Mahathma Gandhi and India Today

[Ronnie The Dutch]

... is the subject of a presentation I am currently working on and I have to deliver it at the end of march.

I find a lot of links about Mahathma Gandhi but almost none about how today's Indians, esp. the youth as the new generation and how different castes, clases and gender, are thinking of him. I also would like to know if anything has changed or if Gandhi's goals were achieved in India. Simply, how would Gandhi comment on India, Pakistan and Bangaladesh and their devolopement regarding Humanity, Economy, Poverty, Power and Spiritualism.

No, I was not at all running after this theme but unfortunately it fell on me.

So Ladies and Gentlemen please help me to elaborate it well. I would also like to collect all views, also radical in both ways. As there are over 9000 hubbers I expect atleast the half to partake.

I am studying Philosophy and Politics.

Thanks in advance,
Ronnie v. H.

Last modified:
17. 01. 2006 Regarding the poll options I was a bit careless. Moderators if you could add the following two more options that would be great, thanks.

- only one among others
- A traitor

[Lambretta]

I find a lot of links about Mahathma Gandhi but almost none about how today's Indians, esp. the youth as the new generation and how different castes, clases and gender, are thinking of him.

This brings to me a memory of my schooldays many yrs ago when one of my classmates had a photo of Gandhi in a Diary tat he got......he disfigured it by drawing a goatee & donkey's ears (& if I rem. right a cigarette dangling from the mouth), exulting in displaying his 'modified art' to sum others in class......nor of course were naughty school brats the only ones I knew w/ such 'admiration' for the Mahatma.....so I guess tat says it all.....?

I also would like to know if anything has changed or if Gandhi's goals were achieved in India.

As Gandhi said Truth alone Triumphs......so the answer from ne TRUTHFUL Indian shud clearly be NO!

[goodsense]

This might be a bit of divergence, but January 26th being an important day for India and for many of us, we ought to think of and remember all those who sacrificed their lives in defending India. Mahatma Ghandi, no doubt should be at the top of the list.

[Lambretta]

This might be a bit of divergence, but January 26th being an important day for India and for many of us, we ought to think of and remember all those who sacrificed their lives in defending India.

Actually I wud rather tat we rem. all those if we were to feel sorry for them, for their very efforts of having 'gifted' us this country r being wasted by our own ppl. today!
Incidentally, January 29th is important too for India, as tat was the day Gandhi was assasinated.....

[Sandeep]

If Gandhi's goals were achieved in India.

Goal 1) A Secular united India

Today - A pseudo secular, suspicion driven society.

Explanation - Secularism has today become the most widely misused term, used with brain and not heart to it. Most Hindus, Muslims, Christians dont hate each other but there is great amount of suspicion. And these suspicions are fanned by pseudo seculars as well as religious fanatics.

[Ronnie The Dutch]

Dear hubbers,
I wish to thank you so far.

Please don't hesitate to come up with your own views as well as of others according to you as this also helps me a lot. Hot tempered discussions are also welcome because that would display the reality of the real India Today.

[abbydoss1969]

Ronnie the Dutch


Gandhi's years in South Africa are largely unknown, and I found some black rights web sites which suggest that Gandhi was rascist, and his conduct in S. A. was against the blacks and supporting the white dominion.
Just to play the devil's advocate I post the links here:



.Gandhi lived in South Africa for roughly twenty one years from 1893 to 1914. In 1906, he joined the military with a rank of Sergeant-Major and actively participated in the war against the blacks. Gandhi's racist ideas are also evident in his writings of these periods



Gandhi was not a whit less racist than the white racists of South Africa. When Gandhi formed the Natal Indian Congress on August 22, 1894, the no. 1 objective he declared was: "To promote concord and harmony among the Indians and Europeans in the Colony." [Collected Works (CW)1 pp. 132-33]


He launched his Indian Opinion on June 4 1904: "The object of Indian Opinion was to bring the European and the Indian subjects of the King Edward closer together." (CW. IV P. 320)


What was the harm in making an effort to bring understanding among all people, irrespective of colour, creed or religion? Did not Gandhi know that a huge population of blacks and coloured lived there? Perhaps to Gandhi they were less than human beings



Addressing a public meeting in Bombay on Sept. 26 1896 (CW II p. 74), Gandhi said:

Ours is one continued struggle against degradation sought to be inflicted upon us by the European, who desire to degrade us to the level of the raw Kaffir, whose occupation is hunting and whose sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle to buy a wife with, and then pass his life in indolence and nakedness.



In its editorial on the Natal Municipal Corporation Bill, the Indian Opinion of March 18 1905 wrote:

Clause 200 makes provision for registration of persons belonging to uncivilized races (meaning the local Africans), resident and employed within the Borough. One can understand the necessity of registration of Kaffirs who will not work, but why should registration be required for indentured Indians who have become free, and for their descendants about whom the general complaint is that they work too much?

http://www.trinicenter.com/WorldNews/ghandi4.htm

[abbydoss1969]

Conspiracy to massacre Blacks: Gandhi was well aware of the conspiracy to massacre the Africans. When there was war hysteria in the colonial press, this prophet of non-violence did not apply his mind as to how to stop such a conflict. On the contrary, he did not want Indians to be left behind, but wanted them to take a full part in this genocide.

In his editorial in the Indian Opinion of Nov. 18 1905, long before the actual rebellion broke out, Gandhi complained that the Government simply did not wish to give Indians an opportunity of showing that they were as capable as any other community of taking their share in the defence of the colony. He suggested that a volunteer corps should be formed from colonial-born Indians, which would be useful in actual service.


Indentured Indians lived in conditions worse than slavery. Gandhi during his 20 years' stay in South Africa, did not raise a finger to ease their sufferings. But he was quick to suggest using them as cannon fodder for racists against Africans.



In his Indian Opinion in Dec. 2 1905 he referred to Law 25 of 1875 which was specially passed to increase "the maximum strength of the volunteer force in the colony adding thereto a force of Indian immigrant volunteer infantry". To assure the Europeans that such Indians would only kill Africans, he pointed out that "section 83 of the Militia Act states that no ordinary member of the coloured contingent shall be armed with weapons of precision, unless such contingent is called to operate against other than Europeans".

Gandhi defends massacre: Many years later, he wrote (p.233) in his autobiography:

The Boer War had not brought home to me the horrors of war with anything like the vividness that the `rebellion' did. This was no war but a man-hunt, not only in my opinion but also in that of many Englishmen with whom I had occasion to talk. To hear every morning reports of the soldiers' rifles exploding like crackers in innocent hamlets, and to live in the midst of them, was a trial.

http://www.trinicenter.com/WorldNews/ghandi4.htm

[goodsense]

I have to say I find the opinions about what Ghandi did or failed to do are based on vague statements made by the Africans. These could be all misinterpretations and can we ever prove that such statements were even ever made by Africans or Ghandi himself or are they just "defensive afterthoughts" made by Africans based on the following:

1. To appreciate the interpretation given to 'clause 200" one needs to know exactly what that clause stipulates.

2. Is it the opinion of the Indian people of March 18, 1905 referred to, or Ghandi's opinion?

3. Going back to Canadian History, at the time of the Boer War (between 1899 and 1902), Ghandi did not yet realized what the British was doing, not even to the Indians.

4. Had Ghandi been appointed or elected as a representative of Indians and Africans, then he would have had an obligation to explain his position on "Clause 200 of the provision", made reference to as to how and why it was formulated and implemented before determining the interpretations of it.

5. When Ghandi made the statement about "concord and harmony" was he aware of what the British was doing? If he was, then the first step to resolution of any conflict would be to foster "concord and harmony".

6. Didn't Ghandi had enough to contend with, defending India, the Indians in the colonies and the colonial-born Indians in various parts of the world? Going back to old research, Ghandi did acknowledge both Indian and African slavery in one form or another.


It could well be that the Africans are trying to justify their own failures i.e. that they failed to see what Ghandi saw and failed to take the necessary steps much earlier.

[goodsense]

This article clearly shows at what stage of the Boer War, the Africans were most affected than others.

http://www.icon.co.za/~dup42/abw.htm

How did Ghandi foresee, supported or perpetrated that?

Proof that Ghandi was againts "untouchability" while he was proud of the Indian Civilization and his "Period of Consciousness" can be see here:

http://www.workersforjesus.com/gandhi.htm

This should not be confused or mis-interpreted or taken as contradictory for convenience.

These days, sources of information must be carefully examined. There is a certain class of people who likes to take credit for everything that is good on earth. We have seen it with the Vedas and it is also possible with the "Non-Violence" theory etc.