Myth_buster_1
BANNED
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2008
- Messages
- 9,016
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Gandhi adored “friend” Hitler: Today BJP Modi use Nazi policies « Rupee News: Recording History, Narrating Archives, Strategic Vision, Profound Analysis, Unique ideas
The so called prophet of non-violence had some really nasty things to say about the Jews, and his support for the Booer and British wars was a slap in the face of “ahimsa” (non-violence).
ACTUAL QUOTES ON GANDHI’S RACISM:
The Durban Post Office: One of Gandhi’s major “achievements” in South Africa was to promote racial segregation by refusing to share a post office door with the black natives.
-“A general belief seems to prevail in the colony that the Indians are little better, if at all, than the savages or natives of Africa. Even the children are taught to believe in that manner, with the result that the Indian is being dragged down to the position of a raw Kaffir.” [local native of South Africa] (Reference: The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Government of India (CWMG), Vol I, p. 150)
-Regarding forcible registration with the state of blacks: “One can understand the necessity for registration of Kaffirs [local native of South Africa] who will not work.” (Reference: CWMG, Vol I, p. 105)
-“Why, of all places in Johannesburg, the Indian Location should be chosen for dumping down all the Kaffirs of the town passes my comprehension…the Town Council must withdraw the Kaffirs [local native of South Africa] from the Location.” (Reference: CWMG, Vol I, pp. 244-245)
-Gandhi’s description of black inmates: “Only a degree removed from the animal.” Also, “Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized - the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty and live almost like animals.” - Mar. 7, 1908 (Reference: CWMG, Vol VIII, pp. 135-136)
-Mohandas Gandhi’s description of black inmates:
Gandhi’s horrific advice to Jews—Commit mass suicide in the face of Nazi barbarism.
Everyone was shocked that Gandhi called the ultimate monster a “friend”.
In his first letter dated. July 23rd, 1939 (Complete Works, vol.70, p.20-21), Gandhi does mention his hesitation in addressing Hitler. But the reason is modesty rather than abhorrence:
The war had already started. After the German occupation of Czech-inhabited Bohemia-Moravia (in violation of the 1938 Munich agreement and of the principle of the self-determination of nations which had justified the annexation of German-inhabited Austria and Sudetenland) and rising hostility with Poland, prompted him to write to the monster of the 20th century:
This stupid approach is held in utter contempt by post-War generations.
Thus, the Flemish Leftist novelist and literature professor Kristien Hemmerechts has commented (”Milosevic, Saddam, Gandhi en Hitler”, De Morgen, 16-4-1999): “In other words, Gandhi was a nave fool who tried in vain to sell his non-violence as a panacea to the Fuhrer.”
Gandhi was in effect giving carte blanche to Hitler for doing that which we know Hitler to have done, viz. the deportation of Jews and others, the mass killings, the ruthless oppression of the subject populations, the self-destructive military policies imposed on the Germans in the final stage of the war.
Indeed, even in the early (and for German civilians, low-intensity) part of the war, protests from the public forced Hitler to stop the programme of euthanasia on the handicapped.
Moreover, it was the paranoia of the Nazi leadership about Jews as a fifth column, retained from their subjective and distorted World War 1 experience of Leftist agitators in the German cities stabbing the frontline soldiers in the back, which made them decide to remove the Jews from society in Germany and the occupied countries.
Transfer of Jews:-(The Saffron Swastika, Voice of India, Delhi 2001, p.506-517, and in Elst: Gandhi and Godse, Voice of India, Delhi 2001, p.48-56)
RACIST DOCTRINE: This very racist reason to befriend Hitler, what Gandhi goes on to call the “doctrine of universal friendship“, contrasts with the manner in which he addressed the British courts in South Africa out of which he was thrown out.
Gandhi certainly earned the ire of post-war public opinion by stating:
In a slogan: “The rulers may have our land and bodies but not our souls.”
To this, Hitler probably made a mental comment that prisoners, such as the many people whom he himself was locking away, were quite entitled to their souls, as long as they left their land as living space and their bodies as slave labour to the rulers.
Gandhi supported the British Empire. Unlike many of his countrymen, Gandhi rejected the idea of achieving freedom from British rule with German help:
Instead, Gandhi explained to Hitler, the non-violent method could defeat “a combination of all the most violent forces in the world”.
It was a strange pacifist who condoned this torrent of violence.
Gandhis utterances regarding Nazism leave a lot of doubt about his ephimeral hostility to this militaristic and freedom-hating doctrine. He spported every British war, yet, he opposed war against Nazism.
It is not certain that this would have worked, but then Gandhism is not synonymous with effectiveness. Gandhis methods were unsuccessful in dissuading the British from holding on to India.
From that angle, it simply remains an open question, an untried experiment, whether the Gandhian approach could have succeeded in preventing World War 2. By contrast, there simply cannot be two opinions on whether that approach of non-violent dissuasion would have been Gandhian.
Our judgment of his letters to Hitler must be the same as our judgment of Gandhism itself: either both represented a lofty ethical alternative to the more common methods of power politics, or both were erroneous and ridiculous.
The so called prophet of non-violence had some really nasty things to say about the Jews, and his support for the Booer and British wars was a slap in the face of “ahimsa” (non-violence).
ACTUAL QUOTES ON GANDHI’S RACISM:
The Durban Post Office: One of Gandhi’s major “achievements” in South Africa was to promote racial segregation by refusing to share a post office door with the black natives.
-“A general belief seems to prevail in the colony that the Indians are little better, if at all, than the savages or natives of Africa. Even the children are taught to believe in that manner, with the result that the Indian is being dragged down to the position of a raw Kaffir.” [local native of South Africa] (Reference: The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Government of India (CWMG), Vol I, p. 150)
-Regarding forcible registration with the state of blacks: “One can understand the necessity for registration of Kaffirs [local native of South Africa] who will not work.” (Reference: CWMG, Vol I, p. 105)
-“Why, of all places in Johannesburg, the Indian Location should be chosen for dumping down all the Kaffirs of the town passes my comprehension…the Town Council must withdraw the Kaffirs [local native of South Africa] from the Location.” (Reference: CWMG, Vol I, pp. 244-245)
-Gandhi’s description of black inmates: “Only a degree removed from the animal.” Also, “Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized - the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty and live almost like animals.” - Mar. 7, 1908 (Reference: CWMG, Vol VIII, pp. 135-136)
-Mohandas Gandhi’s description of black inmates:
Gandhi’s horrific advice to Jews—Commit mass suicide in the face of Nazi barbarism.
Everyone was shocked that Gandhi called the ultimate monster a “friend”.
In his first letter dated. July 23rd, 1939 (Complete Works, vol.70, p.20-21), Gandhi does mention his hesitation in addressing Hitler. But the reason is modesty rather than abhorrence:
The war had already started. After the German occupation of Czech-inhabited Bohemia-Moravia (in violation of the 1938 Munich agreement and of the principle of the self-determination of nations which had justified the annexation of German-inhabited Austria and Sudetenland) and rising hostility with Poland, prompted him to write to the monster of the 20th century:
This stupid approach is held in utter contempt by post-War generations.
Thus, the Flemish Leftist novelist and literature professor Kristien Hemmerechts has commented (”Milosevic, Saddam, Gandhi en Hitler”, De Morgen, 16-4-1999): “In other words, Gandhi was a nave fool who tried in vain to sell his non-violence as a panacea to the Fuhrer.”
Gandhi was in effect giving carte blanche to Hitler for doing that which we know Hitler to have done, viz. the deportation of Jews and others, the mass killings, the ruthless oppression of the subject populations, the self-destructive military policies imposed on the Germans in the final stage of the war.
Indeed, even in the early (and for German civilians, low-intensity) part of the war, protests from the public forced Hitler to stop the programme of euthanasia on the handicapped.
Moreover, it was the paranoia of the Nazi leadership about Jews as a fifth column, retained from their subjective and distorted World War 1 experience of Leftist agitators in the German cities stabbing the frontline soldiers in the back, which made them decide to remove the Jews from society in Germany and the occupied countries.
Transfer of Jews:-(The Saffron Swastika, Voice of India, Delhi 2001, p.506-517, and in Elst: Gandhi and Godse, Voice of India, Delhi 2001, p.48-56)
RACIST DOCTRINE: This very racist reason to befriend Hitler, what Gandhi goes on to call the “doctrine of universal friendship“, contrasts with the manner in which he addressed the British courts in South Africa out of which he was thrown out.
Gandhi certainly earned the ire of post-war public opinion by stating:
Anyone having an iota of knowledge including Gandhi, was practically an accomplice to Hitlers crimes. However, while not giving up on the chance of converting Hitler to more peaceful ways, Gandhi was not that mild in judging the crimes Hitler had already committed. In particular, he criticized the already well-publicized Nazi conviction that the strong have a right to subdue the weak:
In a slogan: “The rulers may have our land and bodies but not our souls.”
To this, Hitler probably made a mental comment that prisoners, such as the many people whom he himself was locking away, were quite entitled to their souls, as long as they left their land as living space and their bodies as slave labour to the rulers.
Gandhi supported the British Empire. Unlike many of his countrymen, Gandhi rejected the idea of achieving freedom from British rule with German help:
Instead, Gandhi explained to Hitler, the non-violent method could defeat “a combination of all the most violent forces in the world”.
It was a strange pacifist who condoned this torrent of violence.
Gandhis utterances regarding Nazism leave a lot of doubt about his ephimeral hostility to this militaristic and freedom-hating doctrine. He spported every British war, yet, he opposed war against Nazism.
It is not certain that this would have worked, but then Gandhism is not synonymous with effectiveness. Gandhis methods were unsuccessful in dissuading the British from holding on to India.
From that angle, it simply remains an open question, an untried experiment, whether the Gandhian approach could have succeeded in preventing World War 2. By contrast, there simply cannot be two opinions on whether that approach of non-violent dissuasion would have been Gandhian.
Our judgment of his letters to Hitler must be the same as our judgment of Gandhism itself: either both represented a lofty ethical alternative to the more common methods of power politics, or both were erroneous and ridiculous.
Last edited by a moderator:
... spreading the words of fact!
