सरदार वल्लभ भाई पटेल की जगह जवाहरलाल नेहरू प्रधानमंत्री क्यों बने जबकि उन्हें जबकि उन्हें सरदार वल्लभभाई पटेल से कम वोट मिली थी
Answers
Answer:
This is the reason .........................
For potential Nehru-bashers, this fact must be taken into account that if Nehru was such a failure, people of India had not chosen him to sit again and again on the chair of their Prime Minister. (Or otherwise people were fools in those generations; they just voted for charm).
This theory that India had been USA if Patel was PM instead of Nehru is a puerile one. Firstly one must not forget that Patel was not banished like Ram, nor he was prevented from suggesting or applying any policies. He was still the deputy PM and Home Minister, and all the decisions taken by the government had his opinion discussed and implemented. Nehru had taken the seat of a PM —not of a dictator or something.
This conspiracy theory that Patel was just to prove an Abraham Lincoln or something has its own part of hero worship by the favorers of capitalism. They ignore the facts that Sardar Patel had never had a secular image out of some valid reasons. (Though it was a wrong impression)
Those who often criticize Nehru for his closeness with British officers and his lifestyle, hide the fact that Sardar Patel had a closer vicinity to Tata, Birla and Sarabhais. It means no offence to him, but his policies were tending much to favor the capitalist economy. No need to say what misfortune it could bring to a divided and unstable India as it was, right after independence.
Under our current proximity with U.S.A., most of our youngsters misread or ignore the past when U.S.A. had been a consistent favourer of Pakistan and in many many cases it was Russia that helped and favoured India, including of the times when U.S.A. was to attack India for Indira Gandhi’s action on Bangladesh’s freedom movement. Sardar Patel favored ‘Western Companies’, isn’t it sounding similar to ‘East India Company’ ?
For those who think that all socialist economy is a waste in each and every case, must be aware that the highest reputed institutes like IIM and IIT , are Nehru’s legacy and it in 1992 that congress itself had brought liberal economy. (I am not a great admirer of congress to put it clear, but watch out that it was the changing world-equations that made economic liberalization a favorable step.)
I feel amazed when some people attempt to curse all multinational companies to have ‘enslaved’ India through their multinational products, and Pepsi and Coke, and believe that a staunch favorer of a capitalists west must be given the chair instead of a mild socialists. World during that era was different from today.
For nationalists who are fanboys of Subhash Chandra Bose, this must also be added that most Netaji-supporters had been disappointed with Sardar Patel for turning congress against him .
Sardar Patel had received intense criticism for his communal bias by even by Maulana Azad . His critics included many names including the Loknayak Jai Prakash Chaukse.
MARK ME AS BRAINLIEST !!