By Shefali Mehta
We remember Bhagat Singh as an anarchist revolutionary, an iconic hero raising the slogan ‘Inquilab Zindabad’, but the fact that he was a thinker and a visionary is mostly forgotten. Perhaps the reason behind this popular perception of Singh is the image of him recorded in British records which we accepted and never thought of adding to. Or perhaps it has more to do with the romanticization that happens in all nationalist movements.
But Singh was a rationalist. He did not like mysticism. Nor did he like blind faith or creation of personality cult. In his essay ‘Why I am an atheist’, he wrote: “Merciless criticism and independent thinking are the two necessary traits of revolutionary thinking. As Mahatma Ji is great, he is above criticism; as he has risen above, all that he says in the field of politics, religion, Ethics is right. You agree or not, it is binding upon you to take it as truth. This is not constructive thinking. We do not take a leap forward; we go many steps back.” Describing himself as a “romantic revolutionary” when he started his participation in independence movement, he realized the need to ‘study’ to counter the arguments of opposing parties on rational ground. And thence he began reading Marx, Lenin and Trotsky among others. This way emerged Singh as a Marxist thinker.
And Singh did make it clear that Gandhi was not above criticism. In 1931, when it became apparent that the British Government and the Indian National Congress would strike some sort of compromise, Singh appealed to young political leaders to adopt the ideology of Marxism and work among the peasants and laborers. Critical of Gandhi’s statement: “We must not tamper with the laborers. It is dangerous to make political use of the factory proletariat”, Singh declared that real revolution can only happen among the factory workers and farmers. The revolutionaries of the time consisted of the bourgeoisie, the class who would never risk their possessions in the struggle. According to Singh, the compromise would only win a few reforms or a few concessions for the Indian capitalists. But this is far from the immediate need, which according to him was complete overthrow of the existing social order and a socialist order to replace it.
He might be an idealist, but he was in no way cut off from reality. In ‘To Young Political Workers’, he carefully plans the future program, breaking it down in steps: 1. The goal; 2. The premises from where were to start, i.e., the existing conditions; 3. The course of action, i.e., the means and methods. His disapproval of nationalist emotionalism and sentimental idealism is apparent when he says: “Cast aside the youthful dreams of a revolution within ten years of Gandhi’s utopian promises of Swaraj in one year. It requires neither the emotion nor the death, but the life of constant struggle, suffering and sacrifice.”
Singh emerged as a strong secular leader with his constant emphasis on the need to separate religion from politics. Even Lala Lajpat Rai earned Singh’s criticism when he joined hands with the Hindu Mahasabha leaders. Rai responded by calling him a Russian agent. Himself an atheist, he dissented ritualism in religion which he saw as a major cause of inequality. He called it a shame that even in twentieth century, untouchability was practiced like sacred religious rites. In a cool headed approach towards conversions happening in 1920s, he wrote: “If you treat them worse than animals then they will surely join other religions where they will get more rights and will be treated like human beings. In this situation it will be futile to accuse Christianity and Islam of harming Hinduism.” His essay on his atheism is a rational questioning of the assumptions that faith in an omnipotent being entails. He exposes the basis of the idea of God as contradictory and also inconsistent with observable state of the world.
What Singh looked forward to was the task of nation building along secular and socialist lines (often synonymous in the context of India where poverty was the state of being for the lower castes). For the present generation, increasingly aware and critical of existing state of affairs, Singh serves as a model where patriotic fervor of the struggle is well contained within a realist progressive approach. Careful planning, will to follow the plan to its conclusion, courage to criticize even the most revered to keep oneself true to rational thinking and constantly testing the received beliefs are the lessons we can incorporate in our lives.
Shefali is a sceptic by nature, with a critical eye on culture, ideologies and evolving trends of societies. A student of English Literature at Delhi University, she is particularly interested in the lives and history of people living in the Indian subcontinent and contemporary issues like terrorism, exile, human rights and global capitalism. Mostly interested in theory, she also likes to explore regional cinema. Contact her at shefali.tie@gmail.com
Stay updated with all the insights.
Navigate news, 1 email day.
Subscribe to Qrius