India without Gandhi

We were taught in school that India got independence because of Mahatma Gandhi. Is it really true? What would India have been without Gandhi? I am not trying to say he was not a great leader, but his leadership and politics of congress split India and Pakistan, and the effect of that is for the generations to follow.

Most of the british colonies started to gain independence after the second world war ended in 1945. There was great devastation after the second world war and ruling over the colonies had become very tough. With congress we had an elitist class coming to rule over India. So from the Queen in England we had the local Kings now. And now we have the Nehru family rule over India from one generation to another. Will this change for India? I don't think so. There are two things that need to be done for India to progress, greater education and stronger judiciary. In all our 60 yrs of independence we have greatly failed in both. It has actually gone worst as education has become privatized with very low quality, and people have become smarter in exploiting the judiciary.

I am presently shocked by how the graduate engineers don't know the engineering basics but still manage to score 70%+. And how the MBA's of today cannot answer basic practical management questions. Education has become a business with very low standards.

Our media which used to be very powerful before and even after independence has increasingly also become a business. Media has stopped asking hard questions. People like Kapil Sibbal can publicly say that 2g was no loss to India and still get away with it and even continue as the telecom minister.

Lokpal and corruption has become a big news of the day, however lets stop for a moment and think how much are we all also to blame for corruption. How many times did we bribe to make our life easy. Even those who take bribe are our near and dear ones, but do we question them? I have seen people defending corruption and also proud about how much money they are making by it. They justify themselves by pointing to a bigger thief and saying they just make a little. Humans have an excellent knack to justify anything.

There are some fundamental problems in the Indian system, and people need to focus on them to fix the things for good. However most people think that it not their problem and they cannot do anything about it. But its only when we all will change and do something the change will come......

Comments

Anonymous said…
Thank God Subhas Chandra Bose didn't win or we would have fascist military rule like Pakistan. There could have been no other end game except Congress because no one else had Gandhi's charisma
4:31 PM
Ankur said…
Why was Bose a fascist? he just took support from where he could get it? Did india become communist for taking help from Soviet for so many yrs? Gandhi's charisma was a great factor to unite the country, and all movements need one unquestionable leader at the helm of it. But Gandhi had a great team around him, and they all were from elite society. I do not know people in that inner league that had humble beginnings.

History is written by the victors, i am sure had Hitler won we would have been reading different history today.

Why pakistan has a military rule is because of it's paranoia against India, the military there is too big and strong at the cost of the country. That is why military wants to rule it. Thanks to Jinnah, Gandhi and Nehru for dividing India into religious lines? Why could we not have waited a few years more for a united india?

Had it not been Gandhi there would have been another leader. The coffin of the british rule in India was made by the world war, the final nails were only to be put in by somebody.
4:42 PM
Shashikant Singh said…
I think you diverted from the topic of your post "India without Gandhi",, reading till last I couldn't get any idea how India without Gandhi would have been.
7:45 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Difference between a Brahmin and a Pandit?

To many people the word brahmin and pandit means the same. I wanted my 2 brahmin friends accompanying me to a recent Jaipur trip, to visit the Amer fort temple. They wanted to leave fast and rest. I insisted..In the heat of Amer and the afternoon, my friend retorted "There is a difference between brahmins and Pandits", i stuck to my guns, "Whatever but i want you visiting the temple". A bystander (sharmaji) could not stop himself from asking the difference between brahmins and pandit (in his lovely heavily accented khadi boli) with my friend OM, and OM gave a very straight and accurate reply...Sharmaji was dumb struck,,,I don't remember the reply as i was enjoying the expression on sharmajis face after the reply from OM.. Answer -  Pandits usually charge a fees for things that they do... like karm kand etc... Brahmins are the ones who are also priests, gurus etc but live on dakshina and not fees...
Read more

Difference between role and designation

This is a follow up post based on a comment on my old post . Here are dictionary definitions of Role and designation Role - Prescribed or expected behavior associated with a particular position or status in a group or organization . Designation - nomination, appointment, or election to an office, position, etc. In many IT companies I have seen designations and roles as totally mismatch. So someone being called as an Architect does no different work from a developer. And sometimes Leads act as managers, and managers just act as project coordinators. This often leads to confusions among what is expected from people, and what are their goals. It's also important to understand that ROLE PRECEDES DESIGNATION. So if you are a lead aspiring to become a manager, in addition to your responsibilities, you need to get into the role of your manager. Start doing and understanding the nuances of being a manager. Any questions?
Read more

Role and Designation

There is lot of difference between role and designation, but v few people in IT industry actually understand it. Many a times role and designation are aligned, but many times it is not. Whenever it is not aligned it leads to lot of frustrations, and confusion for the person on what he should be doing. To make the matters worse, in your annual appraisal cycle you are judged on basis of the designation, and as you were in an unaligned role, you fare badly. The only way i see around is to press management and HR functions to constantly review this and correct this. However as this is a long run exercise it gets overshadowed by many other things. Many people blame attrition on salary, however one can have happy employees even at slightly lower salaries if you can provide them a challenging work environment and role. Also there is big lack of planning future for your employees. Most organizations do not have a growth plan for their people. few who have do not stick to the plan, or make a pl
Read more