द इण्डियन स्ट्रगल / भारतीय स्वाधीनता संग्राम (नेताजी सुभाष चन्द्र बोस - ऐतिहासिक विश्लेषण)

DEFEAT AND SURRENDER 297
that right was conceded, even the modified individual fight
would be called off and peace between Government' and the
people restored, though the Congress political goal is not
satisfied.' Speaking of the Mahatma's condemnation of
secrecy, he remarked: 'By what rule of modern warfare or
sport are we bound to disclose our plans and schemes before-
hand to the enemy? But I forget, it is a religious fight and
not political; so neither the rules of sport nor the canons of
modern warfare apply! Secrecy of one's plans and future
actions is the very essence of all modern national movements
and struggles.' On the decision to call off 'mass,' but retain
'individual' civil disobedience, he stated: 'Does it need an
Indian National Congress to tell an individual to break laws
on his own responsibility and take the consequences? . . .
That eternal liberty to act as he likes and take the consequences
is given to man since the days of Adam.' Then he dealt with
the Mahatma's assertion that 'continuance by even one
person (of civil disobedience) ensures revival into such an
irrepressible mass movement as no amount of repression will
suppress.' And Mr. Nariman asserted on the contrary:
'If this "one man" theory were true, India as well as Ireland
should have been transformed after this most inspiring,
unforgettable, blood-curdling, patriotic, heroic example
(referring to the self-immolation of Terence MacSwiney and
Jatin Das).... The whole misconception is again based on
the same unsustainable theory and slippery foundation—the
"change of heart" theory exploded above, that the Britisher
would pine at the suffering and yield.' Criticising the decision
to dissolve or suspend all Congress organisations, he main-
tained: 'None can dissolve the National Assemblies that have
come into existence by popular vote.' Then finally he asked:
'How can we induce Gandhiji to rid himself of this almost
incorrigible habit . . . this perpetual blundering, blending of
religion and politics?' Mr. Nariman opined that the remedy lay
in securing for Gandhiji, in place of the late Pandit Motilal Nehru,
another political taskmaster—'a plain-speaking outspoken
giant and not lip-sealed mummies who always shake their
heads like spring dolls, perpendicularly or horizontally, accord-
ing as the Mahatma pulls the strings straight or sideways.'