2006-08-06 00:55:54 · 10 answers · asked by abby 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
no not at all.....if u hav neighbour like pak......
for the protaction of such a big country ..... militry is needed strictly...
2006-08-06 01:02:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes.Mohandas(Mahatma)Gandhi said "if the option is strictly between violence and cowardice I opt for violence".. He also said " an eye for an eye makes everyone blind".He also said "I am prepared to die for a cause but I am not prepared to kill for any cause. For Gandhi non violence is an article of faith.India defeated the British rule wihout a weapon and Nelson Mandela following foot steps of Gandhi defeated apartheid in South Africa. Non violence only is relevant today.
2006-08-06 01:09:49 · answer #2 · answered by J.SWAMY I ఇ జ స్వామి 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes it was valid in the past, is valid today and will be valid for all the times to come.
Unfortunately many people have not understood the spirit of the non-violence theory of Mahatama Gandhi and they think the non-violence theory means "not aggitating against the evil being caused to you violently" and thats why there were people in Gandhi's time itself who opposed the theory.
Actually the theory itself strikes right at the energies of the opponent against whom you are applying it. The spirit of the theory is to play with the nerves of the aggressor while being non-violent. The human nature is that you expect a natural response from others under a given situation and non-violence theory tells you NOT to behave the way other party expects you to.
For example, If I stop supply of rations to you, your natural reaction will be to get the food thorugh what ever possible means. I will use all my force to stop that food supply to you. Non-violence theory, instead, advocates that instead of trying to use aggressive means for food supply, you must go to hunger strike against non provision of food. This is a reaction, the one who stopped food supply would have not expected and did not have any course of action to deal with. So with this you are playing with his witts and weakening his resources that he may have employed on supply of food to you.
This is the best way to outpower the opponent and this non-violence theory is always workable, provided you are strong enough to bear the hardships required for it.
2006-08-06 01:20:23 · answer #3 · answered by Ash 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. Look at the rallies that took place around the US by the hispanics earlier this year. People were very quick to note how peaceful the demonstrations were, and politicians noted the sheer amount of people that showed up to protest. Strength in numbers.
Is it valid everywhere? No, it depends on the regime you're fighting against, and how many people you have on your side. Tianemen Square is a good example of not enough support by the people.
2006-08-06 01:03:28 · answer #4 · answered by Islandkiwi 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What are you talking about. Every leader has non-violence speeches for media. But when Ghandi was alive how many indians and pakistanies were killed in 1947 at borders. Still 57 years past innocnet Kashmiries are being killed by his nation. Jinnah and Gandhi were weak leaders, they didnt even divided the countries correctly. We are paying the price
2016-03-27 00:56:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but only if a multitude of people have a common cause (that clearly and explicitly points to injustice) to fight for in a long struggle - recent example of the success of the principle is that of Martin Luther King Jr.'s civil rights fight. It probably is ineffective when someone goes on hunger strike because he/she did not get what they want for personal satisfaction or glory - for example hunger strike by Sadam Hussain recently in Iraq.
When it does work, it leads to a permanent peaceful solution.
2006-08-06 01:10:43 · answer #6 · answered by stvenryn 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
OMG, you asked a doozy. Wish I could say yes, but don't see how. Some Israeli soldiers are refusing to fight but they just throw them in the clink. I think Gandhi would just skip the fasting and go straight to hari kari if he could see what's going on today!
2006-08-06 01:07:50 · answer #7 · answered by bookluffer 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, itb is probably the only way to end the upward spiral of violence we are in now.
2006-08-06 00:59:19 · answer #8 · answered by Gungnir 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, today's world u get a slap if your not wrong return 10.
2006-08-06 01:00:25 · answer #9 · answered by brightstar 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
would be nice to put all the boys and girls in the corner when they misbehaved! in a nonviolent way...what do you say?
2006-08-06 01:00:30 · answer #10 · answered by Dr.Gilwinfrey 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋