Arun Shourie's review of "The Book"

Nothing very explosive. Frankly I’m tiring of the hum-drum line being adapted by both sides of this bookish controversy.

There is one thing I think about though and that’s this – Alright the partition was good for Hindus. If not for partition it would have been a living hell – is all agreed.

A question:

What if the Muslim League had not demanded partition? What if they had been smarter and said, “Heck no. We don’t want Pakistan or any other “Stan”. We want to stay on.” What then?

Over three decades and going strong of Gandhi inspired “non-violent action” and continuing Muslim faith in exactly the opposite would have made the League’s task in United Hindusthan a cake-walk.

So we Hindus should be thankful that; 1. The Muslim League raised and kept up the demand for Pakistan 2. The Congress leaders did not try too hard to resist such a demand.

This is probably the only case where lillie-livered Congress “freedom fighters” actually helped Hindus and averted a great disaster – by sheer default.

Advertisements

2 Responses

  1. “So we Hindus should be thankful that; 1. The Muslim League raised and kept up the demand for Pakistan 2. The Congress leaders did not try too hard to resist such a demand.”

    I am sure you are being sarcastic here. But if you are not the here is a story.

    There liver a hindu family in bangladesh. One fine evening some thugs from a Islamic organization entered the house and raped the wife of head of the family while her husband and young son watched helplessly.

    When the thugs went, another lady in the house, the daughter of who was raped returned. When she saw what happened, she cried and blamed the two men in the house for inaction.

    For her accusation they replied, look, if we had tried to stop this it would have taken them longer to rape your mother. By that time you would have reached here and they would have raped you as well. So thank us for not doing anything.

    Hows that?

  2. No, I wasn’t being sarcastic at all.

    I appreciate your point but that’s not a good analogy.

    The “thugs” don’t translate to Muslims in undivided Hindusthan simply because they (Muslims) were not a sudden presense in our midst. They’ve been with us since at least a thousand years.

    Moreover while Hindus accepted Gandhian ahimsa for whatever reason there was no corresponding Muslim acceptance of the same creed. Muslims remained violent and demanding Muslims.

    Hindus at the time were simply not prepared, mentally or physically, to meet the Muslim threat.

    So without partition, Hindus would have been “easy meat”.

    Therefore my position remains valid.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: