English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

'In order to avoid bloody evacuvation from India the British chose to promote Gandhi and his NON-VIOLANCE' - is that true?

2006-11-25 01:07:26 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities History

5 answers

The British left India on account of a concerted freedom movement of both the violent and non violent types and not on account of the Mahatma's non violent struggle alone. They had the might to tame a violent uprising. But Gandhi's unrelenting struggle gave an international face to the Indian freedom movement. More and more people from different countries of the world learned about and acknowledged India's legitimate struggle for freedom. The pressure to leave India was already exerted enormously on the British by our freedom fighters. Added to that was the adverse opinion of freedom loving people of other countries. Gandhiji was successful in propagating an image whereby people learnt that the British were violently quelling a legitimate non violent freedom movement. So Gandhi couldn't possibly be in your words 'a blown up image of the British'.

2006-11-25 01:26:44 · answer #1 · answered by Modest 6 · 0 0

Well, after WW2 Great Britain was in no position to keep a colony with more than 15 times its population, so they had to let India and Pakistan go. The non-violence approach worked because the British wanted to get out.

Truth be told, Hitler had as big a role in the independence of India as Gandhi.

2006-11-25 09:17:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

by promoting Gandhi The Britishers could keep Indian masses under control. It suited them well till the end of their rule.

2006-11-26 11:54:24 · answer #3 · answered by Brahmanda 7 · 0 0

every freedom fighter had his own way of dealing with the British. be it violence or non-violence. Gandhi's principles were his own way of dealing with them. their aim was the freedom of India. if the British wanted to avoid bloody evacuation from India, then incidences such as the jallianwala baugh massacre, etc.would not have taken place.

2006-11-25 09:27:41 · answer #4 · answered by sonal s 1 · 0 0

no..they knew he would die in a cell and become a marter if they had not did what hey had to do to "blow him up"

2006-11-25 09:09:48 · answer #5 · answered by Bazil 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers