15th August - A different perspective. It's comparison with 26th January

"1 million""The widely-held estimate of the number of people killed in the brutal violence that followed Partition of India. Some estimates put the toll at double this figure (2M)." - Hindustan Times

This was one of the last significant gift of Britishers to India.

These people might or might not be the freedom fighters, but surely they didn't die for the Indian independence. They died as a result of the kind of freedom that we got from the Britishers on August 15th, 1947. Actually, they were massacred by the anxious and defeated aspirations of the brutal imperialism of the great Britain.

None of them were the martyrs of the freedom struggle. They were just massacred. They were the collateral damage happened to make an imperialist empire (British) and a small number of power hungry people (in India) happy.

Neither S.C. Bose, Bhagat Singh, or C.S. Azad may have agreed to this kind of deal. In fact, M.K. Gandhi was not at all happy with it, as evident from the fact that he did not participate in the Independence Day celebrations on 15th August 1947.

I am happy to see India independent, I am a patriotic Indian, but 15th August is just an important date in the Indian and the world history which marks our freedom and also marks the deaths and massacres of more than a million of innocents.

15th August is important, crucial BUT hugely gloomy. It would keep haunting the British empire in future and may keep reminding the citizens to realize how bad the intentions of opportunist politicians prove to be.

Happy Independence Day, RIP all the collateral damages.

Vande Mataram!

Waiting for the real "India Day", i.e. 26th January, which actually marks the start of a new SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and ensured that we get JUSTICE, LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY, and all other fundamental rights and freedoms.

लेफ्ट-वेफ्ट, राइट-वाइट

प्रिय मित्र,
सुना है कि तुम आज कल समाज में हो रही उथल-पुथल से बहुत व्याकुल हो। तुम निष्क्रिय होते या अप्रभावी होते विभिन्न रंगों के आन्दोलनों से भी बहुत दुखी हो।

भाई मेरे, ये तो रात है, सुबह का आलम अभी देखा ही कहाँ है। आपने तो चार-पांच रंगो की बात की है। सिर्फ ३ बाइट्स को ले लें तो 512 रंग बन सकते हैं। वैसे तो अनेकों रंग संभव हैं। आज नीला काम नहीं कर रहा, तो कोई नहीं साहब, कल आसमानी बना लेंगे। कल आसमानी काम नहीं करेगा तो बैंगनी किसी और ने प्रयोग थोड़े ही किया है, वही ले लेंगे। आज गेरुवे और हरे को गाली दे लेंगे, और कल इनसे प्रेम करके नारंगी और धानी को गालियां दे लेंगे।

रंग को स्थापित करने से कुछ नहीं होगा, रंग तो समय के साथ फीका पड़ ही जाता है। चटक करना है तो उसे करना होगा जिसपर हम रंग पोतने की बात करते हैं। इंसानों को। जब तक वो नहीं समझेंगे तब तक कुछ नहीं होगा। हाँ उनको समझाना बहुत दुष्कर है। ख़ैर, अगर वो नहीं समझ रहे तो कम से कम हम उनको समझ लें। दुनिया भर के बिसनेस आज कल यूजर मॉडल ही समझ-समझ कर तो अपना धंधा चमका रहे हैं, हम क्यूँ नहीं चमका सकते। रंग तो उस बेलबॉटम की तरह है, जो आज रहता है, कल चला जाता है, और परसों फिर आ जाता है। पर बेलबॉटम पहनने वालों की फितरत तकरीबन वैसी की वैसी ही रहती है।
नीले वाले सफ़ेद के खिलाफ लड़ते हैं, गेरुवे और हरे एक-दूसरे के खिलाफ लड़ते हैं, और बस ऐसे ही चलता रहता है। सब फीके होते रहेंगे और सब लड़ते रहेंगे। 

हमें हज़ार मूवमेंट्स नहीं चाहिए, सिर्फ एक ही चाहिए। प्रो-इंसानियत। लेफ्ट थेफ़्ट नहीं चाहिए, राइट फाइट नहीं चाहिए, बहुजन दुर्जन नहीं चाहिए। हमें इंसानों की नहीं, इंसानियत की मुहिम की दरकार है।

तुम्हारा को-इंसान,
शीतांशु

I am a brahmin and I am not a casteist!

"Brahmanical" System! This is one of the negative jargon in the dictionaries of many elites. They interchangeably use it with "caste system"! The term "brahmin" has profoundly pious meaning in the Sanatan culture. Associating it with any social evil is not only incorrect but also unjustified. It is a fact that there are people who are real brahmins irrespective of their castes.

What do those modern elites want to say when they comfortably use the jargon "Brahmanical" for expressing some social inequality? Do they have such a limited vocabulary that they cannot find anything but "brahminical"? It's also a truth that many pseudo-brahmins have eroded the social equality for years, but that doesn't mean that anyone is justified to synonymize the word "brahmin" with "caste system." I even do not support people using "Mullah" or "Muslim" as the synonyms for "terrorism." Just imagine how a Muslim would feel if someone uses the word "muslimize" as in "Please do not muslimize (terrorize) the humanity." I know this sounds wrong and weird, and this is because "Muslim" is completely a pious word and a lot of good people have their good emotions and faith associated with the word "Muslim." Another example could be using the word "british" as a synonym for "exploiters". So the sentence "Employees in the company are briticized (exploited) by the owners." This also sounds ridiculous and offending to all of the citizens of Britain, because not all of them were the exploiters.

The elite-offenders don't know the real meaning of the word "Brahmin" and they foolishly use it in a negative connotation. If you get into the literature of Sanatan philosophy, we'll find that the word "brahmin" comes from the root word "brahm" which means nothing but "everything". That further implies that the real "brahmins" are those who can never be non-inclusive and can never discriminate the society into various upper and lower castes.

In addition to the real meaning of the word "brahmin" from the Sanatan philosophy, there are many people, who also are good human being (by virtue of being opposed to social inequality and the caste system), and they identify themselves with the word "brahmin" just as a verbal identifier of their lineage. For them being a brahmin doesn't mean being in the upper or lower strata of the society; for them, it just means that their family and forefathers have been calling themselves "brahmins" for many years. How would they feel if they'll receive an assertion that the term "brahminical" means something which they are opposed to? What can the following sentences mean to different people: (i) "One should eradicate brahminical culture from society", or (ii) "one should eradicate the smith, malhotra or khan culture from the society."

It should be noted that social equality and even social justice can not be achieved by just organizing people from the oppressed class, community, or caste. We have to take all the good people together. This may not happen effectively if you keep on ridiculing the identifiers of the individuals, or by attempting to malign the real and auspicious meaning of a word. Let's reform this world without disrespecting the norms of any language (vocabulary) and by trying to ensure inclusivity of all good people.