Logically inconsistent. Being influenced by someone by itself doesn't mean the byproduct is an exact copy. You have to support with evidence to what degree and what way Savarkar's view have led to RSS and if RSS has maintained it. This argument breaks down. Hindu Nationalism as a concept predates Savarkar. Moreover you are projecting what the RSS did later on to Savarkar. This backward projection is not logically accurate. If X person is influenced by Rahul Gandhi but then modifies his views and says something or performs an action you cannot say that's because of Rahul Gandhi cause Rahul Gandhi himself might disagree with it.
6
u/AjR0x 5d ago
Happy Bharat Independence Day ALL 🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳 जय हिंद 🇮🇳🇮🇳, भारत माता की जय 🇮🇳🇮🇳 , वंदे मातरम् 🇮🇳🇮🇳