Mahatma Gandhi`s Philosophy of Modern Civiliciation Essay
2780 Words12 Pages
Highlight and assess Gandhi’s critique of “modern civilization” and relate it to the debate about the nature and practice of development that surfaced with Gandhi’s 1945 exchange with Nehru [in Sudhir Chandra’s essay] and continue into the post-independence era is with us today.
“Through the ‘successor’ … Gandhi was pitted against a whole discourse which the ‘successor’ and virtually the whole country considered as the only rational mode of ordering life, be it individual or collective” (Chandra 44).
In every argument at least two people are involved. However, in many significant controversies or, even more so, in contestations of well accepted norms, the real debate rages not simply between two rational…show more content…
While Gandhi never precisely defines ‘modern civilization’, such a thing may indeed be impossible as the discourse already, to some extent, defines us, he does offer an analogy to understand its nature. As this kind of civilization exists in idealized forms in its literature and theories and realized forms throughout Europe, America, and their colonies, he considers these its identity. From this, one can infer its nature as one learns of a tiger. While, in theory, a tiger could change its character, this question completely misses the point that the very nature of the tiger is at fault (Swaraj 27-28). The preaching of modern civilization, as rhetoric, plus the real patterns of this kind of living comprise the object of his criticism. This marks one of his first important differences from the discourse he opposes. Where Gandhi considers the tiger in terms of its nature and as a pattern of behavior, the technical rationality of the discourse he is arguing against considers a tiger as a particular collection of biological specificities that may sometimes act in predictable ways, but is entirely mutable. While this summary of Gandhi makes him sound more like Plato than is fair, his arguments tend to look for deeper meanings where possible and permanent truths as opposed to the myopia of the discourse he is criticizing. Similarly, Gandhi claims that “only men with mature thoughts are capable of ruling themselves” (Swaraj 16), whereas modern civilization boasts
Mahatma Gandhi Research Paper
1564 WordsJun 11th, 20117 Pages
Aroused by the massacre of Amritsar in 1919, Gandhi devoted his life to gaining India’s independence from Great Britain. As the dominant figure used his persuasive philosophy of non-violent confrontation, he inspired political activists with many persuasions throughout the world (Andrews 23). Not only was Mahatma Gandhi a great peacemaker, but also his work to achieve freedom and equality for all people was greatly acknowledged. Gandhi’s unconventional style of leadership gained him the love of a country and eventually enabled him to lead the independence movement in India. Mohandas Gandhi, later called Mahatma Gandhi, was born on October 2,1869 in Porbandar, which is the present day state of Gujarat, India (Andrews…show more content…
By saying that, he meant that no one should worry about where they stand in society or how they are judged because in God’s eyes everyone is perfect and everyone is equal therefore, no one who has any faith in God should be worrying about their so called “imperfections.” This great man struggled to gain the important rights for all Indians, and this is where it all began.
Once Gandhi’s mission in South Africa was complete, he returned to India and became involved in the home ruling movement. He was concerned with excessive land tax and discrimination, so he organized protests by peasants, farmers, and urban laborers to help them stand tall and fight for what they deserved (Gold 57).
During World War I, Gandhi had an active part in recruiting campaigns by launching his new movement of non-violent resistance to Great Britain (Byers 202). When Parliament passed the Rowlatt Acts in 1919, Satyagraha, which means insistence on truth, spread throughout India, recruiting millions of followers. British soldiers massacred Indians at Amritsar as a demonstration against the Rowlatt Acts. In 1920 the British government failed to make peace, which resulted in Gandhi organizing a campaign of non-cooperation (Andrews 103). There was chaos in India as the public