Debate Mansion

   

did India move away from Gandhism? (Page 4)

Post Reply New Post

Page 4 of 15

sub_rosa

IF-Dazzler

sub_rosa

Joined: 24 December 2008

Posts: 3609

Posted: 09 October 2012 at 3:51am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Polki_Zofi

 
Yes natives were killed by the British, this is hideous and its with opposing. They did same in Australia. But they also developed the place. Those were the times when one nation would attack and conquer other nation to accumulate wealth, power and nobility. India was such aswell. There were kings in India who fought and died for the same. The British were only more powerful and their strategies were better.
That many Indians were killed by the British is not why colonialism was problematic. The British colonialism in India was primarily about systematic suction of the country's wealth through exploitative agrarian and trade policies. Great Britain wanted to transform India into an expansive market to sell their home-grown products and also to use India's natural resources as free supply of raw material. To achieve this end, the colonial rulers took great care to demolish the traditional Indian cottage industries and practically monopolized the Indian market. And all that money went straight to GB, and was spent mostly for their development. The medieval Indian kings engaged in several wars among themselves, but this method of mechanical and ruthless economic exploitation was probably unknown to them.
 
 However, here India surprises me. Indians accept everything Anglo Saxon, but also talk about their oppression and denial of British. This conflicts. This is not the same in Europe. Each European country have a different way of dressing, architecture, language. We are still distinct, but for that you need to be European to detect our change. We have many common things across Europe so its not easy for a foreigner to see the difference which is still present in every little thing of ours. It tells about our identity. European but also national.
The British had uprooted the traditional learning systems in India, and had introduced 'English' education, which included the study of modern science, geography, philosophy, history and European literature. One of its outcomes was the establishment of English cultural hegemony over the Indians. It produced a sense of inferiority among the educated Indians, so much so that many of them completely denounced their ethnic identities and became brown sahibs. Even though things changed rapidly in the succeeding decades, the inferiority complex was too deep-rooted to go away completely. But, this is definitely not true for all Indians, or should I say that this is only a small part of the picture. India, in spite of British subjugation, had for long remained faithful to her culture. Although, some amount of 'Englishness' was naturally assimilated into India's already composite culture, after the centuries long association. However, the recent wave of westernization has more to do with global economy, rather than India's colonial past.
 
I welcome India's choice, but then to say that they never liked British conflicts here. They prefer to speak in their language aswell. They wish to go there. To become educated, noble or respected, the Indian person must give more and more European identity than being Indian. I asked my husband and he says that "India" is also a British given name!
Indians do not need to go to England to become 'educated, noble or respected'. All of that can be very well achieved without ever setting foot outside of India. What living in England can offer are better career opportunities and a more afflunent lifestyle. For the origin of the name 'India', you can see this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India#Etymology
 
Gandhi alone was an Indian who showed the world that Indians can live happily with their natural outlook without any interference from west. Gandhi behaved more Indian than any Indian today I think. He also founded an Indian way of expressing his feelings. He raised a cultural awareness and a new way towards freedom. How can he be equated to others?
 
While other Indians looked towards the Soviets or the Colonialists for inspiration, Gandhi took inspiration from selflessness, non violence and true Indian feeling!
 
This is what makes Gandhi special. There is reason why the world appreciate Gandhi so much and don't know the name even of others.
 Gandhi was neither the first, nor the only Indian leader to champion nationalism and self-reliance. His methods of peaceful resistance were applied in other mass-struggles even before his arrival in the Indian political scene. What Gandhi did was to integrate rural India into the national movement led so far by sophisticated, urban Indians. I agree with the bit in blue. But Gandhi's anti-industry and anti-urbanization stance did not stand a chance in independent India, and it does not stand a chance in today's world. And it is not reasonable either to turn away from Western technology on narrow nationalistic grounds. Scientific knowledge and inventions are for all humans, no country or culture can have monopoly over them.
 
 


Edited by sub_rosa - 09 October 2012 at 4:56am

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

--arti--

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "did India move away from Gandhism? (Page 4)" in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

Polki_Zofi

Senior Member

Polki_Zofi

Joined: 18 October 2010

Posts: 289

Posted: 09 October 2012 at 8:56am | IP Logged
sub_rosa, its not about monopoly. Rather its about contribution and national identity. To tell you the truth, Europeans are always discussing among themselves on which country invented what, and who owned the patents for which thing. Its common. Its for the world, everything, but there is something about "its from us to the world" for a particular culture, e.g. Polish astronomer Mikolaj Kopernik!

You said that British took all the wealth away, but that was the purpose in the first place. That is what colonization is all about, it is different than establishing a dynasty or kingdom. Those times it was fare for a stronger and more developed civilization to do such a thing. Any other civilization either would defend themselves or be a colony. In this way, the colonizer would benefit from wealth, and the colonized from learning the colonists modern ways.

We, the Poles have been colonized too, but I don't think that any colonist had even shred of effect on our culture, tradition, language or anything you can mention. India is a different story. Prussians tried to introduced Prussian education but failed, Turks tried to introduce Turkish education but failed, Russian failed with Russian education. We had always many uprisings and they never could break our way of thinking and life. During that time we also had inventors and great Polish events.

You said about cottage industries of India, and here in this same thread I see someone disagree with Gandhi over that same thing. You agree Gandhi tried for revival, and he brought in the rural population of India, those who represent 70% as mentioned by another person here. So he basically united India and planned for its self sustaining revival? Then how can anyone else in the history of India be equated to him?

We are actually getting a statue of Gandhi build in our city, of bronze. It is surprising to see him revered all over the world including Europe and so Poland. But in his own India, he is so much argued!

Gandhi, as I read, was not anti industry but rather in favor of Indian industries, self sustaining. He was not against urbanization Confused. Why you say such things?

You said you don't come to west or UK for better education? To learn their ways in thinking and technology, to be more forward in life? Confused You come just to earn and for better living condition? Are you sure? You believe yourself Confused?


Edited by Polki_Zofi - 09 October 2012 at 8:58am

sub_rosa

IF-Dazzler

sub_rosa

Joined: 24 December 2008

Posts: 3609

Posted: 09 October 2012 at 10:10am | IP Logged
Edited.

Edited by sub_rosa - 09 October 2012 at 11:10am

sub_rosa

IF-Dazzler

sub_rosa

Joined: 24 December 2008

Posts: 3609

Posted: 09 October 2012 at 11:00am | IP Logged
Originally posted by sub_rosa

Originally posted by Polki_Zofi

sub_rosa, its not about monopoly. Rather its about contribution and national identity. To tell you the truth, Europeans are always discussing among themselves on which country invented what, and who owned the patents for which thing.
Do not take my words in their strictly literal sense. Yes, naturally, the patent of most inventions must belong to somebody. But the purpose of that invention is to serve humanity. The scientist's nationality is irrelevant. It is the knowledge and the technology and their impact on human life that really count. It is the same with great art, music and literature. By the way, my comment was with regard to Gandhi's opposition to Western technology. 


You said that British took all the wealth away, but that was the purpose in the first place. That is what colonization is all about, it is different than establishing a dynasty or kingdom. Those times it was fare for a stronger and more developed civilization to do such a thing. Any other civilization either would defend themselves or be a colony. In this way, the colonizer would benefit from wealth, and the colonized from learning the colonists modern ways.

We, the Poles have been colonized too, but I don't think that any colonist had even shred of effect on our culture, tradition, language or anything you can mention. India is a different story. Prussians tried to introduced Prussian education but failed, Turks tried to introduce Turkish education but failed, Russian failed with Russian education. We had always many uprisings and they never could break our way of thinking and life. During that time we also had inventors and great Polish events.

You said about cottage industries of India, and here in this same thread I see someone disagree with Gandhi over that same thing. You agree Gandhi tried for revival, and he brought in the rural population of India, those who represent 70% as mentioned by another person here. So he basically united India and planned for its self sustaining revival? Then how can anyone else in the history of India be equated to him?
I have little knowledge of Polish history, and your ideas about Indian culture seem equally vague to me. I don't think we can carry on for too long.
We are actually getting a statue of Gandhi build in our city, of bronze. It is surprising to see him revered all over the world including Europe and so Poland. But in his own India, he is so much argued!
There is always scope for re-evaluation in history. In fact it's very important to challenge accepted notions. There were many other facets to Gandhi other than what you seem to have ingrained in your mind. Indians have been deifying him for too long. But now the time has come for an unimpassioned assessment of India's freedom struggle, and Gandhi's role in it.


Gandhi, as I read, was not anti industry but rather in favor of Indian industries, self sustaining. He was not against urbanization Confused. Why you say such things?
Gandhi considered urban centres as the hub of western ideas, western industries (no matter if they were run by Indians for the benefit of Indians) that sustained themselves by exploiting village economy, and that led the village handicrafts to their ruin.
You said you don't come to west or UK for better education? To learn their ways in thinking and technology, to be more forward in life? Confused You come just to earn and for better living condition? Are you sure? You believe yourself Confused?
I think I wrote that Indians do not need to go to the West to be educated and earn respect. I can't help it if some Indians think that way. But it's my personal opinion that an Indian can live in a village and still become a highly learned and respected individual. But that person would surely not get as much recognition, or exposure, or money (which are also important, no doubt)!
I didn't quite understand the expression "their ways in thinking and technology"! Who are they? The scientific community today includes scholars from different nationalities and cultures, including Indians. They all contribute to the development of scientific knowledge. We can't segragate that knowledge according to the nationalities of the scientists, as American knowledge, Indian knowledge, Polish knowledge or Korean knowledge etc. That would be preposterous. And, this knowledge is availble throughout the world, and is not confined to any specific location, like it used to be ages ago.



Edited by sub_rosa - 09 October 2012 at 11:17am

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

--arti--

Polki_Zofi

Senior Member

Polki_Zofi

Joined: 18 October 2010

Posts: 289

Posted: 09 October 2012 at 1:17pm | IP Logged
I dont think you quite getting me Smile. But its OK. You are right that inventions and research are a global asset, but as long as the world exist, name like Einstein the German Scientist and Kopernicus the Pole, or Newton the English will remain forever. So will Gandhi the Indian's name. No one can dissociate or belittle it. Infact, these minds brought pride to their nations and gave the world gifts which have made it better.
 
Perhaps this also answers your question about whether Rudyard was a racist or not? I think all he mentioneg in his poem is that those who have progressed in science, religion and knowledge must take the responsibility of those who did not yet. They must carry them together to a point from which these civilizations can take of care for themself. This is also a view which many hold on this poem you suggested "The White Man's Burden". This burden is a wrong term, maybe it should be duty. This sense of duty carried those thousands of missionaries to India, among whom is my beloved Mother Teresa!Smile
 
I wish you best of luck, but remember that India still is best known for Gandhi. More than even Taj Mahal. A wonderful soul to have touched humanity. We hope we can learn much from him.

--arti--

Goldie

--arti--

Kasturi, RKS Banner Contest Winner

Joined: 20 June 2008

Posts: 1670

Posted: 09 October 2012 at 4:06pm | IP Logged
Good posts, sub_rosa.

And Polki_Zofi, I said that thing about Kipling, not sub_rosa. There you go thinking we're all one and the same again! Anyway, it's really not my responsibility to educate you if you don't see the racism in that poem. The "White Man's Burden" was not just a poem, but as I said, it was a moral directive that purposely placed white Europeans as superior, and people of colour as inferior. People of colour around the world had complex social systems, and many were not about accumulating profit. White colonizers did not understand how there were entire cultures that were not based on profit/wealth accumulation, so they sought to exploit these cultures. The "White Man's Burden" became a convenient excuse for the looting and pilfering of materials and free labour from the colonies.

Sure, you can argue that we have moral duties as human beings, but at whose expense? The Bush and Obama administrations claim it is their moral duty to conduct drone strikes on people in other parts of the world, to "save them" from themselves, from their own culture, and so on. We all know what the "War on Terror" is all about - it's about oil and about U.S. domination. But all wars/violence are sold to the people with moral justifications. Interesting how history repeats itself, isn't it.

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

sub_rosa

sub_rosa

IF-Dazzler

sub_rosa

Joined: 24 December 2008

Posts: 3609

Posted: 10 October 2012 at 1:57am | IP Logged
Thank you --arti--.Smile You are making very good points as well.

Polki_Zofi

Senior Member

Polki_Zofi

Joined: 18 October 2010

Posts: 289

Posted: 10 October 2012 at 2:30am | IP Logged
Sorry for confusing between the IDs, but it may happen sometime. I hope you dont think I mean to offend Disapprove

OK, white man's burden is maybe bad poem. But I am white woman, not man LOL. Kipling was British and he was member of the ruling people in India. So maybe he defended his position. But it is responsibility of British to give better security and economic welfare to India as India was their colony and in their custody. If British did not do so, then they were wrong. But many Indians love to talk more in English and love everything Western. This always makes me feel they actually find more good than bad with the English.

Poles on the other hand are very opposite. It is rare for Polish people to speak Russian, Turkish or even English, unless we studied some foreign languages. We do trade easily, and we also have our own music bands. Overall picture is that we are developing with consistency on our own history, with no conquerors influence Smile. Polish dresses, professional or casual, are all very Polish and not English.

I felt Gandhi tried same for India, and give it its own unique identity. But seem to me that he is not that successful in India, other than the fact that it gave India independence. There are theories that India could never get independence through violence due to superior British military. The British had Indian troops and Indian spies for their empire. They used money too from India. Many things that made India a colony are rare in the world. Do you know that India was the only developed civilization which became a colony for British, rest were from Africa and new lands they discovered.

USA is a headache to Poland too Ouch. Many demonstrations happen in Warsaw and Cracow. They want to build a missile defense shied in Poland to threaten Russia. This is very dangerous for Poland as Russia warns that if it wishes it can attack Poland to destroy the defense shield Confused. But USA dont want to listen. We are in mess for that. But this is how global politics is and we all need to survive in it.

Someone mentioned about Pakistan and Bangladesh being different to India. Is it something you belief? You all are same people and now divided. Gandhi wanted to prevent this. Very sad episode. Same with North and South Korea. Why you became to weak to your colonizers? Other countries were colonized too, but all of them fought to protect their identity.

As for Jungle book, its just a book. I wish my son to know more of his father's land just as he will obviously know of his mother's land. We live in Poland, so he will grow up here mostly. He will visit his grandparents in India. I hope he will speak Hindi too Smile. He is very small now, 5+ months Smile

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
Wife leaving Hubby taking children away, but why?

2 3

Summer3 16 1860 07 July 2011 at 2:45am
By Summer3
Sania not to play in India - Right move?

2

*Jaya* 10 826 17 February 2008 at 10:40pm
By raj5000
India is not India...it's America...

2

SmarterDesiKid 10 2237 10 August 2007 at 10:59pm
By UDman
We need to move FAST....and brag less... SolidSnake 7 394 23 April 2007 at 10:52am
By sareg
india vs not-india

2 3 4 5 6

simi1295 40 4585 11 February 2006 at 2:56pm
By heart girl

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.