one of the most remarkable and often invisible aspects of the 20th century is the staggering number of peace, nonviolence, and anti-war movements. Like, we know about Gandhi, but what makes the 20th century different in history is that Gandhi was no different. In fact, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of peaceful and non-violent movements around the world. I think I should say, "non-strikers" who survived because, you know, they were not violent. But they were not the only ones. [Theme Music] Thus, by 1900, the people of Europe had ruled the world, although there had been limited peace in Europe since 1871, the Europeans, using new weapons, had unleashed extraordinary violence throughout the planet. They settled in large parts of Africa, Asia, and the Pacific. The American people had spread across the continental United States, and were looking at the Caribbean and Asia. And I want to make it clear that this defeat and the colony were consistently violent. But then some people began to question the very idea of violence.
As in his 1894 book, The Kingdom of God is Within You, Leo Tolstoy, who knew little about War and Peace, examined how Jesus' quote “turn the other cheek” was the basis for a nonviolent lifestyle. He argued that governments and individuals should stop violence if they believe that they are true Christians, and Tolstoy saw nonviolence as a cure for colonialism. In 1908, Tolstoy wrote a book entitled “A Letter to a Hindu” to Mohandas Gandhi, and in that letter he explained that the Indians needed to confront British imperialism with love and nonviolence. Gandhi not only read the book but also published it in his South African newspaper "Indian Opinion" in 1909. And Tolstoy's views on the correspondence with Gandhi marked the beginning of an informal dialogue between the world's most influential non-violent activists. 20th century. And Tolstoy was not the only influence on Mohandas K. Gandhi, who grew up in the Gujarat region of India where there is a large Jain community. And with the Jain monks Gandhi was exposed to Ahimsa's vision: nonviolence or harm to life. He has also learned extensively including western writers such as John Ruskin, and Henry David Thoreau.
So after his return to India from South Africa in 1915, Gandhi began to refute his nonviolent ideas and to make his philosophy more vivid. In his 1929 autobiography book, "The Story of My Trials With the Truth", Gandhi wrote about how his belief in Ahimsa could be the basis for resistance to the Indians in British rule. So for Gandhi non-violence was both a way of life, and a tool for gaining Indian independence. He saw Western culture as violent and exploitative. That's funny. I know the Eurocentrists will be angry with me for saying that but it is true, violent and sometimes violent. Having said that, it is well done with new market-based designs and the Mona Lisa and more. OK let's move on. Gandhi believed that the Indians could abandon that lifestyle and replace it with nonviolence. And Gandhi believed that the Indians could end British rule with a combination of Ahimsa and Satyagraha, a word often translated as adherence to the truth. All right, let's go to Bubble of Thought. These connected ideas of Ahimsa and Satyagraha are best seen in Salt March of 1930. Therefore, since the middle of the 19th century, the British had imposed taxes on salt, and since salt, in addition to making the food more palatable is necessary for survival, Gandhi. saw these laws as a perfect example of how British dictatorship affected all Indians.
Gandhi announced that he and a small group were planning to march from his home in Ahmedabad to the coast to harvest salt. The march lasted about two months and quickly garnered media attention around the world and the British raj in India was forced to choose between arresting Gandhi for violating British law or allowing him to break the law because he was harvesting salt illegally. Millions of Indians were inspired by Gandhi's challenge to British rule and began a series of protests against the salt rule. As public disobedience spread throughout India, the British began to arrest people and the international media became more and more involved in protests and popular opinion began to view British rule as unfair. By refusing to confront the British tyranny with his violence and highlighting the injustices of the British empire, Gandhi was able to use the violence as an ineffective tool to undermine colonial rule. Thank you Thought Bubble. So as noted earlier, Gandhi's use of nonviolence is well-known but not the exception. By the early 20th century, ethnic movements in the colonies throughout Africa and Asia also embraced nonviolence.
Posts
0 Comments