Gandhiji Vs Bhagat Singh - Page 8

Originally posted by: souro

brilliant👏👏👏

Originally posted by: sareg

Well Gandhism works mostly for oppressed who want to fight against an occupier

Gandhism is based on the assumption that your "goodness" will melt the heart of other, however it totally ignores the fact that the other person is blinded and only has an ambition of anhilating you

Many people want to extend Gandhism or the principles which came from ancient times of India(Bharat I should say) to Terrorism and whereas if History taught us anything it fails in that aspect(We did have Babar, Aurangzeb etc, to prove that)

Different situations call for different responses, I think India realized it too, picking up on the nuclear option was a strong indicator(and I am not talking about the Vajpayee's decision, but the process of building it up which started with Indira Gandhi), it is just some of us have a timid mentality and do not want to accept the fact of the world

Gandhism always works.. it works when it does and when it doesnt most likely you dont have any option....Hindi films might have given you an aberrated view of heroism....😆..Not to "first use" nuclear weapons is a resolve supporting this Gandhian philosophy...

Non-violence has worked incase of injustice... provided you give it time... If you think eye for an eye is a solution its only going to make both of them blind...Non-violence should be treated like a fundamental driving force and not a reactive solution... If a 2 year old lays his hands on a loaded gun kept around irresponsibly.. even Gandhi wouldn't sit there in Satyagrah.. So its futile arguing on his philosophy using arguments ranging from the trivial and aberrated to the absurd its good to leave it alone until its value is either realized...😊 or otherwise.

And I think solutions based off of evoking goodness in the hearts of the oppressor are way too superior than calling him for a duel...it.always gives peace a chance - that has been the crux of hindu philosophy...where violence and non-violence have been veri justifiably demonstrated...in all epics.

I like this saying,

He who has injured thee was either stronger or weaker than thee. If weaker, spare him; if stronger, spare thyself.
Author: William Shakespeare

Originally posted by: qwertyesque

Gandhism always works.. it works when it does and when it doesnt most likely you dont have any option....Hindi films might have given you an aberrated view of heroism....😆..Not to "first use" nuclear weapons is a resolve supporting this Gandhian philosophy...

Non-violence has worked incase of injustice... provided you give it time... If you think eye for an eye is a solution its only going to make both of them blind...Non-violence should be treated like a fundamental driving force and not a reactive solution... If a 2 year old lays his hands on a loaded gun kept around irresponsibly.. even Gandhi wouldn't sit there in Satyagrah.. So its futile arguing on his philosophy using arguments ranging from the trivial and aberrated to the absurd its good to leave it alone until its value is either realized...😊 or otherwise.

And I think solutions based off of evoking goodness in the hearts of the oppressor are way too superior than calling him for a duel...it.always gives peace a chance - that has been the crux of hindu philosophy...where violence and non-violence have been veri justifiably demonstrated...in all epics.

I like this saying,

He who has injured thee was either stronger or weaker than thee. If weaker, spare him; if stronger, spare thyself.
Author: William Shakespeare

I dont get a thing why ppl think that freedom fighters who chose the other way to get freedom didnt want peace. Did they want violence unneccesarrily. It was their self defence that they had to pick up weapons. They also wanted peace in their country.

And by the way Gandhi didnt cipy right non-violence.Other who does not believe in Gandhi philosphy does not mean they dont believe in non-violence or peace.

Originally posted by: raj_aamna

I dont get a thing why ppl think that freedom fighters who chose the other way to get freedom didnt want peace. Did they want violence unneccesarrily. Somebody mentioned above that self-defence=non-violence. It was their self defence, that had to pick up weapons. So it was non-violence in a sense. They also wanted peace in their country.

yeah right.....😆😆

Who used it in self-defence exactly?

Originally posted by: sareg

Originally posted by: raj_aamna

He didnt become prime minister himself but let the way empty for his family to do so.

I think you are confusing between Gandhiji's family and Jawaharlal Nehru's family.

Originally posted by: sareg

( not Pandit Motilal Nehru whose family included daughter Indira Feroz Gandhi, Grandsons, Rajiv/Sanjay Feroze Gandhi, Rajiv's wife Sonia Rajiv Gandhi and Sanjay's wife Maneka)

Motilal Nehru was the father of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Grandfather of Indira Gandhi.

Originally posted by: souro

Motilal Nehru was the father of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Grandfather of Indira Gandhi.

Sareg, since when did u become an ABCD????😆😆😆

Originally posted by: souro

Motilal Nehru was the father of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Grandfather of Indira Gandhi.

amma yaar Pandit mane Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, I get sick and tired of thinking about the three generations itself, I dont want to think before or after these three

Originally posted by: qwertyesque

Gandhism always works.. it works when it does and when it doesnt most likely you dont have any option....Hindi films might have given you an aberrated view of heroism....😆..Not to "first use" nuclear weapons is a resolve supporting this Gandhian philosophy...

Non-violence has worked incase of injustice... provided you give it time... If you think eye for an eye is a solution its only going to make both of them blind...Non-violence should be treated like a fundamental driving force and not a reactive solution... If a 2 year old lays his hands on a loaded gun kept around irresponsibly.. even Gandhi wouldn't sit there in Satyagrah.. So its futile arguing on his philosophy using arguments ranging from the trivial and aberrated to the absurd its good to leave it alone until its value is either realized...😊 or otherwise.

And I think solutions based off of evoking goodness in the hearts of the oppressor are way too superior than calling him for a duel...it.always gives peace a chance - that has been the crux of hindu philosophy...where violence and non-violence have been veri justifiably demonstrated...in all epics.

I like this saying,

He who has injured thee was either stronger or weaker than thee. If weaker, spare him; if stronger, spare thyself.
Author: William Shakespeare

Gandhism always works? haha, sure it does. 😛give it enough time and we can even walk to the moon, erect a third-rate multi-storey building etc. So what if it takes donkey years to do so? 😉 after all, time kee toh koi kami naheen hai when it comes to some of our brethren 😉

btw, has the Gandhi self-reliance philosophy worked in the economic sphere? has his ahinsa philosophy worked? didnt we have to fight a few wars, develop nuclear weapons? oh i suppose we shld have tried to avert those wars by turning the other cheek, no? brotherly love is what we needed to show our neighbors. btw, has his philosophy not been diluted over time, not because people are messed up but because there were shortcomings in that philosophy? policy of appeasement, thats the legacy he left behind.

it's always easy putting on a lawyerly smile when u're negotitating with the british or whoever when u know u have youth like Bhagat Singh ready to die for the country. 😊