Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (26069)	4/19/2002 7:21:31 PM
From: frankw1900	Respond to of 281500

Ghandi was a Hindu. Hindus believe that the way to salvation (Atman, redemption from the wheel of Samsara, the cycle of reincarnation) is non-attachment, and non-violence. Some do. I can show you plenty who don't. Ghandi was also a lawyer, who understood the British legal system, and thus, understood that Britains, in the end, would respect the civil rights of Indians. Ghandi practised non violence in the colonial perspective because he knew the colonial government response would be brutal and have enormous play in the British news. It was, it did, and it worked. Hawk is right about non-violence from a colonial perspective: it will play in Europe and America. It would have been a much better play for Palestinians to get better treatment from the Israelis. How it would have played out in Arabia is beyond my competence to judge, but given the large forces there for a long time arrayed against existence of Israel and through comparatively low cost proxies, I'm not sure that non-violence was an option that could survive. Non-violence only works against countries that are inhibited by forces of lawfulness and the anti-Israel forces were not so inhibited - there probably were people who wanted to go non-violence route against Israel but I expect they were quashed early on.