<!--QuoteBegin-LSrini+Oct 15 2006, 10:51 AM-->QUOTE(LSrini @ Oct 15 2006, 10:51 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
The British, with their parlimentary sense of fair play found it difficult to be violent to a man preaching non-violence.Â
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is the term in which Gandhi made sure that the British govt negotiated.
Because the British govt was ruling India in the name of justice and fairplay and perpetuating their hegemony in those terms - hence Gandhi held them to that stds.
British wanted a dominin status for India based on those sense of 'fair play'.
If the British govt was a tyranical and oppressive in nature then there would have been another kind of leader under whom the people would have rallied together. This is the key to kind of leaders who get support during struggle.
After 60 years the world is under the assult of terror and violence inthe name of religion. This will generate a different kind of leadership who will find the appropriate kind of response. For Hindus with the kind of targetted anti-Hindu killings by the Islamists-fascists this will require totally different kind of response. The sense of history now in the 21st century is different from those days when the modern world was opening up just before independence.
The softening of Hindus in 60 years is due to indoctrination and false liberal movement by deracinated Indian elite which just perpetuated this Gandhi philosophy without looking into the sense of History. The current liberal movement is a false movement and has no connection to the liberation movement during the independence of India.
The concept of non violence response to a world at relative peace may need a change and upgrade.
The British, with their parlimentary sense of fair play found it difficult to be violent to a man preaching non-violence.Â
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is the term in which Gandhi made sure that the British govt negotiated.
Because the British govt was ruling India in the name of justice and fairplay and perpetuating their hegemony in those terms - hence Gandhi held them to that stds.
British wanted a dominin status for India based on those sense of 'fair play'.
If the British govt was a tyranical and oppressive in nature then there would have been another kind of leader under whom the people would have rallied together. This is the key to kind of leaders who get support during struggle.
After 60 years the world is under the assult of terror and violence inthe name of religion. This will generate a different kind of leadership who will find the appropriate kind of response. For Hindus with the kind of targetted anti-Hindu killings by the Islamists-fascists this will require totally different kind of response. The sense of history now in the 21st century is different from those days when the modern world was opening up just before independence.
The softening of Hindus in 60 years is due to indoctrination and false liberal movement by deracinated Indian elite which just perpetuated this Gandhi philosophy without looking into the sense of History. The current liberal movement is a false movement and has no connection to the liberation movement during the independence of India.
The concept of non violence response to a world at relative peace may need a change and upgrade.