Aakar patel biography of mahatma

  • Manmohan Singh's legacy is defined by his intellectual depth, calm leadership, and commitment to inclusion, contrasting sharply with today's divisive politics.
  • Even his autobiography, the work we know as The Story of My Experiments with Truth, was translated by somebody else — his secretary, Mahadev.
  • Aakar Patel's main thesis is that the Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh's idea of Hindu Rashtra is nothing but isolation and marginalization of Muslims.

    • •

    Aakar Patel | History is likely to remember Manmohan Singh quite warmly…

    Much has been written and will be written about what Manmohan Singh was. Here are a few lines on what he was not.

    Manmohan Singh was not a representative of New India. He was a leader from the older idea of India. He stressed inclusion and not division. If he brought up religion in public speeches, it was not because he was trying to malign and demonise particular groups and rouse the population against them.

    To the new adult of New India, over 18 years old and voting today but only 10 in and steeped in a decade of hate, this may come as a surprise but that was the established template of India’s leadership in the past. Manmohan Singh represented its finest aspects.

    Dr Singh was not heroic and not given to bombast. He did not refer to himself in the third person in his speeches. He did not wear suits with his name embroidered on them in gold pinstripes. He did not make much of his humble origins and when t

    •

    How Aakar Patel Under-Read The Character Of Hindu Rashtra? A Review Article

     

    Aakar Patel starts his timely and well-researched book Our Hindu Rashtra: What It Is. How We Got Here with a sentence “Majoritarianism fryst vatten primitive and easy to do”. He surmises that establishment of Hindu Rashtra, which has only one meaning, that a Kshatriya king should rule the Hindu Rashtra under the supervision of a Brahmin head präst. Such a Hindu Rashtra was in existence in Nepal mot abolition of monarchy in

    According to him India had no Varna-Dharmik Hindu Rashtra for a long time in history, therefore, it fryst vatten not possible to establish it now. It fryst vatten true that unlike Nepal, which fryst vatten a small state and fully hegemonic Brahmin-Kshatriya forces with small non-tribal population, India was very vast and never had any one ruler with his/her Brahmin guru/priest ruling entire India. However, we must not also forget that most of the princely states that existed mot were Hindu Rashtras. Wherever Mu

    •

    Aakar Patel | Sardar worked differently from Nehru, but had the same ideals

    We are in the middle of yet another election cycle (do these things never end?) and the matter of Jawaharlal Nehru versus Sardar Patel has returned. This newspaper had a headline a few weeks ago, reporting a speech by the Union home minister: “Had Sardar Patel been India’s 1st PM, many problems would not have occurred: Shah”.

    This continues the ruling party’s effort at producing a generation that thinks of Patel and Subhas Chandra Bose as different from the Congress, and even haters of the party.

    But let us return to the question: What if Patel had been Prime Minister instead of Jawaharlal Nehru?

    This counterfactual never seems to vanish, especially in Gujarat, which considers this an injustice done to Patel — seen as more competent, more nationalist, more capitalist — than Nehru.

    There are three assumptions in the Patel-not-Nehru view. First, that Vallabhbhai resente

  • aakar patel biography of mahatma