Godse's defense speech
  • Godse's defense speech in court (a must read confession)






    This is the speech given by nathuram godse in the court when he was
    tried for the murder of mahatma Gandhi....really solid facts



    Do read this....really hard-hitting



    Born in a devotional Brahmin family, I instinctively came to revere
    Hindu
    religion, Hindu history and Hindu culture. I had, therefore, been
    intensely
    proud of Hinduism as a whole. As I grew up I developed a tendency to free
    thinking unfettered by any superstitious allegiance to any isms, political
    or religious. That is why I worked actively for the eradication of
    untouchability and the caste system based on birth alone. I openly joined
    anti-caste movements and maintained that all Hindus were of equal status as
    to rights, social and religious and should be considered high or low on merit
    alone and not through the accident of birth in a particular caste or
    profession. I used publicly to take part in organized anti-caste dinners
    in which thousands of Hindus, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Chamars
    and Bhangis participated. We broke the caste rules and dined in the
    company of each other.



    I have read the speeches and writings of Dadabhai Naoroji, Vivekanand,
    Gokhale, Tilak, along with the books of ancient and modern history of
    India and some prominent countries like England, France, America and'
    Russia. Moreover I studied the tenets of Socialism and Marxism. But above
    all I studied very closely whatever Veer Savarkar and Gandhiji had written
    and spoken, as to my mind these two ideologies have contributed more to
    the moulding of the thought and action of the Indian people during the
    last thirty years or so, than any other single factor has done.



    All this reading and thinking led me to believe it was my first duty to
    serve Hindudom and Hindus both as a patriot and as a world citizen.
    To secure the freedom and to safeguard the just interests of some thirty
    crores (300 million) of Hindus would automatically constitute the freedom
    and the well-being of all India, one fifth of human race. This conviction
    led me naturally to devote myself to the Hindu Sanghtanist ideology
    and programme, which alone, I came to believe, could win and preserve
    the national independence of Hindustan, my Motherland, and enable her to
    render true service to humanity as well.



    Since the year 1920, that is, after the demise of Lokamanya Tilak,
    Gandhiji's influence in the Congress first increased and then became
    supreme. His activities for public awakening were phenomenal in their
    intensity and were reinforced by the slogan of truth and non-violence
    which he paraded ostentatiously before the country. No sensible or
    enlightened person could object to those slogans. In fact there is nothing
    new or original in them. They are implicit in every constitutional
    public movement. But it is nothing but a mere dream if you imagine
    that the bulk of mankind is, or can ever become, capable of scrupulous
    adherence to these lofty principles in its normal life from day to day.
    In fact, hunour, duty and love of one's own kith and kin and country might
    often compel us to disregard non-violence and to use force. I could never
    conceive that an armed resistance to an aggression is unjust. I would
    consider it a religious and moral duty to resist and, if possible, to
    overpower such an enemy by use of force. [In the Ramayana] Rama killed
    Ravana in a tumultuous fight and relieved Sita. [In the Mahabharata],
    Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness; and Arjuna had to fight
    and slay quite a number of his friends and relations including the
    revered Bhishma because the latter was on the side of the aggressor.
    It is my firm belief that in dubbing Rama, Krishna and Arjuna as guilty
    of violence, the Mahatma betrayed a total ignorance of the springs of
    human action.



    In more recent history, it was the heroic fight put up by Chhatrapati
    Shivaji that first checked and eventually destroyed the Muslim tyranny
    in India. It was absolutely essentially for Shivaji to overpower and kill
    an aggressive Afzal Khan, failing which he would have lost his own life.
    In condemning history's towering warriors like Shivaji, Rana Pratap and
    Guru Gobind Singh as misguided patriots, Gandhiji has merely exposed his
    self-conceit. He was, paradoxical as it may appear, a violent pacifist
    who brought untold calamities on the country in the name of truth and
    non-violence, while Rana Pratap, Shivaji and the Guru will remain
    enshrined in the hearts of their countrymen for ever for the freedom
    they brought to them.



    The accumulating provocation of thirty-two years, culminating in his last
    pro-Muslim fast, at last goaded me to the conclusion that the existence
    of Gandhi should be brought to an end immediately. Gandhi had done very
    good in South Africa to uphold the rights and well-being of the Indian
    community there. But when he finally returned to India he developed a
    subjective mentality under which he alone was to be the final judge of
    what was right or wrong. If the country wanted his leadership, it had to
    accept his infallibility; if it did not, he would stand aloof from the
    Congress and carry on his own way. Against such an attitude there can be
    no halfway house. Either Congress had to surrender its will to his and had
    to be content with playing second fiddle to all his eccentricity,
    whimsicality, metaphysics and primitive vision, or it had to carry on
    without him. He alone was the Judge of everyone and every thing; he was
    the master brain guiding the civil disobedience movement; no other
    could know the technique of that movement. He alone knew when to begin
    and when to withdraw it. The movement might succeed or fail, it might
    bring untold disaster and political reverses but that could make no
    difference to the Mahatma's infallibility. 'A Satyagrahi can never fail'
    was his formula for declaring his own infallibility and nobody except
    himself knew what a Satyagrahi is.



    Thus, the Mahatma became the judge and jury in his own cause. These
    childish insanities and obstinacies, coupled with a most severe austerity
    of life, ceaseless work and lofty character made Gandhi formidable and
    irresistible. Many people thought that his politics were irrational
    but they had either to withdraw from the Congress or place their
    intelligence at his feet to do with as he liked. In a position of such
    absolute irresponsibility Gandhi was guilty of blunder after blunder,
    failure after failure, disaster after disaster.



    Gandhi's pro-Muslim policy is blatantly in his perverse attitude on
    the question of the national language of India. It is quite obvious
    that Hindi has the most prior claim to be accepted as the premier
    language. In the beginning of his career in India, Gandhi gave a great
    impetus to Hindi but as he f
  • Interesting...

    >
    >
    > Gandhi's pro-Muslim policy is blatantly in his perverse attitude on
    > the question of the national language of India. It is quite obvious
    > that Hindi has the most prior claim to be accepted as the premier
    > language. In the beginning of his career in India, Gandhi gave a great
    > impetus to Hindi but as he found that the Muslims did not like it, he
    > became a champion of what is called Hindustani. Everybody in India
    > knows that there is no language called Hindustani; it has no grammar; it
    > has no vocabulary. It is a mere dialect, it is spoken, but not written.
    > It is a bastard tongue and cross-breed between Hindi and Urdu, and
    > not even the Mahatma's sophistry could make it popular. But in his
    > desire to please the Muslims he insisted that Hindustani alone should be
    > the national language of India. His blind followers, of course,
    > supported him and the so-called hybrid language began to be used.
    > The charm and purity of the Hindi language was to be prostituted to
    > please the Muslims. All his experiments were at the expense of the
    > Hindus.
    >


    Looks like no one ever thought about the south indian languages.. and how
    they are very different from the hindi/hindustani/urdu..

    Nice to know different perspectives.. But violence/murder is not a solution
    to any of the grievances.. Infact Godse's murderous act setback his goals
    by atleast 50 years and resulted in more minority communalist appeasement..
  • Dear Mohanavel
    interesting read..!!!
    Everybody has his reasons and justifications...It would have been
    very impresive if the Sangh had taken arms and fought the british and
    chased them away...
    Even the great Netaji neede the Japanese to help him fight the british

    All he could do was weild his weapon on a unarmed oldman in a prayer
    ground very impressive and there are outfits which want polital
    mileage about anything so this has made an appearance

    The Indo Pak divide is called the greatest and Bloodiest Divorse in
    the World....

    Why because we were trying to preserve a land mass under one union
    following an occupation and preserve it...

    If interested Read
    Freedom at Midnight by Larry Collins and Dominique Lappieere(of City
    of Joy)

    Its a book every indian shoud read which starts with Gandhis Naokhali
    Hunger strike and ends with his death

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Top Posters