Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Bhagat Singh Terrorist or freedom fighter????

Discussion in 'National Politics' started by Bad Wolf, Apr 19, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bad Wolf

    Bad Wolf Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,453
    Likes Received:
    632
    Was Bhagat Singh a terrorist?
    1 Nov 2007, 0028 hrs IST,Ashish Sinha,TNN


    IAS general studies paper on Oct 26 asked examinees to evaluate contribution of 'revolutionary terrorism' represented by Bhagat Singh (TOI Photo)
    NEW DELHI: Was Bhagat Singh a terrorist? UPSC has unwittingly triggered a debate on whether the legendary martyr should be called a "revolutionary terrorist" - a term historians have been using to describe the freedom fighter but which now, many experts say, needs a rethink because of the changed connotations of the word.

    In the general studies paper of UPSC's civil services exam, held on October 26, candidates were asked to evaluate the contribution of "revolutionary terrorism represented by Bhagat Singh". In the last four days, the way the question was framed has led to a court case in Kanpur and protests in Chandigarh and Ambala, with some agitators even landing at the commission's doors.

    In the martyr's birth centenary year, UPSC had just put in a phrase being used in school and university texts. But now, the historians who had called Bhagat Singh's struggle "revolutionary terrorism" are pressing for a rethink.

    Leading historian Bipan Chandra, possibly the most frequent user of the term, on Wednesday called for change. "It was a phrase of praise then and was used to distinguish Bhagat Singh from the other streams of freedom struggle. But the word terrorism has assumed a different meaning now. I would not like it to be used any longer," the professor emeritus at JNU said. Neeladri Bhattacharya, another JNU professor, agreed with Chandra but said a distinction should be made between "revolutionary terrorism" and "terrorism".


    Was Bhagat Singh a terrorist?-India-The Times of India
     
  2. Bad Wolf

    Bad Wolf Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,453
    Likes Received:
    632
  3. rcscwc

    rcscwc Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    593
    For Marxist historians, Bhagat has always been a terrorist and Netaji a war criminal. In Romila Thapar's view, Guru Tegh Bahadur was a robber and rapist.
     
    1 person likes this.
  4. Sid

    Sid Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,172
    Likes Received:
    283
    I second that.
     
  5. ek_indian

    ek_indian Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    132
    I am not too sure but I have this suspicision also which you guys are pointing.

    There is only one thing common between Romila Thapar, Bipin Chandra, Satish Chandra, Irfan Habib etc. All of them are way too sympathetic to leftist ideology. Though every mentioned individual's expertise is unquestioned still the neutrality of the output (however good they look like) can be debated.

    On a second thought, I guess it is deliberately done to impart secular credentials. Basically idea of India is most important.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2011
  6. Sid

    Sid Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,172
    Likes Received:
    283
    There is a very thin line between following secularism and minority appeasement. Regular leftist leanings of these so called historians is now being considered as minority appeasement.

    What an irony that people who consider foreigners like Stalin and Marx as there demi-gods are writing history of India.
     
  7. Optimist

    Optimist Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    740
    Likes Received:
    127
    He was an extremist not a terrorist.
     
  8. RoYaN

    RoYaN Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    6,454
    Likes Received:
    917
    Extremist definitely!!!
    Terrorist it depends on who shoes step in to!!
     
  9. rcscwc

    rcscwc Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    593
    As long as Stalin and Hitler were chums, the latter was a darling of Marxist. The moment there was Russo-German war on, Hitler was a villain, and British were darlings of Marxists. So Netaji became a war criminal, Gandhi was extremist and was opposed. Whatever the merits of the call, Quit India was condemned by Communists of India.

    Look through Marxist prism, it is easy to know who is who.
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2011
  10. Hashu

    Hashu Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    797
    Likes Received:
    145
    no way! he didn't kill plant bombs or anything! he fought the brits and got India free! btw he gave up his life for his country---i think that's an important detail!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page