Mythbusting Jawaharlal Nehru

The need for this blog too comes from the conversations that I have had with people around me who seem to have a very negative image of Jawaharlal Nehru. This image is based on several myths that have been propagated over the years as an attack on Congress ( the political party ).

While I do not support this Congress , I support the Indian Congress which had the support of Indians from all the spectrum of ideologies pre-independence. That Congress belongs to the nation and not to some dynasts of a certain Prime Minister.

 The aim of this blog is not to defend Congress ( the political party ) or Nehru (the first prime Minister). I write this blog to defend the freedom fighter Jawaharlal Nehru and his contribution to the making of India as a nation.

Myths addressed-

1. Nehru became the first PM only because he was preferred by Gandhi.

2. Sardar Patel should have been the first PM of India as he was more popular.

3. Partition happened only because Nehru wanted to be the PM , had Jinnah been allowed to be first PM partition could have been avoided.

4. Nehru had a questionable character and seemed to have an affair with Mountbaten's wife.

Analysis

Myth 1 : Nehru became PM ' only ' because he was preferred by Gandhi.

To address this myth let us first consider whether Nehru was worthy enough to be the first PM?.

Jawaharlal Nehru entered the political scene in about 1920 with the Non- Cooperation Movement alongside Subash Bose. He was the son of probably one of the richest Indian lawyers ever -  Motilal Nehru. He entered politics despite the opposition of his father.

This shows that he could have easily lived a luxurious life in Europe ( where he studied ) , but he decided to leave that life aside and enter Gandhian politics of non - violence and satyagrah. He knew that the style of politics he was pursuing may make him end up in jail. But irrespective , he still decided to enter such politics.

Now, one may argue that he knew he could exceed in politics with support of his money and ultimately get to be the first PM. This argument is flawed at many levels -

- in 1920 freedom was no where in sight. The Congress was just re-emerging from the Moderates and Extremists divide , India had just lost its most popular leader Tilak and the British had just been victorious in the WW 1. Thus to think that he entered politics as he knew India would become independent and he will get to be PM is foolish.

- he had put his weight behind the Gandhian politics which involved going to prison. In the first movement that he participated i.e the NCM he was jailed. In those days even money or a dad like Motilal Nehru could not stop him from spending 9 years of his life in jail.

- In fact by 1929 , he was willing to go against the whole Congress leadership and demand for complete independence for India. This at a time when he had seen precedents of Sarvarkar and many others who were sentenced for life when they demanded that British leave India. 

( Jawaharlal Nehru was imprisoned nine times during the freedom struggle and was in jail for 3259 days.

He almost spent 9 years ( out of 27 years in political career ) of his life in Jail. )

So, kindly think in that context -

'You are a son of a rich tycoon ,you can easily live a luxurious life in Europe. But you choose to live a life where you will have to spend years ( probably even full lifetime ) sleeping in the rooms of some unsanitary Indian jail!!.'

Thus, it should clear any doubts regarding the popular perception that Nehru was a product of nepotism and the only qualification he had was being rich and close to Gandhi.

Myth  2 : Sardar Patel should have been the first PM as he was more popular.

This has probably been the most polarising debate regarding the legacy of Nehru and Patel. It has become so political that writing about this will defeat the whole purpose of this blog. So let us look at this issue with a different perspective.

By 1945 , it was clear that freedom was round the corner. At that moment there were 2 potential candidates ( J. Nehru and S. Patel ) in the Congress to lead India into freedom. However,  there could have been only 1 Prime Minister.

Gandhi preferred Nehru  over others as he shared his ideas of an India based on modern democratic values. He had pan-India popularity and good acceptance among Muslims , Dalits , Women ,Tribals etc. 

Being a UP wallah he was still quite popular even in South India and had been a star campaigner garnering crowds ever since the Congress rallies in 1937 elections.

Gandhi may have been wrong according to some but let use see how it panned out - 

- Nehru became the PM while Patel became the Home Minister and was only second to Nehru. In fact they both almost worked as a team on all major issues.

- Nehru being the more popular and acceptable among -  the Muslims who had stayed back , tribals , south Indians and other such marginal groups provided a sense of security. While Patel being a hard taskmaster was given the responsibility of getting the Princes on board and managing the defections.( For which he gets all the deserved credit )

- Unfortunately , Patel died in 1950 , well before the 1st Lok Sabha elections. Thus , Nehru being the PM became a blessing in disguise as it provided India the stable leadership for about 15 years post independence. It allowed smooth implementation and working of the Constitution and stabalisation of democracy in India.

This stability was the reason why India succeeded and remained stable post independence while almost all of our neighbors who got independence with us came under military dictatorships ( Myanamar , Pakistan ). Lack of stable leadership was the reason even Bangladesh came under military dictatorship post its independence.

Hence , had Patel been the PM , he would not have been alive till the first elections and the situation could have turned out like Pakistan where Jinnah died in 1948.

Also , Nehru was by far the most popular leader till his death. He could have easily become a dictator , but he chose to strengthen the institutions of democracy which allowed India to sustain even post his death.

Hence , it can be established that while both Nehru and Patel are given credit for initial establishment and stabalisation of India post independence , Nehru gets a little more credit just because he stayed a little longer.

Myth 3 : Partition happened only because Nehru wanted to be the PM and not allow Jinnah to lead.

This particular myth is based out of lack of understanding of history. It is a common perception that had Jinnah been allowed to be the PM partition could have been avoided.

In 1928 , when the British asked the Indians to come up with a constitution which is acceptable to all , Jinnah on behalf of Muslim League put forward the following demands which continued till independence.

Jinnah’s Fourteen Points

1. Federal constitution with residual powers with the provinces.
2. Provincial autonomy.
3. No constitutional amendment without the agreement of the states.
4. All legislatures and elected bodies to have adequate Muslim representation without reducing Muslim majority in a province to minority or equality.
5. Adequate representation of Muslims in the services and in self-governing bodies.
6. 1/3rd representation of Muslims in the Central Legislature.
7. 1/3rd Muslim members in the central and state cabinets.
8. Separate electorates.( i.e only Muslims to vote for Muslims )
9. No bill to be passed in any legislature if 3/4th of a minority community considers it against its interests.
10. Any reorganisation of territories not to affect the Muslim majority in Bengal, Punjab and the NWFP.
11. Separation of Sindh ( a Muslim majority province ) from Bombay Presidency.
12. Constitutional reforms in the NWFP and Baluchistan.
13. Full religion freedom for all communities.
14. Protection of the religious, cultural, educational and language rights of Muslims.

Kindly , read the above demands made by Jinnah which formed the basis of his politics till the independence. Could we have afforded to allow such a communal constitution which probably would have had more mention of the word ' Muslim ' than ' Right to '.?

Hence , it is foolish to think had Jinnah been made the first PM the partition could have been avoided. If at the cost of partition we got the constitution that we have today I would agree for a partition every day.

Finally , as i said it for Gandhi all those attempts at character assassination of Nehru are aimed at diverting the attention from his contributions. Those are part of his personal life and should not be of concern to anyone until the people involved themselves complain. Those aspects of his life should not be the parameter to judge his contributions to India.

Thank You for reading this far.

Amit Chauhan!!

NOTE: 

The aim of this blog is not political or to spread any specific ideology. I write this as an Indian who expects that our freedom fighters be respected and be given credit for all good they have done. Revering a SC Bose or VD Sarvarkar or Bhagat Singh for their contributions does not mean disrespecting Gandhi or Nehru.

It must also be noted that , here i do not defend the Prime Minister Nehru , I only defend the Freedom Fighter Nehru and the Indian Congress which fought the British and not the Political Party Congress.

Personally I feel many policies of Nehru post independence were a failure ( including handling of Kashmir or China or Pakistan ). However this must not stop me from acknowledging the sacrifices he made during the freedom movement.

Also , as i always say I do not expect you to change your mind overnight.You may even find some rebuttals for the arguments i have made but the objective of this is to moderate your views and prevent you from being brainwashed.

Happy Brainstorming!