--- In [email protected], tartbrain <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "seventhray1" steve.sundur@
wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "Ravi Yogi" <raviyogi@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I do enjoy your constant projections of peace, happiness and love
on
> > to others, I'm sure you make your heroes Gandhi, MLK and the Dalai
Lama
> > proud of you !!! Keep it up !!!
> >
> >
> > I know your beef with Gandi, and the Dolly Lama.  But what is the
> > problem with MLK?
> >
>
> Somewhat related topic. Last night I saw a PBS documentary on the
Freedom Riders. Great piece. Those students and volunteers, men and
women, white and black were incredibly "ballsy" and courageous. And
brought down a long standing Jim Crow policy by taking the offensive --
the Freedom Rides and practicing highly disciplined non-violent
resistance against a horrendously racist and violent culture.  No other
tact had worked for 100 years, and I don't see how other approaches
would have achieved the same result in the same time span.
>
> And MLK was behind the curve, not ahead of it on that one. (But for
those dissing King, I hope you have and encourage you to read Letter
from Birmingham Jail -- an his other writings.)
>
> (And while I have some issues with Ghandi's economic policies, again,
what approach other than non-violent resistance would have defeated the
British (Evil) Empire?)
>

That non-violent resistance ended the British Empire is laughable. I
think the reason British granted independence (note how I say granted
and not that India won independence) was two - one they had already
raped India of all its resources, contrast India and Britain between
1600 and 1900, and ruling India was a big burden on Britain and two the
British citizens no longer resembled their uncivilized forefathers of
1600's and started questioning their own government on the continued
occupancy of India and many other countries.
To say Gandhi was non-violent is another laughable statement. He
indulged in fast unto deaths which though superficially can be
considered as non-violent, were in fact highly passive aggressive and
emotional blackmail. In fact I don't recall Gandhi performing a fast
unto death asking British to leave, he was very clever and cunning, he
knew he would surely starve to death if he would do that. He was nothing
but a politician who used the propaganda of non-violence as his main
weapon. That MLK and guys like you are fascinated by him shows the
quality of your thinking as well.

Reply via email to