Many think that without Gandhi India would have still been a colony. An idea which I completely disagree with. In India the education system has a vociferously pro-left bias. It only teaches one part of history while completely ignoring the other part. That is why many Indians have a completely distorted and innacurate understanding of their own history. Any textbooks that are remotely critical of Gandhi or of the mughal oppressors (who were responsible for the largest genocide in the entire history of human civilisation - the murder of 100 million hindus across the tenure of mughal oppression) are not even permitted.
The leftists have brainwashed Indians with the belief that it was Gandhi's mobilisation of public support that caused the UK to reliquish India. However the real reason was that the UK had just come out of WW2 and it's economy was in tatters. The entire city of London lay burning in ruins and the UK could no longer afford to keep India even if it had wanted to.
2007-11-18 01:56:59 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I dont think Gandhi had any problems apart from the partition which he shouldnt have accepted. Problem lied with his chelas and others who surrounded him and used him for their own agendas.
Considering the times he was living in and the mass ignorance around he seems to have done a fairly good job.
Gandhis major problem was that he wouldnt change his stance even when logical arguments were given against it, this lead to the historic partition blunder and the Hindu/Muslim genocide after that.
Seems like more Hindus were killed in Pakistan as to Muslims in India any way common people were tortured,raped,killed during partition and Gandhi could have easily avoided this if he wanted to.
As far as the history in Indian texts is concerned it is modified and incorrect to a certain extent but thats not Gandhi's fault its someone who ruled India for a long time after independance and deliberately tweaked with the history texts.
2007-11-18 19:40:04 · answer #1 · answered by funnysam2006 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
this is what is called hindsight. Gandhi was not known to anybody till he started his movement in South Africa. He was little known in india when he returned to india from south africa. it is mere coincidence, birtish rules reaches its peak of atrocity in the late 1800 and the early 1900. We needed an emotional icon to mobilse people against british rule and it happened because that was the requirement needed by india at that period of time. if not gandhi, some x or y would have done it.the emerged factors at that particular point of time justified his projection and no exaggeration.after 60 years of independence, we turn the old leaves of history, and tries to analyse who or which is at fault. We can prefer to do that if it is really required now. you pointed out that history has been tormented and half truths are included in our education and we were pro left. Have you ever found in the history books of australia's education or US education any mention about physical elimination of the aborigines conducted meticulously over a period of century . can we take the history of any country in the world and confirm that it has not been modified to the tune of the rulers ? this is not abnormal.
gandhi, if he has been over exaggerated as you percieved and happens to be true as you wish, he will wade away soon in the flood of time and no issue on it . this is applicable for any personality in the history.
2007-11-23 18:45:06 · answer #2 · answered by porselvi s 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gandhiji came to the Indian political scene at the correct time. The then Indian National Congress was different, .it was a platform for different Political philosophies from extreme right, middle and extreme left. Even though he was obstinate many times Gandhiji's patriotic spirit is unquestionable. The people had faith in his sincerity of purpose and followed him without doubt. The British also started loosing their grip over their Indian colony and they found a leader with whom they could interact better. All these factors cumulatively helped to arrive
at the freedom of India at that time. Above all Gandhiji had the support selfless regional Leaders in his efforts.
2007-11-18 15:39:59 · answer #3 · answered by Brahmanyan 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Gandhi had no choise but to do what he did.Did u see the well made film Ghandhi and the Jalianwala bag massacre? The solders who fired on On Indians were not White! They were Stupid fellow Sikhs and Gurkhas.
Do u ever see a senario where an Indian gives an order to whites to shoot other whites?
Faced with such stupid fellow Indians this man pulled off a miracle!
Again if u think(like some do that this skinny guy had no gutts) try to live like he did----u wont last 5 minutes.
2007-11-18 14:35:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anjan A 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Your thesis seems entirely sensible to me. However, without doubt, Gandhi was the catalyst that brought the situation to a head.
2007-11-19 08:56:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
why are you sounding jealous or hurt with gandhiji's fame. infact i think you have a different issue with him. You have a problem with gandhiji because he praised prophet muhammad(p.b.u.h) and you somehow want to start criticising him so that it helps you in your ulteriror motive. You are sexist, a male chauvinistic jerk, a pathetic mockery of indians, leave alone hindus, you are not a true indian, and remove that crap from your profile which reads 'I AM HINDUISM PERSONIFIED" If you have any time left go and check the way you are made fun of in the women's gender issues section. And before you put any pressure on your empty head, go ahead and report abuse this answer as I will celebrate that you read these lines. Coooooooool........ click here and read what women think about you http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind...
2007-11-18 22:32:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Not exaggerated but made to remember only the contribution of Gandhi to the exclusion of others'.
2007-11-18 22:57:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
India and as a matter of the fact the world did not deserve Gandhi!? The world was to primitive for his logic !?
2007-11-18 02:08:29 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Gandhi did what he believed in..if ppl didnt want accept his views, they were free to do so......Leave the man alone...if u want to do something, go out and seve the country...stop living in the past..and yeah, get out of the mughal and genocide mentality..the muslims of India belong here..accept it!!!! we can go back further in history and find hindu rulers who did the same (ashoka and kalinga remember?) so drop it man.
2007-11-18 19:53:57 · answer #9 · answered by danny's mom 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Only victims and survivors of Partition 1947 voilence can under stand what you are saying
2007-11-18 22:01:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋