 |
| Young Mohandas Gandhi |
Gandhi thought otherwise. He applied it and made history. Gandhi took that principle and made it the cornerstone of his successful nonviolent resistance movement in South Africa and then in India. And when women in America were struggling to get the vote, they followed Gandhi's example and succeeded too. Martin Luther King was also inspired by Gandhi's example.
Gandhi's earnest endorsement of the religious teachings found in a religious text and then sharing it with believers of the religion is similar to what is happening all over the Muslim world today. Muslims are reading the Koran and going to their fellow Muslims saying, "Did you know we're supposed to be covering our women, striving to seize political power, deceiving and terrorizing infidels, and waging war against them until the whole world follows the law of Allah?"
Often (fortunately), they also get a lukewarm response. But, of course, many of them are reading and following those teachings, and they, too, are making history. More people now die annually in the name of Islam than died in the 350 years of the Inquisition (source). More people have been killed in the name of Islam than have been killed by any other ideology or religion by far (source).
Like Gandhi, these enthusiastic Muslims are following the teachings of a religious book but, of course, the teachings of each religion can be quite different. A devout Jain doesn't eat meat. A devout Buddhist follows the Five Precepts (abstains from killing, lying, stealing, sexual misconduct, and becoming intoxicated). A devout Christian forgives enemies. A devout Muslim tries to make Islam the dominant religion on earth, by peaceful means if possible, by force if necessary.
I don't see how this problem will ever go away. I hope I'm wrong, but it doesn't seem possible to eradicate all Korans and Hadiths from the face of the earth. And as long as these texts exist, it seems likely that somebody will find them and follow them.
But the destructive impact of Islamic teachings can certainly be restricted and restrained. And you can help. The more of us involved, the more successful we will be. Here are thirty things an ordinary non-Muslim citizen can do to help contain the embedded danger in Islamic texts: What Non-Muslims Can Do About Islam.
13 comments:
:)
Gandhi was a dumbass, but if he helps us learn a lesson, then fine.
You the man, C-Dub.
Wow, that's a lot tamer response than I anticipated from Pastorius, given his opinion archived here on the subject of Gandhi.
I actually anticipated a SHTF moment here.
Nicely done.
I don't have a problem with any religion so long as it is peaceful and doesn't try to force their beliefs down my throat.
To each his own.
I'm really trying to be a better person. ;-)
PS: Unlike Pasto I am NOT trying to be a better person :-P
I learned another interesting fact about Gandhi recently. He went to law school in England, then became a Lawyer, sometime in the late 1800's.
Then,
he went to South Africa, where he worked for Muslims.
He sided with the English Colonialist government in their war against the blacks. His only disagreement with the English was when any English person or institution dared to equate blacks and Indians.
He really hated that, because, in his words, blacks were "savages", "Lazy", and stupid, though I do not remember the words he used to insult the intelligence of black people.
Gandhi believed in the Hindu caste system and wedded it with a form of Aryan Supremacism by which he justified his dislike of black people.
But the thing that I find interesting is HE WORKED FOR MUSLIMS.
Pasto,
Yup. And even when he went to India, he joined forces with whining Muslims who were rioting all over the world because they lost their caliphate. He effectively started the Muslim riots in India by encouraging the Muslim cause.
As for blacks, I had read about that before but recently I found out that when the blacks took over the government after the apartheid, they erected monuments to honor Gandhi.
Our world is so upside down.
We have to get this information out, Nico.
Khilafat movement
In 1919 Gandhi, with his weak position in Congress, decided to broaden his base by increasing his appeal to Muslims. The opportunity came from the Khilafat movement, a worldwide protest by Muslims against the collapsing status of the Caliph, the leader of their religion. The Ottoman Empire had lost the World War and was dismembered, as Muslims feared for the safety of the holy places and the prestige of their religion.[55] Although Gandhi did not originate the All-India Muslim Conference,[56] which directed the movement in India, he soon became its most prominent spokesman and attracted a strong base of Muslim support with local chapters in all Muslim centers in India.[57] His success made him India's first national leader with a multicultural base and facilitated his rise to power within Congress, which had previously been unable to reach many Muslims. In 1920 Gandhi became a major leader in Congress.[58][59] By the end of 1922 the Khilafat movement had collapsed.[60]
Gandhi always fought against "communalism", which pitted Muslims against Hindus in politics, but he could not reverse the rapid growth of communalism after 1922. Deadly religious riots broke out in numerous cities, including 91 in U.P. (Uttar Pradesh) alone.[61][62] At the leadership level, the proportion of Muslims among delegates to Congress fell sharply, from 11% in 1921 to under 4% in 1923.[63]
As a rule, Gandhi was opposed to the concept of partition as it contradicted his vision of religious unity.[107] Concerning the partition of India to create Pakistan, while the Indian National Congress and Gandhi called for the British to quit India, the Muslim League passed a resolution for them to divide and quit, in 1943.[108] Gandhi suggested an agreement which required the Congress and Muslim League to cooperate and attain independence under a provisional government, thereafter, the question of partition could be resolved by a plebiscite in the districts with a Muslim majority.[109] When Jinnah called for Direct Action, on 16 August 1946, Gandhi was infuriated and personally visited the most riot-prone areas to stop the massacres.[110] He made strong efforts to unite the Indian Hindus, Muslims, and Christians and struggled for the emancipation of the "untouchables" in Hindu society.[111]
On 14 and 15 August 1947 the Indian Independence Act was invoked. In border areas some 10—12 million people moved from one side to another and upwards of a half million were killed in communal riots pitting Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs against each other.[112] But for his teachings, the efforts of his followers, and his own presence, there perhaps could have been much more bloodshed during the partition, according to prominent Norwegian historian, Jens Arup Seip.[113]
Stanley Wolpert has argued, The "plan to carve up British India was never approved of or accepted by Gandhi...who realised too late that his closest comrades and disciples were more interested in power than principle, and that his own vision had long been clouded by the illusion that the struggle he led for India's freedom was a nonviolent one."[114]
" ... his closest comrades and disciples were more interested in power than principle .."
... among those of course were his Muslim friends.
God, he was a one-man wrecking crew, wasn't he?
Wherever he went, whatever year it was, this man was on the wrong side of history.
What a dumbass.
Muslims
One of the Gandhi's major strategies, first in South Africa and then in India, was uniting Muslims and Hindus to work together in opposition to British imperialism. In 1919–22 he won strong Muslim support for his leadership in the Khilafat Movement to support the historic Ottoman Caliphate. By 1924 that Muslim support had largely evaporated.[164][165]
Jews
In 1931, he suggested that while he could understand the desire of European Jews to emigrate to Palestine, he opposed any movement that supported British colonialism or violence. Muslims throughout India and the Middle East strongly opposed the Zionist plan for a Jewish state in Palestine, and Gandhi (and Congress) supported the Muslims in this regard. By the 1930s all major political groups in India opposed a Jewish state in Palestine.[166]
This led to discussions concerning the persecution of the Jews in Germany and the emigration of Jews from Europe to Palestine, which Gandhi framed through the lens of Satyagraha.[167][168] In 1937, Gandhi discussed Zionism with his close Jewish friend Hermann Kallenbach.[169] He said Zionism was not the right answer to the Jewish problem[170] and instead recommended Satyagraha. Gandhi thought the Zionists in Palestine represented European imperialism and used violence to achieve their goals; he argued that "the Jews should disclaim any intention of realizing their aspiration under the protection of arms and should rely wholly on the goodwill of Arabs. No exception can possibly be taken to the natural desire of the Jews to found a home in Palestine. But they must wait for its fulfillment till Arab opinion is ripe for it."[171] In 1938, Gandhi stated that his "sympathies are all with the Jews. I have known them intimately in South Africa. Some of them became life-long companions."[172] Philosopher Martin Buber was highly critical of Gandhi's approach and in 1939 wrote an open letter to him on the subject. Gandhi reiterated his stance on the use of Satyagraha in Palestine in 1947.[173]
In fact, I would even go on to say that if Gandhi had balls India would still PROBABLY be united. While Muslims were willing to kill to have a state of their own, Gandhi was willing to bow down in appeasement no matter how much that hurt the larger Hindustan as long as everyone collectively hated the Brits.
Although India is not really that great either.
Post a Comment