Expert - My Contemporaries Mahatma Gandhi

I have a powerful object. That object is the will of the people. The will of the people has immense power. At present, in our country, the full meaning of this word has not been fully explained. However, in English, the meaning of this word is very powerful. In English, this word is called “public omnium”. Before it, even the emperor can do nothing. |

Churchill was a brave man. He came from a wealthy family. He was a very eloquent speaker. He was also an educated man. He was a bit like me. But despite all these qualities, Churchill could not hold his seat. This meant that the will of the people of his country was very strong.

(Deuteronomy 10:6,47)

This morning the newspapers printed a summary of Mr. Churchill's speech, sent by a Reuters correspondent. I will translate and give you the following. The summary of the speech is as follows.

Mr. Churchill, in a speech in England tonight, said: “There are terrible movements taking place in India. I am not surprised at them. There are wanton killings and atrocities. The people who are carrying on these animalistic movements and atrocities are their own people, of different races. They are abusing each other. The people who are carrying on this anarchy are the very people who have the potential to produce a high culture. They have lived for ages in peace under the British Parliament and under British rule. I have one thing to fear. A part of the world has been peaceful for the last sixty or seventy years. The population of that part is likely to be much reduced in the future, almost everywhere. With the decrease of population, the civilization of that vast country will also fall. That prospect will be the greatest disappointment and sorrow of Asia.”

Mr. Churchill is a great man, as we all know. Mr. Churchill was born into a noble family in England. The Malvern family is a famous family in English history. When the Second World War broke out, Mr. Churchill was able to take on his administrative responsibilities with great strength. At that time, he was able to save the British Empire from falling into a deep abyss. It is clear that he was able to do so. It is not true that Britain would not have been able to win the war without the help of the United States and other allied countries. Without Mr. Churchill's efforts, it would not have been easy to become a united group of allied countries. Mr. Churchill's efforts during the Second World War are only a testament to his strength.

But after the war was won, England easily replaced Churchill's government with a Labour government to restore life to the British Isles, which had suffered the greatest loss of life and money in the war. The English, having judged the time, decided to break up the empire of their own accord and to build in its place an empire of hearts that could not be obtained from outside. India was divided into two parts. But both parts, of their own free will, decided to become members of the British Commonwealth. All parties in England took steps to give India independence. Mr. Churchill and his party were also involved in this work. How the future will judge the steps taken by the English is a separate matter.

In modern history, there is no comparable work to the British abdication. I am reminded of the abdication of Ashoka. But Ashoka is not comparable to him. At the same time, he is not a figure in modern history. Therefore, when I read the summary of Mr. Churchill's speech in Reuters, I was saddened. I wondered whether the famous news agency that reported it had misrepresented Mr. Churchill's speech.

Mr. Churchill, by his speech, has done a disservice to the country which he had done so much good for. If one knew that India would suffer such a terrible fate after gaining independence from British rule, one would not think for a moment that the blame for this lies entirely with the founders of the empire and not with those who, according to Churchill, had the power to produce a high civilization.

In my opinion, Mr. Churchill is trying to mix up the whole of India in his speech without any limits. There are millions of people living in India. Of these people, there are hundreds of thousands who are as helpless as savages. No one takes them into account. Mr. Churchill himself should come to India and investigate the situation in India. If Mr. Churchill were to come, he would not do so as a man of a party with definite ideas on any subject, but as a neutral Englishman who has the full intention of making the English government successful, who values ​​the interests of his country more than any party.

The partition of India was like setting the two parts against each other. Giving independence to the two parts was like tarnishing the image of independence. It would not be helpful to say that either part of the two parts should be independent if it did not want to be part of the British Commonwealth.

I don't want to say much more on this subject.

I would just like to say why Mr. Churchill needs to speak with caution on this subject. Mr. Churchill condemns the work of his colleagues before he has investigated the situation himself.

Many of you have allowed Mr. Churchill to speak as he does. There is still time enough for you to correct your methods and to show Mr. Churchill wrong. I know that no one will listen to me today. If it were not so, and if people had accepted what I said before we began to discuss the subject of independence, as they do now, I understand that the savage life that Mr. Churchill describes would not have come.

( From Gandhi's "Mary Sama Kalina")

Film Poetry, Volume 6, No. 17, 2001, June

 

          Saroni, who saw Gandhi

Sarojini Devi was elected as the President of the Congress Party for the coming year, and she was elected as the President of the Congress Party last year. She was a person of great ability and merit. Sarojini Naing was a worthy candidate for the position of President of the Congress Party because of her boundless talent and her service as a national representative in East and South Africa.

At a time like this, electing a distinguished daughter of India as the President of the Congress Party, while the influence of the reception committee is still in full swing, is a fitting tribute to the women of India.

The election of Sarojini Naidu as the President of the Congress Party will give our compatriots abroad complete satisfaction and will give them the strength to successfully fight the battles that lie ahead. The presence of Sarojini Naidu in the highest position the country has given them will bring freedom closer to us.

Twelve days ago, Sarojini Naidu left for the United States. Many of us had hoped that our permanent institutions in Europe, America, and other countries, or rather our representatives, would dispel the myths. For me, such hopes are misplaced.

By doing so, public money and the valuable time of some people will be wasted. But if it is beneficial for someone to go to the West, then it will be beneficial for Sarojini Naidu or Tagore to go. Sarojini Naidu's name is famous in the West because of her poetry collections. Sarojini Naidu is also clever. Sarojini understands how to speak on any subject and how much. Sarojini has the ability to speak the truth boldly without hurting anyone. Wherever she goes, it will not be easy for people to work without listening to what she says.

In South Africa, Sarojini Naidu used her talents to the fullest extent. She managed to convince the British in South Africa and clear the way for the Sahayak delegation. The work she had to do in South Africa was not easy. However, in South Africa, Sarojini Naidu, without compromising her reputation and without compromising the law, did important work well and brought glory to India. Sarojini Naidu would do similar work in countries like America. Her arrival in America would also serve as an answer to Mrs. Mayo's false statements. Her courage was like her other talents. Sarojini did not need anyone's help when she went abroad. She did not need anyone's friendship. She could travel alone without fear in the place she was going to.

I often receive letters from many friends in America. In these letters, they praise Sarojini’s work. One friend wrote, “Sarojini is doing a very important work in America. She is using all the talents God has given her to the full for this country. There is no doubt that Sarojini can win the hearts of the Americans.” A dear sister from Canada also wrote a long letter of her experiences. In this letter, I will mention a few things.

“Sarojini has been my guest for some time. I consider myself fortunate to have met Gandhi’s friend and envoy. I am a woman myself. She is a woman. Sarojini is a poet. She is a reformer. So Sarojini has stolen my heart again. Her heart has had a profound influence on me. Even though so much time has passed, the memory of meeting her has not faded from my heart. Sarojini was in the church where she was giving her lecture. The church where Sarojini was giving her lecture was packed. Her intelligence, her experience, her poetic talent, her sweet and cool voice, her eloquent speech, her knowledge of the English language,