Sunday, March 18, 2007

What Would Gandhi Do?

I’m always hearing about how the left wing anti-war movement is always holding up Gandhi as an example of how the world should enact foreign policy, and how they themselves should set an example of how to protest against other policies that are not to their liking.

Evidently, to these people there is no set of problems anywhere, no matter how profound, grave, or complicated, that can’t be solved by peaceful protest. Gandhi himself seems to have felt this way. I have recently read that he even criticized the Allied nations for resisting Hitler in World War II. Worse, he even suggested that the Jews should not have tried to fight him, nor even should they have attempted to escape his atrocities. They should have just peacefully acquiesced to the savagery of the butcher’s gas chambers and ovens, and all the other horrors visited upon them by the Nazi regime.

If this was truly his position, that is most remarkable. What can you say? Try as I might, words fail me in providing a sufficient response to such profound naivety.

But I can still try. In fact, appropriately enough, I just can’t resist sharing with you a few-

GANDHI RIDDLES

How many Gandhis does it take to change a light?
A: One Gandhi can change a light, so long as it’s a dim bulb.

How many dicks does Gandhi have?
A: Gandhi only has one dick however he somehow manages to stick it in millions of asses at once.

How many peaceniks does it take to change Gandhis diaper?
A: Gandi can change his own diaper and you can kiss his ass.

How many Gandis does it take to fill a gas tank?
A: One Gandi can fill one gas tank of a medium sized car however it might take two for an SUV.

Why does Gandhi always smile so serenely?”
A: Because he’s a fucking idiot.

If Gandhi were to watch American Idol who would he vote for?
A: Who gives a shit?

How many Gandhis would it take to bring about permanent world peace?
A: Oh, as of right now, somewhere between seven and eight billion.

But wouldn’t the world be better off if a lot more people followed Gandhi’s example?
A: Yep, it would be especially great for the ones of us who don’t.

I have heard it said that Gandhi might be an avatar of some great Hindu god, like Vishnu. What do you think?
A: I think you’re fucking stupid.

I think you are just a mean, angry person. Why are you so hateful, why don’t you try to be more like Gandhi?
A: Gandhi this dick.

You are disgusting. If I make love to a man it will be a kind and considerate man like Gandhi. They are out there you know.
A: You got that right. They certainly are “out there”.

So would you consider learning more about Gandhi? Maybe you will see the light if you try.
A: Ok you win. I’m like Gandhi. Let’s fuck.

HaHa very funny. Do you think I’m a complete idiot?
A: Yes.

Well, you’re not so smart yourself mister. Gandhi won his country’s independence from the British through his policies of non-violent peaceful resistance. What do you think of that? Doesn’t that prove his way is right?
A: No, it just proves the British had turned into a bunch of wusses. Of course, they also pulled all their investments out after which India slid into abject poverty, but what the hell, who needs food and clothing and shelter?

But don’t you think there are more important things in the world than material things, things like love and compassion and tolerance?
A: Nope. Not when I’m starving to death anyway.

Did you know that Dr. Martin Luther King is an example of a person that followed Gandhi’s example?
A: Nobody’s perfect.

But it worked, didn’t it?
A: Peaceful protest and striking against your own countries improper policies is one thing. That formula is unworkable in the arena of international relations, especially in cases of war. Taken to it’s logical extreme, if the country were invaded and everyone were to do nothing about it but “peacefully protest”, it would probably amount to national enslavement-or suicide.

But if people everywhere were to peacefully protest against the Iraq war, don’t you think it would work?
A: Yep, I think the Iraqi Sunni insurgents and Shi’ite death squads would be so fucking impressed they would lay down their arms tomorrow and make peace and want to help us all establish a worldwide international movement of peace and love.

Then if you know that why don’t you join the movement? Will you join us in protesting this evil war?
A: No thanks. I would prefer to agitate for a sensible long term solution. But it has to be a comprehensive, common sense solution, none of this pie in the sky wishful thinking.

But don’t you see that we are just fueling the insurgency by our presence. Don’t you think we should get out and make amends? War and fighting never accomplishes anything. Just ask yourself, WHAT WOULD GANDHI DO?
A: Oh, I don’t know. Establish, arm, and try to fund the Indian military, perhaps?

So are you saying Gandhi was a hypocrit? India is a democracy, you know. Maybe the Indian parliament did that and he couldn’t stop it, just like he couldn’t prevent the partition of India. It’s not his fault the people wouldn’t listen to him. But don’t you know an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure?
A: Maybe in some cases, but it’s always nice to have that cure available regardless, just in case.

So, I see. You are a conservative wingnut, aren’t you?
A: Not at all. I might vote Republican the next election, however.

KER-SLAP!!!
A: Hey, that hurt!!!

10 comments:

sonia said...

Who's next, Mother Teresa ? A day will come when Che Guevara will get his just deserts too. I love it when icons fall.

The bit about Shiites and Sunnis being impressed by peace marchers is spot on. Did those damn peaceniks ever heard of 'opportunity cost' ? All that energy they waste in marches could probably reverse the global warming for a decade....

SecondComingOfBast said...

Mother Teresa's day is coming too, though actually Christopher Hitchens already beat me to it. I won't let that stop me though.

I'll leave Che' to you, he's more your area of expertise.

Freedomnow said...

What you say about Gandhi and WWII/the Jews is correct.

However, I think that one day he will be relevant again.

Of course, like you I realize that what he advocates would be suicide in today's world.

During WWII the Nazis and Japan recruited Indian soldiers to fight for them and if the pacificist ideals that Gandhi professed became wildly popular in England the Axis would have ruled from England to Japan.

Then he would have had his opportunity to put into practice the non-violence that he proposed against the Nazis.

In such a scenario he would have ended his days anonymously in a concentration camp because one-party dictatorships are not as vulnerable to peaceful political activism as democracies.

Al Qaeda knows this too...

(P.S. I am not saying that those Indian troops mentioned above ever fought with the Nazis. The Nazis did recruit and train them, but they actually were sent to SE Asia to fight with the Japanese against the Allies.)

Many critics will site the Iranian Revolution as evidence that a peaceful political movement could overthrow a one party dictatorship. While it could be argued that it wasnt exactly peaceful, I will concede the point anyway. The fact of the matter is that the Shah did not have a strong hold on his country. His grip was always tenuous. That is why he needed help from the CIA several decades before.

The Nazis had peaceful political activists challenge their power, but were swiftly eliminated. See the short history of the White Rose Movement.

Strong dictatorships are only vulnerable to popular violent revolutions.

Thanks for an entertaining post.

sonia said...

Strong dictatorships are only vulnerable to popular violent revolutions...

... or outside interventions. Viva Bush!

SecondComingOfBast said...

Freedomnow-glad you enjoyed the post, thanks for stopping by.

Actually, dictatorships are vulnerable to many factors, including economic collapse, but a myriad of other things as well. That is why they are dictatorships to begin with. Look at what happened to the old USSR under Gorbachev's perestroika. Gorby was like the little Dutch boy with his fingers in the dyke trying vainly to hold back the deluge which he ultimately could not prevent.

Like i said, Ghandhi's methods have their place at the proper time, but they are not a be all and an end all and are not always appropriate, in fact the vast majority of the time they are not, for the very reasons you so accurately stated.

Sonia Belle-Thanks for the link, but as for Bush, you really need to get over that. Chaos can never compete with competence. I would dearly hope that there has been a method to his madness, unfortunately as of now I have seen way too little method and way too much madness.

Joubert said...

I found this from a link on Hillbilly White Trash and, having just trashed Gandhi on my blog recently, hoped that I could link back to you - but I can't because it would shock some of my more staid Christian readers. I however not being a Christian thoroughly enjoyed it.

SecondComingOfBast said...

Hello Patrick-glad you stopped by, link or no link. Yeah, I could see where most Christians would be a little taken aback by "How many dicks does Gandhi have?". You could always give them fair warning before they click the link. But do what feels best to you. Feel free to stop by and comment anytime.

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

I followed a naked girl's link over here, just to bash on Ghandhi the Dhimmi. You'll like this oldie but goodie.

SecondComingOfBast said...

Thanks, Beamish, I bookmarked that link, from what I've read so far, it looks like a great article. Somebody else told me about the bit about the cuddling with naked teenage girls to test his willpower to resist sex, and I thought he was kidding. Guess not.

That was a great movie as far as the artistic merits go, but it seems it was written about an entirely different person.

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

I remembered that Commentary article from when the movie came out back in '83, and was delighted to find a transcript of it online. I whip it out when Ghandhi lovers come around. Happy to forward it to ya!