Why dont the Palestinians ever try using some of Ghandi's methods of passive resistance?

Question

Israel is a democratic country that can be changed through peacful coercisive means like Britain (even though they were not democratic in India) so why not stop using violence and try using passive resistance like Ghandi? Even Ghandi remained peaceful even when British soldiers were beating or killing his people, he just used all violent incedents performed by Britain to be used against them in the form of media to bring embarrasment to the countries government.

If Ghandi supported suicide bombings and civle wars, there would be no India because Britain will have more reasons to justify their unfair occupation.

Because Britain in its mainland is a democracy and people there want to support governments that are civilized, the more Ghandi embarresed the British government with media exposing violent insidents the less the western world backed the British Occupation.

I do support Israel as a nation but I am little embarresed by their conduct toward Palestinians. So if the Palestinians don't want occupation, they could stand still unarmed as Israeli soldiers beat them so that Israel would be embarressed in the western media by their own actions. And whenever a violent incident is performed by a palestinian the leader can go on a hunger strike demanding them to stop. As tempting as violence is in resolving the conflict, it seems only peacful coercive methods will work in such situations.

But the Muslims in India were able to get their own nation of Pakistan because of Ghandis passive resistance. So I think that Muslim people should be idolizing Ghandi if they really do support peace.

Brain, The British did the same exact things in India but Ghandi and his people refused to sink to their level and stood still and took the beating then showed the world how barbarious Britain was in India as his people were not hurting anyone. (People in the western world expected Britain to be a civilized democratic country, but Ghandi proved them wrong through his media)

He and his people even stood still and took the bullets when British tanks decided to open fire on his protesters. There was no excuse that Britain could have for that action so the media exposed it and the approval ratings for British occupation plumeted. Even people in Britain started begging to the parlament to leave India after they saw what happend to Ghandis people.

Zizo, Japan at the time was not an open democratic country. However Britain and Israel are. So open passive resistance are most effective if the country oppressing them is free and democratic that people have higher expectations for their actions. Israel is one of those free and open democracies that western society expects civilized conduct to be granted like Britain.

Radical Islam is violent in practice. True Islam encourages peace and human ethics like Christianity ,Judeism, and other accepted religions.

So if Palestinians want peace they should clean up their act and try to expose Israel's misconduct they always complain about. If they keep bombing people more justification would be brought to occupying the territories.

But if they both agree to set a secure infrastructure to prevent peace processes to be interupted by violence then more talks will happen and disputes will be resolved at a more effective pace. Israeli peace talks will progress as long as the talks continue without the interruption of violence. Everytime a violent incident happens all progress made by negotiations are undone and then the process has to start all over again.

Aim it would not work against the KKK, but it would work at exposing the KKK's grisily conduct toward the Federal government and ritous American citizens were they will demand action to be taken against the KKK.

Correction not "toward the federal government" I ment to say "actions towards minorities to be exposed to the Federal Government" I accidently left out some words.

AIM you are right about Nazi germany, however you missed my point. Passive ressistance only works if its against democratic countries were their people and supporters of the government expect better conduct out of them. Britain is one of those countries and so is Israel. It does not work against governments that are murderous dictatorships that are not capable of being changed democratically.

Israel is a western supported democracy that people have high expectations for and can be changed without needing to be militarily taken over. So passive resistance would work for Israel and Palestine.

Old dog, A Muslim leader supporting Ghandi's movement against British occupation was being condemned by his violent actions through a hunger strike. The Muslim leader asked Ghandi "What can I do to undo all the wrong I have done?" Ghandi responds "Find a child orphaned by your mistakes and raise him like he's your own son"

Answer 1

That will never work out for the Palestinians.
Why?
Israel has given in on 95% of what the Palestinian want. If you go by what Arafat said he wanted the jews would need to move out of the mideast or die.

This is why a passive movement will not work here you can not get people to kill them selfs off.

Answer 2

"So if the Palestinians don't want occupation, they could stand still unarmed as Israeli soldiers beat them so that Israel would be embarressed in the western media by their own actions. And whenever a violent incident is performed by a palestinian the leader can go on a hunger strike demanding them to stop. "

Here's an interesting question. What would happen if they engaged in passive resistance and the Israelis did NOT beat them? You seem to accept it as a given that that is what will happen. In other words, you think that this is the chain of events: Passive resistance -> leads to been beaten up by the others -> leads to the world being sympathetic -> leads to Israel being embarrassed.

But in any event, if the leaders of the Palestinians were of the same mentality as Ghandi, they wouldn't even have to offer "passive resistance", they would have had their own state through negotiations.
Also, Ghandi and those who wanted an independent India, did not want Britain destroyed. On the other hand, the stated goal of Fatah and Hamas has always been the elimination of Israel. Thus, the whole concept of "passive resistance" is rendered meaningless when confronted with that type of thinking.

Answer 3

There is enough proof that a Ghandi strategy would work for the Palestinians.

The Druze in the Golan Heights are not citizens of Israel, but hold permanent residency status, have the right to get citizenship and have no restrictions on where they can work and their are no check points and soldiers in or around their towns.

The reason is because they did passive Resistance, and the Israelis left them alone.

The same thing is true in many Palestinian towns like Jericho. It gets the best treatment because it was the least violent. Jennin on the other hand gets much harsher treatment due to the violence that comes out of there.

If the Palestinians would have passively demanded their own state in 1967 they would have gotten it decades ago.

The reason why they dont is because many are not interested in their own state side by side with Israel. They are interested in their own state instead of Israel.

and that takes violence.

Answer 4

If everyone on one side was to use Ghandi non-violence, then one of two possible results
* Everyone on that side would be dead ... in fact that is almost what happened in Nazi Germany ... various people knew what was going on, tried to warn Jews, who did not believe the propaganda, whent meekly to be slaughtered
* The conflict would end and there would be peace

However I do not believe Palestinians want Peace with Israel. They want to continue to be used as puppets by those who are interested in the destruction of Israel.

Ghandi philosophy can be effective in a generally democratic state with freedom of press.

Would it work for Jena Six against KKK justice system?
Would it work for US troops against roadside bombs?
Would it work for kids in a school where some nut has gone postal?

Obviously not. There are situations where it just does not apply.

Answer 5

The reason why the Palestinians don't use Ghandi's methods of passive resistance is because those methods wouldn't be capable of killing enough Jews to satisfy the Palestinian bloodlust for those not like themselves. It's sad, but if they did, I can guarantee that they would be getting a lot more support from a lot more people internationally, including myself.

Answer 6

Golda Meir said something very important that has been overlooked left right and centre. She said...." the only way there will be peace in the middle east is when the Palestinians learn to love their children more than they hate the Jews".
She was right.
The only way Gandhi's methods would work is if the Palestinians actually came to love their children more than they're hatred of the Jews! Until then? There isn't anything that is going to work short of the second coming of Jesus the Christ.

Answer 7

Zionism is about taking the land and making a JEWISH ONLY state, "not a democracy" They claim we live in the 21th century now and do not need to believe in God so your nationality makes you Jewish! As to Gaza being an "independent entity", the CIA World Factbook updated 18 Dec 2008 states otherwise: „West Bank and Gaza Strip are Israeli-occupied with current status subject to the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement - permanent status to be determined through further negotiation;“ And according to B'Tselem: (After the disengagement) "Israel continued to control the air and sea space, movement between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (also via neighboring countries), the population registry, family unification, and the crossing of goods to and from Gaza. Also, residents of the Gaza Strip rely solely on Israel for its supply of fuel, electricity, and gas." Independent entity indeed! NATO bombed Serbia because it was trying to expel people of a different religion that occupied land that many Serbs regard to be historically theirs (there was no question of Kosovo leaving Serbia at the time). Do you really see no parallel between the two situations? Luckily for you, Israel has better allies in the West than the poor Serbs (my daughter-in-law happens to be Serbian and she lectures me!). As to your justification for the present killings in Gaza: History did not begin with rockets from Gaza. To remind: Sderot stands in the farm lands of a former village named Najd. If you look to Northern-Ireland with its imposed dominant Protestant population more than 300 years ago and to the troubles that caused (a mild example), you must wonder what the future holds in store for you in Israel/Palestine. A settler coming into already populated new lands has two basic choices: to live peacefully alongside the natives (as Jews seem to have done there before 1948 although mixed marriages were probably very rare) or if powerful enough to eradicate or marginalize them socially and geographically (cf. colonial Americas and Australia). Do you ever wonder what course you are on? What is your vision for the future in say a 100 years time? We live in age of images. Will Israel ever live down the endless enduring images of dismembered and dead children and women? Can you think of no other way to survive?

Answer 8

I dont believe the Palestinians have the same attitude toward peace that Ghandi did. Different countries, different cultures, different beliefs......and on and on. See my point? Just because they live in Asia doesnt mean they will all behave alike,

Answer 9

If Japan ocuppied Hawaii, during WW2. do you think americans will wait some Ghandi with his"passive resistance" to defeat japenese.
for your Knowldege: since1967,Israel occupies: Julan, Gaza, west bank (you can check with Mr Ban Ki Moon)

Answer 10

I've heard that it was said in the Koran... Negociate until you have the power to annhilate. I just don't feel like looking it up right now. But that's what they are trying to do. They are a violent and revolutionary cult... and will stop at nothing to take out those they chose to take out...

Islam... if you look at the word... is I SLAM.... "meaning I slam you and anyone who gets in my way"