• Music Lovers

    Who will decide who is a hero or a villain? It can only be a perception of an individual who belongs to one of the sides( Hero/Villain). The whole point is that a hero is a villain and a villain is also a hero.

    Let me give you one example:

    • Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose was influenced by Adolf Hitler and the discipline of his army, and met him with the objective of an Independent India. Many people see Hitler as a villain but Netaji didn't.

    • Bose demanded total submission and fealty from Indians everywhere and anybody who dared to oppose him could be hanged on Bose’s order.

    • In 1943 Bose during a speech in Singapore said that India at least needs 20 years of dictatorship after independence. (Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose wanted ruthless dictatorship in India for 20 years)


    Can you call him a villain?(btw dont you ficking dare call him a villain, it was people like him to whom we owe our independence)

    It was his way of nation-building. His perception of nation-building was different from others, and being different doesn't necessarily make you wrong/villain .

    Now let’s talk about Godse...


      • Nathuram Vinayakrao Godse was born into a Maharashtrian Chitpavan Brahmin family. Most of us know about Peshwa BajiRao who also belonged to the same community. It is said that Chitpavan brahmins are very protective of their culture, ritual, and motherland. Be that as it may, Godse dropped out of high school and became an activist with RSS and Hindu Mahasabha.

      • He participated in protest marches including the protests of 1938–39 in Bhagyanagar against the Nizam of Hyderabad who was trying to turn Hyderabad into an Islamic state for which Godse was jailed for a short duration.

      • In 1946, Godse left the RSS and Hindu Mahasabha over the issue of the partition of India. His relations with many members of the RSS soured, and he felt that the RSS was softening in its stance.


    Neither Godse nor any Hindu organization agreed with Gandhi. Why so?

    Let’s see some statements of Gandhi Ji

    “We should dispassionately think where we are drifting. Hindus should not harbor anger in their hearts against Muslims even if the latter wanted to destroy them. Even if the Muslims want to kill us all we should face death bravely. If they established their rule after killing Hindus we would be ushering in a new world by sacrificing our lives.”

    He advised to Sindh Hindus during partition;

    “I said that you should suffer bravely, but non-violently unto death. But if you cannot do that and must make a disgraceful surrender of all including honor, your womenfolk, and religion, in that case, the only safe and proper course for you to take is migration, not singly, but of all the Hindus and other non-Muslims”

    There is no doubt that Gandhi had his own way of nation-building and he wanted everyone to follow it.

    In Bhagavad Gita in chapter 2, verse 33, Lord Krishna says to Arjuna

    “But If you will not fight this righteous war, then failing in your duty and losing your honor you will incur sin.”

    You also can see in Mahabharata, how each individual was fighting for a cause which he considered to be Dharma. Karna had his ways, Duryodhana had his ways and others had also their ways.

    Hence we can say;

    • Gandhi was fighting in the way that he considers righteous.
    • Bose was fighting in the way which he considered righteous or his Dharma ( righteousness).
    • Godse was fighting in the way that he considered righteous.


    Gandhi Ji preached ‘Ahimsa Paramo Dharma’ which let us know the essence of non-violence. But on the other hand, Godse perhaps was following the opposite way which was right for him or his Dharma.

    Godse never supported Gandhi’s ideas and approached Gandhi on 30 January 1948 during the evening prayer at 17:17 on 30 January 1948. He first bowed down to Gandhi and shot him in the chest three times at point-blank range.

    Now Before Godse was hanged, he gave his final statements where he spoke from his heart about what he believed and the reason of Killing Gandhi Ji.

    ‘’Gandhi is being referred to as the Father of the Nation. But if that is so, he had failed his paternal duty in as much as he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it. I stoutly maintain that Gandhi has failed in his duty. He has proved to be the Father of Pakistan. His inner-voice, his spiritual power and his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled before Jinnah’s iron will and proved to be powerless. Briefly speaking, I thought to myself and foresaw I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could expect from the people would be nothing but hatred and that I shall have lost all my honor, even more, valuable than my life, if I were to kill Gandhiji. But at the same time, I felt that the Indian politics in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be proved practical, able to retaliate, and would be powerful with armed forces. No doubt, my own future would be totally ruined, but the nation would be saved from the inroads of Pakistan. People may even call me and dub me as devoid of any sense or foolish, but the nation would be free to follow the course founded on the reason which I consider to be necessary for sound nation-building.”
    “I have to say with great regret that Prime Minister Nehru quite forgets that his preachings and deeds are at times at variances with each other when he talks about India as a secular state in season and out of season, because it is significant to note that Nehru has played a leading role in the establishment of the theocratic state of Pakistan, and his job was made easier by Gandhi’s persistent policy of appeasement towards the Muslims. I now stand before the court to accept the full share of my responsibility for what I have done and the judge would, of course, pass against me such orders of sentence as may be considered proper. But I would like to add that I do not desire any mercy to be shown to me, nor do I wish that anyone else should beg for mercy on my behalf. My confidence about the moral side of my action has not been shaken even by the criticism leveled against it on all sides. I have no doubt that honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof some day in future.”

    All the facts are in their places and the reader should use their own conscience before jumping to any conclusions.

    and Im up for a good chat about the topic, if you need any clarity on it just comment and Ill try my best to help!

    It's not people that are evil or heroic, but actions.
    What matters irl is not a pure heart with good intent, but the will to take an action to an effect. When you do what you believe in, there's good outcomes and bad, and people remember you for the change you made with feelings according to their perception of right and wrong.

  • Music Lovers


    It's not people that are evil or heroic, but actions.

    Actions define people.

    What matters irl is not a pure heart with good intent, but the will to take an action to an effect.

    Ends justifies the means!
    quick anecdote; what differentiates a murder done in self-defense, from the one done in angst is
    the intent.

    When you do what you believe in, there's good outcomes and bad, and people remember you for the change you made with feelings according to their perception of right and wrong.

    EXACTLY! thank you


    Actions define people.

    People may be compelled to do an action with reasons the others don't/can't know. What I meant is that we can't judge a person to be a villain just by their one action, we don't know the person fully.
    Take Hitler for example. Wasn't he a patriot who had in mind the ultimate goal of the good of his people?
    Take Ravan. You know what i mean.

    Ends justifies the means!

    Only when the good outcomes outweigh the bad.

    What I meant here is this: that people who bring to action what they say, are the ones remembered.

    And, you're welcome! xD


Suggested Topics

View More Recent Topics

By using TalkWithStranger, you are accepting our privacy and usage terms . You must be 18+ or 13+ with parental permission to use our online chatting site.