z:\ ambedkar\vol 08\vol8 03.indd MK SJ+YS 28 9 2013 135
PAKISTAN : HINDU ALTERNATIVE TO PAKISTAN
135
to come a danger of fanatical riots, the scramble for services, legislative seats, weightages out of proportion to their population on the part of the Moslem minority and consequently a constant danger threatening internal peace. To checkmate this probability which if we are wise we must always keep in view even after Hindustan attains the status of a self-governing country, a powerful and exclusive organization of Hindudom like the Hindu Maha Sabha will always prove a sure and devoted source of strength, a reserve force for the Hindus to fall back upon to voice their grievances more effectively than the joint Parliament can do, to scent danger ahead, to warn the Hindus in time against it and to fight out if need be any treacherous design to which the joint state itself may unwittingly fall a victim.
“The History of Canada, of Palestine, of the movement of the Young Turks will show you that in every state where two or more such conflicting elements as the Hindus and Moslems in India happen to exist as constituents, the wiser of them has to keep its exclusive organization intact, strong and watchful to defeat any attempt at betrayal or capture of the National State by the opposite party; especially so if that party has extra-territorial affinities, religious or cultural, with alien bordering states.”
Having stated what is Hindustan, and what is Hindu Maha Sabha, Mr. Savarkar next proceeds to define his conception of Swaraj. According to Mr. Savarkar :*
“Swaraj to the Hindus must mean only that in which their “Swaraj”, their “Hindutva” can assert itself without being overlorded by any non-Hindu people, whether they be Indian Territorials or extra-Territorials— some Englishmen are and may continue to be territorially born Indians. Can, therefore, the overlordships of these Anglo-Indians be a “Swarajya” to the Hindus ? Aurangzeb or Tipu were hereditary Indians, nay, were the sons of converted Hindu mothers. Did that mean that the rule of Aurangzeb or Tipu was a “Swarajya” to the Hindus? No! Although they were territorially Indians they proved to be the worst enemies of Hindudom and therefore, a Shivaji, a Gobindsingh, a Pratap or the Peshwas had to fight against the Moslem domination and establish real Hindu Swarajya.”
As part of his Swaraj Mr. Savarkar insists upon two things.
Firstly, the retention of the name Hindustan as the proper name for India.†
“The name “Hindustan” must continue to be the appellation of our
*Speech 1939, Ibid., p. 18.
† Ibid., pp. 19-20.