laitimes

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

India, a country destined to rise.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

As a superpower with a voice and color, India has long been active in the international arena, and is a veritable "model of democracy" and "pioneer of freedom" in the eyes of Western countries.

Generally speaking, if you want to have a group of friends, or a superpower like the United States, after all, in the face of the super strength of the flock, other silent countries do not have the courage to say "no".

As a country whose strength is far inferior to that of the United States, the reason why India can meet the source and get around the international community is mainly because Indians have a lot of stupid money. At a time when the vast number of people are still starving, India has insisted on buying and buying at high prices for many years in order to dream of a great power with sound and color, which has deeply captured the hearts of international arms dealers, so both the United States and Russia have rushed to enshrine India as a guest of honor, and the olive branch thrown out is enough to weave a basket for the Indian people.

Of course, the fundamental reason why the United States and Russia and other major powers dare to sell a large number of advanced weapons to India, and even package them for production lines, is that India has never risen. Since the establishment of the gateway in 1947, India has been like a day for more than 70 years, and its long-term insistence on not rising, the performance of mud on the wall has made the United States, Russia and other countries feel at ease.

Because there is no strength, so everyone is very polite to India, but this is by no means India's original intention, after all, the effect that India's "three Thai tigers" want is "a roar of the tiger, the rabbit trembles three times", but the reality is that the rabbit not only does not shake but also wants to roll himself up again, which makes India feel deeply insulted while being disgraced.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

Therefore, although India rarely feels like being praised by the stars of the United States and Russia, it always has the ambition of a great power to rise. After all, India has not only sound and color, but also a head and a face, and they want Indian mythology rather than Indian jokes.

But India's rise is a more terrifying hellish task than "occupying Paris before the Surrender of France", and when India continues to advocate a "parallel rise" with China, the Indian elite's porcelain mentality and blunt words jump on the paper, which is the most speechless place in India.

In the view of the history of quiet night, the fundamental reason why the rise of India's great powers is difficult to ascend to the heavens is that India lacked Qin Shi Huang more than 2,000 years ago, and Chairman Mao more than 2,000 years later.

To put it bluntly, the hot soil of India is born without the soil that gives birth to great people.

Of course, in India, a country with a population of more than 1.3 billion, it would be too biased to say that all of them are rabble-rousers, after all, Indians have long occupied the CEO throne of Silicon Valley. In fact, in addition to ashoka, chao ri king, babur and other ancients, modern Indian history did give birth to at least three leaders, and also played an important role in the birth and rise of India, such as Gandhi, such as Nehru, such as Modi.

However, no matter which leader, it is difficult to lead India to the real rise, but it has led India to a strange path that is constantly deviating.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

1. The two ends of the "Mahatma" head rat

As a highly respected mahatma in the minds of Indians, Gandhi has always been a legend in Indian history.

As the son of the Prime Minister of the Indian state, Gandhi's original family was relatively wealthy, which was the fundamental reason why Gandhi was able to study in the UK and see the outside world.

And once he saw the colorfulness of the outside world, coupled with the unfair treatment of colonial status, Gandhi's desire to draw a line with the British colonists suddenly emerged. Then Gandhi found his own organization, the Congress Party.

As a political party that has been the most prominent party in Indian history, the Congress Party, whose full name is the Indian National Congress Party, originated in Mumbai in December 1885, and was founded by A.O. Hume, a retired British Indian civilian.

The original intention of the Congress Party was to be a bridge between the British colonialists and the merchant class in British India, a platform for the landlord and merchant class to brush up their sense of existence, and its goal of struggle was to achieve autonomy under British colonial rule and protect the interests of the landlord and merchant class.

After many divisions and mergers, in 1920 the idea of non-violent non-cooperation was identified as the guiding ideology of the Congress Party, and Gandhi became the de facto leader of the Congress Party.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

Although from 1927 onwards, Nehru's left shifted the goal of the Congress party's struggle towards full independence for India, its method of struggle remained non-violent and non-cooperative, in stark contrast to the wolf-smoke and flame-filled situation in other parts of the world.

The congress party insists on non-violent non-cooperation and opposes violent movements. In addition to the compromise nature of the Congress party itself as a bourgeois party, the fundamental reason is that the Congress Party is both the oppressed under the British colonial rule and the comprador collaborator of the British colonialists in India, and is a real vested interest. The Congress Party was most afraid of overthrowing itself when the people at the bottom woke up, so Gandhi repeatedly emphasized non-violence in order to protect the interests of his own class, so the Congress Party was supported by the Indian bourgeoisie and the landlord class.

The fundamental reason why this kind of first-and-last approach can unite most Indians at the same time is that in the process of struggle, Gandhi not only called for the unity of all religions, but also cared about the lives of the poor at the bottom, such as weaving native cloth to resist British textiles, traveling a long way to the sea to boil salt against the British salt monopoly, which made Gandhi's prestige after being captured and released by british colonists again and again.

After the end of the Second World War, Britain was completely beaten back to its original form, and the United States and the Soviet Union, which became a superpower after the war, vigorously promoted the independence of the peoples of the Third World in order to prevent the resurgence of colonial empires such as Britain and France, and Gandhi's non-violent non-cooperation movement finally waited for the day when the willows were dark.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

But as a veritable "offshore balancer, European churning stick", the British believe that "if you are well, then you have to pay it back", in order to stir up dissension or even "there are difficulties to go up, there is no difficulty to create difficulties to go up". Therefore, India, as the jewel in the crown of the Queen of England, is naturally not only not exempt from vulgarity, but also must be taken care of.

Immediately after the formation of the Congress Party, the British supported muslims to form the All India Muslim League in 1906, laying the foundation for the division of Hinduism and Islam and the "partition of India and Pakistan" in 1947.

The partition of India and Pakistan was undoubtedly not what Gandhi wanted to see, but the masses seemed to be more angry than Gandhi, so after the partition of India and Pakistan, the Hindu extremist Goldhewy assassinated Gandhi on January 30, 1948.

Gandhi's assassination not only heralded the end of Gandhi's era, but also opened the curtain on the Nehru era. It also declared the complete failure of Gandhi's attempt to integrate The Indian national identity with "Indian citizenship".

After all, even China, which has a long history, has experienced at least a thousand years before it has gradually gained its own national identity, from the founding of Confucianism in the Spring and Autumn Period to the "Three Religions Flowing Together" in the Wei and Jin Dynasties, and finally forming the chinese nation's ideology even as late as the War of Resistance Against Japan.

Therefore, gandhi alone could not integrate India and form an Indian national consciousness, and the efforts of future generations are equally important.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

2. The wishful thinking of the "founding prime minister"

As India's true founding leader, Nehru continued to fight tirelessly for India's rise after Gandhi's death.

Compared to other Asian countries enslaved by Western colonialists, India has made a really good start.

Although the partition of India and Pakistan has left India with nearly a million square kilometers less land than British India, and it has also been caught between the east and the west of Pakistan, what is more embarrassing is that the six northeastern states are almost completely cut off by East Pakistan.

But with an area of 2.98 million square kilometers, a large population, and no war or revolution, India has preserved a large number of British colonial heritage, including more than 60,000 kilometers of railways, more than 6 million skilled workers, and a relatively mature cotton and jute textile industry.

Moreover, because India, which pursues "non-alignment," is at the "gap" in Eurasia, the window of the Soviet Union to the four oceans, and the last link in the United States' encirclement of the socialist camp, the two superpowers of the United States and the Soviet Union have treated India with courtesy, especially the Soviet Union, not only giving money and goods to help India establish an industrial system, but also frequently standing for India in the international community.

Although the United States was once allied with Pakistan, it also responded to India's needs, such as the aircraft carrier into the Bay of Bengal in the late 1962 Sino-Indian War, cheering for nehru, who was afraid of dying.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

In addition to the competition between the United States and the Soviet Union, India, which led the Non-Aligned Movement, has long been a veritable third world leader, which can be described as a response in the international community.

It can be said that before India began to work hard, it had already realized Nehru's dream of being a "great power with sound and color".

Then, one step forward, is the abyss.

As a more prominent person than Gandhi's family, Nehru's position is undoubtedly a little higher, so he also knows what kind of undercurrents are surging beneath India's glamorous surface and what historical tasks India needs to complete.

In Nehru's view, India mainly needs to complete three tasks, namely, inheriting Gandhi's legacy to establish India's national consciousness, reversing the situation and establishing a strong state apparatus, and promoting industrialization to enhance India's comprehensive national strength.

Given that Gandhi's death had proved that religion could not play a unifying role, Nehru firmly chose the direction of secularization.

But the problem is that without a strong central government, it is difficult to implement the ruling power to all corners of the grass-roots level, and because the caste system is deeply rooted, it is difficult to eliminate illiteracy.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

Because of the extreme compromise nature of the non-violent non-cooperation movement, especially the mix of forces on all sides, India, as a so-called model of democracy, has no cohesion and dominance at all. Therefore, for more than 560 native states in the country, Nehru did not use hot hands to destroy flowers, but to coax and deceive. To put it bluntly, Nehru relied on his prestige to take a big step forward in the unification of India.

What about after Nehru? And what is even more frightening than the mountains caused by the tubang is that most of the land in India is in the hands of the landlord class, and the poor people, who make up the majority of the country, have no place to stand.

The serious uneven distribution of land has first led to serious social contradictions. However, in this large country where the caste system is deeply rooted, the channel for the rise of the lower caste is not the "following offense" of "the prince will have a kind of xiangning", but the cycle of suffering that endures humiliation and burden.

They believe that if they suffer a lot in this life, they will become superiors in the next life, so most Indians, especially the people at the bottom, take the initiative to "lie flat" from birth, so the land contradiction is not easy to cause social contradictions. What makes Indians greet each other with a knife and gun as soon as they meet is the clash of religions.

Nehru was most anxious about India's industrialization. Consider that the Soviet Union provided larger industrialization assistance than New China, but the Indian land was in the hands of the landlords, and the project could not be guaranteed, which also meant that India's industrialization could not be discussed at all.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

But the problem is that Nehru himself is a rich second generation, with a family of fertile land, countless manors, and a large number of slaves, and wants Nehru to revolutionize himself for india's industrialization.

So in the end, Nehru couldn't do it either, but damaged his prestige. So for the sake of his own face, Nehru decided to find another way, such as through a brilliant victory in a foreign war, to once again enhance Nehru's prestige, and then clear the way for his own governance.

Then, in the Sino-Indian War of 1962, Nehru turned the war of aggression into a capital defense war, and let the people of the world see the spectacle of African wildebeest migration on the South Asian subcontinent. Then, India was completely kicked off the altar of a Third World leader, and Nehru died of depression shortly after the defeat of the urine stream.

Of course, the tragic defeat objectively gave India a certain national awakening, after all, under the nest, the people of New Delhi could not run away, because they all had the label of Indians.

However, we did not give India a chance to think hard, and India soon swelled up again.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

3. The grand cause of "civilian leaders"

Nehru's depression did not change the situation in which the Congress party dominated India, and Nehru's daughter Ingillah Gandhi and grandson Rajiv Gandhi successively took power in India.

But like Nehru's tigers, neither Ingillah Gandhi nor Rajiv Gandhi was able to solve India's most intractable problems of national consciousness, industrialization, and central government, and instead, mother and son died as a result of religious strife and foreign provocation.

The Congress Party also gradually fell in the disappointment of the Indian people, and then the radical Bharatiya Janata Party came to power in 1996, and India also began a new journey in the post-Congress era.

As an important leader of the People's Party, Modi has also played a huge role in India's development.

Given the efforts of Nehru and the Congress party, without exception, the Modi government has once again forged a unique path: "uniting the majority."

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

As a civilian-turned-prime minister, Modi undoubtedly knows India better than Gandhi and Nehru. Modi argues that since religion cannot glue India and secularization is even less feasible, the least costly option is to pursue "Great Hinduism" and unite Hindus, who make up 83% of India's total population.

It turns out that this way of uniting the greatest common denominator has allowed Modi to achieve an unprecedented support rate, and the People's Party has been successfully re-elected in 2019 and continues to exist as the largest party in the Indian parliament.

However, there are pros and cons to everything, and Modi's vigorous unity of Hindus means the marginalization of non-Hindus, which has also become an important reason for the intensification of sectarian conflicts.

However, this does not seem to be what Modi is worried about, after all, the basic situation of Hindus is in place, and Modi's approval rating is as steady as a rock. Not only that, but the Modi government has also introduced the Citizenship Law, which openly cracks down on non-Hindus and provokes religious conflicts.

It should be said that this radical approach has indeed played a certain effect, and Modi, as a "strong" ruler, has been able to implement the abolition reform and toilet revolution in India, and vigorously enhance the dominance of the central government.

Under a series of drastic reforms by the Modi government, India's economy has experienced unprecedented rapid growth, and India's GDP has once surpassed That of France and Britain, becoming truly the fifth largest economy.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

But the problem is that India's structural contradictions have always been deeply rooted, especially the concentration of land in the hands of landlords, the caste system has seriously constrained the release of the demographic dividend, and the corrupt government system is even more unlovable. Therefore, the foreign capital that was fooled into going to India by the Modi government quickly regretted its intestines, especially in Japan, which had worked hard to grab the Indian high-speed rail project, and had already fainted in the toilet.

After the Modi government's three-plate axe fell, the Indian economy was quickly beaten back to its original shape, even if the cow dung cowshed was included in GDP, it would not help, after all, the cowshed would collapse and the cow dung would dry out.

Then, when the epidemic struck, India collapsed completely from the inside out, and the economy was even more collapsed, becoming the laughing stock of the international community.

But even so, the Modi government has not stopped jumping provocatively on the Sino-Indian border.

And this kind of beam-jumping clown's method is destined to accelerate India's fall into the abyss of no return.

Therefore, India cannot become China, let alone learn the skin of China. This hot land could not give birth to great figures like Qin Shi Huang and Chairman Mao, and India was doomed to become a real power.

Three men in one play? How did Gandhi, Nehru and Modi make India's rise a nod?

There are many omissions, please axe correction.

I am The History of Quiet Night and look forward to your attention.

Read on