History should be a guide, not a cause of unseemly controversy. The late Bipan Chandra was an eminent historian and what he wrote should be treated with respect and not result in such intemperate remarks as “academic murder”. There is no doubt that what is taught at academic institutions can be debated in Parliament but not with political vendetta. .Bipan Chandra was an eminent historian and famous for his work on Bhagat Singh. Bhagat Singh started his political pronouncements with the question, “Why am I an atheist?” Revolutionary terrorism in British days was not a hated term as terrorism is today. The Gandhian mainstream represented by the Congress was committed to non-violence. But Bhagat Singh’s Naujawan Bharat Sabha and Chandrashekhar Azad’s Hindustan Socialist Republican Association along with the Anushilan Samiti and Jugantar in Bengal advocated extremist politics- some the politics of the bomb. Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose also believed in an armed movement and even got involved in World War II to liberate India from the clutches of the British.
Over the last few years, terrorism, especially Islamic terrorism, has become associated with blood-thirsty murderous gangs. When Sabyasachi, hero of Sarat Chandra Chatterjee’s famous revolutionary novel, “Pather Dabi”, asked if he could be called a terrorist he did not have a pejorative sense in mind. The government of India looks upon Tamil separatism in Sri Lanka as a brand of terrorism which cannot be linked with Khudiram Bose or Bagha Jatin. Bipan Chandra also made it clear that he has not used the term “revolutionary terrorism” in a bad sense when writing on Bhagat Singh. It is good that the Union HRD Minister is expected to take necessary steps to keep an eye on what is taught at universities. But she should not be bogged down in politics and semantic confusion.
