Thursday, November 24, 2005

Thoughts on another blog

Response to http://www.ripeningwrite.blogspot.com/

Part I.

By what definition is this man great, he neither created nor built anything of significance, He was not a sage, He choice of life was a means to a goal not his life, He was not a writer/ thought-maker , his sermonizing is an amalgam of aphorisms from religion.. The identity and pride that he sought to instill in Indians is non-existent. Did he grant India its Independence? The confluence economic and political factors and the futility of colonization resulted in Independence.
Yet he is the icon of the struggle for independence, how could he hijack the symbol of a movement? Did the English create a saint like image of him and trade the image for an incessant but peaceful struggle he brought with him?
Is he relevant today? I guess not, Any man who earns money, loves his family, loves life has no place in his society, His way of life can only offer a feckless solace, not a solution to society’s ills.
Despite its fallacies Capitalism is great because it reduces everything down to the simple things intelligence and effort. The equation can be corrupted but its redemption is quick.
“Production by the masses instead of mass production” what crap, Imagine the possibilities of making the country the mass manufacturing capital of the world 50 years ago.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Truth, purity, self-control, firmness
fearlessness, humility, unity, peace, and
renunciation—These are the inherent
qualities of a civil resister.

—Mahatma Gandhi

Anonymous said...

What makes any person or entity great?
i remember george bush saying 'If india wants to be great...'. surely, we heard
him umpteen times calling his own country 'great'. So..?

Anonymous said...

A 'great' 'creator' like Albert Einstein said :

Generations to come will scarce believe that such
a one as this walked the earth in flesh and blood.

Everyone concerned in the better future of mankind must be deeply moved by the tragic death of Mahatma Gandhi. He died as the victim of his own principles, the principle of nonviolence. He died because in time of disorder and general irritation in his country, he refused armed protection for himself. It was his unshakable belief that the use of force is an evil in itself, that therefore it must be avoided by those who are striving for supreme justice to his belief. With his belief in his heart and mind, he has led a great nation on to its liberation. He has demonstrated that a powerful human following can be assembled no only through the cunning game of the usual political manoeuvres and trickeries but through the cogent example of morally superior conduct of life.
The admiration for Mahatma Gandhi in all countries of the world rests on recognition, mostly sub-conscious, recognition of the fact that in our time of utter moral decadence, he was the only statesman to stand for a higher level of human relationship in political sphere. This level we must, with all our forces, attempt to reach. We must learn the difficult lesson that an endurable future of humanity will be possible only if, also in international relations, decisions are based on law and justice and not on self-righteous power, as they have been upto now.