Certainly the reins of the country should have been handed to Sardar Patel only after freedom
The year was 1946 when all State and Regional committees of Congress had assembled to choose the next President of the party in India.
But the heavens fell apart when Mahatma Gandhi asked Sardar Patel to allow Nehru to hold the post even though while 12 out of 15 committees had cast their vote in favour of him, not even a single committee had cast its vote in favour of Nehru.
What could have been more heinous than to have not given a chance to lead the nation to an upright man like Sardar Patel who had to his credit the big task of having brought more than 500 princely states of the country together under one umbrella to form India a united nation? [1]
Everybody knew that only the President of the Congress party was going to become the first Prime Minister of the country once Britain announced the freedom of the country.
However, there is nothing very unusual with what Gandhi ji did.
It is in the DNA of the country to do not reward the man who, really deserves some reward the way Gandhi ji did not reward Sardar Patel.
Knowingly or unknowingly they, invariably, reward the wrong man only the way Gandhi ji rewarded Nehru.
But look at what transpired after Nehru assumed the office.
The first thing Nehru did after assuming the office
There is every chance the British would have not handed over the keys of the nation to Subhash Chandra Bose even if he would have been alive on August 15, 1947, since it was him only who had made them weak in the knees as had been confided by Clement Richard Attlee, ex-Prime Minister of Britain in the year 1956 to the Governor of West Bengal, during his visit to India by asserting that Britain had taken the decision of granting freedom to India only out of the fear that they were afraid of the rebellion in the ranks of the Royal Indian Navy who had mutinied against the Empire and had brought down even the Union Jack on their ships; in the ranks of the Royal Indian Air Force as well as in the ranks of the British Indian Army who were in no mood to fight with the soldiers, who had returned from the World War II and planned to join Azad Hind Fauz of Subhash Chandra, instead of — Gandhi ji’s philosophy of nonviolence. [2]
But, instead of giving any recognition to Subhash Chandra Bose, Nehru preferred to post a few spies outside his ancestral house to read each letter they received to ascertain whereabouts of Neta ji, after having come to know that he had, perhaps, not got burnt to death during the air crash in Taipei and this news had been floated only to serve as a cover-up for his plan to escape to some country, anonymously.
Do you know — why?
Nehru dreaded that if he came back — he could have usurped his Prime Ministership.
The next thing he did after assuming the office
Soon after getting the Junagarh State accessed into Indian Union Sardar Patel, who was Union Home Minister at that time, pledged that the Somnath Temple shall be restored to its original glory. [3]
When he broached his plan with Mahatma Gandhi — though Gandhi endorsed his plan but with the rider that the funds for its reconstruction should come from the public, to which, Patel offered his consent.
However, since the temple could not be reconstructed during his lifetime — he handed over the task to K M Munshi, one of the Cabinet Ministers, who responded to him in the following words.
“I am very clear in my mind that the temple of Somnath was not just a monument; it lived in the heart of the whole nation and its reconstruction was a national pledge.”
But it is noteworthy that Nehru did not mix words while telling Munshi, “I don’t like your trying to restore Somnath. It is ‘Hindu Revivalism’.”
Though the then President Rajendra Prasad had presided the inaugural ceremony of the renovated temple on May 11, 1951 — it is noteworthy that Nehru had shot him a letter, admonishing, “I confess that I do not like the idea of your associating yourself with a spectacular opening of the Somnath Temple.”
I hope it makes it clear why though the reconstruction of a temple in Ayodhya could have been next on their agenda — it was not given a go-ahead signal by Nehru ji out of his spectre of ‘Hindu Revivalism’.
The third great thing Nehru did after assuming the office
We can check how much anti-Hindus, he must have been as he fought tooth and nail to get the Hindu Code Bill passed which was meant to make the Hindus “second class citizens” of the country.
He would have even succeeded to get the bill passed while Sardar Patel was still alive if he would not have threatened that if this bill was tabled — he would resign from the party.
Though Nehru managed to get the bill passed in the Parliament only after the death of Sardar Patel — it is noteworthy that Acharya J P Kriplani had told Nehru at such occasion that though he claimed to be a Hindu, he did not behave like a Hindu even a bit.
Some other Anti-Hindu and Anti-national Roles of the Congress Party
It is noteworthy how the Congress Party conspired to turn the country into a Muslim country by giving the Reservation System to divert the attention of the Hindus from their intention of making Ghazwa-e-Hind a success.
Though, according to http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1964/Secularism-and-Constitution-of-India.html, the inclusion of the words “Secular” and “Socialist” in the preamble of the constitution; only ensures that no religion shall get any preferential treatment in the country but the ground reality is quite different because a particular religion is being given an exclusive treatment due to the minority appeasement policy of the government, in comparison of the Hindu religion.
Take the case of the following mosque, that is being constructed by some uproarious people right in the mid of a highway that connects Hyderabad and Warangal.
Maybe, the people who may have started constructing this mosque may have done so since the people who must have constructed the highway may have demolished some old mosque that should have stood here. But they should have kept in mind that no mosque could have been constructed here if there would have been some highway over here when they should have constructed it but to make a mosque over a highway does not make sense.
For sure, if it would have been a temple, it would have been demolished by now without caring two hoots for anybody’s sentiments.
Does it not belie the assumption that no religion gets preferential treatment in the country?
The following incongruities also stand as witness to the fact that there is succinct inequality in respect of religions, in the country.
The incongruities that stand as witness to the fact that there is no equality in respect of religions in the country
Some of such incongruities are:
(i) Nobody knows — why the government should have made a provision of a Muslim Personal Law Board and a Christian Personal Law Board in India. Does it ensure parity of religions? Why these Boards should not be scrapped to uphold secularism?
(ii) Nobody knows — why no action should have been taken by the Union Ministry when Hindu Pundits had been evicted from Kashmir by the Muslims on January 19, 1990?
(iii) Nobody knows, though the priests of the Hindu temples are not paid any salary there is not only a provision of paying salaries to the Imams of the mosques and the Moazzins (helpers), the state governments even keep on increasing their salaries from time to time the way the Delhi government raised the salary of the Imams from Rs 10,000.00 per month to Rs 18,000.00 per month and the salary of the helpers (Moazzins ) from Rs 9,000.00 to Rs 16,000.00 of about 165 mosques of Delhi on January 23, 2019. Surprisingly, all such money is paid out of the tax collected from the taxpayers of the country. Don’t you think — it would be better if all the taxpayers form a national level Union that may counter any frivolous payments to anyone, such as the payment of salaries to the Imams and Moazzins or the payment of subsidy to the Haj-pilgrims?
Once the taxpayers form such Union as has been proposed by me; it may ask the government to curtail even such expenses as not only the pensions being paid to the MLCs, the MPs and the corporators after they have completed a term of just five years but even all other luxurious perks they get.
If there would have been a provision of having some representatives of the taxpayers in the panel, I am sure — they would not have allowed such lavishness nor would they have allowed even the Finance Ministry to have doled out Rs 10 million as seed money from the exchequer for constituting a family NGO “Rajiv Gandhi Foundation”, though they could not have been able to have ostracised it from taking a lion-size donation from China as a bribe to cooperate with it by providing all sorts of subsidies to it for selling their goods in the market at much cheaper rates than the corresponding indigenously produced products.
The problem of continuous infiltration of the Rohingyas and Bangladeshi Muslims in the country is making the Hindus of West Bengal nervous that if they keep on pouring into West Bengal, Assam and Tripura at the same rate at which they have been pouring in since last five or six years — it may turn into a Muslim state and they may also be evicted from their home-state the same way as the Hindu Pundits had been evicted from the Kashmir valley, in the years 1989 and 1990.
Though the Hindus control the sizes of their families, keeping in mind the welfare of the country — it is not so in the case of Muslims. They have started jacking up their population by producing more and more children per family and by encouraging illegitimate infiltration of Muslims from the adjoining countries since they have understood that, in democracy — the power goes into the hands of the community that may be in the majority.
The Hindus are afraid that there may be, again, the same type of division of the country as had taken place in the year 1947 followed by the same sort of bloodshed as had taken place on the eve of freedom.
Almost everybody holds the view that such a horrible situation would not have arisen in the country if Mahatma Gandhi would have allowed Sardar Patel to have become the President of the Congress Party in the year 1946 instead of Nehru.
____________
[3] https://swarajyamag.com/politics/the-somnath-saga-precursor-to-debates-around-secularism-in-india