Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sun_
Thank u sohel bhai for ur nice post. Really, that was a nice read. I have heard similar sorts of things from my parents. Anyway what I don’t understand is why did mujib try to implement autocracy, i mean unconditionally he was the sole leader and more or less there was no other political parties without AL during that period. Then what was the necessity of such controversial decision. If there was an election and bal participated in that vote war under the leadership of mujib then it’s almost certain that they would definitely win in that election. But mujib didn’t follow that straight route rather he took the dark curved path and banned every other political party.
The question is what was his reason? Did he really felt that those two faced opposition force who didn’t appreciate the independence of Bangladesh were so strong that allowing all political parties to do politics will allow such hypo crates to participate in the countries’ decision making and later it could threaten the sovereignty of the country. It could be though. I guess it’s true that quite a few corrupted rich Pakistani minded people were present in the country during that era. As a result if mujib declared any election, hypothetically it can be said that these handful amount of rich people would use their black money to win some seats through election. Plus the number of isi agents who were visiting freely inside the country was also a headache for mujib. Actually these reasons were mentioned by mujib himself to a journalist named Abir in an interview to fortify the necessity of establishing bakshal . So, ya questions can be asked regarding the legitimacy behind such reasoning.
Anyway, on the other side someone can also assume that all these reasons given by mujib and bakshal sympathizer were actually just an eye wash. May be Mujib wanted to be a dictator like Hitler or late F Castro, and perhaps the implementation of bakshal was the first step of that long staircase to fulfill the cherished dream of mujib, who knows. Anyway all these are assumptions and it is almost impossible to reach a definite conclusion regarding the effectiveness of Bakshal as It was implemented for a real short period of time.
Was the intention of mujib good? Was it bad? Well we will never know. But it’s true that the 72-75 was not a happy era for mujib and bal. Understandably People will not forget that easily. I have heard that still people talks about the killings of rakkhi bahini , the bank robbery of kamal, the unavailability of sufficient relief during the famine etc, etc. Later many people found out that many of those relief materials were available in different departmental store which means bal thugs sold them instead of distributing them during that hard period of time. There are so many examples. So will we ditch mujib for all these? Hmm I don’t know……… So ya perhaps the thinking and planning of mujib was groundbreaking but the implementation of them was really poor. Moreover most of the time reason behind such mismanagement was either his family or his own party, which he failed to control.
|
You may heard something and drew conclusion from it but
Only AL didn't free this country. AL's agenda was to have a PM of East and West Pakistan after the 70
DECEMBER election. Bhasani on the other hand had "ek dabi" no 5 points, 7 points. Just one that is liberation. There were other parties who participated as much if not more than the AL in liberating our beloved country. Jashod for example. Then there was people of Bangladesh who didn't have any party but wanted his/her country to be liberated.
Not until February '71 AL switched their stands when they figured out Pak president would not let them have what they wanted. Razakars or their simpathesizers were a non-factor after the liberation. It was NAAP and Jashod who fought in the trenches in 71 a threat to AL. Thus the one party rule ideology came.