is that the Bhadralok which vociferously stood for division on religious identity lines and which embraced Bankim Chandra as one of their intellectual seers was composed entirely of land lords (zamindars or rent receiving class as lightly referred to here) !
The Bhadralok were people of means, people who owned excess farmland and had armies of half starving people from the underclass working for them, producing all their food and bringing it home for them and selling the excess and bringing home the proceeds. The men and women of the Bhadralok did not have to work for a living, very often did not even have to do mundane chores of maintaining their homes !
In such circumstances, the emergence of liberal ideas in Bengal in the latter half of the nineteenth and first half of the twentieth centuries (propounded by a host of reformers including Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Vivekananda, Tagore, etc) was seen as a direct threat by the Bhadralok to their continued hold over a disproportionately high share of resources !
The embrace of the so called hindutva was simply the route the Bhadralok believed would prevent those liberal ideas of humanism, equality, fraternity and universal justice from ending up divesting them of all the excess farmland and other resources held captive by them.
In short, the so called hindutva embraced by the Bhadralok hyndus and their high reverence for Bankim Chandra were only measures taken to keep the majority of hyndus in Bengal as their slaves !
Even after partition, muslims could not be made secular, maximum fanatic approach - their Maulana link every issue with religion. Are we in Secular State, and many local politicians including congress is pampering them.
Even after partition, muslims could not be made secular, maximum fanatic approach - their Maulana link every issue with religion. Are we in Secular State, and many local politicians including congress is pampering them.
What is not mentioned in this article by
piri on Jul 07, 2018 01:48 AM | Hide replies | Hide message
is that the Bhadralok which vociferously stood for division on religious identity lines and which embraced Bankim Chandra as one of their intellectual seers was composed entirely of land lords (zamindars or rent receiving class as lightly referred to here) !
The Bhadralok were people of means, people who owned excess farmland and had armies of half starving people from the underclass working for them, producing all their food and bringing it home for them and selling the excess and bringing home the proceeds. The men and women of the Bhadralok did not have to work for a living, very often did not even have to do mundane chores of maintaining their homes !
In such circumstances, the emergence of liberal ideas in Bengal in the latter half of the nineteenth and first half of the twentieth centuries (propounded by a host of reformers including Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Vivekananda, Tagore, etc) was seen as a direct threat by the Bhadralok to their continued hold over a disproportionately high share of resources !
The embrace of the so called hindutva was simply the route the Bhadralok believed would prevent those liberal ideas of humanism, equality, fraternity and universal justice from ending up divesting them of all the excess farmland and other resources held captive by them.
In short, the so called hindutva embraced by the Bhadralok hyndus and their high reverence for Bankim Chandra were only measures taken to keep the majority of hyndus in Bengal as their slaves !
"We can mix with the English in a social way. We can eat with them, they can eat with us. Whatever hope we have of progress is from them. The Bengalis can in no way assist our progress" Reality speak is this .Aspirations said fair and square! Stand by it.Shift not stand!R.PONNAMBALAM
If we join the political movement of the Bengalis our nation will reap loss, for we do not want to become subjects of the Hindus instead of the subjects of the "People of the Book." And as far as we can we should remain faithful to the English Government. By this my meaning is not that I am inclined towards their religion".So wanted to be faithful to the English Govt."wanted to be the Subject of the People of the book? Great aspiration! This is Unity .This is not polarization.This is not hate?Why do the blame is put on others.That is question .You feel and do what you want.Why this pretension eternal?R.PONNAMBALAM
Please throw light on “Our Mahomedan nation has hitherto sat silent”said in Meerut in 1888!Where was or is that Mahomedan nation? In whose hands shall the administration and the Empire of India rest?, suppose that --the whole English army, were to leave— the Mahomedans and the Hindus — could sit on the same throne and remain equal in power Most certainly not.Why one country was divided that day in MEERUT?You know who did it?R.PONNAMBALAM
