Early Release Form: Fill & Download for Free

Let's say, for sure, that the US Civil War was the most unusual war in history. Not only were all the generals academically schooled in warfare, they all went to and graduated from the same war college, were taught over the same time period, and their professors were on each battlefield with them, either as comrades or combatants.From the initial bombardment at Fort Sumter, where PGT Beauregard fired bombardments for 34 straight hours at one of his artillery trainers, to the confederate surrender at Appomattox Court House, where victorious general Grant’s first questions were if Lee remembered him from their joint time in the Mexican War, this was a huge, bloody conflict fought in a strangely intimate manner. Both sides defaulted to the same initial tactics, then fell back on the same workarounds and secondary solutions. The men on both sides fought hard and inflicted horrendous amounts of damage with weapons far more efficient than those of previous wars in Western culture.Often, it came down to a knowledge of the terrain. Complex maneuvers and split-second timing advantage went to those who knew where they were and what was around the bend. The confederate generals and forces had nearly all of the advantages on this score in the eastern war theater. Jedediah Hotchkiss was the ‘secret sauce' for Robert E Lee's Army of Northern Virginia.Near the end of June, 1861, Hotchkiss signed on as a Confederate teamster to take supplies to the Churchville Cavalry at Rich Mountain, West Virginia. Hotchkiss offered his services as a mapmaker to Brig. Gen. Richard B. Garnett, whose Confederate brigade was operating in western Virginia. Hotchkiss served at Rich Mountain and created maps for General Robert E. Lee's planned campaign in the mountains. He took a brief medical leave after being stricken with typhoid fever, but returned to duty in March 1862 as chief topographical engineer of the Valley District, reporting to Maj. Gen. Stonewall Jackson.[3]On March 26, 1862, Jackson summoned Hotchkiss to his headquarters and directed him to "make me a map of the Valley, from Harper's Ferry to Lexington, showing all the points of offence and defence [sic] in those places."The Shenandoah Valley had never been mapped in detail before. Running 150 miles in length and 25 miles wide, it was a daunting task, but Hotchkiss accepted the assignment, and worked on the map for the remainder of the war. In order to accommodate his large scale of 1:80,000, he glued together three portions of tracing linen to form a large single map of 7 feet by 3 feet.[4]One of Hotchkiss's maps: Valley Campaign of 1864 for Jubal EarlyCaptain Hotchkiss served under Jackson for the rest of the general's life. Producing large volumes of accurate, detailed, and even beautiful maps, he also aided the general by personally directing troop movements across the terrain with which he had become so familiar. Jackson's reputation for lightning movements and surprise attacks, befuddling his enemies, owes much to Hotchkiss's cartography. Together they served in the Valley Campaign, the Northern Virginia Campaign (including Cedar Mountain, the Second Battle of Bull Run, and Chantilly), the Maryland Campaign (including Harpers Ferryand Antietam), and the Battle of Fredericksburg. At the Battle of Chancellorsville in May 1863, Jackson asked Hotchkiss for eight maps of the area west of Fredericksburg and, along with local residents, discovered the route that Jackson's corps took in the famous flanking march against the Union army.[5]That night, Jackson was mortally wounded and died less than two weeks later.After his general's death, Hotchkiss continued to be assigned to the staff of the corps commanders who succeeded Jackson (Generals Richard S. Ewell and Jubal A. Early), but he was frequently called upon to work directly for General Robert E. Lee at the headquarters of the Army of Northern Virginia. Balancing these dual responsibilities, he served through the Gettysburg Campaign, the Mine Run Campaign, and the Overland Campaign. In June 1864 he accompanied General Early on his raid through the Shenandoah Valley toward Washington, D.C., and one of his maps contributed to Early's successful surprise attack against General Philip Sheridan at the Battle of Cedar Creek(although the map was not able to prevent Early's decisive defeat by the end of the battle). He then returned to the Siege of Petersburg with the remnants of Early's defeated army for the remainder of the war.After General Lee's surrender at Appomattox Court House in April 1865, Hotchkiss surrendered to the Union Army. General Ulysses S. Grant had Hotchkiss released from custody and returned his maps to him. Grant paid Hotchkiss for permission to use some of his maps in his reports and almost all of the Confederate maps in the Official Recordsproduced by the U.S. War Department were those drawn by him.Nobody in the western theater was a cartographical genius for the confederacy, and interestingly enough, not one of those confederate armies displayed any of the innovative tactics benefiting Lee and his generals in the east.

Veer Savarkar.Never was there a more polarizing figureHalf the country loves him, the other half sees him as devil spawn. The truth about the life of this individual lies somewhere in between.The GoodYoung Savarkar in LondonAs a law student, studying in London, Savarkar galvanized the revolutionary movement that sought total and complete freedom from British rule. From India to Europe, and even America, a network of Bravehearts guided by him, made contacts with Irish, French, Italian, Russian and American leaders, revolutionaries and the press to bring British India to the forefront of global discourse. He started regular Sunday meetings to discuss various topics related to India's future. These soon became popular among Indian students. Revolutionaries from other countries such as Egypt, Ireland, Russia, China, and Turkey used to attend. Lenin was one of them . One of the topics of discussion was "Future constitution of India."Savarkar also organized the days of the remembrance of national heroes such as Shivjayanti (birthday of Chhatrapati Shivaji) and celebrations of festivals like Diwali and Dassara. He also celebrated the golden jubilee of the 1857 War of Independence against the British in India House.He was a prolific writer and interested in history, naturally, he wrote many biographies and poems on great personalities. At the age of 12 Savarkar composed his first-ever poem Shrimant Sawai Madhavravaancha rang on the Peshwa Sawai Madhavrao. His poem Swadeshicha phatka dealing with Swadeshi and composed when he was merely fifteen was published in the Jagadhitechchu periodical from Pune. Savarkar completed his biography of Giuseppe Mazzini, a man Savarkar idolized, in Marathi in September 1906. His elder brother Babarao published it in India in June 1907. A year later, the British proscribed the book. He wrote his famous book Indian War of Independence 1857 in Marathi. The book was the first one that informed people of the Rani Laxmibai’s valor. His friends in India House translated it into English. It was published secretly in Holland in 1909 and immediately banned in India. Savarkar's book served as a source of inspiration to Indian revolutionaries for the next 40 years. While in England, Savarkar prepared notes for his book 'History of the Sikhs' which he completed while in Paris. He also sent 43 newsletters from India House during the period from 17 August 1906 to 26 November 1909. These were related to politics and current affairs and were published in the Marathi newspaper, Vihari.Three leaflets were printed in India House.Gurumukhi leaflet - This appealed to the Sikhs to revolt against the British.'Oh Martyrs!'-. This was addressed to the fighters of the 1857 war. Savarkar assured them ' your blood oh martyrs, shall be avenged. We will continue your fight and drive the British out of India.'Choose, oh Indian Princes' -This was sent out to Indian Princes, Rajas and Maharajas after Dhingra’s martyrdom in August 1909. Savarkar appealed to them to join in the freedom struggle.Savarkar was arrested in London for allegedly plotting the armed insurrection in India, spearheaded by his brother Ganesh Savarkar.Hoping to evade arrest, Savarkar moved to Madame Cama's home in Paris. He was nevertheless arrested by police on 13 March 1910. In the final days of freedom, Savarkar wrote letters to a close friend planning his escape. Knowing that he would most likely be shipped to India, Savarkar asked his friend to keep track of which ship and route he would be taken through. When the ship SS Morea reached the port of Marseilles on 8 July 1910, Savarkar escaped from his cell in the hope that his friend would be there to receive him in a car.SS MoreaBut his friend was late in arriving, and the alarm having been raised, Savarkar was re-arrested.He was deported to India and brought to Pune, where he stood trial. The trial before the special tribunal was started on 10 September 1910.One of the charges on Savarkar was abetment to murder of Nashik Collector Jackson. The second was waging a conspiracy under the Indian penal code 121-A against the King emperor. Following the two trials, Savarkar, then aged 28, was convicted and sentenced to 50-years imprisonment and transported on 4 July 1911 to the infamous Cellular Jail in the Andaman Nicobar Islands.Cellular Jail.Savarkar entered the jail on 4 July 1911 , but even in jail he did not stop his revolutionary activities. For the first 6 months he was kept in isolation. Only during meals could he mix with other prisoners. And yet with his inspiration, prisoners started to organize themselves. Within a matter of 10 months a letter written by the prisoner Hotilal Varma was smuggled out and sent to the Moderate leader, Surendranath Banerjee in Calcutta. He bravely published it in his paper Bengalee (in English) on 27 April 1912.Another letter was smuggled to Pune about Indubhushan Roy's suicide and torture of Ullaskar Dutta in prison , which made news on 28 July 1912 in the English paper Mahratta of Pune. This gave publicity to conditions of Political prisoners in The Cellular Jail.In October 1912, Savarkar’s friend Guy Aldred, in his paper Herald of Revolt published in London, also gave publicity to conditions of Political prisoners in the Cellular Jail. Due to such wide publicity about the treatment of Political prisoners in the Cellular Jail, Sir Reginald Cradock, Home Member in Viceroy's Council, visited the Cellular Jail in November 1913. He met Savarkar. After Sir Cradock had gone, no changes were announced by the prison authorities, therefore Savarkar organised the third strike in jail. Eventually, concessions were made to the prisoners.In the British Parliament, Keir Hardie, a Labour Party M.P raised the question of treatment of political prisoners in Andaman Island. So, brutal officers like Barrie could no longer get away with impunity, with their treatment of prisoners.Despite its fearful reputation, more and more revolutionaries were prepared to face Cellular Jail and a large number of them were sent there during 1914 -1918. Savarkar learned from the new prisoners that Indian merchants, while passing through the Indian Ocean used to bow in the direction of Andaman, to show their respect for the Indian freedom fighters imprisoned there.The Bad.Savarkar wrote several mercy petitions to the government urging for his release. He submitted his first mercy petition on 30 August 1911. This petition was rejected on 3 September 1911.Savarkar submitted his next mercy petition on 14 November 1913, and presented it personally to the Home Member of the Governor General's council, Sir Reginald Craddock. In his letter, asking for forgiveness, he described himself as a "prodigal son" longing to return to the "parental doors of the government". He wrote that his release from the jail will recast the faith of many Indians in the British rule. Also, he said "Moreover, my conversion to the constitutional line would bring back all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide. I am ready to serve the government in any capacity they like, for as my conversion is conscientious so I hope my future conduct would be. By keeping me in jail, nothing can be got in comparison to what would be otherwise."In 1917, Savarkar submitted another mercy petition, this time for a general amnesty of all political prisoners. Savarkar was informed on 1 February 1918 that the mercy petition was placed before the British Indian Government.Savarkar submitted his fourth mercy petition to the British Government on 30 March 1920. In which he stated that"So far from believing in the militant school of the Bukanin type, I do not contribute even to the peaceful and philosophical anarchism of a Kuropatkin [sic.] or a Tolstoy. And as to my revolutionary tendencies in the past:- it is not only now for the object of sharing the clemency but years before this have I informed of and written to the Government in my petitions (1918, 1914) about my firm intention to abide by the constitution and stand by it as soon as a beginning was made to frame it by Mr Montagu. Since that the Reforms and then the Proclamation have only confirmed me in my views and recently I have publicly avowed my faith in and readiness to stand by the side of orderly and constitutional development."This petition was rejected on 12 July 1920 by the British government.After considering the petition, the British government contemplated releasing Ganesh Savarkar but not Vinayak Savarkar. The rationale for doing so was stated as followsIt may be observed that if Ganesh is released and Vinayak retained in custody, the latter will become in some measure a hostage for the former, who will see that his own misconduct does not jeopardize his brother's chances of release at some future date.The British were worried of the Savarkar bro’s firebrand, aggressiveness, and their growing popularity. For them, Savarkar was a threat, and freeing him would only increase their problems on the subcontinent. Yet, it was after much pressure from eminent leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Vithalbhai Patel and Bal Gangadhar Tilak, who demanded his unconditional release, did the British finally free him from Cellular jail.He, along with his brother, was transferred to a jail in Ratnagiri, where both were incarcerated for 4 years. On 6 January 1924 was released but confined to Ratnagiri District until 1937.Savarkar in RatnagiriHe was forced to give up all seditious writing, was forced to remain unemployed, and could not participate in any movement against the British empire. In return for this restricted freedom, he would receive a meager pension of 60 rupees.The UglyMembers of The Hindu Mahasabha, Savarkar, seated second last row, 4th from right.Savarkar eventually moved to Bombay and was elected president of the Hindu Mahasabha in 1937, and would serve until 1943. The Congress swept the polls in 1937 but conflicts between the Congress and Jinnah would exacerbate Hindu-Muslim political divisions. Jinnah derided Congress rule as a "Hindu Raj", and hailed 22 December 1939 as a "Day of deliverance" for Muslims when the Congress resigned en masse in protest when the British India Governor-General declared India's inclusion into World War II for the United Kingdom and its allies against Germany and its allies. Savarkar's message of Hindu unity and empowerment gained increasing popularity amidst the worsening communal climate.Savarkar as president of the Hindu Mahasabha, during the Second World War, advanced the slogan "Hinduize all Politics and Militarize Hindudom" and decided to support the British war effort in India seeking military training for the Hindus.Congress launched the Quit India movement in 1942, Savarkar criticised it and asked Hindus to stay active in the war effort and not disobey the government; he also urged the Hindus to enlist in the armed forces to learn the "arts of war".Hindu Mahasabha activists protested Gandhi's initiative to hold talks with Jinnah in 1944, which Savarkar denounced as "Appeasement" He assailed the British proposals for transfer of power, attacking both the Congress and the British for making concessions to Muslim separatists.It was during this time, that Savarkar began to be openly vocal about his views of Islam and Muslims;-Savarkar saw Muslims in the Indian police and military to be "potential traitors". He advocated that India reduce the number of Muslims in the military, police and public service and ban Muslims from owning or working in munitions factories. Savarkar criticized Gandhi for being concerned about Indian Muslims.Chaturvedi notes that there was a "shift" in Savakar's views: in his earlier writings he argued for "Indian independence from British rule", whereas in later writings he focused on "Hindu independence from Christians and Muslims". In his 1907 Indian War of Independence, Savarkar includes Muslims as heroes. This was omitted in his later writings; his 1925 Hindu-pad-paatshahi included Hindu heroes but not Muslim ones. In his 1963 Six Glorious Epochs, Savarkar says Muslims and Christians wanted to "destroy" HinduismThe Unknown (why i admire Veer Savarkar)Savarkar’s critics chastise him for writing mercy petitions to the British, they deride him for being a ‘traitor’,for accepting pension from the British and giving up all activities against the British. Some still go as far as to portray Savarkar as the murderer of Gandhiji, (even after being proved innocent and acquitted twice), and claiming Savarkar supported the partition of India, writing so vociferously that a reader might think it was Savarkar himself who pulled the trigger and tore the two nations apart. All this despite the plethora of evidence that explains Savarkar's actions, and his innocence in the final two accusationsHatred towards Savarkar stems from the fact that many people don't know much about him, except the opinion pieces being peddled by the media houses and few journalists with vested interests. Public opinion is based only on Savarkar’s unfortunate comments, but there is a whole unknown (at least to the average reader) side of him that might make people reconsider their opinions.Yes, Savarkar wrote many mercy petitions, a charge he himself never shied away from,and in his petitions called himself a ‘prodigal son’ or whatever, but there was a reason behind this sudden loving attitude towards the British from a man who vowed to “eat the British empire alive”. For his honeyed words were hollow and ungenuine. to quote “Majhi Janmathep”:-Rotting in British jails was not the aim of Savarkar's revolutionary struggle. Savarkar himself declares his motive behind his petitions for release, “It was my duty as a follower of responsive cooperation, to accept such conditions as would enable me to do better and larger work for my country than I was able to do during the years of imprisonment. I would be free thus to serve my mother country, and I would regard it as a social duty.”….“Whatever good I could do in the Andamans or whatever awakening I might bring about among its people was nothing in comparison with what I could do in India as a free man. On the other hand, to win my freedom, I would not stoop low or lend myself to anything mean or treacherous such as would bring disgrace on my country or be a blot on her fair name. Freedom thus obtained would have harmed the cause and would have been, as I regarded it, an immoral act.”He cared not for how history would perceive or judge him. His goal was to serve the motherland and ensure that the dignity of the same was not tarnished. He was a lawyer, knew his petitions had to be genuine. Hence his sudden love for the Raj.Yes, he accepted a pension from the British but that was necessary for his survival. He could not work, was forced into a state of unemployment, and had a family, his wife, and child, to feed. Besides the pension was a meager 60 rupees, barely enough to sustain one man, let alone a family of 3. Savarkar had to rely on public donations to eke out a living.No, he did not give up all activities against the British after his incarceration. He continued writing patriotic books and leaflets under various pseudonyms, while in ratnagiri,which would influence many other people to work for independence. In 1937 once his ban on politcal movements had ended, he once more joined the fray. He led the Satyagrah against the Hyderabad Nizam state. He led the Hindu Mahasabha in a civil disobedience movement against the Nizam in March 1939. The objective of the Satyagrah was to secure religious and cultural liberty for the Hindus who at that time constituted 86% of the total population of Hyderabad State. Many notable people like Senapati Bapat, V.G Deshpande, Prabhakar Balwant Dani, and Madhavrao Mule took part in it. The Arya Samaj also sent around 10000 civil resisters. At last, on 19 July 1939, the Nizam government announced some political reforms. In the new dispensation, 50% of seats were left for non-Muslims. Although Hindus were the majority in the state and Muslims were in minority, Hindu Mahasabha accepted this proposal. Instead of supporting Savarkar and Hindu Mahasabha for their righteous movement in getting Hindus the rights they deserve, The Indian National Congress did not support this movement and called it 'communal' and 'anti-national'.No he did not kill or have a hand in killing gandhiji. He respected Gandhiji was working for caste unity, just like he was, in fact both had met each other in India House, London, and again during Savarkar’s limited freedom in Ratnagiri. Infact, A day before his arrest, Savarkar in a public written statement, as reported in The Times of India, Mumbai dated 7 February 1948, termed Gandhi's assassination a fratricidal crime, endangering India's existence as a nascent nation. The accusation on Savarkar rested solely on Approver Digambar Badge’s claim that Savarkar met Godse and Apte and blessed their plot to kill Gandhi. However Badge's testimony was not accepted as the approver's evidence lacked independent corroboration, Bombay C.I.D, was keeping a vigil on Savarkar from 21 to 30 January 1948. The crime report from C. I. D. does not mention Godse or Apte meeting Savarkar during this time. Even after two inquiries, both of which acquit Savarkar, some people still claim Savarkar’s hand in Gandhi's assassination. Their ideological hatred of the man curtains their morality from making a logical decision based on evidence.No, Savarkar did not support Partition. The claim that savarkar wanted partition stems from this quoteIndia cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogeneous nation, but on the contrary there are two nations in the main; the Hindus and the Moslems, in India.” (Samagra Savarkar Vadmay- Volume 6, Maharashtra Prantik Hindusabha Publication, 1963-65, Page 296)However, proponents of this claim quickly forget, either deliberately or out of sheer ignorance, the statements that immediately follow“And as it has happened in many countries under similar situation in the world, the utmost that we can do under the circumstances is to form an Indian State in which none is allowed any special weightage of representation and none is paid an extra price to buy his loyalty to the State….. The Hindus as a nation are willing to discharge their duty to a common Indian State on equal footing.” “We shall ever guarantee protection to the religion, culture and language of the minorities for themselves, but we shall no longer tolerate any aggression on their part on the equal liberty of the Hindus to guard their religion, culture and language as well. If the non-Hindu minorities are to be protected then surely the Hindu majority also must be protected against any aggressive minority in India.” (ibid, Page 296)This part of his speech was criticised even while Savarkar was alive. Therefore, Savarkar clarified his statement to journalists on 15 August, 1943 in the office of the Marathi weekly Aadesh published from Nagpur. He also clarified his position in an interview given in Mumbai on 23 August, 1943. In the interview, he said,"People still do not understand the important thing that stating the fact of Mussulman and Hindu nations being present in Hindusthan is not to accept the Pakistani adamancy of carving a country of the Mussalmans….. While two or two hundred nations that consider themselves separate from the Hindus have presently entered Hindusthan by force and are demanding Partition of Hindusthan, it is not by a woolly-headed and cowardly denial of this fact but rather by understanding, facing and changing it shall an independent, undivided and indivisible Hindu nation alone shall without doubt, remain in Hindusthan. But as in our history when the Hindu Nation successfully rallied under the Hindu Flag, the Hindus should come forward and rise unitedly…..We should not confuse between nation and state. Even if the state goes, the nation remains. When the Mussulmans were ruling over us, the government (state) was theirs. But the existence of the Hindus was most certainly intact. Even so, there is no problem in a common state of Hindus and Mussulmans. In the past, we had nations (Rashtra) such as Maharashtra, Saurashtra, Devrashtra (near Berar). Where are these nations? They mingled with each other. The Shakas and Huns came to Hindusthan as nations. But what is the evidence of their existence today? We digested them. So if the Mussulmans want, they could amicably stay with Hindus as a minority community …. In the end, desire is the most influential and important factor for a nation.”Through this, Savarkar merely made a statement of fact and was not advocating for such a situation. Although some people would have us believe that he did.Savarkar even opposed the partition of India. In a telegram sent to Sjt. L. B. Bhopatkar, President, All India Hindu Mahasabha, on the eve of the Meetings of the Working Committee and All India Committee of the Hindu Mahasabha, June 4, 1947, he wrote,“My personal view is that we must vigorously protest against the creation of a moslem state independent of the central Indian state. We will not willingly sign the death warrant of the integrit of Hindustan” [1]There still does exist an unknown side of Savarkar. Seldom do we hear, in our history books and opinion pieces, the sheer magnitude of work Savarkar did to bring together the Hindu people in Ratnagiri, one of the centers of Orthodoxy.Advocating a strong case for the total, complete and unconditional eradication of Caste at a time when these ideas were not yet a part of the political discourse popularised by either Gandhi or Ambedkar, Savarkar was the pioneer of a vision of a casteless India.In his 1931 essay titled Seven Shackles of the Hindu Society, Savarkar said that heredity as a determinant of talent and intellect was erroneous and an individual’s environment was what shapes his character and conduct. Taking a radical stand against those scriptural injunctions, including the Manusmriti, that advocated caste, he said fossilizing oneself to them was idiocy.These scriptures that were often self-contradicting according to Savarkar were created by human beings and were relevant in a particular context and in a particular society. They need to evolve or be discarded as society moves ahead, he said. He viewed the caste system as an evil that splintered and disunited Hindu society, making it susceptible to attacks and conversions by other groups.The seven fetters that he advocated a complete dismantling of were:1. Vedoktabandi: Exclusivity of access to Vedic literature and rituals to only the Brahmin community.2. Vyavasaayabandi: The choice of a profession an individual chooses must be entirely his and based on his aptitude and capability and not on one’s birth.3. Sparshabandi: Untouchability that he considered a sin and a blot on society.4. Samudrabandi: Loss of caste on foreign travel or crossing the seas.5. Shuddhibandi: Disallowing reconversions to Hinduism. “I have nothing,” he said, “against those who convert to another faith by sheer conviction. But such examples are rare. Why should we not allow the enhancement of our (Hindu) numbers due to some antiquated idea that does not even have any scriptural sanction that we cannot convert to Hinduism?”6. Rotibandi: Prohibition on inter-caste dining.7. Betibandi: Prohibition on inter-caste marriageHe was a social reformer. Calling for a reinterpretation of the chaturvarna or four varna system based on Lord Krishna’s assertion in the Bhagwad Gita that it was He who created the four varnas, Savarkar writes,“Different human beings have different qualities and virtues. All that Lord Krishna is saying is I create human beings who are different in nature, character, virtues and values — yet, good or bad, they are all my creation alone. Nowhere in this declaration does he state that I also make those virtues hereditary for the person’s successive generations… We are all shudras at birth. As life progresses, we attain qualities, education, and virtues to graduate to various levels of consciousness and thinking — that is the fundamental concept behind the four varna system.” Savarkar asserted strongly that the varna system was not part of Sanatan Dharma. “Sanatan are those lofty ideals and beliefs.” he said, “that predate time and are indestructible…whereas social practices such as caste system, opposition to widow remarriage or vegetarianism are man-made social practices and rituals that can easily be dismantled depending on the needs of the society.”To further these beliefs, Savarkar advocated social reforms on a large scale during his incarceration in Ratnagiri from 1924 to 1937. Among his measures that earned the ire of the local Brahmin community were the advocacy of large scale inter-caste dining and the establishment of a Patit Pavan (literally meaning the protector of the fallen) temple that allowed entry to members of all castes for community prayers.(patit pavan mandir, in Ratnagiri, Maharashtra.)Just like he gave a call to the Hindu community to give up these superstitions, he exhorted the Muslims too to reform themselves with time and “abandon the belief that not even a word in the Quran can be questioned because it is the eternal message of God, even as you maintain respect for the Quran.”Elaborating, Savarkar said that the norms that seemed feasible to an oppressed but backward people in Arabia at a time of civil strife could not be accepted as an eternal way of life. The Muslims must “accept the habit of sticking to only that, which is relevant in the modern age,” he said.A staunch advocate of a capitalist, market-driven, mechanized society, Savarkar wrote as early as in the 1930s about scientific temper alone being the foundation of a modern and prosperous India.“It is through science, modern thoughts and industrialization and not by spinning wheelsIndia will have a job to do, food to eat, clothes to wear and a happy life to lead.”He even held other social reformers such as Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar in high regard. In a message to Dr Ambedkar's Golden Jubilee Committee on 15 January 1942, he wrote,"His personality, erudition and capacity to lead and organise-would have by themselves marked him out as an outstanding asset to our nation. But in addition to that the in-estimable services he has rendered to our motherland in trying to stamp out untouchability and the result he has achieved in instilling a manly spirit of self-confidence in millions of the depressed classes, constitute an abiding, patriotic as well as humanitarian achievement. The very fact of the birth of such a towering personality among the so-called untouchable castes could not but liberate their souls from self-depression and animate them to challenge the super-arrogative claims of the so-called touchables"Seldom do we hear about these qualities of Savarkar, shine out. Despite his many contributions to this great nation and the people, Savarkar is mostly derided, accused of a crime he didn’t commit. People may try to catastrophize this great personality, they may try to hide or even destroy his contributions, but their attempts, at the end of the day will always be futile. Truth always triumphs over falsehood. and it is no false claim that Veer Savarkar was one of the most erudite, patriotic and diligent of personalities to have graced India. As a politician, he may have been a polarizing figure, but as a social reformer and patriot, he was second to none.And that is why i admire him.Footnotes[1] Towards Freedom, 1947, Part 2 : Mahajan, Sucheta : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Choosing a movie to watch isn't a fraught decision if you know who to trust. That's the simple idea driving this list, which will be consistently updated and meticulously rearranged throughout the year. With some films getting their release days moved and others premiering early on VOD because of the ongoing global pandemic, this is already a strange, challenging year for the movie industry. But, like last year, we'll still do our best to keep you in the loop on the explosion-filled blockbusters you can't miss and the more intimate smaller films you must seek out. If it's good, we want it on here.From skin-crawling horror movies to hard-hitting documentaries, there should be something on this list to satisfy your highly specialized cinematic cravings as the year goes on. We recognize that you're busy and there's a lot of forces fighting for your attention at the moment, so we pledge not to waste your time. These are the best movies of 2020.15. The Vast of NightRelease date: May 29Cast: Sierra McCormick, Jake Horowitz, Gail Cronauer, Bruce DavisDirector: Andrew PattersonWhy it’s great: This low-budget debut feature is a UFO movie that takes time to achieve lift off. In addition to saddling the story with a mostly unnecessary framing device, which underlines the already obvious echoes of The Twilight Zone, director Andrew Patterson and the film's writers open the 1950s New Mexico-set story with a handful of overly precious exchanges featuring the two main characters, chatty DJ Everett (Horowitz) and young switchboard operator Fay (McCormick). In the beginning, these two might get on your nerves. But once the movie locks them in place, tampering down the acrobatic camerawork and letting the sound design take control, the material finds a more natural rhythm, drawing on the hushed intimacy of old-fashioned radio drama. Like many of the best UFO yarns, The Vast of Night taps into a deep sense of yearning. Wanting to believe is half the battle.14. Bad Boys For LifeRelease date: January 17Cast: Will Smith, Martin Lawrence, Vanessa Hudgens, Paola NúñezDirector: Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah (Black)Why it’s worth watching: In what hasn't exactly been a great year for action movies so far, Bad Boys for Life has to be the biggest surprise. Given its lengthy production history, its January release date, and the departure of series director Michael Bay -- the action auteur gets a winking cameo here, perhaps taking a break from shooting Netflix's 6 Underground -- this movie could've been a disaster. Instead, Smith and Lawrence easily slip back into the roles that made them action movie icons in the '90s and the writers find a way to update the garish, over-the-top aesthetic of the series for the franchise era. In a wise decision, directors Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah don't even bother trying to top the excess and mayhem of Bay's Bad Boys II.Bad Boys For Life is a gentler, sillier movie than its predecessor, less interested in moments of vulgarity than in scenes of sitcom-like human connection and familial melodrama. There are explosions and car chases through the streets of Miami and jokes about getting too old for this shit, but the material is given a light touch that lets the two stars do what they do best.13. Palm SpringsRelease date: July 10Cast: Andy Samberg, Cristin Milioti, J. K. Simmons, Camila MendesDirector: Max BarbakowWhy it’s great: Arriving on streaming in the middle of a pandemic, a time when many lives have fallen into unceasing loops of quarantine-related repetition and tedium, the Lonely Island produced comedy Palm Springs perhaps resonated differently than when it premiered at Sundance earlier this year. Jokes about doing the same shit over and over just hit harder now. Tracking a romance between a goofball wedding guest (Andy Samberg) and the bride's self-destructive sister (Cristin Milioti), writer Andy Siara's clever script combines Groundhog Day existentialism with a quippy take on quantum physics, doling out inspirational life lessons and math cram sessions at a clipped pace. In the same way Tom Cruise had to battle aliens in Edge of Tomorrow, the two must relive a wedding over and over, struggling to escape from an Instagram-ready, celebratory hell. It might not be as purely funny as Samberg's other big screen adventures Hot Rod and Popstar, but Palm Springs finds its own winning spin on a surprisingly robust micro-genre.12. The Way BackRelease date: March 6Cast: Ben Affleck, Al Madrigal, Michaela Watkins, Janina GavankarDirector: Gavin O'ConnorWhy it’s great: Disciplined in its approach and unapologetic about its contrivances, Ben Affleck's basketball coach in crisis drama The Way Back is a sports movie that understands the fundamentals. What it lacks in flashiness or ingenuity -- the underdog narrative of a crappy team hitting its stride under the leadership of a gruff coach hits all the requisite Hoosiers notes -- it makes up for with an oddly enthralling downbeat craftsmanship. Little details, like the freeze-frame when the scores of games pop up on screen or the click-clack percussion-heavy music, accumulate emotional power over the film's brisk runtime. Playing a washed-up ex-athlete with an immediately apparent drinking problem and a number of strategically hidden personal demons, Affleck delivers a weary performance that resonates with his off-screen persona (and his recent tabloid headlines) in ways both obvious and surprising. In brief stretches, director Gavin O'Connor, who helmed the similarly intense melodramas Miracle and Warrior, pulls off the ultimate sports movie trick of making you believe the character's redemption isn't inevitable. Every win is a battle -- even if you know the results going in.11. The AssistantRelease date: January 31Cast: Julia Garner, Matthew Macfadyen, Kristine Froseth, Makenzie LeighDirector: Kitty Green (Casting JonBenet)Why it’s great: The systemic culture of indifference and cruelty that often forms around a powerful serial abuser gets put under the microscope in this studiously observed New York office drama, which draws inspiration from the behavior of Harvey Weinstein while intentionally blurring some of the details. We never learn the name of the tyrannical boss in the story and the exact nature of his crimes are never fully revealed; instead, Julia Garner's assistant Jane, a Northwestern grad fresh off a handful of internships, provides our entryway into the narrative. The movie tracks her duties, tasks, and indignities over the course of a single day: She makes copies, coordinates air travel, picks up lunch orders, answers phone calls, and cleans suspicious stains off the couch. At one point, a young woman from Idaho appears at the reception desk, claims to have been flown in to start as a new assistant, and gets whisked away to a room in an expensive hotel. Jane raises the issue with an HR rep, played with smarmy menace by Succession's Matthew Macfadyen, but her concerns are quickly battered away and turned against her. Rejecting cheap catharsis and dramatic twists, The Assistant builds its claustrophobic world through a steady accumulation of information. While some of the writing can feel too imprecise and opaque by design, Garner, who consistently steals scenes on Netflix's Ozark, invests every hushed phone call and carefully worded email with real trepidation. She locates the terror in the drudgery of the work.10. Bad EducationRelease date: April 25Cast: Hugh Jackman, Allison Janney, Ray Romano, Geraldine ViswanathanDirector: Cory Finley (Thoroughbreads)Why it’s great: A chronicle of greed, status, and vanity, Bad Education shares more than a few qualities with Martin Scorsese's financial crimes epic The Wolf of Wall Street, the story of another Long Island striver with slicked-back hair. Trading the stock market for the public education system, director Cory Finley's wry docudrama, which takes its inspiration from a wild New York Magazine feature from 2004, charts the tragi-comic downfall of Roslyn School District superintendent Frank Tassone (Hugh Jackman), a charming and beloved administrator in a rising wealthy area. When his assistant superintendent Pam Gluckin (Allison Janey) gets caught allowing family members to make personal charges using the school's credit cards, Frank's world of healthy smoothies, expensive suits, and gleeful deception begins to unravel. Using a high school newspaper reporter as an audience surrogate (Geraldine Viswanathan), the script withholds key details of Frank's life for large sections of the runtime, allowing Jackman to give a performance that gradually reveals new layers of emotional complexity and moral emptiness. Like the tweezers Frank uses to dutifully pluck his nose hairs, the movie takes a surgical approach to its subject.Where to watch: Stream on HBO/HBO Max (9. Sorry We Missed YouRelease date: March 6Cast: Kris Hitchen, Debbie Honeywood, Rhys Stone, Katie ProctorDirector: Ken Loach (I, Daniel Blake)Why it’s great: The modern gig economy is set up so that the customer rarely has to think very much about the person delivering a package to their door. Sorry We Missed You, the latest working class social drama from 83-year-old English filmmaker Ken Loach, is a harsh reminder that those piles of cardboard Amazon boxes have a human cost. The film follows married couple Ricky (Kris Hitchen) and Abbi (Debbie Honeywood) as they attempt to raise their two kids, keep their humble home in Newcastle, and and hold down jobs stripped of conventional protections. As Ricky's domineering boss tells him at the beginning of the movie, he's not an "employee." No, he's his own small business owner and independent contractor. Loach finds dark laughs and absurdity in the the convoluted language of precarity, particularly the way management attempts to sell poor working conditions as a form of empowerment, but he also captures the tender, intimate moments that occur in even the most soul-sucking jobs. Ricky and his daughter find joy in knocking on doors and leaving notes; Abbi, who works as a nurse, genuinely cares for her patients like her own family even if the company she works for refuses to pay for her transportation. Though the script leans too hard on melodrama in its final stretch, setting up scenes that don't always deliver on their dramatic potential, Loach never loses his moral grasp on the material.8. ShirleyRelease date: June 5Cast: Elisabeth Moss, Michael Stuhlbarg, Odessa Young, Logan LermanDirector: Josephine Decker (Madeline's Madeline)Why it’s great: In short stories like The Lottery and novels like The Haunting of Hill House, Shirley Jackson conjured unease, tension, and queasy strangeness that made them difficult to put down. Fittingly, Shirley, an adaptation of a novel by Susan Scarf Merrell, examines a highly pressurized moment in the author's life that makes for occasionally nerve-rattling viewing. As played by Elisabeth Moss, Jackson can be temperamental, brilliant, and cruel, especially to Rose (Odessa Young) and Fred (Logan Lerman), the newlywed couple that move into the paper-strewn house she shares with her controlling professor husband (Michael Stuhlbarg). Where Decker's previous exploration of the creative process, the dizzying Madeline's Madeline, took an often nonlinear, combustible approach, Shirley retains some of the stuffy mechanics of the writerly biopic, particularly in the scenes of Jackson typing away at what will become her novel Hangsaman. (That book, which was partially inspired by the real-life disappearance of college student Paula Jean Welden, was written earlier in Jackson's life than the movie portrays.) But Moss's mischievous performance, the subtle interplay between the two women, and the feeling that the movie could tilt over the edge into chaos, chasing darker impulses and rolling around in the mud with Decker's roaming camera, keeps it from falling into many of the traps set by the often worshipful "great artist" micro-genre.7. Color Out of SpaceRelease date: January 24Cast: Nicolas Cage, Joely Richardson, Madeleine Arthur, Brendan MeyerDirector: Richard Stanley (Hardware)Why it’s great: For a certain type of moviegoer, any film where Nicolas Cage says the word "alpacas" multiple times is worth seeking out. Luckily, Color Out of Space, a psychedelic adaptation of H.P. Lovecraft's short story from 1927, offers more than just furry animals and unhinged Cage theatrics. Mixing hints of science-fiction intrigue and bursts horror movie excess, along with a couple splashes of stoner-friendly comedy, Richard Stanley's proudly weird B-movie vibrates on its own peculiar frequency. Cage's Nathan, a chatty farmer with a loving wife (Joely Richardson) and a pair of mildly rebellious kids, must contend with a meteoroid that crashes in his front yard, shooting purple light all over his property and infecting the local water supply. Is it some space invader? A demonic spirit? A biological force indiscriminately wreaking havoc on the fabric of reality itself? The squishy unknowability of the evil is precisely the point, and Stanley melds Evil Dead-like gore showdowns with Pink Floyd laser light freak-outs to thrilling effect, achieving a moving and disquieting type of genre alchemy that should appeal to fans of Cage's out-there turn in the similarly odd hybrid Mandy. Again, you'll know if this is in your wheelhouse or not.6. She Dies TomorrowRelease date: July 31Cast: Kate Lyn Sheil, Jane Adams, Kentucker Audley, Chris MessinaDirector: Amy Seimetz (Sun Don't Shine)Why it’s great: The strobing lights and shifting colors that flash across the at crucial points in She Dies Tomorrow signal a psychological shift that can't be fully explained or articulated by any of the characters. They all know something is wrong -- unavoidable death is approaching, soon -- but they can't exactly put a name to it or make others empathize with their anxiety until the reaction spreads. And this condition spreads fast: starting with Amy (Kate Lyn Sheil), who just moved into a sleek new house, and jumping to her obsessive friend, and then that friend's family and on and on. Is this a medical thriller stripped of jargon or a dark social comedy of manners stylized into a more abstract register? Quibbles about genre feel less urgent as the movie builds its peculiar world of dune buggies, leather shops, and swimming pools. Director Amy Seimetz scrutinizes behavior with a careful eye, and she brings joy out of the performers even in dire circumstances, but the movie's big questions are metaphysical. Surrendering to the void or stepping into the light can only do so much.5. Bloody Nose, Empty PocketsRelease date: July 10Directors: Bill and Turner Ross (Western)Why it’s great: The theme song from Cheers succinctly summed up the communal appeal of the local bar: "Sometimes you want to go where everybody knows your name." On the surface, this genre-bending documentary from brother filmmaking team Bill and Turner Ross is a straightforward celebration of that concept, one that explores depths of feeling, patterns of behavior, and types of language you wouldn't see on a network sitcom. Chronicling the closing night of a Las Vegas dive called Roaring '20s in November 2016, in the the shadow of Donald Trump's election victory, Bloody Nose, Empty Pockets introduces a series of bartenders and barflys, observing them in verité style as they watch Jeopardy! on TV, sing songs, and get in arguments. An Australian regular takes acid; a cake gets smashed. Just another night out. The setup is simple and the hangout vibe is a pleasure, but the story of how the the film was made, which goes mostly unacknowledged on screen, blurs the line between fiction and non-fiction in a way that gives the events a woozy texture. It's a sentiment most bar-goers can relate to: Why let the truth get in the way of a great story?4. Da 5 BloodsRelease date: June 12Cast: Delroy Lindo, Jonathan Majors, Clarke Peters, Norm LewisDirector: Spike LeeWhy it’s great: Exploding with historical references, directorial flourishes, and flashes of combat action, Spike Lee's war epic Da 5 Bloods is a movie that embraces the inherent messiness of its subject matter. At first, the story sounds simple enough: four elderly Black veterans regroup and travel to Vietnam to recover the remains of their squad leader Norman (Chadwick Boseman) and search for a shipment of gold they buried in the jungle decades ago. But Lee, pushing the movie in sharply funny and emotionally fraught directions depending on the demands of the scenes, refuses to approach the Treasure of Sierra Madre-like set-up in a straight-forward manner. Instead, the movie pings between the MAGA-hat speckled present and the bullet-ridden past, using his older actors in the flashbacks as their younger selves to underline the strangeness of time's passage. While some of the detours might test your patience, particularly once the men discover the gold and start arguing over what to do with it, the powerful ending, which becomes a moving showcase for the great Delroy Lindo, makes this a long journey worth embarking on.3. Never Rarely Sometimes AlwaysRelease date: March 13Cast: Sidney Flanigan, Talia Ryder, Théodore Pellerin, Ryan EggoldDirector: Eliza Hittman (Beach Rats)Why it’s great: The Port Authority bus terminal provides the backdrop for a good deal of the drama and the waiting in Eliza Hittman's powerful portrait of a teenager traveling from Pennsylvania to New York to have an abortion, a procedure she can't receive in her home state. Quiet and watchful, Autumn (Sidney Flanigan) observes the world around her from benches, bus seats, and doctor's office chairs, dragging an enormous suitcase through the drab interiors of various midtown locations. She doesn't tell her parents about her pregnancy or her trip. She's joined by her cousin Skylar (Talia Ryder), who wants to be a supportive friend and sounding board. Still, the two don't talk much. The movie's most striking image shows the two holding hands in a moment of shared vulnerability, like their bond transcends language. As a filmmaker, Hittman is most interested in behavior and gesture, approaching her story with the type of careful rigor that allows for poetic moments to emerge in unexpected places. It's a style that's especially suited to the challenging emotional terrain of the material.2. BacurauRelease date: March 6Cast: Sônia Braga, Udo Kier, Bárbara Colen, Thomas AquinoDirectors: Kleber Mendonça Filho and Juliano DornellesWhy it’s great: When a movie tells a story about a community joining together to fight off outside invaders, there are certain shots, moments, and heroics you want to see. Bloodshed, vengeance, and justice all have a place in Bacurau, a feverish, quasi-dystopian genre mash-up centered around a fictional Brazilian city in the country's Northwestern region, but the film doles out its cathartic showdowns in an inventive, dizzying manner. After a stretch exploring the geography, political realities, and daily routines of the city, a scheming American villain arrives and, in an inspired bit of casting, he's played by B-movie staple Udo Kier, reveling in the cruelty and complexity of the role. He's leading a team of aspiring would-be commandos, the type of people who view killing as a novel thrill. Exposition gets tucked in odd narrative corners; the tactical demands of the situation shift; scenes play out in tense, curious confrontations. Eventually, the movie explodes like a volcano, bursts of stylized gore and righteous indignation flying everywhere. Both visually hallucinatory and morally centered, Bacurau excites and inspires in equal measure.1. First CowRelease date: March 6Cast: John Magaro, Orion Lee, René Auberjonois, Toby JonesDirector:Kelly Reichardt (Certain Women)Why it’s great: First Cow, Kelly Reichardt's evocative and wise tale of frontier life, begins with the discovery of two skeletons in the woods. An unnamed young woman (Arrested Development's Alia Shawkat) and her dog -- echoing the human-and-canine pair at the center of Reichardt's 2008 road story Wendy and Lucy -- come upon the bones in the modern day Pacific Northwest. Then we flash back to a time when the Oregon territory was far less developed, an era of perilous opportunity and rampant exploitation, and meet Cookie (John Magaro), a bashful and unassuming cook for a team of unruly fur trappers. Eventually, he befriends the wandering King-Lu (Orion Lee), a Chinese immigrant who claims to be fleeing some Russians. The two stumble on an opportunity to make some money: a wealthy landowner (Toby Jones) brings the first cow to the region. Cookie and King-Lu decide to steal the cow's milk at night and use it to bake sweet honey biscuits, which they sell at the local market. The story has an allegorical quality, gently pulling at classic American notions of hope, ambition, and deception. Reichardt, who chronicled a similar historical period in 2010's neo-Western Meek's Cutoff and an equally rich male friendship in 2006's buddy comedy Old Joy, has a gentle human touch that never veers into sentimentality. On a literal and metaphoric level, she knows where the bodies are buried.