I just call to say wether I love him or hate him

Me and Gandhi

This essay is about what I think of Gandhi and why. This is in a dialogue form and explains some of the facts that sometimes disturb me about Gandhi.
So the discussion starts--

Me: The overall attitude that Gandhi showed in tackling with the Britisher’s didn’t provide a healthful lesson to the people of India. I do not think that the way that he followed would provide any fruitful result in present day. You cannot submit to anyone like this because now a day one is witnessing how the helpless people are crushed. Take the case of Israel, how it has been taking actions against the Palestine’s to safeguard ones own security. And also look at what the people of Palestine is doing to safeguard its own independence. Take the similar case in India. India has suffered the same form of militancy for over two decades now from Pakistani side. What has it done, always talking about peace and friendship with Pakistan, never has been a firm step taken against it. China attacked from behind the veil of friendship. Isn’t it the gandhivadian attitude being responsible for no leader taking step against them.

Myself: this is not at all true. What you speak of is right but there is another perspective though which you must see. Palestine crisis is not going to solve in the present future. The hatred that the Palestinian people have generated against Israelis will last for many decades. There is much blood bath to take place. The way that U.S is waving war for oil will also have its own consequences, one of the examples we see is downing of the world trade center. The way that India has coped with the problem of militancy is different, first of all you must know that India was never favored over Pakistan by the western countries. So India was not able to take any firm step against Pakistan. Secondly the way in which India has acted has resulted in generation of respect for the country.

Me: Gandhi has always stressed on religious solutions for the welfare of the society and improve the way of living. This is quite visible today that the religious bodies are only providing havoc on the people of the society. See what the sangh parivar has been doing in India, is this that what Gandhi wanted. No this results in riots and oppression of the weaker sections.

Myself: you are absolutely wrong about this. This is not what Gandhi said about using religion for the refinement of the society. Let me explain in other perspective other than the situation in India. Take the two countries US and Russia. They are superpowers, but there is a great difference between these two societies. The Russian society is seeking religion for solving the problems in the society, on the other hand the American society is far of from this. The difference seems to be clear here. In Russian society despite of being very poor as compared to the American counterpart are far better of in understanding of human values, the family holds a respectable place in this part while on the other hand in the American society breakage of families is quite a visible thing.



Me: the other thing that is what the attitude that Gandhi showed to the partition of Bengal was also not right. At that time no serious efforts were taken against it. He writes in hindswaraj that Bengal will be reunited after the British leadership had gone, in this he failed to estimate that the seeds of the Hindu Muslim inequality was laid down now which slowly engulfed India. He then also kept on giving petitions.

Myself: The way Gandhi acted does not mean what you think. It was Gandhi who was instrumental in stopping the riots between the Muslims and Hindus. But at the time he was not a great political leader so his comment does not say what he really means. He was always against these riots and laid his life for preventing this.

Me: Gandhi says that English are enterprising and says that this is not the way one must be. Gandhi in his comment says that one must not ask for earthly possessions but try for godly pursuits. Let’s take the case in the present context. Let you try this thing out, how on earth not being enterprising can help you to do some thing for country. Some one has to help others to fill their stomachs. Now everyone cannot be Gandhi or Vinoba Bhabe and the other interesting fact is that both took the help of entrepreneurs in some way or other in fulfilling their dreams. Also how can a country develop without the help of entrepreneurs and the people who think ahead.


Myself: This is really a very tricky question. But you have taken it the other way, how can one do these things when you know that he himself was a professional lawyer and a great entrepreneur too. He said this in comparison with the Britishers and says that too much of want of power is not a good thing if you respect humans. One can clearly witness what America is doing for the want of oil. Is it they who want the oil or something else.

Me: I do not understand why when the non corporation movement was moving at full fledged, Gandhi pulled it of. Think about the people who had taken part in the movement against the British rule. Many lost what they had. The movement was going in full pace when an event of not such an high intensity of what happened in chouri-chaura resulted in Gandhi calling of the movement. After that he left the political scene for many years. This left most of the people helpless and congress without a leader was rendered to be a useless institute.

Myself: you may be right but this is not as easy as it seems. Let the event would have been left to be continued. There would have been many such attacks on the British rule but this would have given rise to a new problem. There would have been emergence of new leaders in many parts of the country and different strategies that they have used would only result in weakening of the massive movement and in such a case a full fledged movement will not be possible for some time. The other thing is that once the civilians pick arm against the administration they will also do the same once an administration in Indian hands will come in place. This may result in civil rights that may have engulfed the country which was mostly witnessed by other nations that became independent along with India. You can say that it was because of Gandhi there was no such an action against any government and today one can say that here democracy is among the best in the world.

Me: It has been said that Gandhi because of his rivalry with people like Bhagat Singh and Shubash Chandra Bose has tried to remove them from the path. Some say that he even had the chance to save the life of Bhagat Singh but didn’t do anything.

Myself: I do not really know the truth behind these but the thing is that way they were operating was not right for the nation. Subhash Chandra Bose was trying the military way out. This was not a good idea as this would have resulted in increase in violence as the after affects. Also a war torn nation is not what one likes. Bhagat Singh was also somewhat of this approach.

These are some of the views that come to my mind. I do not think that the contradictions are up to the mark. But these things really say that I have not fully understood what Gandhi really was. I cannot think the way he used to think but certainly his ideas seem to impress me after all we are proud of Gandhi.