- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Silentdawning, the reason I went through all that is because Gandhi has become an acceptable palatable figure, like MLK. There are reasons for this, as stated. Personally I think he, and his thinking, are overrated, and some of his contemporaries such as Ambedkar and Nehru are just as, if not more interesting, but Gandhi gets the press because his ideas are cuddly.
Sure, the “hurt no one” thing fits in with the wishful thinking of American liberalism, but I don’t believe it fits in completely with reality. Sometimes people have to be hurt to get change of any kind. I don’t mean physically hurt by the way.
It’s highly arguable just how successful Gandhi was. There were other things happening at the time as well. But Gandhi is publicized because his tactics were unusual, not successful.
SamBee wrote:Silentdawning, the reason I went through all that is because Gandhi has become an acceptable palatable figure, like MLK.
There are reasons for this, as stated. Personally I think he, and his thinking, are overrated, and some of his contemporaries such as Ambedkar and Nehru are just as, if not more interesting, but Gandhi gets the press because his ideas are cuddly.
Sure, the “hurt no one” thing fits in with the wishful thinking of American liberalism, but I don’t believe it fits in completely with reality. Sometimes people have to be hurt to get change of any kind. I don’t mean physically hurt by the way.
It’s highly arguable just how successful Gandhi was. There were other things happening at the time as well. But Gandhi is publicized because his tactics were unusual, not successful.
You might argue that he did little for Indian independence — that the British only dropped their colonial attitudes after Hitler gave imperialism a bad name. That Ghandi’s non-violent methods were only an irritant to the British. Granted, they turned public opinion in his favor at times, but that wasn’t sufficient to make the British just walk out on a short timeline.
Anyway, my point here was to try to apply his approach of achieiving his own aims while striving not to hurt other physically in the process. My parallel was to learn to be Mormon without believing every SMA out there, and definitely, without hurting others spiritually by resorting to open rebellion. Open rebellion can make you feel independent, and provide an outlet for the angst one feels toward the Church, but it can hurt others in the process through testimony-shaking, hassles to local leaders who have no control over big picture doctrinal stuff anyway, and by moving children and spouses further left of center than you might ultimately want….
I prefer the saying about having to crack eggs to make an omelet. People will get hurt to some degree. There are even people who seem to be hurt about the existence of this website (I don’t understand that either) Someone (Ray?) mentioned that sometimes pain (and therefore by extension hurt) is a symptom of growth. Certainly is for teenagers. Through it we can actually develop, and that hurt is not always irreparable.
I believe the truth hurts, and does hurt people sometimes.
A quote I really like comes, ironically, from an LDS pop-spiritual song: Quote:I guess we shouldn’t think it strange that growing causes growing pains.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.