Criticism Of Mahatma Gandhi

Gandhi was an Indian lawyer, politician, social activist and writer who would lead the independence movement of India to free the country of British rule (“Mahatma Gandhi,” 2017). He would prove that a single person could change the course of history and take on the entire British Empire. Gandhi’s principles of nonviolence and civil disobedience are attributed to his success in gaining independence for India. The act of passive resistance allowed Gandhi to generate more support for his movement for independence while making it difficult for the British to find reasons to arrest them. He argued that although violence could be more effective than peaceful

It became evident that the British could maintain the empire only at enormous cost. At the end of the Second World War, they saw the writing on the wall, and initiated a number of constitutional moves to effect the transfer of power to the sovereign State of India. For the first and perhaps the only time in history, the power of a mighty global empire 'on which the sun never set', had been challenged and overcome by the moral might of a people armed only with ideals and courage.

In 1757, Great Britain extended its empire into India. This occupation would not fully end until 1947. In the time between, there were many movements by the Indian people to gain independence from the British. The movement that finally succeeded in winning India’s independence was led by one of the most influential figures of the 20th century, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Gandhi’s methods for fighting against the occupation of the British were very different from those of any of the freedom movements before. And that was why it worked. Gandhi did not agree with the general reasoning of the time: that conflicts could be solved through negotiation and forceful resistance.1 Rather, his faith led him to go

The Indian resistance against the British empire is one example of opposition against imperialism. Until 1858, India was controlled by the British East India Company. Thereafter, the crown rule replaced the company rule until 1947. “The slow expansion of the Indian role in public affairs would not have occurred without mounting political pressure from Indian society” (Findley 188). The people of India had tried to cause a reform through a political channel, evident through the slow yet steady participation in political affairs from 1858-1947. In this resistance,

British imperialism had a negative impact on the politics of India because of the establishment of the framework for India that leads to their downfall and the Indian Army which they used to control their own kind. According to Dr.Lalvani, the British established the framework for India’s justice system, civil services, loyal army, and the efficient loyal police. (Paragraph #6). While this is true, the framework didn’t include the Indians, because “Of 960 civil offices, 900 are occupied by English men and 60 by natives”(Doc. #2). British laws often benefited the British and were designed to limit the freedom of speech of the Indians, for example, the Rowlatt Act in 1919. (Gandhi). This evidence shows that the British, when creating the framework for the new and improved India wanted to benefit from it while trying to lower the Indian’s and limit the

(Document 5) This shows that even though Britain gave education to Indians they only gave it to who could afford it and hardly anyone could. Lalvani claims that over the 200 year span of British imperialism, India’s religions felt safer and less discriminated against. ( According to Dr.Lalvani) Although the British thought this was true it actually was not. Christians were mocking and discriminating against Muslims and Hindus. (Gandhi) Similarly Hinduism believes in nonviolence so when the protest at Amritsar took place the Indians were brutally slaughtered while being unarmed. (Gandhi) Because of their non-violence beliefs the Hindus had no defense and were killed by what they thought was their

Throughout the years many historians have compilated and examined why Indian people were so desperate to gain back their independence from the British Empire during their rule over India, from 1612 to 1947. The reasoning can most definitely be found as the British discriminated against Indian people as they believe that they were inferior; it is no surprise that Indian people fought so hard for their independence. Throughout the British Raj, they placed and put forward unbelievably racist acts and laws which discriminated against Indian people. Which of course led to Indians to rebel against the British rule and which the British reacted with causing massacres. Explaining the nationalistic many India’s felt during the British Raj.

The whole notion behind imperialism, more often than not, is regarded as a negative chapter in history, due to the obvious damaging effects that it had (for the purpose of this inquiry) on India specifically. Regardless of that fact, we need to analyze this era with an

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and Ho Chi Minh are the leaders of national independent movements from late 19th to early 20th century. Both of them defeated the colonial rulers and won national independence. This paper will talk about the influences of ideas and circumstances, the goals that they wanted to get and the historical significance of their behaviors.

Aroused by the massacre of Amritsar in 1919, Gandhi devoted his life to gaining India’s independence from Great Britain. As the dominant figure used his persuasive philosophy of non-violent confrontation, he inspired political activists with many persuasions throughout the world (Andrews 23). Not only was Mahatma Gandhi a great peacemaker, but also his work to achieve freedom and equality for all people was greatly acknowledged. Gandhi’s unconventional style of leadership gained him the love of a country and eventually enabled him to lead the independence movement in India.

There were many way causes which led Gandhi to become a leader this is one of them. Gandhi wanted to get rid the British out of the way, without using violence at all. An example of this was when he brought all of the reporters, to India and tried to burn the passbooks.

Once again, he wanted to show to his friends, comrades and all India that they needed to free there self from the cast segregation, and have a respect for all humans at the same time they were searching from freedom. He taught them that no job or task, therefore man was less important that another, and dignity is not related to money or status.

This essay will focus on the decolonisation of India by the British Empire and the problems they encountered. It will also aim to bring recognition to the struggle decolonisation brought upon the world after World War II. Pierce states that “after the War concluded, a worldwide process of decolonisation commenced in which Britain granted independence to all of its major colonies, beginning notably in India” (Pierce, 2009). India had struggled with uprisings and conflicts for the many years of British occupation but when Gandhi began sharing his social efforts; the perceptions of colonialism began to change leading to the collapse of the British colonial Empire. Gandhi began changing the lives of regular Indian’s with his popular visions, he also advocated for the people of India in a non-violent

We all live in a civil society in a country where we have equal rights and everyone gets the same kind treatment,sounds great right, and it is hard to imagine having all those privileges taken away. But the world wasn't all cheery and great less than 100 years ago the people of India and South Africa were discriminated and unjustly treated by people who were not even native to their region but another one more northern. It sounds dreadful because it was dreadful, but in hardships there are always motivating people like Mahatma Gandhi who liberated India from British rule by motivating a generation and many to come, to stand up for injustices in their life or the life of others.Furthermore, it is people like Nelson Mandela, who worked hard and got jailed for his belief of equal rights for all people no matter the color of their skin.Even if they both are inspirational and had to sacrifice greatly for their respective nation. One person will always come on top of the rest and that position was intended for Mahatma Gandhi.Therefore, you can infer this literary analysis will confirm the thesis that Mahatma Gandhi was the greater civil right activist. For the author for Eulogy For Mahatma Gandhi clearly states, “that man with divine fire, changed us also--and such as we are, we have been molded by him during these years; and out of that divine fire many of us also took a small spark…”, This doesn't make him just a civil rights activist but an inspiration to many people.

Mahatma Gandhi once said, “Nonviolence is not a garment to be put on and off at will. Its seat is in the heart, and it must be an inseparable part of our being". The book The Essential Gandhi expresses Gandhi’s views on issues like untouchability, religion, nationality, his movements like civil-disobedience are deeply shown in this book. Readers can learn about Gandhi’s childhood, his early married life, his realization and transition in South Africa, and his ways of approach towards attaining Independence in India. The book did a fantastic job in showing the Gandhi’s principles like non-violence with exemplary contexts.