Thoughts on economics and liberty

India was blessed to have Gandhi. Without him India would have seen a total blood bath like China, Nazi Germany or USSR

After reading Bose in some more detail, I’ve become extremely relieved that he was removed from his two year Presidentship of Congress by Gandhi in 1939 – the year that Hitler came to power.

I now begin to see the INVALUABLE ROLE Gandhi played in India’s independence movement. It did not get India independence (that came because of many other factors). But it saved India from extremism.

Given there was almost no one around who understood liberty (Ambedkar understood it very faintly), it was extremely fortunate for India to have Gandhi as a check on extremist (communist/fascist) views.

Had Bose managed to get a free hand, he would certainly have become a Mao, Stalin or Hitler. India would have become a communist-fascist dictatorship. There would have been mayhem, terror and mass murder. Total bloodbath.

So Gandhi’s confusion was extremely helpful in keeping extremist communist and fascist forces in check. He even managed to moderate Nehru’s communist extremism.

And we know that Gandhi also took away the influence of the extremist RSS/Hindu Mahasabha through his own avid Hinduism. Gandhi kept in check the poison of Hindutva (these people finally killed him).

I never thought about Gandhi in this way earlier, but now it becomes clear that GANDHI WAS TRULY THE FOUNDER OF INDIA. India lives today because of Gandhi’s idiosyncratic but effective way of dealing with all forms of extremism.

One can’t agree with his economics, but one can agree with his insistence on non-violence. Note that he ALLOWED guns in self-defence. So one can call him half-liberal.

Sanjeev Sabhlok

View more posts from this author
2 thoughts on “India was blessed to have Gandhi. Without him India would have seen a total blood bath like China, Nazi Germany or USSR
  1. anupam

    For someone who was a staunch supporter of caste,racial segregation,hindu karma theory i would not even call him a quarter-liberal.

     
  2. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    No, he was not a liberal. He was a conservative who insisted on non-violence (non-aggression is a core principle of liberalism). He was not socialist.

    His contribution was that he prevented India from becoming Hell on earth through the likes of the extreme communists/ fascists and rabid Hindutvas.