Skip to main content

Nothing wrong in calling Amit Shah, but will this top school also call Rahul or Kejriwal?

By Rajiv Shah* 
A letter, reportedly signed by group of former students from the school in which I spent 12 long years – from the nursery to the 11th -- New Delhi’s Sardar Patel Vidyalaya (SVP) took me back to my SPV days, late 1950s and the entire decade of 1960s. In the “open letter”, which has been published in full in The Wire a day after the news agency PTI released a news on it, the 300 plus signatories, all school alumni, question the decision to invite Union home minister Amit Shah to the school as chief guest on the Sardar Patel Jayanti, which fell on October 31.
Founded by HM Patel, I was a little saddened to see that there is little on the SPV’s site about the school’s history – except a mere 56 seconds video. A known right-winger who joined the Swatantra Party some time in 1960s, HM Patel was close to Sardar Patel, but was out-and-out secularist and a democrat. One who became civil servant before the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) was founded, he was instrumental in the preparation and implementation of the crucial document “The Administrative Consequences of Partition.”
Among HM Patel’s major contributions was, as defence secretary between 1947 and 1953, he ensured reduction in the powers of the Indian Armed Forces because it was feared that they might take over the country. He also succeeded in separating finances from the Forces by pushing for the civilian government to pass a separate budget for defence in Parliament every year. HM Patel, who continued as one of India's highest-ranking civil servants till 1958, post-Emergency, from 1977 to 1979 also served as Finance Minister and Home Minister.
Looking back, today I am proud to be part of the school – and surely not because it is considered one of the best (or should I say a most sought after?) elite schools of Delhi – but because it was founded by HM Patel, whose contributions surely outweigh his later day political meanderings. The school management, under founder-principal Raghubhai Nayak and his wife, Jashiben, daughter of a prominent Gandhian educationist in Gujarat, were close to HM Patel’s worldview, and went out of the way to promote Sardar Patel – even as “remembering” Mahatma Gandhi.
The letter objecting to Amit Shah being called at the SPV function said, the decision undermined the SPV’s “ethos, that stands for the Constitution and pluralism.” Claiming that under the “current climate of hate and violence” Amit Shah has been responsible for “flagrant disregard of constitutional values”, it continued, “We are a school that encourages questioning, democratic ideals of dissent, argument and debate”, insisting, “As a senior leader of the BJP -- the political front of the RSS -- Amit Shah stands in opposition to the ideals of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, that have been inculcated in us by SPV.”
Noting that the BJP has lately appropriated Sardar Patel in the recent years, the letter said, he “banned the RSS in 1948 after Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination while he was the home minister”, even as quoting from a communiqué issued of February 4, 1948, in which the Government of India said it was banning the organisation "to root out the forces of hate and violence that are at work in our country and imperil the freedom of the nation.”
The letter further quoted Sardar Patel as stating, he told Hindu Mahasabha leader Shyama Prasad Mookerjee on July 18, 1948 with regard to Gandhiji’s assassination, that “activities of the RSS constituted a clear threat to the existence of Government and the State”. Sardar Patel made his views “explicit” on September 11, 1948, telling MS Golwalkar, that “all their (RSS) speeches were full of communal poison” and that “it was not necessary to spread poison in order to enthuse the Hindus and organise for their protection.”
The letter believed, based on these facts, “The politics of the current ruling party represented by Amit Shah is at complete variance with the ideology of Sardar Patel, and therefore goes against the very ethos of what this school and this country stand for.” It added, "Our Vidyalaya has taught us to respect diversity as we were encouraged to celebrate all festivals during morning assemblies, develop a curiosity for difference and the ability to learn from it.”
In late 1960s Vajpayee was called to make a speech – even though he and his party (Jana Sangh) then were virtual political non-entity
Though an alumnus of the SPV (I passed out in 1970 after spending 12 years in the school, nursery plus 11 years), ironically, I did not receive the letter. Nobody emailed it to me, though I am in touch with a few of them, and have even registered myself as an alumnus both on social media and the school site. Though there is nothing in its contents with which I would possibly disagree, I personally felt that insisting on not calling Amit Shah violated the very spirit of SPV about which the letter advocates.
Jashiben-Raghubhai Nayak, HM Patel
Perhaps a more prudent approach would have been -- it is all right you are calling Amit Shah, we disagree with his views, but the students, who were being made to listen to his views (of standards 10th to 12th) have all the right to listen to other viewpoints, too, of Rahul Gandhi, Arvind Kejriwal, Sitaram Yechury, to name a few. The children should be free to make their opinion after listening to all the viewpoints, and one just one, who happens to be a top politician.
I listened to to Amit Shah on YouTube, but I don’t know if he freely interacted with the school children, nor do I know if media was called to cover the event. Known to air political views without any limits, he had no problem in stating that had Sardar Patel been made India’s first Prime Minister, India wouldn’t have faced the problems which it faced post-Independence, over the last 75 years. 
Amit Shah, however, appeared to contradict himself a little later: He said, Sardar Patel “relinquished” the PM’s post and allowed Nehru to become PM. Of course, he conveniently didn’t recall, it was Gandhiji who wanted Nehru to take over the reins of power. Stating only half-truths, and obliterating facts which may be politically "harmful", is known to be a convenient pastime of our politicians. But who cares?
I remember, in 1968 (or was it 1969?), Atal Behari Vajpayee was called to make a speech during an SPV function – even though at that point of time, he and his party (Jana Sangh) were virtual political non-entity. Vajpayee praised the powerful rebellion in Czechoslovakia in which people protested against the country’s leadership of acting like a Soviet tutelage. In his strong speech, in which he spoke highly of democracy and freedom, he sharply criticised the Soviet invasion of the East European country which crushed the rebellion.
I wonder: If Vajpayee could be called in 1968, why couldn’t the school administration consider calling Rahul Gandhi, who has a much better political clout in India today than what Vajpayee had in those days? Rahul Gandhi has addressed many a school and college children, and is known to have interacted with them freely, answering all the questions without any hesitation. Would the school management call him, or Arvind Kejriwal, or Sitaram Yechury? Or, is it afraid of intimidation?
The other day, I was talking to one of my classmates, Durgesh M Mehta, currently in Mumbai. He recalled how one of the civics teachers, BD Mehta, would hold dummy Parliament in classroom, where children were divided between ruling and opposition parties, and there was debate between them. Surely, if such free, democratic spirit was sought to be inculcated then, why couldn’t it be done now?
As a post-script, after listening to Amit Shah’s SPV speech on YouTube, uploaded by the Haryana BJP, I was amused to listen to the lady who “thanked” the Union home minister; she said Sardar Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru were “complimentary” to each other ... and the video suddenly stopped. A fitting SPV reply to Amit Shah, who believed Nehru as PM was a great blunder? Let the organisers release the full, unedited video, including interaction, if any, with children.
---
*Editor, Counterview

Comments

Unknown said…
A wonderfully articulate article by a wonderful ex student of the school. It was a pleasure to read such a nice and complete article. It can only be when a very senior journalist of a Rajiv Shah in name could reply in such a comprehensive manner !!
Anonymous said…
Half-truths are now a way of life with many politicians.

The Sardar and the Pundit got along very well-differences were not unknown but there was no bitterness or venom. They and other stalwarts of the day thought of the country first and easily put aside their egos and differences.

Alas...no longer!

TRENDING

Reducing emission? India among top nations whose coal as energy source going up

By NS Venkataraman*  The State of the Global Climate report by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) confirmed that the year 2023 was the warmest year on record, with the global temperature of 1.4 degree celsius above pre-industrial 1850-1900 base line.

Lockdown 'total failure' of science more than of politics: Open letter on 4th anniversary

Counterview Desk  In an open letter to fellow academicians, scientists and medical practitioners in India, marking the fourth anniversary of India's lockdown (25 March 2024), the Managing Committee* of the Universal Health Organisation (UHO) has insisted on the need to "repair two years of immense damage to science".

Insider plot to kill Deendayal Upadhyay? What RSS pracharak Balraj Madhok said

By Shamsul Islam*  Balraj Madhok's died on May 2, 2016 ending an era of old guards of Hindutva politics. A senior RSS pracharak till his death was paid handsome tributes by the RSS leaders including PM Modi, himself a senior pracharak, for being a "stalwart leader of Jan Sangh. Balraj Madhok ji's ideological commitment was strong and clarity of thought immense. He was selflessly devoted to the nation and society. I had the good fortune of interacting with Balraj Madhok ji on many occasions". The RSS also issued a formal condolence message signed by the Supremo Mohan Bhagwat on behalf of all swayamsevaks, referring to his contribution of commitment to nation and society. He was a leading RSS pracharak on whom his organization relied for initiating prominent Hindutva projects. But today nobody in the RSS-BJP top hierarchy remembers/talks about Madhok as he was an insider chronicler of the immense degeneration which was spreading as an epidemic in the high echelons of th

Magnetic, stunning, Protima Bedi 'exposed' malice of sexual repression in society

By Harsh Thakor*  Protima Bedi was born to a baniya businessman and a Bengali mother as Protima Gupta in Delhi in 1949. Her father was a small-time trader, who was thrown out of his family for marrying a dark Bengali women. The theme of her early life was to rebel against traditional bondage. It was extraordinary how Protima underwent a metamorphosis from a conventional convent-educated girl into a freak. On October 12th was her 75th birthday; earlier this year, on August 18th it was her 25th death anniversary.

Savarkar 'criminally betrayed' Netaji and his INA by siding with the British rulers

By Shamsul Islam* RSS-BJP rulers of India have been trying to show off as great fans of Netaji. But Indians must know what role ideological parents of today's RSS/BJP played against Netaji and Indian National Army (INA). The Hindu Mahasabha and RSS which always had prominent lawyers on their rolls made no attempt to defend the INA accused at Red Fort trials.

'Wrong direction': Paris NGO regrets MNC ArcelorMittal still using coal-based steel

By Rajiv Shah  A new report by Paris-based non-governmental research and campaigning organization, Reclaim Finance, has blamed the MNC ArcelorMittal – formed in 2006 following the takeover and merger of the western European steel maker Arcelor (Spain, France, and Luxembourg) by Indian-owned Mittal Steel – for using use “climate destructive” metallurgical coal for its projects in India.

'Flawed' argument: Gandhi had minimal role, naval mutinies alone led to Independence

Counterview Desk Reacting to a Counterview  story , "Rewiring history? Bose, not Gandhi, was real Father of Nation: British PM Attlee 'cited'" (January 26, 2016), an avid reader has forwarded  reaction  in the form of a  link , which carries the article "Did Atlee say Gandhi had minimal role in Independence? #FactCheck", published in the site satyagrahis.in. The satyagraha.in article seeks to debunk the view, reported in the Counterview story, taken by retired army officer GD Bakshi in his book, “Bose: An Indian Samurai”, which claims that Gandhiji had a minimal role to play in India's freedom struggle, and that it was Netaji who played the crucial role. We reproduce the satyagraha.in article here. Text: Nowadays it is said by many MK Gandhi critics that Clement Atlee made a statement in which he said Gandhi has ‘minimal’ role in India's independence and gave credit to naval mutinies and with this statement, they concluded the whole freedom struggle.

A Hindu alternative to Valentine's Day? 'Shiv-Parvati was first love marriage in Universe'

By Rajiv Shah*   The other day, I was searching on Google a quote on Maha Shivratri which I wanted to send to someone, a confirmed Shiv Bhakt, quite close to me -- with an underlying message to act positively instead of being negative. On top of the search, I chanced upon an article in, imagine!, a Nashik Corporation site which offered me something very unusual. 

Attack on foreign students: Gujarat varsity's reputation, ranking at stake, say academics

Counterview Desk  Expressing anguish over the attack on international students in Gujarat University hostels, a letter claimed to have been signed by 122 current and former academics has asked the Gujarat Vice Chancellor, Dr Neerja Gupta, to provide emotional support to the attacked students and to ensure their physical safety.  

As double engine takes backseat in Odisha, BJP is pitted against 'firmly rooted' BJD

By Sudhansu R Das  BJP has got 25 years to build its party base in Odisha. After 25 years, it felt helpless and insecure to fight elections on its own strength. The party was almost crazy to have an alliance with the ruling BJD in Odisha.  Looking for alliance at the time of election shows that the party has not groomed its grassroots level workers into potential leaders.  The state BJP leaders woke up and convinced the Central leaders that they are capable of going solo; the alliance was stillborn. The question is can BJP defeat BJD which is firmly rooted in Odisha after launching piles of populist programs in the state.