Ramachandra Guha's violent assault on history

Ramachandra Guha sure has a knack for stereotyping. In a recent column, he called Punjabis cheats. Now he claims that "we" have a violent streak (thanks to Sandeep for bringing this to our attention).The question is, who is "us"? The final para of the column offers some clues, it is Hindu men.

So we are violent, claims Guha. Can we have some benchmark here please? Are we more violent than Genghis Khan? How about the Japanese during the height of their imperial triumph? The caliphate? Crusaders? Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao? Vikings? American settlers in the early days? Darfur marauders? Also, will this benchmark be applied in real terms with some statistical backing (say per capita casualties, violations etc.) or will it be administered through mind reading?

Some of our sec-soc friends are actually right. We do need real universities. Since almost every kid is doing computers these days, we are seeing some serious scarcity in the liberal arts arena. People like Guha are jumping in to fill the void.

Guha claims that Subhas Chandra Bose was violent because he gave the following speech:

"Friends! My comrades in the War of Liberation! Today I demand of you one thing, above all. I demand of you blood. It is blood alone that can avenge the blood that the enemy has spilt. It is blood alone that can pay the price of freedom. Give me blood and I promise you freedom." (Burma, 1944, speech as Indian National Army commander)

Blood? Ooooh! So scary! Bring me the smelling salt.

Now let's see here. Here is an example of a typical speech by an army commander when he is about to send his troops in harms way:

"Boys, I want you to piss your pants, throw your rifles and run back to your mommas."
(England, 1944, General Patton)

Just kidding. He said something to the effect that he didn't want those sons of bitches (meaning the troops) to die for their country. He wanted them to make the other sons of bitches (meaning the Germans) to die for their country. (full speech).

Violent? A commander delivering a rallying speech before sending his troops into war. Violent? Huh?

Guha mixes excerpts from the Congress election manifesto, the Guardian newspaper, heresy evidence and his own interpretation of religion and culture to prove that we are - well, violent. Apparently every other historical text is wrong but his. The world war never happened. The Brits left solely because of the steely determination of Gandhi and Nehru. Guha finds roots of Subhas Bose's violence in the cult of Kali. Has he even taken the trouble of researching Subhas Bose? Bose's father had gurus from both Shakto and Vaishnava traditions. Bose was most influenced by Rishi Aurovindo's philosophy. In real life Bose was the most amiable person possible, not the bloodthirsty animal Guha wants to paint him like.

This is seriously funny. Richard Nixon was a Quaker, Jimmy Carter a Southern Baptist. Look what happened! By the way, Guha is a pure Tamil (as far as we know), in case you are wondering.

Most of the article is basically gibberish, bearing no resemblance to actual history and offering no real insight by way of analysis. As usual, he plays the victim:

As it happens, those who lost the political argument continue to have millions of followers and admirers. The chief architect of Indian freedom was Gandhi; the chief architect of Indian democracy, Jawaharlal Nehru. However, were a poll taken among middle-class men, Savarkar, Bhagat Singh and Bose would all garner more votes than Nehru and - in some states and among certain communities and classes - even more votes than Gandhi.

Now you begin to see Guha in true light. If certain communities do not accept his version of history, they are the bad ones. How true is his claim that Savarkar, Bose or Bhagat Singh would garner more votes than Gandhi? Why, then, do we have a party of perpetual Gandhi flashers in power?

Many ordinary Indians also admire him, as witness his presence on posters and calendars in middle-class homes across the land. Bose’s appeal is enhanced by the fact that for the bulk of his career he operated within the mainstream of, indeed at the very top of, the national movement. He was twice elected President of the Indian National Congress. That he then broke away from Gandhi and company and forged an alternative path of his own places him in a different category from Savarkar and Bhagat Singh.

Well, we have Osama's picture in ordinary homes too. Our political leaders name their kids Stalin. Bose broke away from Gandhi? Come on Guha Sahib, you can do better than that. The Gandhi-Bose feud is well documented.

In nothing else have Western writers gone more wrong about Gandhi than in overlooking his insatiable love of power and implacability in its pursuit. In this he was no different than Stalin. Only, he did not have to kill because he could eliminate his opponents equally well by means of his non-violent Vaishnava method. (I need not repeat here that he was a devout Vaishnava.) A well-known Bengali tale illustrates non-violence as practiced by Vaishnavas. One day a renowned Vaishnava, who was passing near some men who were about to kill another man, their enemy, stopped in horror and cried out: 'Hold, hold! Don't kill a creature of of Krishna!. ' ' What then should we do?' asked the men. The Vaishnava replied: 'Tie him up in a sack and throw him into the river.' This according to the Vaishnavas was not killing, but the non-violent way of getting rid of enemies. This was done. In like manner, Gandhi had Bose put into a sack and thrown into a river. Bose succeeded in breaking out of the sack, but his swimming strength was insufficient for him to attain either bank of India's river of politics. He was carried downstream, out to sea, eventually to reach foreign shores - only to die. Trotsy was murdered in Mexico. Bose was killed in an air crash on Formosa. Their modes of death was different, but the end was the same; a necessity in both cases for the man in power. (reproduced from Thy Hand, Great Anarch!, Nirad C. Chaudhuri).

It is quite clear that Guha is trying his very best for a national award. Any more of Nehru and Gandhi invocation (right now he averages about a dozen per passage) and he is a sure bet for next year's Padma Vibhushan. He is also showing signs of desperation. Mid-terms polls may come up. He has just released a book, the timing is just right. God forbid, if a communal party were to come to power next year.....