I think your analogy is seriously flawed: religious fundies think their beliefs are the word of God, and immutable.

But US Constitutionalists imagine no such thing. The Constitution is merely an instrument, devised by men and which can be changed anytime we want. Indeed, it’s been amended plenty of times in history, and part of the genius of its design is that it has a process for self-alteration build right in! (would that this were true for humans).

The fact that the US, in it’s current governmental form, has been around for 200 years verifies the good design of the Constitution, but we can change it any time we really want to.

i believe that if the palestinians had adopted and kept Ghandian political techniques long ago… the middle east would be a profoundly different place right now.

hero worship can sometimes be a way of rationalizing ourselves “off the hook” because we all fail to understand that the extraordinary can spring from us all.

with all due respect to shakespeare who i seem to recall said something like: there is nothing so common as the desire to be extraordinary.

There is a confusion here between a thinker’s image and the thinkers ideas and influence through his work.

No one owns an image.

But what is an image? Does it reflect anything real? Probably not!

The work on the other hand is real and tangible and is owned by those people who understand it and use it in their own work.

This is true even of Gandhi, who is over rated it seems to me as force for peace in the world.

What did he achieve. India was on the road of independence in spite of him. He didn’t or couldn’t stop the violence between Hindus and Muslims which claimed the lives of millions.

His ideas of non violence could only have put into effect in democracies such as those of Great Britain and the US.

His tactics would never have worked in Nazi Germany nor in Soviet Russia. How would they work in Iran? Needless to say his fate in Iraq would be certain and obvious.

So what are we left with?

A Gandhi can easily destroy an imperfect democracy but he cannot overturn much less reform a totalitarian state.

This is the problem with his work. His image appeals to many and will continue to appeal. But then images are empty they don’t refer to anything substantial.

what a beautiful point you make about Gandhi learning from the suffragettes. It really made me think about how the struggle for women’s equality (I won’t call it feminism, which is much too limiting in my view) has in so many ways defined all of human history, with obvious emphasis on the last three centuries.

metolious;

who owns a historical figure? I agree; we all do. And more: “we” “own” all public figures past and present. That we can use or misuse these figures as we like is part of the tragedy of history: nothing can truly be understood, not even in its own time by its own practitioners. Jesus couldn’t foresee becoming a t-shirt, but that isn’t even the least of the perversions of his own mission that began the moment the nails were hammered home.

As for Gandhi himself:

I am not a fan of repression in any form, and so find much of the Mahatma’s practices unappealing; however, I laud his courage, both personal and spiritual, which was by any measure titanic.

And these days, doesn’t the whole world seem blind?

vipulujwal.blogspot.com

thanks

StupidShark

Your mail came as pleasant surprise as you not only read my Blog but also appreciated the thought conveyed in the Blog. So Thanks! As now I am more resolved to write as good as I can. My mobile phone number is +91-94148-92850 and I am free in the evening hours (6 PM to 10 PM IST +5:30 GMT) but being mainly a student I am not in position to bear the call cost but than we always have INTERNET and Yahoo/MSN messenger to share the ideas. But with deepest of regret I want to tell you that I am not well (Viral Infection) thus not in a position to immediately help you though after 3-4 Days I will be healthy enough to Talk with you….

Now about the questions raised by you in your e-mail:

Q1: Why in India Gandhi’s message seems suddenly resonant again?

Mainly because it is First time since independence some Main-Stream Film maker tried to combine the Gandhian philosophy with Entertainment and given the Box-Office success of MunnaBhai’s First movie the sequel was destined to be viewed by many. Apart from that the Success and impact of movie Rang De Basanti among youth also paved the way for taking MunnaBhai Seriously. Apart from it, it is the first time Gandhi is taken out of the Archives and made available to commoner.

The movie offered applied aspect of the Gandhian philosophy in solving very mundane problems of daily life. Otherwise in India Gandhi WAS most discussed but least understood figure. Basically before LRMB (Lage Raho MunnaBhai) a faction of Indian (especially the Congress Party) glorified Gandhi to the extent to a God because they benefited from this as they projected themselves as the true heirs of the Gandhian Ideology (though Gandhi himself would have objected for this) and Other Faction Portrayed Gandhi as the Ultimate Villain as they made him responsible for the untimely death of Bhagat Singh or they blamed him for his helplessness in Stopping the Partition. Thus in a way both separated Gandhi from the Masses but what LRMB did was it returned the Gandhi back to the masses (a place where he truly belongs) and offered them practical Gandhian Advice on various issues.

Apart from this resurrection of Gandhigiri is also a result of prevailing “Anarchy” in India where Corruption and Violence became the norm rather than being exception. Prior to LRMB, Mr. Bacchan as The Young Angry man Tried to solve the mundane problems of “AAM ADMI” through Violence but since last 30 years the commoner had realized that the proposed solution (By Mr. Bacchan) failed to deliver. So in this state Gandhian Ideology offered a “NOVEL” alternative. We can also understand the recent emergence of Gandhigiri in light of the Rise of Middle Class. The Great Indian Middle Class accepted Gandhigiri immediately as it offered them an viable alternative because this class is though unsatisfied with current state of affairs yet have materialistic comforts thus they just can’t adopt the Violent methods as they are “too career oriented” and “too Sophisticated”. So Gandhigiri offered them away to express their anger and dissatisfaction without worrying out the Massive Retaliation by the “Power Centers”.

We can also view the emergence of Gandhigiri after so many years from the angle that it’s only now the Indian Mainstream Cinema is experimenting with the novel storylines (thanks to Multiplex Culture). And it’s only recently when we started to fathom the real potential of Celluloid in influencing the masses. This line of thought further gets vindicated if we see it with the fact that Books Reading as a habit is on decline thus Movies/Television are the only mass medium that have a sincere following.

Q 2. Have you encountered obvious /acts/ of Gandhigiri? Is the movie changing the way younger Indian generations think of the Bapu? Are people talking about him more?

How much is, in your terms, the “Gandhi within ourselves” entering

conversation and thought these days?

Obviously being the Flavour of the Day, Acts of Gandhigiri are very much common now a day. In Jaipur (Rajasthan, India) Students are giving flowers to the Vice Chancellor, People are going for “fast until Death” so as to make authorities do their job, peaceful Candle Marches are being organized etc. and interestingly many of these acts are resulting into success. People, Students and Mass Media are talking more about Gandhi and discussing more about Gandhi. Even “Gandhi-within-oneself” is being referred more.

Bapu is the latest “in-thing” and the younger generation is changing it’s perception about the Gandhi. Now rather than saying “Mazboori ka naam Mahtma Gandhi” (helplessness thy name Gandhi), kids are singing “Bande me tha Dum” (the Guy had Guts). So in nutshell the scenario is indeed changed. But then comes the ultimate question….

Q 3. Will Gandhigiri last?

Well the answer is both Yes and No. No because the kind of Moral Discipline and Spiritual strength required for Gandhigiri is not common and thus many of us are not fit for following the Gandhian ideology in its pristine purity. Mainly because the New Generation is a follower of path of Least Resistance and their Guiding beacon is Principle of Least Effort that means though we all want improvement but at the same time want it to be done by some one else. That means that the newer generation believes more in “passing the Buck” than “Shouldering the Responsibilities”. This attitude gets evident when we see the Voter Turn-Out at general election. Be what ever the reasons but the Indian intelligentsia and the great middle class (which are main engine of change) are shying away from their responsibility.

Apart from this, practicing Gandhigiri comes in direct conflict with two main characteristics of today’s generation. Firstly, today’s generation believes in “immediate gratification” whereas Gandhigiri requires that one should take the “rightest” path may it be the longest one. Not many would love to get their job done in 30 days (though through the proper channel) when all they have to pay few extra Gandhi-Chhap (slang for Rs. 500) to get it done in matter of hours. Generally bribes are decried either by the older people or by those who cannot pay bribes due to resource crunch otherwise it is termed, accepted and offered as “service Tax”. I don’t want to sound cynical but that’s what is the attitude of younger generation towards normal problems. Secondly, today’s generation lacks Altruistic Attitude, the basic lynchpin of Gandhigiri. Today’s generation is very much preoccupied by Self that they do not have time to think about others. They will protest against bribe but not because they do not like it as a matter of principle but because they think that their protest will ensure that they need not to pay the bribe and thus save the money. I have seen numerous examples where corrupt officer can get away scot-free even after asking for the bribe if he offers to the so-called-idealistic-citizen to do the job without the bribe and ironically the modal-citizen accepts the offer and walks away. A true Gandhian should have refused the bait and should have complained about the official but instead people rationalize their Selfish Act as Honesty by arguing that they got their job done without bribe. But what they forget to take into account that their walking away without lodging the complaint is also a kind of bribe. So in summary, the present breed of Gandhians is more of opportunists rather than true followers.

I still believe that we all have Gandhi in ourselves but most of the time talk and discuss about him to portray ourselves as intellectuals and liberals rather than really identifying and assimilating him in our “consciousness-proper”. What is needed more than having the “Gandhi-within-ourselves” entering in our conversation and thought more and more, he should enter in our deeds.

However, it does not mean that current “fad” of Gandhigiri will fade away without making any significant change in the common psyche. LRMB had offered us a fresh outlook and a alternative to our contemporary world-view and some of us will make it their final world view. And to me if LRMB can covert a Single person into a true Gandhian then movie will be successful beyond expectation.

Amen ! ! !

And apparently, it is India’s entry for the Oscars.

with all kinds of repressions we are creating a society which has split personalities and all kinds of disorders. Gandhigiri at the least is unnatural, it is like a cloak which one possesses to hide one’s own cowardice and helplessness!