Why are the methods of Gandhi and MLJ, Jr. being overlooked?

[silenus]

@Sage Rat

Malcolm X might have been deliberately taunting White America, which is admittedly bullyish, but he was at least closer to this model. So long as people were fair with him, he was fair back. If they were a jerk, he’d raise a ruckus and make sure everyone knew the person was a jerk.

What was it Malcolm X said? Something along the lines of “The reason they are willing to talk to King is because the alternative is talking to me.”

[smiling_bandit]

@gonzomax

I am an old peace marcher and have been been at demonstrations where the police were going crazy beating the long hair hippies.

Love, the fact that you’re getting links to Answer’s public releases tells me all I need to know. And had you actually bothred to READ your own links, you might have noticed that they started violence first in every case. You can argue that the police overreacted, but people tend to do that when they’re hit with

I always loved* the far-leftist tactic of starting violence and then running crying to mommy about the consequences. You start force, you expect to get force back. And jsut because you can walk down th street doesn’t mean you have a right to break into buildings or throw things.

*And by oved I mean I despise it as a bloody-minded dishonesty by people who will happily sponsor mass purges, theft on a national scale, gulags, and thought control once they’re in power after “sweeping away the current reign of tyranny.”

[Little_Nemo]

Karl Marx’s message was that all people should be equal as well. Jesus’ message was that everyone should be happy tilling the soil and that caring about money would end us all up in hell. While as in real life, the instant that people decided that it was alright to charge interest on loans, inventors popped up left and right, invented the cotton wheel, slavery ended, and a hundred and fifty years later I can order pizza online and have never once felt the need to kill an infidel.

If you look at game theory (specifically, the Prisoner’s Dilemma), being a bully is a bad thing, but so is laying down when someone is being a bully to you. Overall, kind and forgiving in the long-run but punishing wrongs when they happen is what gets you to the best outcome.

King never said that anyone should lay down and accept being bullyed. Just the opposite: King was one of the people who said that black people had laid down too long and it was time for them to stand up and resist the bullying.

And King wasn’t an idiot. He knew that some people would succeed and some would fail. But he wanted everyone to have an equal opportunity to succeed or fail on their own individual merits.

Malcolm X might have been deliberately taunting White America, which is admittedly bullyish, but he was at least closer to this model. So long as people were fair with him, he was fair back. If they were a jerk, he’d raise a ruckus and make sure everyone knew the person was a jerk. Now I’ll admit that I’m basing this view on Spike Lee’s movie–the real Malcolm X might have had guys out with bats, smashing heads, for all I know–but the movie X looked like he was trying to be a reasonable guy but one who couldn’t be pushed over, and nothing more. That to me seems like a much better rolemodel for success.

Leaving aside the usefulness of movies as history, the problem with the idea is that Malcolm X was looking for a fight he wasn’t going to win.

It’s good in theory to say you should always stand up for yourself and defy bullies. But what happens when there’s ten bullies and only one of you? Standing up for yourself is just going to get your ass severely kicked. And the bullies know that. So you’re probably better off trying to figure out a different strategy. I’m not saying give up and let the bullies do whatever they want either. What you need to do now is look for some third alternative.

[Zoe]

Malcolm X, Gandi and Martin Luther King, Jr. were all “pushed over” eventually. Which ones were successful in the long run?

Adj de Gallina: MLK works because blacks had shown they weren’t going to take it. So the threat of vioence was present.

It wasn’t the threat of violence that was present. King never threatened violence. It was the threat of continued passive resistance and continued civil disobedience. That was the whole point. The police were violent with clubs and fire hoses and took protesters and marchers to jail sometimes. The protesters were to be passive while they were being arrested.

newcrasher, you probably already know this, but Gandi was influenced by Henry David Thoreau’s essay “Civil Disobedience.” It’s cool that the man who lived at Walden Pond had such an influence on both Gandhi and Dr. King. The class you are teaching sounds like a good one. May I ask what material you are using?

[newcrasher]

@Zoe

Malcolm X, Gandi and Martin Luther King, Jr. were all “pushed over” eventually. Which ones were successful in the long run?

It wasn’t the threat of violence that was present. King never threatened violence. It was the threat of continued passive resistance and continued civil disobedience. That was the whole point. The police were violent with clubs and fire hoses and took protesters and marchers to jail sometimes. The protesters were to be passive while they were being arrested.

newcrasher, you probably already know this, but Gandi was influenced by Henry David Thoreau’s essay “Civil Disobedience.” It’s cool that the man who lived at Walden Pond had such an influence on both Gandhi and Dr. King. The class you are teaching sounds like a good one. May I ask what material you are using?

We are using Threads Media : Get Uncomfortable. It is ok. It serves the purpose of introducing social justice issues to my church. The way the class is set up, you should take some action to address injustice. Not sure what that will be yet.

I am somewhat disappointed at the “ignorance” for a lack of a better word on the mission and methods shown in this thread regarding Jesus, Gandhi and King. And I am not the type of person who is going to lay out a point by point refutation or explanation. I just don’t have the time. I wish someone would come in and illustrate them though. (how is that for a cop-out?!)

In fact I am often staggered by the general lack of knowledge I see regarding these great men. The average person knows little beyond what they see in popular culture about these giants.

[Sage_Rat]

@Little Nemo

It’s good in theory to say you should always stand up for yourself and defy bullies. But what happens when there’s ten bullies and only one of you? Standing up for yourself is just going to get your ass severely kicked. And the bullies know that.

Isn’t this equally true for Gandhi’s method? Either way, you’re reliant on the making the bullies look like bullies so they get ashamed and back down. If it was an actual battle, sure the team with fewer men is more likely to lose, but that’s not the case here as ultimately its a psychological battle. The only difference is whether one is saying, “Hit me! I <3 it!” versus, “I’m just walking here, I ain’t causing any harm, I’m not asking to do anything bad. But, don’t think you can fuck with me.”

[cosmosdan]

@newcrasher

In fact I am often staggered by the general lack of knowledge I see regarding these great men. The average person knows little beyond what they see in popular culture about these giants.

What would you expect the average person to know?

[askeptic]

@cosmosdan

What would you expect the average person to know?

He doesn’t have time to explain it and he wants somebody to do it for him. Not something you often see from an OP. Oh well different strokes and all that…

[newcrasher]

@askeptic

He doesn’t have time to explain it and he wants somebody to do it for him. Not something you often see from an OP. Oh well different strokes and all that…

zowie! ya got me!

I am more of an actions rather than words type of guy. I don’t have the patience, or the skill, to pull together the treatise it would take to make my case. Just being honest. But I do appreciate the people who have the time and ability to really dig into a topic, which is one of the reasons I started this OP.

I am one of those unusual guys who comes here admitting he has more to learn than to teach.

[newcrasher]

@cosmosdan

What would you expect the average person to know?

Well thank Og for popular culture, or the average person wouldn’t know a thing!

[newcrasher]

@askeptic

He doesn’t have time to explain it and he wants somebody to do it for him. Not something you often see from an OP. Oh well different strokes and all that…

Upon rereading your post, I think I underestimated the level of smarm therein, so let me tell you just why I am too busy.

I have a team of folks in Costa Rica right now that I have been trying to reach all day. They are working in a community of orphans, organizing a feeding program, educational support and leading the children in a few days of fun and escape from abject poverty. The last time we were in this particular village last August we were robbed at gunpoint by a group of banditos. The leader of the team came down with a bout of Noro virus in the airport so the rest of the team had to go without them. Without the leader, this is a very green team, and I have been trying to reach them all day by email and phone to give them some vital information.

This isn’t just an intellectual excercise. Social justice and service to others is something I actually do IRL. You know, different stroked and all that…

[askeptic]

What? Do you want a cookie?

[furt]

@newcrasher

I am somewhat disappointed at the “ignorance” for a lack of a better word on the mission and methods shown in this thread regarding Jesus, Gandhi and King. …

In fact I am often staggered by the general lack of knowledge I see regarding these great men. The average person knows little beyond what they see in popular culture about these giants.

Should the average person know that Gandhi suggested that the Jews should have committed mass suicide rather than fight Hitler?

Should the average person know that he did not allow his wife learn to read, and let her die rather than take penicillin? (He later allowed himself to take it) That he disowned one son because he got married, and a second because he loaned money to the first?

Should the average person know that in overpopulated India, Gandhi denounced birth control as sinful? That he was vehemently opposed to sex for pleasure, even among married people?

Should the average person know that one of Gandhi’s fasts was against a British plan to give Untouchables seats in the Indian legislature? (He claimed he was their sole legitimate spokesman.)
I mean, I know you know all of this, but wouldn’t it be good if everyone knew the truth?

[askeptic]

@furt

Should the average person know that Gandhi suggested that the Jews should have committed mass suicide rather than fight Hitler?

Should the average person know that he did not allow his wife learn to read, and let her die rather than take penicillin? (He later allowed himself to take it) That he disowned one son because he got married, and a second because he loaned money to the first?

Should the average person know that in overpopulated India, Gandhi denounced birth control as sinful? That he was vehemently opposed to sex for pleasure, even among married people?

Should the average person know that one of Gandhi’s fasts was against a British plan to give Untouchables seats in the Indian legislature? (He claimed he was their sole legitimate spokesman.)
I mean, I know you know all of this, but wouldn’t it be good if everyone knew the truth?

None of that was in the movie.

[furt]

@askeptic

None of that was in the movie.

Sad, I know. You’d think a film financed by the Indian government would have been more honest about his greatness.

[askeptic]

@furt

Sad, I know. You’d think a film financed by the Indian government would have been more honest about his greatness.

And people say you don’t have a sense of humor…

[furt]

@askeptic

And people say you don’t have a sense of humor…

Yep, and yet I’ve apparently got the OP ROTFLOLing so hard he can’t make it to the keyboard. A regular riot, I am.

[gonzomax]

http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1650 This may be considered slightly slanted but the film was made by the police.

[brickbacon]

@furt

Should the average person know that Gandhi suggested that the Jews should have committed mass suicide rather than fight Hitler?

Any cites for this? I am genuinely curious if he said it, or implied this, and in what context.

@furt

Should the average person know that he did not allow his wife learn to read, and let her die rather than take penicillin? (He later allowed himself to take it)

Ok, this part seems to be false AFAICT. Wiki states the following:

They were both 13 years old. At the time, she was illiterate, and so Gandhi taught her to read and write — a potentially radical move, given the position of women in India at that time. When Gandhi left to study in London in 1888, she remained in India to raise their newborn son Harilal.

The part about penicillin appears to be true, but I haven’t found anything that states he later took penicillin. They say he later took quinine when he was suffering from malaria. Perhaps that was hypocritical, but that is up for debate. The first successful use of penicillin was in March 1942. His wife died in Feb. 1944 at 74 years old. Quinine was a “natural” medicine that can even be useful in its unextracted form. People had been using it that way since the early 1600’s. I would imagine the average person’s outlook for each medicine would be very different at the time. I don’t think that absolves him of responsibility, but it’s not as cut and dry as you make it seem.

@furt

That he disowned one son because he got married, and a second because he loaned money to the first?

Well many sites also note that the first son was troubled as well.

Harilal had always wanted to go on to higher studies, including becoming a barrister as his father had been. His father was firmly opposed to this, and disallowed him from pursuing it. His father believed that receiving this Western styled education was not helpful in the struggle against British rule over India. [1] Eventually Harilal rebelled against his father’s decision. He renounced all family ties in 1911 and embarked upon a tragic, lifelong path of self-destruction.

He became a Muslim convert, an alcoholic, an embezzler; accounts of his arrests, public drunkenness, and destitution became commonplace. Harilal converted to Islam, adopting the name “Abdullah Gandhi”, but later again converted back to Hinduism. This decision did not bother his father, who believed that all religions were as one, but his mother felt that he should not be publically displaying this back-and-forth behaviour. [2].

Not that that means he should have been disowned, but the situation may have been deeper than it seems. Can’t find much about the situation regarding the other son. Can you elaborate on either situation and the context?

@furt

Should the average person know that one of Gandhi’s fasts was against a British plan to give Untouchables seats in the Indian legislature? (He claimed he was their sole legitimate spokesman.)

This site states the following:

The British had proposed a new Constitution for India which included a separate electorate for untouchables. Gandhi saw this as one more barrier, and he began a “fast to the death” in protest. “Untouchability poisons Hinduism as a drop of arsenic poisons milk.” Nehru wrote, “I felt angry with him at his religious and sentimental approach to a political question, and his frequent references to God in connection with it … What a terrible example to set!”

and this:

Mahatma Gandhi launched the war against untouchability with the "epic fast’’ of Sept. 20-26, 1932. Gandhi had been arrested by the British and at the time was in the Yervada jail near Poona. Gandhi had warned as early as Sept. 13 that he would undertake the fast in protest of the "Communal Award’’ of the British government. Under this divide-and-conquer tactic, the British were to establish a separate electorate for the untouchables, and the British had succeeded in winning over lower caste leaders to the idea.

"We do not want on our register and on our census untouchables classified as a separate class,'' declared Gandhi in his statement of protest. "I would far rather that Hinduism died than that untouchability lived. I will not bargain away the rights of the Harijans for the kingdom of the whole world. I cannot possibly tolerate what is in store for Hinduism if there are two divisions set up in every village.''

Despite Gandhi’s threats, the British executed the Communal Award, in the name of "democracy.‘’ For his part, Gandhi agreed to reserving a percentage of seats for the harijans, but would not countenance separate electorates.

"I have endeavored to qualify myself to represent not the upper ten even among the untouchables but represent, as far as possible, the lowest strata of untouchables, whom I always have before my mind's eye wherever I go; for they have indeed drunk deep of the poison cup,'' Gandhi told reporters on the first day of the fast. He warned leaders of the harijans and of the Congress Party, then meeting in Bombay, that he would not be satisfied with a mere formal pact. "What I want, what I am living for and what I should delight in dying for, is the eradication of untouchability root and branch.... My life I count of no consequences.... My fast I want to throw in the scales of justice and if it wakes up caste-Hindus from their slumber, it will have served its purpose.''

Through a series of compromises frantically worked out by the Congress Party and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, founder of the Depressed Classes Welfare League, Gandhi ended his fast on Sept. 26. But the significance of the fast was that it unleashed a spirit within the Hindu population against untouchability. The eradication of untouchability was thereby incorporated as a fundamental principle of the Congress Party fight for independence. Across India, in towns, cities, and villages, actions by all Hindus began the opening of the doors of the Hindu temples to the harijans.

I think you misrepresented the situation here as best as I can tell.

[askeptic]

IMHO Wiki is a great jumping off point but it hardly qualifies as authority when facts are in dispute. As for the rest, I will let those who know about the guy argue his merits.