Sometimes, I feel the role of Gandhi in our struggle for independence is slightly overrated. I dont agree when people say that he was amongst the most influential persons of the twentieth century. If he really was as influential as our doctored History textbooks claim him to be, we need to question ourselves - If the world was really influenced by MKG, has there been a reduction in armed rebellions world over?
Read for one such (slightly extreme) view…
http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/2000/0214/india.godse.html
So whom do you think is the most influential person of the twentieth century?
Good Night!
i remember reading somewhere on the Net that the reason the British left India was coz of Subhas Bose’s INA, and three mutineering soldiers of the Indian army, which showed the brits they couldn’t anymore rely on the army to quell rebellions.
The only reason why Gandhi gets so much coverage was coz the congress party wanted to exaggerate their role in the freedom struggle, and hence it has been made to look like Gandhi was the one everyone rallied around. and two whole generations have grown up reading about the father of their nation in textbooks… it’s little wonder that the whole world exaggerates Gandhi’s importance.
The reason why there is no reduction in armed rebellions is that peace doesn’t work!
Peaceful struggles work only when the problems are due to lack of communication or other misunderstandings. not when the other is truly evil.
we have a legacy of gandhi’s though - fasts-unto-death, relay fasts, hartals, strikes, rasta rokos, destruction of govt property, disrupting of normal life… the list is endless.
After having read through Morarji Desai’s autobio, I disagree.
Never before has a single man accomplished so much with so little.
The world abounds with Idi Amins, Hitler clones and Noakhali’s.