Q. "Elections which were held during the years 1945-46 were the most important political event for the Muslims of the Indian subcontinent." Do you agree or disagree with the statement? Give reasons for your answer.
[ 10 marks ]
no giving answers if you don't know!!
Answers
The 1945-46 elections were, by far, the most critical at all levels in the annals of the history of Indian sub-continent. The first Simla Conference had broken down on 14th July 1945 on the controversial issue of the representative culture of the All India Muslim League (AIML). Also, once World War II was over the new government in Britain took control. The new government gave some new instructions to the Viceroy of India. So, on 21st August 1945 the Viceroy Lord Wavell announced that elections to the central and provincial legislatures would be held in the coming winter. As for the first phase it was decided that election to the central legislative assembly would be held to be followed by the election to the provincial assemblies.
Explanation:
please mark as brainliest and follow
Answer:
It has been very secular to discuss and research Muslim voting pattern in all election these days, so why not this special election in 1945-46 which was watershed in History of India and history of world? It was most fateful election in India, our mother India's limb were cut off.
Partition of India became imminent the day Muslims all over India voted for Muslim League and Jinnah in 1946 elections, hence supporting Jinnah two nation theory. Rest was just formality. Tragedy of partition was, except Congress everyone thought they (Congress) were representing Hindus, while Congress under Gandhi Nehru Azad thought and acted as representative of Muslims.
Many prominent historians have turned the partition story other way around. Claiming partition was necessitated because Muslims felt unsafe because of RSS. RSS came in 1925, and before that there were many massacres of Hindus in 1921 in Malabar, and other places. Bengal was divided in 1906 based on religious lines, 2 decades before RSS came into existence. If Muslims felt unsafe then why Muslims stayed in India after partition? And instead Hindus left from Muslim areas.
It is another form of waicharik atankwad, if you dont accept that Muslims are victims, they will do your character assassination and even kill you. If Muslims felt unsafe they wont start Direct action, if Muslims had any respect for Gnadhi, they wont cold bloodily start Killing Hindus in Kolkata in 1946. Partition was genocide of Hindus but they have claimed otherwise that Muslims felt unsafe.
While court cases are still going on for Babri structure demolition, not a single inquiry has ever been set to find out who all Indians were involved in creation of Pakistan. Just like entire population of Kashmiri Hindus were wiped out from Kashmir and no politician or other was ever held responsible. Jawahar Lal Nehru hastened to ban RSS which fought for one India but Muslim League (Ally of Congress), Jamat e Islami and all Islamic organisations which lead the blood bath against Hindus were rewarded. Most of Muslim League leaders who stayed in India they soon joined mainstream political parties. I am making feeble attempt to do some justice to India, to Hindus.