Thread: Passive resistance ,when the deck is stacked.

I've studied Gandhi and Nehru at some length and I believe Gandhi is greatly overrated.

First, Gandhi's tactics did not bring down the British Empire. WW2 brought down the British Empire. It could no longer afford to hang on to India, having been financially exhausted by winning a war that destroyed its power forever.

Moreover, Gandhi was not the great advocate of non-violence most people think. He served with distinction in the British Army in South Africa and later supported the British Empire in both World Wars, actively making pro-war propaganda and recruiting many thousands of his countrymen to join the British armed forces to fight and kill other white people. Gandhi was a great supporter of wars in which millions of whites killed each other. He only opposed violence against his own people.

After the failed Sepoy Mutiny of 1857, when indigenous Indians rebelled against British hegemony, Gandhi made a calculation that direct, violent confrontation with the modern, industrialized British would be futile. Hence, he formulated "non-violence" which achieved mixed results because of lack of resolve on Gandhi's part.

I think it's useful to read Nehru's books ("Toward Freedom", "The Discovery of India", "Glimpses of World History") because they give a great insight into the plight and tactics of an oppressed people. Nehru talks about the network of spies, informers, police and imprisonment of people for thought crimes, such as free speech, etc. Nehru spent much time in British jails during the 1930's and used that opportunity to write many books. In the introduction of "The Discovery of India", Nehru writes that a friend heard he had been once again sentenced to jail and asked what book was he (Nehru) going to write this time? Every time the British locked this guy up to silence him, he used the time to write another 500 page book. An amazing man.

The problem with adapting Gandhi/Nehru type tactics is that Indians did not have the right to vote and were unable to influence public affairs with elections the way we can in the USA. I'm not sure their tactics would work against the kind oppression we're going to face.

I would recommend studying the various nationalist movements that opposed the British Empire, specifically those of India and Ireland, but remember that our tactics much match our political realities rather than theirs.

Their emphasis on massive resistance and massive public action and awakening is useful, but we have along way to go before we lose our rights to vote and freedom of speech as they did. They were working from a much lower political base line than we are. British oppression of Ireland and India was very much similar to Jewish oppression and control of the USA today.

Ghandi may well be over- rated but I truly believe had a white man assassinated him and not an indian there would not have remained a single white person left in all of south asia.

I hope you didn't think that i was making a direct comparison between the usa and india ,were you?

Let me know how you are influencing public affairs and how well the voting is going for you.

Those who lose the most are those who have the most to lose.