anil wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

anil wrote:

Vikram Sharma wrote:

India was independent in 15 of Aug.1947 but we can't say we are acheive  this through non violence, because in past in present and in future anything we can't acheive without violence. Well really we got independence our fighter Bhagat Singh, Chandra sgekhar azad, subhas chandar boss etc.. These are the hero.

You are right, I said what I want to say. While giving credit of Gandhi ji and his non violence plan for independence we must be forgot Bhagat Singh, Subhash Chander Bose, Chandershekar Azad. It shameful that till the day Bhagat Singh is not martyr in government records.

Record of Bhagat singh is in Lahore (Pakistan) jail. Apparently, the govt. of independent India is a continuation of the British Indian government. Although we believe that Bhagat singh was a martyr, the govt. records remain as they were during British period. 

Yes we believe and respect him and martyr. In north India Bhagat Singh is a great person but government of India must be declare him a martyr.

Please see that Bhagat singh was tried in Lahore and sentenced to death there and executed there. That region is now in Pakistan. India has no jurisdiction in the matter. It is for Pakistan authorities at Lahore to reopen the case and get the court order honorably acquitting Bhagat singh. Only then he can be officially declared as martyr. In eyes of law, Bhagat singh as well Subhash chandra Bose are still criminals even though we hold them in high esteem. 

India surely achieved its independence under Gandhiji's leadership and through non violent means. Lakhs of people would participate in the various programs and momentum was built over te years ultimately leading to British leaving India. This was the main thread of the independence movement. The actions of Bhagat Singh, later on of Subash Bose and Naval Mutiny etc., were isolated attempts but they added to the overall movement for independence. It has become a fashion these days in self styled champions to deny the main architects of the freedom movement their due recognition but keep harping about much smaller contributions making them look as if it was they who were responsible for ejecting the British. Blaming Congress for partition also betrays ignorance of the politics of that time. Jinnah played the Muslim card successfully because the British helped him to do so. Post partition violence does not dilute the independence movement of its non violent nature.

I think no Indian would ever dare to deny the contribution of Gandhiji and that's the reason he is the Father of the Nation. But, by saying so I would add that when we term the contribution made by others like Bose, Bhagat Singh, Lala Lajpat Rai and unlimited other freedom fighters as small one then we are humiliating those greats. One may not support their style of movement but demeaning their contribution is basically uncalled for.

Shampa Sadhya wrote:

I think no Indian would ever dare to deny the contribution of Gandhiji and that's the reason he is the Father of the Nation. But, by saying so I would add that when we term the contribution made by others like Bose, Bhagat Singh, Lala Lajpat Rai and unlimited other freedom fighters as small one then we are humiliating those greats. One may not support their style of movement but demeaning their contribution is basically uncalled for.

That has always been the case because it did not suit the Nehru family which took full advantage and glowed under Gandhi's ¹  name..

Who has ever stated that the contribution of others than Gandhi and his colleauges was small.?  please give examples

vijay wrote:

Who has ever stated that the contribution of others than Gandhi and his colleauges was small.?  please give examples

For the example you asked for, I would copy paste from your first comment on this thread: 

The actions of Bhagat Singh, later on of Subash Bose and Naval Mutiny etc., were isolated attempts but they added to the overall movement for independence. It has become a fashion these days in self styled champions to deny the main architects of the freedom movement their due recognition but keep harping about much smaller contributions making them look as if it was they who were responsible for ejecting the British.

i am happy you quoted the full para and not the latter part only. I am trying to differentiate between a planned movement led by Gandhi from 1915/16 till 1947 for freedom and the individual or small group attempts by martyrs like Bhagat Singh. It is in this context I have said latter were smaller contributions. They were individually heroic acts. After all, the most precious possession of their life they gave up for the country. How can I ever even think of belittling them. As a young student I remember tears welling up in my eyes when I watched the scene of Bhagat Singh being led to the gallows in the Manoj Kumar film on him. It is only in the overall freedom movement that I said there are larger and smaller contributions which together added up to the entire freedom movement. Hope i have made myself clear. My apologies if you felt otherwise.

The advantage Gandhiji , Nehru and others who were part of the freedom moment was education. They were able to use it to their advantage, thereby unifying the entire nation . However, the freedom moment began much earlier by the smaller kingdoms that felt the injustice of the British rule and other self respecting citizens like Bhagat Singh fought till their end thereby making the citizens realise that there was need to oppose the rule with force.

vijay wrote:

i am happy you quoted the full para and not the latter part only. I am trying to differentiate between a planned movement led by Gandhi from 1915/16 till 1947 for freedom and the individual or small group attempts by martyrs like Bhagat Singh. It is in this context I have said latter were smaller contributions. They were individually heroic acts. After all, the most precious possession of their life they gave up for the country. How can I ever even think of belittling them. As a young student I remember tears welling up in my eyes when I watched the scene of Bhagat Singh being led to the gallows in the Manoj Kumar film on him. It is only in the overall freedom movement that I said there are larger and smaller contributions which together added up to the entire freedom movement. Hope i have made myself clear. My apologies if you felt otherwise.

Everyone is free to express their own opinion regarding any issue. Even from your first post it is clear that you give credit to other freedom fighters too but I expressed my displeasure regarding the use of the word 'small contribution'. I feel that these fighters sent a strong signal to the Britishers that if there was Gandhi on one hand with non-violence weapon then on the other hand there was another set of leaders who were revolutionaries. So, either way it was a threat to the British regime about which they became very much aware. This whole process forced them to leave India. Those who didn't believe in non-violence does not mean that they were non-achievers rather they were great achievers who did not fight only with the outsiders but also faced criticism from the insiders, their own countrymen, but still they were determined to fight for India's freedom.   

Shampa Sadhya wrote:

vijay wrote:

i am happy you quoted the full para and not the latter part only. I am trying to differentiate between a planned movement led by Gandhi from 1915/16 till 1947 for freedom and the individual or small group attempts by martyrs like Bhagat Singh. It is in this context I have said latter were smaller contributions. They were individually heroic acts. After all, the most precious possession of their life they gave up for the country. How can I ever even think of belittling them. As a young student I remember tears welling up in my eyes when I watched the scene of Bhagat Singh being led to the gallows in the Manoj Kumar film on him. It is only in the overall freedom movement that I said there are larger and smaller contributions which together added up to the entire freedom movement. Hope i have made myself clear. My apologies if you felt otherwise.

Everyone is free to express their own opinion regarding any issue. Even from your first post it is clear that you give credit to other freedom fighters too but I expressed my displeasure regarding the use of the word 'small contribution'. I feel that these fighters sent a strong signal to the Britishers that if there was Gandhi on one hand with non-violence weapon then on the other hand there was another set of leaders who were revolutionaries. So, either way it was a threat to the British regime about which they became very much aware. This whole process forced them to leave India. Those who didn't believe in non-violence does not mean that they were non-achievers rather they were great achievers who did not fight only with the outsiders but also faced criticism from the insiders, their own countrymen, but still they were determined to fight for India's freedom.   

Some of them like Jahnsi Rani, Kittur Chennamma and Bhagat Singh sacrificed their lives for the sake of freedom to their nation ..