No one is worshiping democracy in this country.
Just check the point to which I responded and you will know why I said so. It is the second or third comment of this thread.
It amazes me that
you are worshiping a man, even though a great nationalist but a very weak politician and a nobody when it comes military planning.
Funny how you lop-sided democracy zombies are now pointing the same finger at me to escape from the allegation of worshipping a form of governance.
You're talking about Netaji being a poor politician: now India has NO nationalist NO leader and ONLY politicians who are screwing the country inside out. 
Money of people like you and me are going freely into the hands of these "POLITICIANS" and some people here continue with the weak "chalta hai" mentality.
I don't know what he was thinking when he thought that he could defeat British Indian Army with a handful of soldiers.
Netaji at least had the guts to get out there out of his home and take the initiative to actually fight for his nation and his loyalty to motherland rather than sitting in an armchair and condemning the British like you are mocking the great hero right now. He had the sheer courage, the love and devotion to go out there and take on a world superpower of that time. Netaji founded a parallel government that fought the superpower of that time despite no definite national following in that era when even lee enfields were considered the state of art weapons.
Today's "democratic" government of India would wet its pants if even a nation like Sri Lanka sneezed. That's the difference between Netaji and the Nehru-Gandhi British slave alliance.
Regarding the talk about inspiring the masses and soldiers, soldiers pledged allegiance to the British and I don't want to be around a soldier who breaks his allegiance for some political reasons and trust me neither do you. We suffered a long period of License Raj and a selfish man's foolish schemes to be great just because he was "influenced" by the socialist system. Then imagine another national leader who wasn't "influenced" but is actually a Communist. India would have had become just another communist nation just like some of them who no longer exists. As for your justification for authoritarian rule, we already had our share in the 1977 and it didn't felt good.
You kidding me? Emergency was against the will of the people but everything was so damn organized. All the work in time, people not screwing public property like they do today, no protests, no trouble on the streets, crime became rare etc etc. THIS my friend, is a system. Not the freedom to piss on footpath, drive on the wrong side, honk near a hospital or spit paan on the roads like south Asian "democracy". My father says a lot about emergency period. The only drawback was Indira Gandhi started to later misuse the systematic arrangement of emergency. But it was also a period where Indians were actually being taught how to live in a civilized manner. Singapore, UK, Denmark, Turkey etc all started with an authoritarian rule and moved into democracy, emerging as clean, developed, advanced nations while we continue to progress ahead simply because of common man's work like a zoo.
Are you telling me you seriously don't see the difference?
Netaji was a national socialist; not a communist as you'd like to imagine. His difference from Hitler's theory was that he did not believe in a superior race theory like Nazis did that's all. There's quite a lot of difference between the two. Goodness! Such is your fascination with this lopsided democracy! I never knew you'd prefer a chaotic, disorganized and corrupt "democracy" over a clean, well-managed, well organized, powerful and systematic authoritarian regime. This is why I said in my last reply, ask the common road laborer or the fresh graduate what he wants.
I also despise Communism as a principle but I am certainly not averse to
authoritarian rule by leaders that can actually lead the nation to success. Democracy just doesn't do well in Asia without an authoritarian beginning. This is the reality that most "chalta hai" Indians who don't want to be disciplined and organized will refuse to agree. They never see the bigger picture. Take any Asian country's history and you will get my point. Turkey, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan.. you name it.
As for the Japanese and Germans helping India, they were trying to help themselves because with a sizable part of India under control they might have had recruited Indians to "break free and fight the evil". At the Battle of Berlin, a large chink of the defenders were teens. If it was Netaji, Indians would have been defending Berlin and Iwo Jima.
You really don't see the bigger picture, do you? Just like today, a relationship then was also a relationship of convenience. However, you forget the status INA was as compared to what India is today. We are today one of the most influential countries around the world. Our country is one of the most prominent countries on the map today with every company wanting to enter and grab this massive market. During INA's era, we were NOTHING but lackeys of colonial imperialists just like most Congressiyas are still to the ideology of imperialism. I am aware of Battle of Berlin. Japan and Germany agreed to help INA when it was a non-entity in the world map with no definite nation, funding, weapons industry, economy, etc. THAT, is a big move for two countries that were superpowers long before USA and Soviet Union jumped into the scene.
This would have just been like NATO-- an alliance that benefits both sides. Why are you so apprehensive about Germans and Japanese? Just because you see this from the British imperialist point of view that we are taught in our education system? When it comes to national interests, one doesn't see what the other nation has done to third and other nations. It only is seen as what our nation can gain from and how they can gain from us without harming each other's interests. That is the reality of geo-politics that most Indians cannot seem to get into their heads.
USA has bombed dozens of countries and regions to stone age, destroyed thousands of lives which involved civilians also, Soviet Union slaughtered its own citizens just because of Communist overdose. But did the Nehru-Gandhi gang consider this or does it consider all this before shaking hands with either countries? NO. Because it is always about national interests. NEVER about what is happening to the rest of the world.
You need to see the world a bit more, take a trip around (not for sightseeing but interacting and knowing more) before discussing geopolitics with me. Don't take this as a taunt but as an advice. Trust me, you will benefit a lot in the end.
Nazis were bad to Jews and Japanese were nasty to Chinese... but they were pretty cool with us and that's what we should be concerned about.
