Today I learned...

that Gandhi and Nehru could have agitated the British further during the beginning of WWII potentially executing their campaign for home-rule while attentions were distracted with fascist regimes in Europe.  Not the case - They decided, along with the Bengali intellectual contingent (Tagore, Coomaraswamy and Nandalal Bose) that the fight against fascist regeimes was more important at the time than independence. 

Others such as Subhas Chandra Bose did not agree.  He wanted to take advantage of the weakened British state to gain independence.  He spent time with Hitler looking to connect on the "aryan" thing - meaning the Aryans origninated in the Indus river valley civilization, thus Bose saw himself as an Aryan, yet, Hitler didn't know what to do with him - he had dark skin and didn't fit the bill.  Hitler sent him to Japan.  Japanese didn't know what to do with him, so they sent him in to Burma to fight the Brits.  That lasted for a bit and then he was killed (more info needed).  There are some that think he is still out there in a cave somewhere waiting until the time is right when he will emerge as a messianic figure to lead India on to global domination.

The dangers of developing a national identity - seems Gandhi and the Bengalis had their feet on the ground and were able to balance their inspiration from the Russian and European idealist identity writers (Hegel, Tolstoy...) with the understanding of human empathy and Truth.  Bose missed the boat on that one. 

One can draw an argument here from looking at the development of the nation-state theology in the late 18th c. and take Hitler's third reich as an example of how destructive (yet mesmerizing) developing national identity can be.  The other example are the Indian nationalists in the middle of the 20th c. 

hm.