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.'