at September 29, 2005 9:37 AMHere is an interesting perspective on Gandhi and his penchant for extreme pacifism. I agree with a lot of what the blogger says about Gandhi. I haev often wondered how can it be that a man who so completely believed in the Gita (which of course, says that to protect Dharma you are allowed to kill even your own leave alone those who are oppressing your kin) could have gone to such extremes in pacifism. I completely agree with the claims in the post linked above that he was an extremist in his beliefs and cause and had the luxury to be blind to everything else since he kept himself so far removed from the mainstream - not physically mind you, but mentally - he obviously thought he was so pure and beyond the regular human instincts that he kept preaching people that it was better for them to die than fight back even while they were being massacred.
It brings to my mind the story of the Budhhist monk and the snake - the monk asks the snake to be peaceful and to stop biting others. The next time he meets the snake, he sees it covered in bruises and near death. When he asks the snake what had happened, the snake replies that since he stopped biting people, they were no longer afraid of him and started throwing stones at him for fun. The monk then asked the snake that he needn’t have bitten the people but could have hissed at them as if to threaten a bite to protect himself - that way the snake would have remained peaceful and still could keep the people away from him.
I believe that a threat of violence, if not actual violence is extremely inportant to keep peace. Think about it - why do we punish criminals? Why is there a [metaphorical] “stick” that we use when the carrot doesn’t work? Not for the fun of violence, but so that the threat of violence further discourages crime and keeps peace among the citizenry. By openly and completely eschewing any violence and by ordering his people to do so, Gandhi took away any semblance of the stick from the opressed during the partition to the point violence flared out openly in the belief that some people could get away with whatever they wanted since the leader of those who opposed partition (Gandhi) would never allow his followers to fight back for what they believed in.
I think threats of “Satyagraha” work only as long as those you are trying to bend to your will are actually inerested in keeping up a good public face and care for good PR. The minute the mob psyche takes over, they call your bluff by taking up arms against you. What are you to do then, if all your life you have been moving more and more to the extremes of pacifism? What do you do when you are militantly against violence? I think Gandhi had no way to save face and his people paid the price.
Posted by shanti at September 29, 2005 8:17 AMTrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.realwomenonline.com/scgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/3308
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Gandhi and the Holocaust:
Gandhi’s methods worked with the British, because of their lack of ruthlessness - non-violence and extreme pacifism will never work against a regime that is not bothered by public opinion. I shudder to think what would’ve happened if the commies had colonized us.
The underlying “threat” behind Gandhi’s methodology was the fear of shame - the humiliation that comes from people knowing you have been beating up someone weaker, and it would only work with people that care about such things. During partition, it failed because the hatred overwhelmed any sense of shame that people might’ve had.
Oh, btw, very nice post.
Posted by: Karthik at September 29, 2005 9:12 AM
Shanti,
The Bhagavat Gita does not “allow” you to kill per say. It merely states that you oppose adharama. Given that the knowledge of the Gita was imparted during a war, people assume that it allows you to kill. Infact almost all leadership teachings in the Mahabharata suggest that war ( since this was being taught to Kings) should be the last recourse and other means of peace, such as economic and strategic alliances should be sought. However, if after you have left no stone unturned then the only option is war. Note that I am only using the term war here since I am paraphrashing the teachings for Kings.
Posted by: Ashwini at September 29, 2005 9:19 AM
Karthik, you said what I meant to say. Humiliation works on only those who actually have something to lose by the humiliation - wouldn’t have worked with Stalin or Hitler.
Ashwini, I should have been more careful in my choosing of words. What I meant to say is that the Gita itself says you oppose evil by any means necessary, even if it means resorting to violence. Gandhi made his followers impotent by taking the threat of violence even out of the question and thereby nullifying the one major trading piece from the anti-opposition people, fear of an all-out war.
p.s. Glad to hear from you :)
Posted by: shanti at September 29, 2005 9:37 AM
Probably we Indians were lucky. Gandhi’s methods probably restrained the British too and we have a vibrant democracy today.
Posted by: SloganMurugan at September 30, 2005 3:50 AM
I think Gandhi’s actions did work to a certain extent at that time. To think of applying them now…definatly would lead to failure.
One good thing..the man did say and that was ‘BE THE CHANGE YOU WANT SEE’. So now if you think something else can work better than Gandhi’s preachings…then follow that and help change the system.
A really good post….blog rolling ya.
Posted by: Sakshi at October 1, 2005 1:42 AM
Thanks, Sakshi - I agree that things should always be looked at in the context of the time they happened in and not with these days’ values and outlook.
Posted by: shanti at October 1, 2005 8:05 AM
Humiliation generally works. You just can’t assume that what humiliate you would humiliate somebody else. In many a culture killing a disobidient slave is a virtue in itself, whether the slave be armed or not.
Gandhi’s method worked against the British of that time. It would have failed forty years earlier or against others.
Posted by: Oliver at October 7, 2005 4:42 AM
I don’t beleive Ganndhi’s way of ahimsa will work now BUT nobody thought it would work eight deacdes earlier either;)
Posted by: Dr. Prahalathan KK at October 9, 2005 11:50 AM
nobody thought it would work eight deacdes earlier
He had a lot of followers.
Posted by: Oliver at October 24, 2005 1:57 AM