Anna and Mahatma Gandhi
Anna hails from a small village in Maharashtra, India and leads a very simple life in a temple like a saint. Anna is neither a barrister nor a graduate, served the defense forces for a few years and jumped into social services, earned international status. From the last one year Anna has been hard struggling to eradicate the cancer of corruption from India. Corruption is flowing through the thick blood of rulers, save a few, who are in power and also through the thin blood of common man who is compelled to adopt bribery for getting things done lawfully or lawlessly. Anna has been demanding a strong Janlokpal Bill but in vain. He went on hunger strike in July/August 2011 and now again for the eradication of corruption.
People called Anna as another Mahatma Gandhi of India. Gandhiji hails from a good family in Porbundar, educated in Rajkot, and then went to UK to become a barrister. Gandhiji fought tooth and nail in South Africa for the rights of the Indians settled there. He returned to India in mid-1925. Gokhale, his guru, advised him to travel far and wide in India to read the mind of people of India. He did so and he was hooked by the Indian National Congress party in the ongoing independence movement of India. And we know he went many times on hunger strikes rarely against the Indian people like Dr. Ambedkar but normally against British to obtain more rights for Indians as he did in Africa. Because of the world scenario after WW-II, British cunningly left India sowing seeds of… that made Gandhiji martyr. Both Anna and Gandhiji are involved in making India a well-fare state, but they are unique in their own ways. The challenges then and today are entirely different. Hence, that comparing Gandhi with Anna or vice verse amounts to disrespect to both. Let us reason out this.
Independence movement of India can be traced back as early as in 1857. India had stalwarts like Robindranath Tagore, Swami Vivekanada, Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Dayananda Sarasvati and many more who made the soil ready for crop. Then came Krantikaris and many strong political leaders like Lal, Bal and Pal. Lokmanya Tilak expired in 1920. But by this time he implemented Ganesh festival, four folds approach of which Rashtriya Shikshan, and Swadeshi were the backbone. Hence Bengal and Maharashtra were just boiling and became a threat to British throne. This had provided a wonderful support to Gandhiji. His karamabhumi was Maharashtra and to some extent Ahmadabad. His main Ashramas like Sewagram and Uruli Kanchan were in Maharshtra and one Sabarmati, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, and was well supported by wealthy people like Bajaj and Birla. Even Dr. Hedgewar, who founded RSS in 1925 and died in 1940, was, unlike Jinnah, a pucca Congressman, was a member of Congress Party, involved with social work and also with Tilak faction of the Comgress Party. In the 1920 session of Indian National Congress held in Nagpur, Dr Hedgewar was appointed as the Deputy Chief of volunteers cader overseeing the whole function. Dr. Hedgewar was in jail twice, one year in 1921 and 9 months in 1930. To mention but a few, Vinoba Bhave, Patwardhan, Balkoba, Sane Guruji, and many more were amongst the stanch followers of Gandhiji. Thus, Gandhiji had loyal followers, supporters and mass appeal, though he was not, as I understand, an official member of the Indian National Congress Party. These true Gandhians kept away themselves from political activities as Gandhiji probably thought the main work of Congress party was over, all Indians supported independence movement then led by a single Party called Indian National Congress, and therefore Gandhiji advised to dissolve the party and keep away from politics and power game. Hence true Gandhians distanced away from politics but many others started testing the fruits of power, and that might be one of the reasons that corruption started creeping in.
On the other hand, Anna has to fight against his own people who are not falling short of any trick to make Anna down. They leveled the charges against Anna unheard during the days of Gandhiji, who was carrying forward the movement started by 1880s and never faced the dirty tricks today we witness like personal attacks on character, creating confusion in the minds of people, infusing quarrels in a team, the politics of religion, number game, Anna, who works at a village level, is incapable to go to national level, etc.
In view of the above, is it logical and reasonable to call Anna as Gandhi of today? By such a calling we are insulting both; we understood neither Gandhi nor Anna. Hence, support Anna in the present context of corruption simply in the interest of nation.
******
People called Anna as another Mahatma Gandhi of India. Gandhiji hails from a good family in Porbundar, educated in Rajkot, and then went to UK to become a barrister. Gandhiji fought tooth and nail in South Africa for the rights of the Indians settled there. He returned to India in mid-1925. Gokhale, his guru, advised him to travel far and wide in India to read the mind of people of India. He did so and he was hooked by the Indian National Congress party in the ongoing independence movement of India. And we know he went many times on hunger strikes rarely against the Indian people like Dr. Ambedkar but normally against British to obtain more rights for Indians as he did in Africa. Because of the world scenario after WW-II, British cunningly left India sowing seeds of… that made Gandhiji martyr. Both Anna and Gandhiji are involved in making India a well-fare state, but they are unique in their own ways. The challenges then and today are entirely different. Hence, that comparing Gandhi with Anna or vice verse amounts to disrespect to both. Let us reason out this.
