Indian Army conducts surgical strikes in POK and the nation rejoices.
Whatever our age might be, we all know Gandhi Ji as our Father of the Nation, because of whom we got our Independence from the British Rule. A lot of us might disagree with it, whereas for some, it’s a fact like the leaves are green.
But isn't it time we asked ourselves that do we actually agree with his philosophy of non-violence?
So let's start by knowing about his philosophy. I've not done a thesis on it, but what I've gathered over the years through textbooks and hearing about it, is that it forbids every type of violence, even for self defense. This, we gather by the famous dialogue: "If someone slaps you on one side of your face, turn the other one to him."
So, do we agree with it? And if not, why do we still think of him as our Father?
Whether we agree or not can be judged by our reactions when we heard of the surgical strikes. If you felt proud and vindicated that it was just a retaliation for our martyred soldiers in Uri, then you are really not a Gandhian follower. Conversely, if you condemn the action India took, well then, you are a Gandhian.
So we are standing at a crossroads, where we need to ponder over the following questions. That if we don't believe in the philosophy and ideology of 'Mahatama' Gandhi, do we still need him to be our Father of the Nation? Do we still need to celebrate his birthday as a national holiday? Should we follow someone who advocated non-violence and not putting up fight, lest it be potentially violent, even in the face of a threat to our life or our nation?
Having said that I do think that non-violence should be followed to a large extent but even our law clearly states that everyone has the right to self defense when we fear for our lives.
Of course, Gandhi had opinions other than this, but he is world renowned for 'Ahimsa'. But I believe that even his ardent followers would react differently if their own child or parent is threatened.
Gandhigiri in daily life..
Made famous by the movie 'Lago Raho Munna Bhai' the word Gandhigiri has become a synonym with a non-violent protest. It did garner some results and was widely applauded all over the world as a re-generated philosophy, which could be practiced to solve world problems. But, except for a few isolated incidents, it failed to live up to its initial furore. And, do we think that Gandhigiri can work with fanatic terrorists and hardened criminals?
So when surely it will not work with them and hardly with others, do we need this thought process? Is it something that can be remotely practical or just a political diplomacy?
Again, I'm not advocating violence, only advocating against non-violence for self defense.
