FREE BHAGAT SINGH FROM MEDIA STEREOTYPES!

Recently Bhagat Singh was voted the greatest Indian of the 20^th century. It was, of course an opinion poll of a news channel, where mostly the urban youth voted. Ironically, the present generation, who almost worships him as “the quintessential rebel”, stands in complete dissonance with his views. The urban youth represent anything but Bhagat Singh in their lifestyles. He is our Indian version of Che Guevara. Both have been reduced to romantic, consumerist, adrenaline pumping militants, whose merchandise will be worn with aplomb, but their ideals pushed into the attics of their intellect. You will know what I mean as we trace the character of Bhagat Singh through the course of this article.

Bhagat Singh was born in Lahore and belonged to a family of freedom fighters, amongst them Ajit Singh is of some popularity. It was only natural that he had strong political convictions and patriotic sentiments from a very young age. One of the reasons that he is admired is that, he died at a young age of 23 for the love of his nation. While this is, no doubt, a heroic deed, many freedom fighters laid down their lives around this age. Amongst them, Ghadar revolutionary, Kartar Singh Sarabha was a big inspiration for Bhagat, whose picture he always kept in his pocket along with him, till the day of his arrest. Sarabha died at 20, but today, I doubt if anyone except history students know him, let alone admire him. This is no way implies that his sacrifice was unimportant or less in anyway. The question is why is it so? In the answer lies the reason for Bhagat Singh’s immense popularity.

Some distortions in the character of Bhagat Singh need to be dispelled, as painted by the mainstream media today. The first one is that he was a violent revolutionary, a militant. However, this is unfair to him. Prof. K.N. Panikkar observes, in his essay “Celebrating Bhagat Singh” “The popular image of Bhagat Singh is of a terrorist who took to violence in contrast to the pacifist methods adopted by the mainstream liberation movement under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. Bhagat Singh himself had drawn attention to this: “Let me announce with all the strength at my command that I am not a terrorist and I never was, except perhaps, in the beginning of my revolutionary career. And I am convinced that we cannot gain through those methods.” This oft-repeated self-appraisal points to the evolution of his political ideas and practice. Even if in his last political act he had used the bomb to make the deaf hear, he had long time back given up violence as a part of his political armoury. Such a transformation as a result of deep study and contemplation distinguished him from those who had earlier taken to the cult of the bomb. Such a transformation as a result of deep study and contemplation distinguished him from those who had earlier taken to the cult of the bomb.”

This should put to rest all the fallacious theories of taking to violence, just for the sake of it. It is well known, that as a young lad he had taken part in Gandhi’s non violent, non – cooperation movement, which was withdrawn after Chauri Chaura.

When Bhagat was 10, the Bolshevik Revolution was brought about in Russia, under Lenin. This had a profound impact on his thoughts. He immersed himself in to studying works of Marx, Lenin, Engels and Trotsky. He writes “Study, was the cry that reverberated in the corridors of my mind. My previous faith and convictions underwent a remarkable modification. The romance of violent methods alone which was so prominent amongst our predecessors was replaced by serious ideas… I got ample opportunity to study various ideals of world revolution. I studied Bakunin, the anarchist leader, something of Marx, the father of communism and much of Lenin, Trotsky and others, the men who had successfully carried out a revolution in their country.” It is no wonder that he came up with the slogan “Study and struggle” for the young political workers. Bhagat was a voracious reader, his reading varied from Victor Hugo, James Mill to the likes of Upton Sinclair and Spinoza. Another important and noticeable transformation is the withering away of the “romantic militant revolutionary’ to a man who had meditated upon and studied the socio-political, economical and historical conditions of his country and produced a lucid view of the society he wanted to build and gave an alternative to the Indian people. To this end, he studied Lenin, Marx and Trotsky, as they were the men who had “successfully” brought about a revolution, indicating his pragmatism. In this respect he differed from Gandhi, who said after the Chauri Chaura that we were not ready for independence.

Bhagat Singh

He had declared himself a rationalist and an atheist. The people, especially the Indian right wingers, who say that he read the Bhagwat Geeta, should go and read his pamphlet “Why I am an atheist?” This brings to light, another facet of Bhagat Singh’s personality, his tolerant, progressive and secular views. He abhorred the caste system that is in practice, unfortunately, till even today in India and believed that such an order should be created “where exploitation of man by man, in not possible.” Bipan Chandra, in his book India’s struggle for Independence, observes “More than any other contemporary leader, with the exception of Gandhiji, he understood the danger that communalism posed to Indian society and Indian nationalism. He often warned his comrades and followers that communalism was as big an enemy as colonialism…Religion, said Bhagat Singh, was the private concern of a person, but it had to be fought as an enemy when it intruded into politics and took the form of communalism. Bhagat Singh also believed that people must free themselves from the mental bondage of religion and superstition.”

He was an able organizer and took part in and organized various large-scale, mass rallies, whilst working with the Naujawan Bharat Sabha (NBS) and the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association (HSRA). He was elected the secretary of the NBS. He emphasized the need to work with the masses or the proletariat of India. According to him, the real revolutionaries were the workers and the farmers in the villages, and they needed to be organized if India was to make any strides towards the goal of independence. Another idiotic thing that is propagated by the modern day media about Bhagat is that he had an intrinsic dislike for the Congress leaders, like Gandhi and Nehru. In fact, he wrote a letter, stating that he respected these leaders enormously and appreciated their contribution to the independence struggle. Although he had political disagreements with them, which is perfectly fine. He considered them to be looking after the concerns of the bourgeois and their petty compromises while dealing with the establishment peeved him. He did not discount the role of compromises in Politics altogether, being the pragmatist that he was, on the contrary he thought they were an inevitable part of the process. However, the bone of contention was the “nature of compromises”. A compromise should lead you somewhere or put you in a position where you could move forward, in his opinion, the compromises were meek and almost subservient, to be harsh. Another preposterous assumption is that Gandhi conspired with Erwin to kill Bhagat, or else he could have got a commutation. First of all, it is useless to even consider this point, let alone polemically dismiss it. If Gandhi would have succeeded in getting Bhagat a reprieve, he would have been assaulted with a scathing critique by none other than Bhagat himself, as his father received when he pleaded for clemency. He would have considered it “nothing short of treacherous” had it not been from his father, in his own words.

Today the youth and the media have more or less killed his ideals of “study and struggle”, equitable distribution of wealth and working with the masses. This is reflected in the bankrupt state of youth politics and the anti-intellectual movement that is growing in our country. Parallels are drawn with him, of a man, who killed out of pure spite, in a supposedly landmark political movie “Rang De Basanti’. He is an icon of a consumerist, rebellious teenager, who wants revolution, without even knowing the meaning of the term. What that does is, to give ample scope for the communal forces in our country to portray him as an ultra nationalist, and just use him for political mileage. While he was way above all this, it appalled me to see that RSS had suggested his name for Bharat Ratna. How dare they use him to polarize thought? It is like Hitler recommending Einstein for the Nobel, to galvanize Jewish support! If you really want to know Bhagat, read his thoughts, try to imagine the amount of intellectual prowess that man possessed, that at the age 16 – 17, he was reading historical literature to pave a revolutionary theory! Imagine the superhuman will that man possessed, that made him, triumphantly in the end, withstand heinous and inhuman torture. Imagine the love he had, for his country, for justice, peace and for humanity above all, that he sprinkled the altar of revolution with his blood, for the noblest of causes. I can remember Che Guevara’s words at this point “At the risk of seeming ridiculous, let me say that every true revolutionary is guided by the principle of love…” Stop selling or buying a non existent image of Bhagat Singh! Free him from the shackles of shallow commercialism and the profit motive. Try to interpret, I don’t even say emulate, his works and his life. How a very shy, tall Sikh lad, from a village, registered his names forever in the annals of history! Shaheed – e Aazam Bhagat Singh, Inquilaab Zindabad! (Long Live revolution!)

For further reading and finding out my sources for this article you can visit :

www.shaheedbhagatsingh.org

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2421/stories/20071102500100400.htm ( Essay- Celebrating Bhagat Singh)

http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl2421/stories/20071102500100400.htm (Frontline Issue)

www.cpim.org – The Marxist – Bhagat Singh: An Immortal Revolutionary – Ashok Dhawle