This is the statement by subramanyaswamy, the janata party president, in his party website about the details of spectrum scandal unleashed by the DMK minister A Raja.

While many often undermine the credibility of swamy’s statement, no one is ready to file defamation case on him in any of the courts in India.  This shows that there is stuff in swamy’s statements, which would win if there is any case in the court.

Incidently, subramanya swamy had filed many cases against sonia gandhi, based on various charges like antique smuggling, her KGB links, and her citizenship status, all of which were admitted by courts and proceeding for decades.  If swamy’s case is NOT worth, the court would have dismissed it long back.

So, for those who ridicule swamy, please dont waste your energy in undermining him in your comments.  Please share any important info you have, either in support or opposing to the swamy’s statements.  Simply making fun of him doesnt make his statement false.

——————————————————————————————–

Press Release: 28 – Oct – 2009

As Union Law minister, H.R. Bhardwaj[responding to an opinion sought by the Telecom Ministry on going ahead with the allocation of 2G spectrum on first-come-first-served basis and on prices fixed in 2001] wrote on file on November 1, 2007 that: “In view of the importance of the case (2G spectrum allocation) and various options indicated in the statement of the case, it is necessary that the whole issue is first considered by an Empowered Group of Ministers and, in that process, the legal opinion of A-G (Attorney General) can be obtained.”

This Law Ministry opinion did not go down well with Raja. On the following day, the morning of November 2, 2007, Raja wrote a D.O. to the Prime Minister and questioned the Law Ministry’s wisdom in asking for setting up an EGoM as follows:  “The Ministry of Law and Justice, instead of examining the legal tenability of these alternative procedures, suggested referring the matter to EGoM. Since the present issues relate to procedures, the suggestion of the Law  Ministry is totally out of context.”

The same afternoon, the Prime Minister wrote back to the Telecom Minister and cautioned him against taking any measures without informing him. In hisreply he wrote:“I would request you to give urgent consideration to the issues being raised with a view to ensuring fairness and transparency and let me know of the position before you take any further action in this regard.”

In the two-page letter, Manmohan Singh also objected to Raja’s proposal to go ahead with the first-come-first-served model and cheap pricing. Singh instructed the Minister to adopt “correct pricing of spectrum and revision of entry fee”. The Prime Minister also asked Raja to clarify on the objections raised by TRAI over the first-come-first-served basis and the 2001 pricing for sale in 2008.

After his silence for the ensuing 50 days, Raja wrote another letter to him on December 26, 2007. Therein, he claimed that he had received consent from the then External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee and the then Solicitor General Goolam Vahanvati to go ahead with the spectrum allocation. He wrote:  “In these circumstances, the discussions with External Affairs Minister and Solicitor General of India have further enlightened me to take a pre- emptive and pro-active decision on these issues as per the guidelines and rules framed thereunder to avoid any further confusion and delay.”

Mukherjee and Vahanvati, if quoted correctly by Raja, have no locus standi to overrule the PM.The Prime Minister merely acknowledged the letter on January 3, 2008, but said nothing more. Between December 26, 2007 and January 5, 2008, Ms. Sonia Gandhi was sent Rs. 10,000 crores in dollars equivalent by Raja’s benefactors into her Cayman Island Bank of America account, which incidentally Rahul Gandhi also operates.

Hence, the PM became silent. I urge the BJP to attack Sonia Gandhi for this deal and not waste time on our puppet PM. She is the Tadaka who has to be countered and not her minions. I also  demand that the PM grant me sanction under the Prevention of Corruption Act or face me in court as a co-conspirator in this deal.

More details about spectrum scandal:

http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2601/stories/20090116260112800.htm

Spectrum Scandal and Telecom Minister’s covert activities

CBI Raid Turns The Heat On DoT

Proving charges tricky in India’s spectrum scandal

The Just concluded elections of the three states, have the already predictable results.  that congress will win in all three states.  In Haryana, it has fallen short of 6 seats.

But these are not the matters.  The more important question that is suppressed under a conspirical silence is the EVM fraud.  There are some moaning voice from some corners like this news.. Electronic Victory Machines ..

One of the important question about the recent election is that why does EC have two weeks of time between election and the counting of votes.  I believe, election date was around Oct 10, and counting was done on Oct22.  Why so much gap? With so much delay, one can tamper even with ballot boxes.  We have to remember, that for the last loksabha election, the counting was done, within two days of completion of the election process.  Why no opposition parties questioned this?  Have they become dumb, or subservient?

Some one took a video on how simple its to fraud the EVM, which happened in arunachal pradesh..  this blogger ZiminZiro has explained in detail about this fraud..

Some more of my thoughts about Wireless Feature in EVMs:

In my previous post, i had written about the possibility of secret wireless feature in EVM chips.  Still i believe its possibility.  We can understand this from the real time examples.

Today, almost all mobiles comes with bluetooth feature.  But, how does a buyer knows, if there is a bluetooth in the mobile?

Either he learns it from manual, or from the mobile menus, where option for activating bluetooth would be available.

But imagine, if there is no mention in the mobile manual, nor there is a menu available for activating bluetooth.  How do we find if the mobile actually contains bluetooth or not?  No possibility, right?

And let us analyse how the bluetooth communication occurs.  When any one connects to our mobile, the mobile will alert us that a particular device is cotacting our set.  But imagine, if there is no alert raised in our mobile (either deliberately or fault in software design)?  The connection will be established in the background without our knowledge, and some person from 10 meters apart will be silently browsing our mobile memory.  We would never know of this, unless there is an alert feature in the mobile.

Now, some electronic experts say, that we can identify the presence of bluetooth, by detecting bluetooth waves when the set is contacted.  This seems to be valid, but we can only identify that only if the set responds for incoming connection requests.

Suppose, the manipulated mobile set is programmed that it will be in silent mode, and should respond only when contacted by a particular device with particular secret code?

Hope, it sounds logical.

Extending the same, the electronic chip of the EVM machine can be programmed like this, such that it can be contacted from the satellite and alter the data.

In the case of ballot papers, once a vote is caste, its difficult to change the markings for each vote.  But in case of EVM, the vote is only virtual.. ie it lies as a number in a electronic memory location.

Every one is aware of the mobile memory card.  We can store files, songs, or the images taken from the mobile in this card.  But also, the same card can be read through an external reader.  Today, most of the laptop comes with a memory card reader inbuilt.

This means, the memory which we are using in our mobile can be read externally too.

Extending the same logic, why cant the memory of the EVM machine be altered by an external reader?  It requires just change in value at a particular memory location, which will alter the entire results.

Adamant Election Commission:

But inspite of all these suspicions, the election commission is adamant in its claim that EVM machines could not be hacked and its fool proof.  More idiotic stand is its claim that no one is able to tamper the EVM or prove that Trojan exists there.  This claim of EC is idiotic for the following reasons.

1. An EVM can be tampered only during manufacturing stage, that too during the manufacturing of the Chip.  Now, why is EC not revealing where the chips are manufactured?  I heard it is manufactured in Japan & US.

2. After tampering the EVM, its difficult to detect it, by third party.  Because, when the tampering happens at the manufacturing stage of chip, even those who are assembling the EVMs will not be aware of that, and cannot detect that. In that case, how can the ordinary citizen identify that?

3. Since the tampered EVMs are dispersed among the normal EVMs, its really rubbish on the part of the EC to give some random EVMs and challenging the opponents to tamper.  In my opinion, this challenge should be rejected in the first place, and its a wrong move on the part of those who oppose EVMs.  We have to identify those booths, where we suspect of tamperings, and then demand EVMs used in those booths for inspection.  (again here we should be careful not to accept any challenge).

The only solution is that in the next elections, when the opposition parties detect of any unnatural behaviour in the EVMs, they should immediately seize the evm and transport it to a secret location.  After that, check both the data so far polled along with the timing recorded in the memory.  Also, try to poll some more votes, and see if they are actually working.

This may require some daring skills on the part of the opposition parties.  But still, we may not be sure, to detect the manipulations.  The opposition parties should invest their energy in learning the inner details of the EVMs.

4. The very conduct of the Election commission is deeply suspicious.  Their stance on this issue is like a big boss.  Its like a thief challenging the people to prove that he had actually done the theft.

The election commission, in principle, should take effort even to clarify the minute doubts on the EVM.  It should have taken initiative to explain to the concerned parties, and clarify their doubts convincingly.

But so far, the EC is blaming the opposition, and repeating its words like a parrot.

5. Finally, every institution is as credible as its leader.  Now, with Naveen Chawla, as its chief, the EC had lost its credibility both in its behaviour and its image.  The 400 page report by previous CEC, gopalaswamy, has been deliberately withheld by the Congress government, which proves, that there is serious allegation on him about his conduct and impartiality.  The opposition should have stalled the entire nation out of this issue, but surprisingly they remained silent on this.

Even now, they can openly declare their lack of trust on Naveen Chawla, and in turn demand the 400 page report to be released.  Its doubt, if the opposition parties can do it.

Future Elections will be a mockery:

I doubt, in future, the elections will be a mockery.  The opposition parties invest so much of money and man power, only to be fooled in the end, through EVm manipulation.

However this time, i doubt the role of opposition itself, based on conduct of certain parties.

In tamilnadu, the ADMK which lost in Chidambaram due to deliberate manipulation, had become silent on this issue.  So as the PMK, the TDP of andhra and other parties.

I suspect, that a considerable amount would have been transferred to these parties, to compensate for their spending on the election, and also to remain silent about the EVM issue.

I even doubt the conduct of the BJP delhi leadership like Advani, arun jaitley etc.  Either they would have been blackmailed and checkmated, or they would have been bribed.

Advani’s conduct (and the dilli-4 of BJP) doesnt corroborate to their earlier image and stature.

Now in future, the ruling party will be going to decide the result through EVM, and the opposition parties, will find it more profitable to lose than winning (by getting double the amount they would be spending on election from the ruling party for ignoring election fraud).

Ultimately the common people who take time and vote for the parties, will the joker of that election drama.

An article by N.S. Rajaram, a famous indian researcher, known for his nativity approach, opposing euro centric view of indian history.  This article istaken from another link..

http://folks.co.in/2009/10/who-brought-freedom-gandhi-or-netaji/

——————————————————————————–

There is a story that the late Mao Zedong, when asked his opinion about Napoleon as a leader replied: “How can I say? He is too recent.”  Napoleon’s career ended in the Battle of Waterloo in 1815 and Mao died only in 1976. So what could Mao have meant when he said that Napoleon was too recent? He meant that a certain amount of time has to pass before we can view historical events and personalities objectively. Our reading of recent events is bound to be colored by our closeness to them. This truth was brought home to me a few years ago when I was visiting Penang in Malaysia as the guest of some veterans of World War II, but first some background.

In India, people are brought up on the story that Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru with others receive grudging notice if at all led a heroic struggle freeing India from the British rule.  Miraculously, the whole thing was accomplished without resort to violence, by the application of a mighty spiritual force called *ahimsa* (non-violence) unleashed by the Mahatma. If true it is a tribute not only to the power of Gandhi’s (and Nehru’s) spiritual vision, but also a lasting tribute to the spiritual sensitivity of the British rulers. Like the tiger in the children’s poem (*govina kathe *in Kannada), which killed itself rather than eat the calf, the British gave up the empire and left.

This received a jolt during a recent trip to Southeast Asia where I had occasion to visit some people who had served with my late father during World War II. Their account of their experience in the period from 1942 to 45 casts serious doubt on this beautiful story. Here we are faced with a dilemma the conflict between what we read in history books and what the people actually saw on the ground. The usual story is that after some initial reverses the British defeated the Japanese. But those who actually served there, now in their late 70s and 80s, remember it quite differently. Uniformly, this is what I heard everywhere and from everyone.

When the Japanese attacked, the British ran away. They were very clever. They had a wonderful life with bungalows and butlers and cooks and all that, but as soon as the Japanese came, they ran away. And once they got back to India, they sent Gurkhas, Sikhs, Marathas and other Indians to fight the Japanese. They knew it was too dangerous for them. That is how we got independence in Malaya. Malaysia was then called Malaya and Singapore was its capital.

Not one of them remembered the British fighting the Japanese only running away. They remember also Indian soldiers coming and fighting; some of them stayed back in countries like Malaya (as it was then called), Singapore and other places. One man, who as a youngster had been my father’s orderly during the War, invited me to his home in Penang for the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Singapore. What he told me took my breath away.

That is why the British left India also. When the war was over, all the Indian soldiers who had defeated the Japanese returned to India, and the British got scared. They didn’t want to fight the Indians who had just fought and defeated the Japanese. So they ran away from India also.   I tried to explain to him that Gandhiji’s nonviolence was the force that convinced the British to leave. But this man, not an intellectual but a battle-hardened soldier with sound commonsense would have none of it.  If it was non-violence, why didn’t they leave earlier? Gandhi and the nonviolence were there before the war also. Did they have to wait for the Japanese to come and teach them non-violence?

One may smile at this simple way of looking at history, but as will be seen later, this revisionist view has good support. The ‘authorized version with Gandhi and Nehru as central figures continues to be taught in India because it benefits those in power. It shows the British also in favorable light as a magnanimous and even spiritual people, which of course they don’t mind. But history shows a different picture.

The year 1942 was momentous. It was the year in which the British Empire suffered a massive defeat at the hands of an Asiatic people (Japanese); it was also the year in which Mahatma Gandhi launched his famous but ill-fated Quit India Movement. Subhas Bose also entered the picture at about that time, first in Germany and later in Southeast Asia. But first it is necessary to get an idea of the momentous impact of the Japanese victory on the psyche of the colonized people as well as on that of the colonizing powers. What triggered it was the Fall of Singapore.

The fall of Singapore in 1942 heralded the end of the British Empire and of European colonialism in general. Indian independence came in 1947, but what really ended the Empire was the fall of Singapore. This has received scant notice by Indian historians who remain trapped in Eurocentric thinking, but there is ample evidence supporting it. Among Indian historians, only R.C. Majumdar has seen its significance: the fall of Singapore broke the spirit of Imperial Britain. As we shall soon see *British historians have themselves admitted it.* Let us look at what really happened to the British in 1942.

When the Japanese attacked Singapore in February 1942, its large and well-equipped British garrison surrendered without a fight. These well-attended pukka sahib used to good living had little stomach for war. For decades, the ruling authorities had avoided facing the truth that they were not a fighting force. They had deluded themselves with resounding slogans calling Singapore the “Bastion of the Empire”,”Impregnable Fortress”, “Gibraltar of the East” and such. None of it helped when Singapore fell to a Japanese army less than a third the size of the defending forces.

Yet, so far removed from reality were Singapore’s British residents, that even on the verge of surrender, a gunnery officer was refused permission to mount guns on the golf links for defending the city. He was told that he needed permission from the golf club committee. And the golf club committee would not be meeting for at least a week, so he better hold off!

In the fall of Singapore, its symbolic significance was infinitely greater than the military defeat. *It destroyed the myth of European superiority over the Asiatics once and for all.* Historian James Leasor wrote in his Singapore, the battle that changed the world:

Dazed by the incredible superiority of the Japanese, the defenders will to win had withered.  The psychological damage was even greater than the military defeat and this had been grotesque enough. Under the lowering Singapore sky lit by the funeral pyres of the British Empire, a door closed on centuries of white supremacy. Actually the Japanese had planned it that way to break the sense of superiority exuded by the Europeans, by the British in particular, in their dealings with the Asiatics. Leasor wrote:

At the start of the campaign, each Japanese soldier had been issued with a pamphlet that set out Japan’s reasons for fighting the British and the Americans. Her [Japan’s] claim was that she would liberate East Asia from white rule and oppression, for since “We Japanese, as an Eastern people, have ourselves for long been classed alongside the Chinese and the Indians as an inferior race, and treated as such, we must at the very least, here in Asia, beat these Westerners to submission, that they may change their arrogant and ill-mannered attitude.

The Japanese attack on Singapore accomplished much more: it ended the British Empire to be followed swiftly by the end of European imperialism itself. To return to the fall of Singapore, as with the fall of Hong Kong a few weeks earlier, the only worthwhile resistance had come from the Indian garrisons the Sikh and the Gurkha regiments. The prestige and the mystique associated with the British Empire were shattered by these ignominious defeats.

And this is how my gracious host in Penang and his friends, men who had seen it at first hand, remember it. As they saw it, the massive defeat destroyed the British morale. It was the specter of the whole nightmare being reenacted in India, with nearly three million Indian soldiers just returned from war, which made the British leave India. They ran away, the old soldier kept telling me repeatedly.

I may point out that this is also the view of many Indians who saw action in the war— both in the Indian Army and those who fought in Subhas Bose’s INA. Indian soldiers saw that their British officers were frightened to death of the Japanese, while they themselves were prepared to fight them.

After the War, the British defeat in Singapore was followed by the French defeat in Dien Bien Phu at the hands of Ho Chi Min’s soldiers in Vietnam. This laid the groundwork for the American defeat in all of Vietnam and their inglorious flight from Saigon. No one today talks about the superiority of the White Race. The first nail in coffin was driven by the Japanese in Malaya in 1942.

It was this changed perception, that the British were just ordinary mortals like the rest that allowed Netaji Subhas Bose to recruit Indians in Southeast Asia into the Indian National Army (Azad Hind Fauz or the INA).  Subhas Bose saw that the Indian armed forces were the prop of the Empire not just in India but everywhere the British went. But Gandhi and Nehru, preoccupied with their utopian dreams of nonviolence failed to realize its significance. When the opportunity arose, Bose seized it to transform the armed forces into a nationalist force, while Gandhi and Nehru started the Quit India Movement which collapsed in a few weeks.

Before we look further, we need to ask: what support do we have for this revisionist view, that Subhas Bose and the INA brought freedom to India? The evidence is ample and impeccable. Several have noted it, but the most distinguished historian to highlight Bose’s contribution was the late R.C. Majumdar, one of modern India’s greatest historians. In his monumental, three-volume *History of the Freedom Movement in India* (Firma KLM, Calcutta) Majumdar provided the following extraordinary evidence:

“It seldom falls to the lot of a historian to have his views, differing radically from those generally accepted without demur, confirmed by such an unimpeachable authority. *As far back as 1948 I wrote in an article that the contribution made by Netaji Subas Chandra Bose towards the achievement of freedom in 1947 was no less, and perhaps, far more important than that of Mahatma Gandhi’s ” The unimpeachable authority” he cited happened to be Clement Attlee, the Prime Minister of Britain at the time of India’s independence. Since this is of fundamental importance, and Majumdar’s conclusion so greatly at variance with the conventional history, it is worth placing it on record (Volume III, pages 609 –10).

When B.P. Chakravarti was acting as Governor of West Bengal, Lord Attlee visited India and stayed as his guest at the Raj Bhavan for three days. Chakravarti asked Attlee about the real grounds for granting independence to India. Specifically, his question was, when the Quit India movement lay in shambles years before 1947, where was the need for the British to leave in such a hurry. Attlee’s response is most illuminating and important for history. Here is Governor Chakrabarti’s account of what Attlee told him:

“In reply Attlee cited several reasons, *the most important were the activities of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose which weakened the very foundation of the attachment of the Indian land and naval forces to the British Government.* Towards the end, I asked Lord Attlee about the extent to which the British decision to quit India was influenced by Gandhi’s activities. On hearing this question Attlee’s lips widened in a smile of disdain and he uttered, slowly, putting emphasis on each single letter “mi-ni-mal”. (Emphasis added.)

Another point worth noting: after the fall of Singapore that ended the British Empire, the most dramatic national event was the INA Trial at the Red Fort not any movement by Gandhi or Nehru. This led to the mutiny of the naval ratings, which, more than anything helped the British make up their minds to leave India in a hurry. They sensed that it was only a matter of time before the mutiny spread to other parts of the armed forces and the Government. None of this would have happened without Subhas Bose and the INA.

The crucial point to note is that thanks to Subhas Bose’s activities, the Indian Armed Forces began to see themselves as defenders of India rather than of the British Empire. This, more than anything else, was what led to India’s freedom. This is also the reason why the British Empire disappeared from the face of the earth within an astonishingly short space of twenty years. Indian soldiers, who were the main prop of the Empire, were no longer willing to fight to hold it together. This is the essence of leadership.

This brings us back to Mao’s half joking reply— that it takes time to get the proper historical perspective. It is now more than sixty years since India became free. We can afford to look back and see the real reasons for British leaving India in a hurry. To sum up, by the end of the War, Gandhi was a spent force, and Subhas Bose was India’s most popular leader.

Now, sixty years and more later it is time to recognize the truth: first, it was the Fall of Singapore in 1942, not the Quit India Movement that was the beginning of the end of the British Empire; and finally, it was Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose more than anyone else who was responsible for India’s freedom in 1947.

Update: I am reproducing quotes from RC Majumdar book, on how Gandhi was NOT responsible for independance.  Please read that at the end of this post.

——————————————————————

The title itself will be surprising to many.  But i had this question for the past few years, when i came to know the real history of india.

The term gandhi jayanthi is a highly misleading term.  because it equates with the term krishna jayanthi, a festival that is celebrated on the birth of God Krishna.  So gandhi is raised to the level of god, well beyond the title Mahatma.

But do gandhi deserve all these?  The real history of india, will answer this.

Did Gandhi fight for independance?

We might be taught like this in our school history book.  But as per records, gandhi never advocated independance till 1939, whereas there are many leaders like balagangadhar tilak who declared swaraj decades before gandhi came on the scene.  Gandhi was so close to britishers than the rest of the indian leaders that he got few provisions in the name of satyagraha, to establish himself as the key representative to negotiate with britishers.

Gandhi’s concept of non-violence is the greatest subversion that any leader could have done to india.  I am not against non-violence, but i am certainly against gandhi’s stupidity of the non-violence he proposed.  He proposed a new term for non-violence, called “satyagraha”. But literal meaning of satya graha, do not have any relevance to non-violence.

satyagraha – satya+ graha = truth + holding firmness

So literally satyagraha, means upholding truth.  There is not even a bit of meaning in the lines of non-violence.  But gandhi chose to use this word in a wrong meaning and in a wrong way, because, indian people uphold the term “Satyam” as a divine one.  Truth is held high in indian society, and this sensitiveness of people, was used by gandhi for his subversive activity.

Did Gandhi won us freedom?

Definitely NOT.  This might again be surprising.  But, if we analyse the events of history, we will understand the true perspective of our freedom struggle.

The popular notion of indian independance history is that gandhi started quit india movement, and finally british conceded to his demands and gave independance.  But if we look at the history, we find that gandhi’s quit india movement, fizzled out by 1942, where gandhi himself recalled the movement.  But britishers gave us freedom only during 1947.  In the years b/w 1942 and 1947, there was no major protest done by gandhi against britishers.  In such case, why should britishers give independance?

How did we get independance?

Everyone know that savarkar was the author of the book, 1857 war of indian independance.  Savarkar is the first person who uncovered the events of 1857 and established that 1857 was not a mere riot, but largely a freedom struggle, where every section of society participated, right from peasants to local rulers, and more importantly by the indian soldiers of the british army.

He found out, that indian army was the foundation of the british hold on india, and thus, he conceived a great strategy to awaken the soldiers within british indian army, so that a rebellion would be created, similar to 1857.  He conveyed his strategy to Nethaji Subhash Chandra bose, and induced him to take over the leadership of Azad Hind Fauj (popularly called as INA), which was already formed by another person called Mohan Singh, an indian officer, captured by Japan.  There were around 40,000 indian PoWs, joining the newly formed INA.

Nethaji took over the leadership of INA and marched towards india, but due to surrender of japan, INA failed and most of the INA soldiers were captured as prisoners.   The brutal tortue of the INA prisoners had caused dissention in Indian army, and after WW-II ended, there was a naval mutiny, popularly called as Bombay Mutiny.

Adding to it, there were many cases where indian officers did not obey the commands of their british superiors.  All these, gave a clear indication to britain, that the trust quotient of indian army is at the very low, and that there may be another mutiny or rebellion waiting to happen at any time in the indian army.  Also, the fact that WW-II had exhausted the economy of much of europe, and the wealth of india had already been sucked out with no more to extract, the britishers found that disbanding the indian army and creating a new one, would be a costly thing, and would become a liability on their part, as there is no means to tax much in india, to finance such a new army.

Hence, the britain decided to leave india, rather than to keep it under britain which would incur loss.  So, they gave away the power to their trustable friends in india, rather than those who actually fought for freedom like INA or other smaller organisations.

In all these circumstances, the contribution of gandhi to indian freedom has been much less, and infact, it was negative.  Gandhi worked against nethaji, and also called off Quit India Movement, when it actually started to take off. And after the failure of his quit india movement, he did not have much influence, except for helping britain in their war efforts.

Is Gandhi a Mahatma?

He may be mahatma by title, but those who know gandhi much will never accept this title.  Gandhi did not deserve this title of Mahatma, because there was nothing that could qualify him to be mahatma.  Because, much of what he said as his values are farce which he himself did not practiced what he preached.

His non-violence being a laughing stock, his high handedness in everything, his secret pact with britishers to betray Nethaji Subash chandra bose, and his overt obsession with Sex, where he tested his sexual control, by sleeping with naken women the whole night, and many other things in life, did not conform to his mahatma title.

Actually, this title was given by tagor to gandhi, which later much of congress persons adopted.

Is Gandhi a Fascist?

Yes.  Because, in much of his history, we find him, imposing his decision on others, even if majority of the people did not agree to his views.  Much of the Indian National Congress, was controlled by him as an autocrat, and important decisions taken by him.  He created an atmoshpere, where other leaders could not take decisions independantly without getting his nod.

Thus, when the whole congress commitee chose sardar patel as PM, gandhi overruled them and instead appointed Nehru, for a foolish reason.

Thus gandhi was a fascist, who did not heed to any other’s advice or consulted with others in decison making.  He often used fasting as blackmail tactics, to force leaders emotionally.

——————————————————————————————————-

Thus in my understanding of the history, i could never call gandhi as father of this nation.  Gandhi may be father of the Indian Congress, but for the nation, he is to be remembered as a leader, promoted by britishers for their convenience, and as a leader who mis-leaded the people, and as a leader who failed to take pragmatic decisions which caused so much of destruction and losses to lives of millions of people.

I question the very rationale of celebrating only gandhi’s birthday, while there were so many freedom fighters, suffering in the prisons of andamans, and so many freedom fighters like aurobindo who full-fledgedly opposed britishers, and thus got exterminated by them.

We need to remember that the britishers who could eliminate fierce leaders like tilak, aurobindo, savarkar, could have easily displaced gandhi too.  But they found gandhi’s ideal as a complementary factor to their hold on india, because, gandhi advocated non-violence, which is what britishers wanted.  Thus, gandhi was a person, used by britishers to prevent people falling to the side of revolutionaries, and thus preventing a major challenge to british army.

Let Truth be told as it is, even if it hurts.

—————————–

Quote From RC Majumdar Book:

We are now in a position to assert with confidence that the formation of the INA was one of the major grounds for the decision of the British Government to quit India. This was admitted by no less a person than Clement Attlee, the head of the British Government which conceived the idea of granting freedom to India and carried out the decision in spite of opposition of die-hard Conservatives like Churchill. This is proved by the (English translation of the) following extract of a letter written in Bengali by Shri P.B. Chakravarti, ex-Chief Justice of the High Court, Calcutta, on 30 – 3 – ‘76.

” While I was acting as the Governor of West Bengal (in 1956) Lord Attlee, who gave India Freedom by putting an end to British rule, visited India and stayed in Raj Bhavan, Calcutta for two days. I had then a long talk with him about the REAL GROUNDS for the voluntary withdrawal of the British from India. I put it straight to him like this:
” The Quit India Movement of Gandhi practically died out long before 1947 and there was nothing in the Indian situation at that time which made it necessary for the British to leave India in a hurry. Why then did they do so?”

In reply, Attlee cited several reasons, THE MOST IMPORTANT OF WHICH WERE THE ACTIVITIES OF NETAJI SUBHAS CHANDRA BOSE WHICH WEAKENED THE VERY FOUNDATION OF THE ATTACHMENT OF THE INDIAN LAND AND NAVAL FORCES TO THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT.

Towards the end I asked Lord Attlee about the extent to which the British decision to quit India was influenced by Gandhi’s activities. On hearing this question Attlee’s lips widened in a smile of disdain and he uttered, slowly, putting emphasis on each single letter – ‘ MI-NI-MAL’.

When debating on any dalit issues, a particular argument is blindly placed often.  That, the caste system had forced the dalits to do menial jobs for generations.  Among the menial jobs, two cases are often cited.

1. Night Soil Cleaning

2. Sewage cleaning

But on detailed analysis of this accusation, i found that it is baseless and untrue.

Let me explain my findings.

Night Soil Cleaning:

This means, cleaning of the human waste.  I will take the example of “Septic Tank” cleaning, that is done today by a section of people in cities and towns.  The elite indians and the secularists often blame caste system for the pathetic state of those people who do this work of septic tank cleaning.  But there are many contradictions in this blame.

Let us consider the situation 20 years before.  ie, around 1990s, when india was NOT yet liberalised and globalised.

During 1980s and 1990’s, 99% of the rural villages do not have the system of toilet.  All the village people defecate either in open fields in the outskirts, or in the nearby bushes.  Since, a typical village is made up of around 1000 to 2000 people, and usually surrounded by forests or fields, the people did not have the necessity to have toilet facilities.

Now, if there is no toilet in villages even at 1980s, we can very well assume that the same was the case during 1900’s, 1800’s  and in the entire past of hindu india.  I am specifically mentioning hindu india, for a reason which we discuss later on.

If village system do not have toilets, how can the caste system force the dalits to clean night soil?

The propoganda of the secularists is outrightly false in this case, as night soil cleaning is never part of the caste profession.

Who forced dalits to be septic cleaners?

Now lets analyse how come the dalits happened to be septic tank cleaners.

We need to understand that NOT all dalits do this menial job.  Only specific community, who happened to be extremely poor, are doing this now.  But how they came in to this job?

The toilet system is the most necessary, only in Urban system.  Wherever a town or city is created, every house has to have a toilet, as there is no open space for defecation.  So, when there is a toilet system, there is a septic tank.

When the whole town is using toilets, then there arises a need to clean the septic tanks once its filled.  Thus, the urban people was in need of some one to clean their septic tanks.  Unfourtunately, the dalits who had a means of living in rural villages, were left as an orphans as their village became towns.  They have to earn for basic living, and for earning, they have to do some jobs.  With limited opportunities, and unable to accustom to sudden environmental changes of their area from village to town, some people, had to compromise in doing this menial job of septic tank cleaning.

Its natural, that for any job where man power is less, there is a demand, the demand for septic tank cleaners increased, and gradually, the entire community started doing this job for survival.

Now, let me ask this question.

Who is responsible for dalits cleaning night soil?  Is it caste sytem or Urban system?

Why is caste system accused for this, while the actual perpetrator is the urban people?

Now, coming to the point of night soil cleaning, this system was actually first brought to india by the invading muslim rulers.  The life style of the muslim invaders were predominantly urban oriented, and hence they had already employed slaves for night soil cleaning in their original homeland.  Later, when they invaded india, they forced the defeated army to do that job.  Since for the next thousand years, it was the muslim rule, and muslim rulers happened to rule many parts of india, the night soil cleaning was often forced upon defeated or captured forces, who later became a community in itself.

When britishers came, they expanded the urban system as a government policy itself, which further increased the demand for night soil cleaners.

Sewage Cleaners:

Like toilet system, sewage system are present only in towns and cities.  Have we ever seen any sewage in villages?

In villages, due to low density of population, there was no necessity for separate sewages.  The waste water decomposes naturally in open spaces.

So, who is responsible for forcing dalit people to clean sewages.  The same urban system.

How come caste system be responsible for that?

Today, we find that the demand for sewage cleaning is directly proportional to the expansion of the cities.  The more the city expands, the more the need for sewages.

More worse is the underground sewages constructed in big cities.  Atleast in open sewages, its relatively easy to clean it.  But in the case of underground, it requires the employees to clean it by entering in to the tunnel.

This kind of urban development is very artificial, and it is such system, which creates a necessity for the people to do such menial jobs.

And normally, when cities expand in to nearby areas, the forward communities, who mostly posses lands sell it and comfortably settle in the expanding city.  But the dalits people and other poor communities, who once depended on the agricultural lands, now become landless and also pennyless.  Everyone knows, that everything is commodotised in india, right from food to education to hospitals.

In a typical city, no one can live without money.  what will the dalits do?  The public lands around them are encroached or converted in to plots.  So these dalit people become slum dwellers around a concrete houses.  It is the same people, who later become a servant to these new middle class colonies.

In villages, the dalits had decent agriculture job.  But in urban colonies what kind of job they have? without education, they can offer only physical labour.  And in urban cities, physical labour is needed mostly for disposing wastes, cleaning sewages and toilets, and cleaning septic tanks.   And such physical labour is commodotised under the guise of “Cheap Labour”, to be exploited by the urbanites.  Contrary to this, in villages, the dalits often received their wages as a share of the agricultural produce.  So, their labour is treated in participatory mode, and NOT cheaply commodotised.

The later day clashes b/w dalits and land owners arose due to monetisation of agriculture, and hence when wages were started to be paid in cash, it became unaffordable both for farmers and the labourers.  As usual, the communist vultures treated this as opportune moment and played their havoc.

90% of india was Rural:

We all know that during independance, 90% of india was rural.  I think, the same situation continued as late as 1980s’, where atleast 85% should have been rural.  Which means, 85% of india did not know what is meant by toilet.  So, it is that 15% who had exploited the dalits, but to cover up, started accusing the rural caste system.  The rural villagers so far was NOT used to such kind of intellectual terrorism and hence silently suffered from this kind of ostracisation.  Today, with more people educated from rural areas, it is their duty to dispel such kinds of myths, and bring those urban intellectuals in to trial.

As an additional note, i would like to inform that the brahmins of rural india, too did not have any toilets and I hope they too defecated in open grounds.  If any of the brahmins are from rural side or have living memory of rural life, please enlighten me.

I will end with the following questions.

1. Is the urban elites trying to conceal their sins, by shifting the blame on caste system?

2. The so called secular writers, human right activists (read communists),  and other torch bearers of social justice, live in urban centers, probably in posh bungalows, utilise the very same dalit people for cleaning their toilets, and septic tanks, and also pay a tax to the municipality who further employs dalits to clean the sewages.  Are these writers not part of a system that forces dalits to do menial jobs?

3. So far, caste system is heavily blamed and tarnished for making dalits to do menial jobs.  Now since its proved that it is the urban system which is the culprit, will those elites, and torch bearers, accuse and blame the urban system as evil?  Ofcourse, in my view it is the most evil.

The title of this post would be quite a strange question to many.

Almost all the educated indians, would be instantly saying “Untouchability is evil”.  Because, it how they are being taught in indian schools.  Even i was taught like that.  The very first page of my tamil book will contain these statements in all the classes.

But, how many of us, had actually thought, why untouchability is evil?  Ofcourse, our schools, never teach us how to think.  But, its human nature to inquire each and every thing, and reason out. What is the reason to classify untouchability as evil?

I believe, most of us will not be able to reason out.  All they can do is to again repeat the statements like “Untouchability is inhuman, and discriminates people” etc.  But how many of us actually understand this problem of untouchability?  How many of us, has ever experienced untouchability first hand?  The actual supposed victims of untouchability, namely the dalits never had a voice to express.

I could remember the history of ambedkar, and he being an icon of dalit community.   I have not read his writings.  But, i accept, that his writings were from direct experience of his as a victim.  However, we have to remember, that he has been largely under the influence of the british propoganda.  I would not call his opinions as wrong.  But, i do have a different angle of seeing untouchability.

All that we hear about untouchability is just academic propoganda, who write those in AC rooms, without ever having an iota of understanding about the subject.  Even most of those supposedly dalit writers, are victims of such propoganda, and most probably the christians, who write based on specific agenda.

So, what exactly is untouchability as practiced in india?  Is it really EVIL?  Let us discuss here.

What is Untouchability?

Untouchability in india, is a practice where a particular community considers even touching another community person as polluting one.  A person who touches the untouchables are usually made to undergo cleansing process, like bathing, or spraying of water, depending on the regional practice.

Who practices untouchability?

There is a intense propoganda that untouchability is practiced by higher caste people over lower caste people.  But that is NOT right.  Untouchability is practiced by almost all castes, right from brahmin caste to the dalit caste.

Dalit caste?  Dont be surprised.  Even the dalit castes practice untouchability over others.  One dalit caste will not even drink water from another dalit caste.

Does Untouchability means segregation?

Segregation in western sense, means, classification and isolating a certain groups of people, for varied reasons.  Segregation is mostly associated with authority based society like the western one.  Normally, the criminals, rebels, and other anti-social elements only are segregated from the mainstream society, and deported to far off lands or put in jail.  This is what happened in the western societies.

As per the History, australia was originally used by britishers for deporting such segregated people.

In general, segregation  means, separation of different groups of people from one another, and no relationship exists among these groups.  For example, in Europe, the protestants and the catholics are segregated, and there is no healthy relationship b/w them, except for that both worship jesus.  Similarly, shias and sunnis are segregated people, without any interdependance.

But, untouchability does NOT mean segregating.  Because, untouchability was mutually practiced by all groups.   In caste system, eventhough people practiced untouchability, the different castes are interdependant on one antoher, thus always having some kind of interaction and relationship.

Does Untouchability means isolation?

Definitely NOT.  There may be segregation of houses of castes in some villages.  But there is never isolation in any villages.  Almost all castes interact with each other, because, all castes depend on one another for some needs.

The level of interaction differs from caste to caste.  For example, the dalits will strictly not mingle with other dalit caste.  Eg. Sakkiliars will never drink water from parayars.  But, they will get food and water from the dominant caste of that region.  Similarly, the dominant castes like chettiyars, devars, nayakkars, etc may have interactions on equal footing.  But still, they do not mingle with one another.

There are few communities, who have to closely interact with one another.  Particularly in kongu region, the naavithars, vannan community, kosavar community, etc have close interaction with the dominant gounder community.  The naavithars (barbers) usually conduct most of the rituals, right from birth to death in the gounder’s family.  It is they who used to sing mangazha vaazhthu during gounder’s marriage.

Does Untouchability means persecution?

Many often imagines untouchability to persecution.  Untouchability may have lead to some clashes in villages.  But its never a tool for persecution.  We have to remember, castes eventhough followed untouchability, had interaction with one another.

Why does castes practice untouchability?

There is no definite answer to this, as the reason may vary from place to place.  But based on my understanding, untouchability is practices because of extreme cultural contradictions.  Let me list out the possible reasons for untouchability, as i perceive.

• Life style:We all know india is a land of cultural diversity, and that the life style of one community largely differs from others.  For eg, a brahmin community follows strict hygiene, and are strict vegetarians.  On the other hand, the farmers and farm labourer castes usually work in fields, do not have hygienic life practices.  The dalit community works on cowskins, which is a sin to brahmin community.So its natural that the brahmins could not mingle with other castes.
• Commune Living: Most of the castes live a strong commune life, with a common profession.  So, the life style of all the community members are aligned towards that lifestyle.  And there are strong inter dependencies among the community member.  In such commune living, people used to live as large families, with common interest.  In such cases, when a member of the family or community, elopes with the other community girl or boy, it creates a confusion in the large family.  The incoming girl/boy may not adapt to the family life style, and may not adapt to the community profession.  For example, a brahmin girl will not be able to work in fields if she marries a farmer.  Or a farming girl may not be able to work in leather products if she marries a dalit.  So, the society has evolved itself to an inbuilt arrangement, not to mingle with each other.
• Prisoners of war: On those days (before muslim invasion), when a king was defeated in a war, he captures the prisoners of war, and deports to his kingdom to work as labourers.  Or current empire may be ruled by the enemy for few years, and recaptured by the original king. In such case, the people settled there by the former temporary ruler, may lose their status, and become laborers.  In such cases, the victorious king may take steps to suppress the settled external people, so that they dont again attempt to overthrow him.  Let me cite few examples.
  • In my opinion, the devars are the historic rulers of south tamilnadu, and the pallars may be invading armies, who might have ruled wide areas for some time.  They probably may be the pallava people.
  • The vanniars and parayars may have a similar history.
  • And the most famous examples are the Rajputs invaded by muslim rulers, who were made to work as night soil cleaners for the muslim kings.
  • There are many cases, where the defeated army might have moved away to far way regions, and settled there.  In such case, the native rulers may chose to keep the settled people in check.
• Religious Differences: I need not mention about hindu muslim differences.  That is entirely a different subject.  However, there are many subsects within hinduism, which had opposed each other.  Particuarly the influence of budhism had profound impact on suppressing those people who work on leather products, as budhist believed in ahimsa.  The vegetarian character of india is believed to have acquired during budhist rule.   Also, since any one who left the caste is usually abandoned by the community, those who had converted to buddhism might have been left out after budhism waned way.
  • Today, for many of the dalit people, their kula deivam is Vishnu.
• Cultural Differences: Apart from life style, the cultural values of the castes also an important reason for untouchability.  For example, the ruling castes had stricter cultural values, which they have followed for generations.  For example, widow remarriage is NOT allowed in dominant castes.  But its normal in dalit castes.  The widow in dominant caste often follow sati, whereas it is not required in the dalit castes.
• Lineages: The common culture and profession resulted in a common lineage over centuries, which evolved the respective castes in to a distinctive identities, which had made them not to mingle with others.

Excemptions from Untouchability:

• The saints and rishis are mostly exempted from untouchability.  It means, almost all communities welcomed rishis and saints, and the saints also embraced all communities.

• Also, the saints are placed outside the caste system, as they have raised one level above in their life, towards the god.

• Most of the kings never practiced untouchability, and they were mostly secular.  More over, they did not have the situation or the time to do that.

————————–

Having detailed all the above information on untouchability, i will finally come to that most important question.

Is untouchability EVIL?

Before going in to this discussion, lets first understand what is meant by EVIL.  Evil is a word used mostly by christian missionaries, to denote the element that opposes christian GOD.  Normally satan is depicted as evil.  We can understand the context of evil, from the words good and bad.  Good and bad are words to describe characters of a man or an object.  They are highly dynamic, in the sense, that a thing good for one person can be bad for other. Also, a bad person can become good at some point of time, through transformation. But when we term anything as evil, all types of reasoning is closed.  We cannot explain why it is evil.  It simply means, the person or the entity is for ever bad, and it has to be destroyed.

Good and Bad in this world are highly relative term rather than a universally defined one.  In the society of barbarians, murderers and rapists, a thief could be the most good person among others.

However, in a society of saints and nobles, the same thief would be the most bad person.  Thus when we are judging anything as good/bad, we need to consider the environment and prevailing situation.

With the above understanding of the word evil, let’s approach the problem of untouchability.

As we have detailed earlier in this post, untouchability is a social problem that arised out of some basic necessity.  Untouchability has largely been mutually practiced, so that each caste can live their own way of life.  In that case, how come untouchability become evil?

As i said earlier, untouchability is bad in terms of humaneness.

But in practical terms, untouchability has been one of the good things that hinduism had.

Surprised?….  Please read on.

We have understand why untouchability is a good thing from the world history of events.  Let me list out some of the terrible phases of history.

Goa Inquisition:

The Goa inquision took place for about 3 centuries from 15th century to end of 18th century.  The inquisition was done on behalf of catholic church, by the portugese kings, to establish the rule of christ over the Portugese empire.  When the portugese captured goa, they came to rule a predominantly Hindu people, who could not be converted.  The portugese being a catholic nation at that time, could not tolerate the presence of Hindu culture, and hence ordered inquisition, which banned all types of hindu worships, destruction of hindu temples, and persecution of those who fail to convert.  The husband was killed brutally in front of wives, and the women raped in front of the husbands.  And more horrors of the inquisition was the brutal extended torture given to those who suspected of apostacy.

I dont want to go in to those brutalities.  But if we analyse why Goa Inquisition happened, we find that the main reason for this persecution is the intolerance of the catholic church in accepting the hindu culture.  Because, in bible, it is mentioned that Jesus is the true god, and all others are false.  The christian theology divides the whole world in to two – believers and non-believers.  So the non-believers has to be either converted or destroyed, because, in christian belief, only when the last man in this world is converted, jesus will resurrect in this land and give judgement to all people so far lived in this planet.  Normally the christains used to refer that as Judgement day.

So we largely find an inherent  inability of the catholic christain invaders to live peacefully among a culturally diverse hindu people.

Now consider how hindus dealt in such cases of cultural contradictions.  The different castes chose to keep away from each other, rather than persecuting the other.  Thus, the very concept of untouchability, has given an option for the people to live peacefully with each other.  Only because untouchability was followed by all castes in hindu society, any new set of people, who came to india were tolerated and allowed to live separately.  And that is the reason, why the persecuted syrian christians, the jews, the parsees, and the many other refugee communities were able to thrive in india, because of already existing untouchability.  When hindus find the culture of those refugees contradictory, they kept away from them.

Witch Hunt:

The witch hunt is the persecution of european people following traditional cultures, by the catholic church.  Normally, the mid wives who are believed to apply magic when attending child birth, is considered a practice against christianity by the catholic church.  Hence, first they were ordered not to apply magic.  But later on, they were ruthlessly persecuted on the orders of the POPE, as they are the only sources of paganism remaining after converting much of the european people.

It has to be noted, that witch hunt was continuing as late as 19th century, as a legalised one.

The indian society too had the people performing black magic.  But, they were not persecuted, as people chose to keep from them.  Untouchability is the key to that tolerance.

Sexual Abuse of American Slaves:

The american slave system, which was thriving during 18th century was filled with horror stories of numerous african slaves.  Since the slaves were owned by white people, they were treated as per the masters wish.  Many of the slave women were sexually exploited for around one century.  The children born out of that rape was sold as slave to another master.  Some white people even justified this as a means to produce more slaves.  The african slaves lived a commune life in their homeland, and they tried to live the same as slaves in america.  But the mastes separated members of the community and sold it other masters.  Once sold, they dont have the opportunity to meet their old commune members.  Also, the slaves were over worked, beated mercilessly, and almost treated like animals.

Now lets take the case of indian caste system.  There was heavy propoganda of dalit oppression and suppression by the marxists, for around a century here.  But even assuming their propoganda to be true, lets see how the dalit people were treated here.

• The dalits lived in a separate colony in the same village.
• The dalits are NOT slaves.  They were mere labourers to the land owners.  They have the right to move to other village, if they feel, the current village is discriminatory or NOT able to live in.
• A typical dalit community is allowed to have their own commune life, simply because, untouchability prevented the dominant caste from abusing or exploiting them.
  
• The dalits had their own temple, their own festivals.
• The dalits had similar type of caste structure, with gothrams and kula deivams.  A dalit married from a different gothram of his caste from another village.  This ensured that the dalit people also had relations among multiple villages and have their own social structure to follow with.
• Since the dalit people were allowed to live as a community, their women had the inherent protection from exploitation.  In the case of american slave system each african women is an individual slave, which the owner can do what ever he want.  Other slaves cannot come to rescue if the owner rapes the slave women.  However, in our caste system, the women were part of the dalit community, and they could not be exploited.  Also, since the dominant caste practiced untouchability over the dalits, their youths refrained from mingling with dalit girls, as such an act would excommunication from his caste.  It is same for the dalit people too.
• The dalit people had their own panchayat for issue resolution.  This is the highest point of freedom that any community might have.   The elders in the dalit caste usually tries to solve the problem.  If that fails, they take the case to the village panchayat head.

There are many other things to be mentioned.  But the main point is the social security accorded by the mutual practice of untouchability.  In the history, we have always seen, that the dominant and ruling caste has the absolute power, and hence exploited the powerless caste.  But in indian caste system, untouchability remained as a barrier and protection from such persecution from ruling caste.

Imagine, if the american white people practiced untouchability, the sufferings and torture of numerous african slaves could have been avoided.

Jewish Holocaust:

I need not elobarate about this.  But i would drive the point that if hitler and Nazis would had practiced untouchability over jews, the 6 lakh jews would not have been persecuted.

Kashmir Hindu Cleansing:

To quote a recent history of india, the entire kashmir valley had been ethnically cleansed of hindus, just because the muslims could not tolerate the presence of hindus.  So when they became majority they persecuted the hindus.  Lack of tolerance.  However, it has to be noted that the hindus, even though invaded by muslims were able to tolerate them for thousands of years, by simply practicing untouchability.

There are many other instances in the history where i find that untouchability would have prevented genocides, persecution and other horrors of the history. Comparing those incidents with our caste system, we find that untouchability is a practical system evolved as a solution to peaceful existence of conflicting communities.

Summary of Positive Aspects of Untouchability:

There are many positive aspects of Mutual Untouchability as practiced in India.

• It gauranteed a private living space for each and every community.  For people in every community, the real happiness lies in the freedom to have a family and children, to have relatives, to have a temple to worship, to have the freedom to conduct festivals.  If we look at the typical caste system in india, every caste had their own kula temples, their own commune setup, and have their own festivals.  Such freedom is possible, only if one community keeps away from others.
  

• Untouchability has ensured that the dominant ruling caste had always stayed away from the weaker castes, and because of this, abusing of the weaker caste, like that of the american slaves, did NOT happen in india.  Since even touching the other caste is prohibited, the physical abuse of the weaker caste did not happen.

• Women in the weaker caste had a means of protection from sexual abuse.  Again, we can understand from the history of american slaves, where the slave women were sexually exploited.  In India, untouchability served as a barrier and a protection against sexual abuse of the women in weaker castes.  Since people from dominant caste were excommunicated, if they happen to mingle with other castes, the barrier is equally applicable for the dominant caste too.  I feel, this is one of the important aspect, which we need to consider, while judging untouchability.

• Untouchability enabled creation of new castes.  When a group of people do not agree with the certain caste rituals, they can move away from and form their own caste.  In such case, the other caste members, simply keep them away, instead of persecuting them.

Untouchability as practiced by the urbanites.

Very often, the so called intellectuals of marxist variety often accuse hindu caste system as evil system which follows untouchability and other so called evils.  And joining them were the macaulay educated english elites, who would often have a moral superiority over the rural people.

But nevertheless, these people also follow untouchability in varied forms.

We all know that the urban people are classified as Higher class, middle class and lower class.  But its a fact that these class peoples mostly lived isolated from others.

For example, the higher class people live in posh areas, with neat roads, electricity water facility and spacious homes, public parks etc.  The middle class, usually lives in comfortable homes, but in congested areas.

The lower class people often were the slum dwellers who live in unhygienic and horrific conditions.

Let me ask the following questions.

• How many upper class people live along with slum dwellers.
• Suppose a slum dweller roams in front of a posh bungalow, what will the security of the bungalow will do?  We often find that the rich people drive away the slum people through their securities.
• How many of the higher class people allow their children to play with middle class people?
• How many of the middle class people allow their children to play with the slum boys & girls?
• In villages, even though castes follow untouchability, each caste know the members of the other caste.  When the dalit caste had any needs, they always approach the dominant caste.  The dominant caste, provides food to the dalit people, when they come to the home.  The dalit women, often share their problems with the dominant caste women and seek solution.  Thus there is a mutually supporting life in villages, inspite of untouchability.  Let me ask, how many people in rich posh areas, know the people of the nearby slum.  Or how many rich people help the slum people in needy times?

So, we find that untouchability is often followed in many other forms in urban areas.

Lets take the case of gang wars in colleges.  Students belonging to one group wont interact with the other.  Its the norm in many colleges.  Its natural because, when there are differences, people chose to live away.

A college life is only a few years one.  If even in that college environment, such untouchability happens, we can understand that its inevitable that our society whose native political system has been destroyed by the britishers, had no one to intervene and regulate, and hence out of the worst situation of the society, the different caste lived peacefully because of untouchability.

Now please answer.  Is untouchability really EVIL?

I dont know how many people had heard the original song of vande mataram.  I happened to see it in the following youtube video, which is supposedly taken from ananda mutt bengali film.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xj1Iy4nRMkc

I was completely surprised to see an entirely different flavor of our national song.  It arouses the spirit of the freedom fighters.   It is the apt song for the warriors.  It delivers that psychological and moral force required for that situation of slavery, to raise and fight against the mighty britishers.

Unfortunately, such a forceful song was converted in to a bakti form making the people passive, and stagnant.  The song is now heavily mutated in A. R. Rahman’s song, where even the lyrics had also changed.

I feel, considering today’s pathetic condition of india, the original emotion has to be brought back, for us to win the true freedom.  ie, the freedom from submission, and the freedom from colonised minds of india.

Btw, i have one big question.  Why is bengal in such a pathetic state now, which had produced such great freedom fighters?

I was long thinking to write about Vijayanagara Empire, that was cowardly left out of indian history book.  IT was one of the golden periods of Hindu Civilization, that existed for around 250 years, finally devastated and destroyed by the Muslim Invaders.

The entire south india has to pay the tribute to the vijayanaga samrajyam, because, without them, the whole of south India would have lost its culture, religion, and even its soul.  And not only that, the culture and religion, got a major boost by the patronage of the vijayanagara kings, which we had inherited now.  Not to say, that we are again losing it, NOT because of enemy now, but because of the voluntary ignorance.

Kindly read the history of vijayanagara empire, from the below article of Retired Coloner Prabhakar Rao.

————————————————————

DESTINY DID NOT SMILE ON VIJAYNAGAR EMPIRE AT ITS FOUNDATION DAY CEREMONY

Prof Dr Col (Retd) K Prabhakar Rao

Link: http://www.sanghparivar.org/blog/dr-k-prabhakar-rao/destiny-did-not-smile-on-vijaynagar-empire-at-its-foundation-day-ceremony

Harihara Raya and his brother Bukka Raya found Vijaynagar Empire on the banks of Tungabhadra River in Bellary District of Karnataka in the 14 Th century. It is learnt these brothers served as commanders in the Army of Prataparudra Deva II, the Last King of Kakateeya Kingdom that ruled at Warangal in the Present Telangana region. After the fall of Kakateeya Kingdom due to the invasion by Mohd Bin Tughlaq, the Delhi sultan in 1324, these brothers escaped to the court of Jambukeswar at Anegondi which is close by to Vijaynagar. Mohd Bin Tughlaq subsequently attacked Anegondi in 1328 as the king Jambukeswara (Kampili Deva) gave asylum to Bahauddin Malik, rebel ruler at Gulbarga and a close relative of sultan. The king defended his land bravely and fell on the battlefield and the Sultan annexed Anegondi and he captured and carried away Harihara and Bukka Raya to Delhi and they were forced to embrace Islam. Subsequently, the brothers were sent back to Anegondi to administer the region as the representatives of Sultan as local rebellion broke due to cruel administration of Governor Malik Naeeb who let loose a reign of terror.
Harihara Raya and Bukka Raya though were forced to embrace Islam, were Hindus to core at heart and they came in contact with Prolaya Naika, Kapayya Naika and his followers Prolaya Vema Reddy, Singama Naika and Veera Ballala of Karnataka. Kapayya Naika was responsible to drive away Muslim commander Malik Maqbool from Warangal after prolonged Guerilla fight of ten years amply supported by his worthy friends. The like minded warriors thus made up their mind to establish a force of reckoning to defend the Hindu faith and protect Hindu culture, heritage, temples, women and children with whom the invading muslim armies played havoc in those eventful years. The invading Muslims destroyed temples, looted and destroyed houses, raped scores of Hindu women, killed children and carried away women, children and men as slaves.  Entire South India faced cultural turmoil and genocide during the successive invasions of cruel and wretched Allauddin Khilji, Malik Kafur, Gayasuddin and Mohd Bin Tughlaq who were nothing short of devil incarnates. In a course of time. The Raya brothers met Saint Vidyaranya Swamy an eminent scholor in Vedas and Hindu scriptures and their association changed entire course of history in Southern India. Sensing the turmoil in Delhi Sultanate in the Tughlaq dynasty, the Raya brothers threw away the yoke of loyalty to the Delhi throne and were soon got converted into Hinduism on the advice of the Saint Vidyaranya Swamy. Harihara and Bukka Raya brothers were administering Anegondi areas when Kapayya Naika gained power in Telangana after his victory over the Muslim Governor at Warangal during 1335-36.At Daulatabad (subsequently at Gulbarga) Bahamani Sultanate was established by Allauddin Hassan Bahman Shah revolting against the rule of Tughlaq that became the arch rival and enemy of Vijayanagar empire.

The capital of Vijaynagar appears to have been established on 18 April 1336, equivalent to Salivahana Saka 1127 Prabhava Chaitra Pournami, Sthiravaram Ratri (night) where all activities of Sankalpa were completed and the foundation stone was laid in Bahula Paksha Amavasya at Midnight.This is confirmed by Raya vachakam which is a contemporary document.

It is learnt that saint Vidyaranya Swamy made all the arrangements for the foundation laying ceremony. The saint by himself conducted mahasankalpam, invoked the deity of Vastu, determined the directions of North and South with the help of Dhruva Star and the Trisanku was erected. On East and Western directions Sankhas (conches) were arranged and molten gold of sixteen shades were poured in the foundation pit in large quantities. Sri Samrajya Lakshmi yantram was then placed and opposite to the site a reservoir was dug where his disciples were asked to wait and watch for his signal of most auspicious time for laying the foundation stone. The Saint conveyed to them that he would give an indication by ringing a bell and would blow a conch shell. A brick was tied to the end of a thin string, along with Vastu yantramu, Diamonds and Mercury and arrangement was made such that by slicing the thread, the brick would fall into the foundation pit at the auspicious moment. Making all these arrangements and instructing Harihara and Bukka Raya the Saint went over to the top of the hill and was engrossed in the astronomical calculations and was waiting for the auspicious moment. The Saint planned the time and state of various planets such that the capital and the Empire that was likely to be established would flourish for 3600 glorious years.

To the misfortune of Hindus, a Tantrik was worshipping lord Shiva at a place down the hill and after completing his worship rang the bronze bell and blew his conch shell loudly. Harihara Raya who was at the foundation pit awaiting the indication from the Saint immediately sliced the thread and the brick fell into the foundation pit before the auspicious moment arrived. Within a short time another sound of the bell and and blowing of conch shell was heard. Harihara and Bukka Raya ran to the top of the hill to enquire abount the two sounds at different moments. Vidyaranya Swamy lamented that the foundation stone was laid much before the auspicious time. He after examination of the time and planetary position at the instant of dropping of the foundation stone predicted that the empire would lost for 260 years and would be destroyed by the enemies due to inauspicious time of the ceremonial event. He also said that the prediction of sage Vyasa to him at Kashi has come true. It appears Sage Vyasa stated that the empire would last 300 years. The Vijaynagar city was thus established and the empire flourished for nearly three centuries from 1336 to 1646.

The empire was ruled by successive dynasties of Sangama, Saluva, Tuluva and Arveedu. The rulers successfully blocked islamisation of South India by the Bahmani Sultans and then by the Deccani Sultans of Golconda, Bijapur, Ahmednagar, Bidar and Berar that became independent after Bahmani Kingdom collapsed. The rulers extinguished the Sultanate at Madhura that existed for nearly 70 years in heart of South India after the invasion by Malik Kafur. Great rulers established their sway over entire South India and Hindu culture, art, sculpture, music and literature flourished. The empire reached its zenith at time of Sri Krishna Deva Raya who ruled from 1509 to 1529 who was a contemporary of emperor Baber of Mughal Dynasty. The empire received severe setback at Tallikota Battle on 23 Jan 1565. Araveeti or Aliya Ramaraya the defacto emperor of Vijaya nagar who gloriously ruled for 25 years after the death of Srikrishna Deva Raya faced the Muslim Confederation army of Deccani Sultans with a large force. Unfortunately, his Muslim generals and their troops betrayed him and went over to the enemy. Rama Raya lost the battle and was captured. Hussain Nizam Shah, the Sultan of Ahmednagar who had a personal grudge against him, killed him by cutting off his head with his sword. . The Muslim army entered Vijaynagar and stayed for five long months. They destroyed every monument, sculptures, every building, every idol and the town was burnt and defaced to fullest extent. Such was the fury and hatred of Muslim army over the Hindu Vijaynagar. However the empire was not destroyed fully. Tirumala Raya the brother of Rama Raya escaped to Penukonda where they tried to revive the empire. With suspected murder of Sadasivarayalu, the emperor, the Tuluva dynasty rule ceased and Araveeti Dynasty of Ramaraya ruled the empire. The empire however could not regain its past glory although it still commanded great respect. At Tallikota Battle, the prestige of its Army received great jolt. Subsequent rulers like Venkatapathirayalu II at Chadragiri revived the empire to a great extent. The empire slowly weakened due to in- fights of its chieftains and betrayal of local subordinate rulers of Madhura, Chenji, Tanjavur and finally the empire vanished into pages of history in 1646. The last ruler Sri Ranga III is known to have survived till 1659 devoid of an empire.

The glorious empire established with the blessings of Saint Vidyaranya Swamy in 1336 lasted for 310 years. However, it lost its glory after Tallikota Battle in 1565. The glory of the empire lasted for 229 years that is very close to the predictions of the saint. Although the saint took all precautions and planned for an empire to last 3600 years, the destiny did not smile at the foundation ceremony and the foundation stone fell at an inauspicious moment and destiny came out victorious. The truth is that no one escapes destiny whoever he may be and how great he may be. The entire empire and its long history were forgotten till the arrival of European Sewell’s book Forgotten Empire. Vijayanagar and Hampi are now in ruins and forms worlds heritage.

I got this through mail, and it is very interesting.

———————————————————————————-

*What Nandan Nilekani can do by his “Fully integrated ID card system”*

Operator : “Thank you for calling Pizza Hut . May I have your…”
Customer: “Heloo, can I order..”
Operator : “Can I have your multi purpose ID card number first, Sir?”
Customer: “It’s he., hold..on.889861356102049998-45-54610″
Operator : “OK… You’re… Mr Singh and you’re calling from 17 Jal Vayu.
Your home number is 22678893, your office 25076666 and your
mobile is 09869798888. Which number are you calling from now Sir?”
Customer: “Home! How did you get all my phone numbers?
Operator : “We are connected to the system, Sir”
Customer: “May I order your Seafood Pizza…”
Operator : “That’s not a good idea Sir”
Customer: “How come?”
Operator : “According to your medical records, you have high blood pressure
and even higher cholesterol level Sir”
Customer: “What?… What do you recommend then?”
Operator : “Try our Low Fat Pizza. You’ll like it”
Customer: “How do you know for sure?”
Operator : “You borrowed a book entitled “Popular Dishes” from the
National Library last week Sir”
Customer: “OK I give up… Give me 3 family size ones, how much will that cost?”
Operator : “That is enough for your family of 05, Sir. The total is Rs 500.00″
Customer: “Can I pay by! Credit card?”
Operator : “I’m afraid you have to pay us cash, Sir. Your credit card is over
the limit and you owe your bank Rs 23,000.75 since
October.That’s not including the late payment charges on your housing loan, Sir..”
Customer: “I guess I have to run to the neighbourhood ATM and withdraw some
cash before your guy arrives”
Operator : “You can’t Sir. You’ve reached daily limit on machine withdrawal today”
Customer: “Never mind. I’ll have the cash ready. How long it takes anyway?”
Operator : “About 45 minutes Sir, but if you can’t wait you can always come
and collect it on your Nano Car…”
Customer: ” What!”
Operator : “According to the details in system ,you own a Nano car,…registration
number GZ-05-AB-1107..”
Customer: ” ????”
Operator : “Is there anything else Sir?”
Customer: “No. Aren’t you giving me that 3 free bottles of cola as advertised?”
Operator : “Normally yes Sir, but based on your records you’re also diabetic……. “
Customer: #$$^%&$@$% ^
Operator : “Better watch your language Sir.. Remember on 15th July 2010 you
were convicted of using abusive language on a policeman…?”
Customer: [Faints]

Update:

Eminent writer Mrs. Radha Rajan had written an article in vijaivaani.com regarding this USCIRF.  The article can be accessed at the following URL.

http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=629

—————————————————————————————————————

It has been a fashionable statement to see reports in newspapers about interfaith dialogue.  People, particularly Indian middle class, would think, that this is an attempt and opportunity for different religions, to come together and understand each other.  Added to that, the parties who initiate this, would advertise this effort as an attempt to establish religious peace.

However, not all that glitters are gold.  The interfaith dialogue is mostly initiated by christian missionaries, and recently by catholic pope.  However, we have to note that point, that it is the christian missionaries who spread venom and hatred, under the guise of service to poor, that they often insult the other religions as pagans, false religion, false god, and particularly towards hinduism, they had been vehemant in calling hindu gods as satans, and those hindus who worship idols as prostitutes.

Where is the logic in such a body or institution, who doesnt respect other religions, and in whose holy book is stated that “Jesus is the only true god”, calling for an interfaith dialogue.

What actually are they going to discuss in that dialogue, when their very scripture is an extreme ideology, intolerant of other religions.

IF we consider a typical dialogue b/w a christian missionary and a hindu, the hindus will agree that Jesus is also a god to be reverred, while the church will say (either directly or indirectly), that jesus is the only true god (which by implicit means all other gods are false), and that man can get salvation only by worshipping jesus.

To a common sense, its not an interfaith dialogue..  Rather a bullshit..  an attempt to intimidate the other religious leaders, and through soft persuasion, to collapse the resistance of the other religious leaders in opposing conversion activity of the christian missionaries.

When a person really wants to understand others, there are lot of ways or sources to understand (in this internet age).  Its very silly to say, that i will understand christianity only through a dialogue.

Please read the following press briefings  by kanchi sankaracharyar, highlighting very important points.

Opposition by Kanchi Sankaracharya – a press briefing:

1. Exactly one month ago to the date, the Pope went to Jerusalem where Jesus was born, for a similar dialogue that the Vatican had undertaken with the Chief Rabbinate of Israel. At the end of that meeting when the Pope and Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metzer jointly addressed the Press and Media, the Chief Rabbi thanked the Pope for assuring the Chief Rabbinate that the Catholic Church would desist and cease from all missionary and conversion activities among the Jews. This is construed as endorsed and agreed by the Pope since he was present in the press meet. We need a similar commitment from the Church for Hindus.

2. After such inter-faith meetings, the points agreed have to be faithfully abided. Otherwise there will be no point in holding such meetings. Unless the Church reassures Hindus that it will not conduct itself in a manner that wounds Hindu sensibilities and follows up on those assurances, such inter-faith meetings, no matter how frequently they are held will be futile and will not serve any meaningful cause.

3. In 1999, Pope John Paul II had stated that the mission of the Vatican was to plant the Cross in Asia in the third millennium to facilitate the Christianize of the world which alone would cause the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. The Pope must tell us the rationale for the First Coming of Jesus Christ when there was no Christianity or the Church to undertake the mission to Christianize the world.

4. We see the USCIRF (US Commission on International Religious Freedom) as an intrusive mechanism of a foreign government to interfere in the internal affairs of this country. The USCIRF which has been permitted to visit this country to hold meetings with our people to ascertain religious freedom in our country must no longer be permitted to enter this country on this intrusive mission. We will not allow external interference into our internal affairs.

5. We know that very large amounts of money come into this country for Churches and Christian groups, ostensibly for charitable work. These funds should be used only for social causes like health, education etc and should not be used for religious conversion. During these dialogues, it should be agreed that the funds should be distributed to all Organizations who do charitable work irrespective of the organizations’ religious faith. A common pool should be created and a Committee formed to distribute and monitor the usage of these funds.

6. It has become easy for the Missionaries to convert Hindus. All Hindu Organizations and Associations should work together to educate Hindus and eradicate the conversion activity.

7. Hindu dharma is by nature diverse and so all different panths and sampradayas co-exist on this bhumi without seeking to destroy the others. Hindu dharma has nurtured and supported all faiths and religions because that is the way of dharma. We expect that religions which have come into this bhumi from other lands will respect this vital characteristic of Hindu dharma and not do anything to subvert or disturb the sense of nationhood of this country. Hindu dharma and the Hindu people welcome Christians and Muslims, Parsis and Jews to make this land their home. We expect from these religions that they will not seek to destroy our faith, our religion and wound our religious sensibilities. We encourage all religions to live with mutual respect and harmony in a shared sense of nationalism which should bind us all as one nation. Nationalism should come first.

8. We are aware of the preaching that they will cure diseases and ailments if the individual converts to their faith. This is illegal as per the DRUGS AND MAGIC REMEDIES ACT 1954.

9. Most of the countries in the world (USA, UK, Japan, Middle-east nations, Pakistan, Sri Lanka etc.), adopt national resolutions and statements of intent proclaimed by their governments and their tallest religious bodies affirming their determination to protect and defend the culture and the religion from which their cultures derive. In India alone we pass resolutions which officially and legally promote an irreligious and nonspiritual creed called secularism. Secularism is an administrative quality; it cannot be the soul of this nation. The soul of this nation is religious and spiritual. We call upon our government and other important religious bodies to recognize this truth and affirm their commitment to protect the soul of this nation.

10. The Buddhist Mahasangha and the Joint Committee of Buddhist Organizations have declared its intention to get the Sri Lankan government to pilot and pass a national anti-conversion Bill and make it law. We welcome this move and strongly endorse this measure.

11. The Church in India must stop forthwith the use of Hindu religious words, phrases and symbols like Veda, Agama, Rishi, Ashram, Om and other such in what is referred to as ‘inculturation’ tactics but which are only intended to deceive the vulnerable sections of our people who are the intended targets for religious conversion. This is also insulting to and wounding the religious sensitivities of Hindus. Similarly it has been brought to our notice that some churches are scripting a new Bible for the new converts by usurping sections of our sacred Vedas, Upanishads and Puranas and incorporating them into the Bible. This must stop immediately and all such Bibles must be withdrawn from circulation. We urge the Indian government to look into the issue and do the needful.