My beef with Gandhi

[Pekka]

"Besides, Gandhi was not commander of the Indian people. If he'd failed, it would have sucked for him. There were violent revolutionaries as well; Indian freedom fighters were free to follow them as well. They chose to follow Gandhi instead. How is this his fault?"

Well, it can't be all put on his shoulders in the case he would have failed. What can I say? Indian freedom fighters also were sissies.

"Hence the "far more likely" part. Of course, being responsible for the life of every Indian like you seem to believe Gandhi was, isn't it smarter to risk going to jail yourself than having your people slaughtered in order to crush a violent uprising? "

Ok. Far more likely is an opinion. Not a fact. There were other options as well than trying to whip everyone into violent frenzy. And it's not what I'm saying, I'm saying, everyone keep on their toes, act cool, don't do anything stupid here. But if the man comes around, shoot them and hide their bodies. Plus pee on their graves.

"
Why exactly was his non-violent protest different enough for you to conclude that he was courageous while Gandhi wasn't?"

Because he was holding people back from violence. It was like, if this fails, we can still try violence. He was way more powerful in his character. He actually HAD a character.

[LeftHand]

Pekka: You don't make much sense. I did an essay about Gandhi. There was nothing "sissie" in him.

You seem to have issues with Gandhi. I think you are either trolling or seriously out of touch.

[LordShiva]

Meh, I tried. I can't convince you, so I'll go do something else now. I think you're just wrong; since I don't know you well enough to echo Imran's assessment of your character, I'll just assume you aren't familiar enough with Gandhi's teachings and the history of the Indian freedom movement.

[Pekka]

Why don't you explain then your view?

[Pekka]

LordShiva, ok fair enough. But I really am disgusted what Imran tried to do. Character assasination. I don't think that was called for. I'm disappointed. I always make an effort to have issues fighting issues, kind of like Gandhi you know?

[LordShiva]

My view, or LeftHand's? My view is that he was a very brave man who stood up to an empire and an unjust system, and that even though we would have won our freedom anyway, it's better to have won in with (comparatively) little bloodshed.

[LeftHand]

Pekka: My view? My view is that what you are trying to do here is useless. You have your own opinion and you seem to be stuck with it.

I don't know how you gained your opinion but it doesn't seem to matter what the rest of us think. You are not able to change your view.

Gandhi might have been a paedophile but this should not be the key issue. There is no evidence of this but I saw a documentary that tried to accuse him of paedophilia so I understand you make this claim.

He freed a nation without blood. He inspired the whole world with it. The people know non-violence works. Not only did he free India, he also gave a new model for others to work with; non-violence.

[SlowwHand]

Has anyone asked about using beef and Gandhi together?

[Pekka]

LordShiva, I meant LeftHand. But thanks for your response anyway.

I'm not saying Gandhi was the worst fo the worst. I'm trying to portray a view that he was not all that hot.

[LordShiva]

There are certainly reasons to fault Gandhi - his insistence on "self-sufficiency" and a utopian view of some sort of socialist village economy is my biggest gripe with him.

[Pekka]

Let me apologize to everyone who hurt their feelings or felt insulted. This was not my wish. I hope to fight this Gandhi with issues. Not against other people.

[VetLegion]

I'd say 8/10. Pekka got everyone remotely connected with India worked up

Now, about the restraint issue. Who really thinks Gandhi didn't grab some ass?

[VetLegion]

Originally posted by Pekka
Let me apologize to everyone who hurt their feelings or felt insulted. This was not my wish. I hope to fight this Gandhi with issues. Not against other people.

Too late for apologies. You're going to reincarnate as a chiuaua.

[Pekka]

Listen Vet, if you're .. I mean.. If you want to sleep with naked women and all that, to show how you can restrain yourself, that's just another form of sexual pleasure. Just like celibacy can have sexual forms. As in, you get sexually hypersensitive and you would feel cloudy when you get feelings of excitement. You'd get energized, that energy is basically sexy energy man.. that's all there is to it.

To deny it is to play some kinky sex game. It is to deny basic human need and urge.

So I'm saying it was a perverted game he played. It's like shooting heroin and denying you're high. I mean, the fact of the matter is, you're still in the center of sexual tension. You don't need penetration to have sex, or even touch. Only thing you need is sexual tension, it's form of sexual feelings and pleasure.

[VetLegion]

Interesting angle. I'd need to touch at least (to get the juices flowing).

But the whole celibacy thing I always found weird. If you want to prove you're tough, go fight an enemy. Don't torture yourself.