Discover & Read Best Stories about british comedians. Also Read about english comedians, an era of darkness the british empire in india, black comedians, british council library, best stand up comedians, british optics, british movies, american comedians, difference between american and british english, difference between american english and british english, british poets, best british movies, popular comedians, famous comedians.
Why Gandhiji is loved so much by West but not so much by Indians?
Why West love him:-
West love Gandhi ji because they only read his theory in text book or in other books not experienced it with their lives unlike Indians so they have no idea about the reality behind his idealistic theory in a imperfect not really idealistic world
They love it because his ideals later turned into peaceful revolution in America and South Africa
They love it because he was saying something unique, non violent and peaceful and impressive in the times of World War and when everyone was out to kill their competitors
British love him because he let them suck India dry for longer time and they encouraged him to carry on with his merry ways as that was beneficial to them, so no wonder they love him
I have huge respect for Gandhi ji as an Indian
But here's my problem with him-
At that point of time, many Indians got racist attack by the Caucasian people, so it's not like when Gandhi ji was pushed out of a train in South Africa was anything new or exceptional
Gandhi ji was the single person responsible for stereo typing Indian people. I mean you have got to be kidding me!! Gandhi ji was a very superficial person in a very opposite sense. Let me explain- what do we understand from word superficial - it generally used to describe the Hollywood type of people who are all about what is outside and so so and glamour etc etc. Well in Gandhi ji's case it's extreme opposite, he actually promoted India and indian as certain type in a very de glamouised way . As a result, a new trend was born throughout India which is why Indian still feel insecured about various things in life. Not really able to compete with the world the way they were supposed to, basically the problem self confidence and cagy type
We never were in through out our history non violent people. I mean look at war and traditions of various battle techniques in our history. So how come we suddenly become a non violent country in Gandhi ji's India. It is absolutely rubbish. I also don't agree with his non violent approach towards life as I believe it is very superficial, simplistic and one dimensional approach towards a very complicated multi dimensional world. There's a reason why human characteristic like violence exist in the first place. Now we are not Gods and we don't know what is exactly needed when or what is relevance of a particular thing in life, so by taking away a significant characteristics of human beings and expecting things to be good and normal and workable is not only unrealistic but in certain ways utter stupidity. Sorry for using this strong word, but I believe it is needed. His most famous speech about non violence is utter bullshit- “Eye for eye will make the whole world go blind”. I mean really!!!!!? Did Gandhi ji think the whole world was simple and one dimensional? People can't handle their emotions. I think Gandhi ji underestimate people's intelligence, resolve, and capabilities. It's true that violence doesn't solve problems but that doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't have any relevance in real life. Anybody who thinks like this is fooling himself.
Actually the reason why Gandhi ji was promoting bullshit like that because he had experience in western world. World War was going on that time, so he knew what exactly to say in that point of time to get all the necessary attention on him which will further clear his easy access into Indian politics as famous leader. As a result there was a little revolution in America on non violence, every one knows the Nelson Mandela case in South Africa. This is a chain reaction which Gandhi ji saw happening before it's actually happened. So Gandhi ji was never the honest the people of India would like to think. He obviously had the tricks of mischievous politician. He is actually a fake person in that way. His superficiality about India in de glamouised manner shows exactly that.
Another example is his phobia with technology, yet he never had any problems with any of that when he was in foreign countries. Infact he used telephone quite frequently. Hypocrisy anyone? Another fakeness exposed
He was a horrible father to his children yet he is the father of our country. Wow!!!
Gandhi ji was a different type of attention seeker than the usual type one get to see in real world. He was the politician and he knew that Shubhas Chandra Bose could become more popular or bigger leader than him so he made sure that Bose would leave Congress and create a new party named Forward Block. Basically a clever way to eliminate one's competition.
And then Nehru!!!!! Okay I have to share my personal experience here, I had a grandfather who died when I was little kid. Now my grandfather had the good fortune of seeing Gandhi ji when my grandfather was very young. He told me that nobody in India even heard of Nehru, everyone thought either Bose or someone like him would become the first prime minister of India as Gandhi ji made it clear that he won't be. So when Nehru became first prime minister of India, everyone was dumbfounded. But that time people were so poor and had plenty of problems of their own and that's why they could not afford to think about anything else as result, it was a very easy access for Nehru. It was after his accession into prime ministerial position, every one knew that he was the son Motilal Nehru!!! Ha, ha. Politics is a funny business.
Hitler was the aly of Bose , and enemy of British as a result he decided to help Bose to fight against British by sending a ship full of weapons to Azad Hind Fauj which definately would have troubled British in a very big way, after that British would have left India. But Gandhi ji betrayed not only Bose but entire people of India by revealing this secret to the British. Can you imagine? In other occasions, such act would make a person 'Mirjafar'. As I said before politics is a funny business :D
By the way Gandhi ji and Congress didn’t give us freedom from British. It's absolutely myth. Freedom struggle was a long hard battle where so many freedom fighters gave their lives from all over India. Most of them has been lost from history pages. Gandhi ji actually delay the process as I mentioned it before. Even when British decided to leave India, it was because of multiple reasons not because of Gandhi ji or Congress
British left because Azad Hind Fauj was creating too many problems for them to be here in India
British left because there were plenty of unheard freedom fighters from all over India gave their lives and Gandhi ji was part of this process not the mover and shaker of freedom movement. British didn't left India because of Gandhi ji infact they were encouraging him to be more non violent so that they can exploit more. Gandhi ji knew relevance of this support from British. Politics is a funny business :D
British left because they were dying from all over the world because of World War and they were becoming home sick
British left because there was economic clash back in England because of long hard battle in World War
Most Indians recognise 26 January as Republic Day, but not many are aware that on 26 January 1930, exactly 20 years before India became a republic, the Indian National Congress in an electrifying resolution declared Purna Swaraj — complete freedom from the British Raj. From then on, it was a question of when — not if —India would become free.
By 1920 Indian nationalist leaders were convinced that contrary to what the British government had promised during World War 1, few, if any, of their demands would be met. The Jallianwala Bagh massacre, the disturbances in Punjab and the Rowlatt Act (which indefinitely extended ‘emergency measures’ enacted by the government during the war) added to the sense of gloom. The British failure to heed the grievances of the leaders of the Khilafat movement over the disintegration of the Turkish Empire alienated a large section of Indian Muslims. All this culminated in the non-cooperation movement that was launched on 1 August 1920. The Khilafat movement, which Mahatma Gandhi endorsed, ran parallel to the non-cooperation movement.
‘Non-cooperation’ was a call to Indians to surrender all titles and government posts, boycott functions of the British government and shun foreign articles. It also stressed on developing small scale industries, using swadeshi articles and maintaining communal harmony.
Gandhi called off the non-cooperation movement after a mob in Chauri Chaura set a police station on fire, killing 22 people. As the first mass movement of its kind in India, it led to tangible gains. In their book India’s Struggle for Independence Bipan Chandra and other historians write: “After non-cooperation, the charge of representing a ‘microscopic minority,’ made by the Viceroy, Dufferin, in 1888, could never again be hurled at the Indian National Congress. Its reach among many sections of Indian peasants, workers, artisans, shopkeepers, traders, professionals, white-collar employees, had been demonstrated…The capacity of the ‘poor dumb millions’ of India to take part in modern nationalist politics was also demonstrated.”
Gandhi was arrested in March 1922. He was released from jail in February 1924 on health grounds. Meanwhile, there was a split in the Congress ranks, with a section calling themselves ‘Swarajists’ in favour of working with the councils instead of boycotting them. The most important Swarajists were C.R. Das and Motilal Nehru. Gandhi intervened between the two sides and brought about a rapprochement, agreeing that the Swarajist Party would work in the legislatures on behalf of the Congress.
Motilal Nehru called for the framing of a new Constitution to transfer real power to India in the first session of the central legislative assembly. The demand was passed. There were other moral victories for the Swarajists. The government faced severe criticism for its repression of dissent. C.R. Das said: “Repression is a process in the consolidating of arbitrary power — and I condemn the violence of the government for repression is the most violent form of violence…”
However, as the 1920s progressed, the nationalist movement seemed a little confused and lacking in coherence. Ironically, it was the British who provided a spark which re-ignited a nationwide struggle. This was the infamous Simon Commission, which was set up ostensibly to discuss further reforms for India, but without a single Indian on board. The backlash was immediate. In January 1928 Gandhi wrote in Young India: “The act of appointment (of the Simon Commission) needs for an answer, not speeches, however heroic they may be, not declarations, however brave they may be, but corresponding action…”
As soon as the Commission arrived in Bombay on 3 February 1928, it was met by protestors carrying black flags. Protests spread to major Indian cities, with the Congress at the forefront of the opposition. In one such protest in Lahore, the senior Congress leader Lala Lajpat Rai was severely injured in a brutal police lathi-charge and
What can be even better name for India since 'India' is a racist name in a world where native Americans are called 'Red Indians'? Is there any better solutions for India's new name which could explain India better without going away too much from the name 'India' as it sounds nice?
I like the name ‘India’ although I understand the sentiments behind the question.
Probably some Iranian in the past started to call us 'Hindu' from Indus valley civilization where original name was 'Sindhu' or 'Sindh'. They were mispronouncing the name 'Sindhu' to 'Hindu'. That name 'Hindu' got stuck from that time.
Now with British, they took it to another level, they were mispronouncing it to 'Indu' or 'Ind' or 'Indi' from 'Hindu' or 'Hind'. From that the name 'India' was invented by the British.
Now India is a sweet name. All the people in India like this name. But the problem is with it's racist history. For example Columbus, when he first discovered America, he thought he mistakenly came to India as he saw the similarity between native Americans and brown Indians. He thought these people are probably redish skintone Indian people or popularly called 'Red Neck'.
Now we all know that the name ‘Red Indian' is highly racist name in America, it is probably as notoriously racist as calling African people 'Nigga' or 'Nigro' or 'Nigre'.
That's why some people in West or more specifically in America has started to call native Americans as Indians to avoid any such issues.
This creates a lot of unnecessary stupid insulting issue. For example we all know American people are notoriously ignorant about things. As a result they often think that there's actually two Indian group in this world, one of them is in America and other one is in Asia. Some even go further than this and ask stupidly how come Indians exist in Asia?
Can you imagine how insulting it is to Indian people when at one point of time in history India aka ‘Bharatbarsha’ was arguably the richest country in the world or very close to it.
The whole Indian civilization has therefore become joke or absolutely nothing to some people due to some historical racist stupidity.
The thing is Indians don't necessarily care about such stupidity of Americans but they don't necessarily like to hear about this from various ways either. It's not really a very nice thing end of the days.
So therefore the issue such as the above mentioned question arises.
India is basically the world's smallest continents. We have more language than rest of the world, as many as culture and even more customs and food habits and many skintones.
All Indian people are not necessarily from Indus valley civilization. 50% or more or slightly less are from Dravidian civilization which tend to live in Southern India. Now because of history behind the name, when we call our country India, it doesn't necessarily represent the people from Southern India.
But what are the options- we can go back to ‘Bharatbarsha’ or in short 'Bharat' in that case southern Indians may say that is Northern Indian name which could create another controversy which we don't want.
We could name our country ‘Hind’ or 'Hindustan' but then other religious people will think that we are trying to destroy their religion which will create another controversy which we don't want.
Also the name 'INDIA' has such a sweet tune to it and it has also got into our Indian blood and brain.
So what can be the solution then?????
Well, in my opinion this should be the perfect solution-
Indus valley civilization+ Dravidian civilization = Indria (Indrian).
Yeah, just adding one 'R' in a perfect position and everything automatically put into place nicely and also the ‘India’ or ‘Indian’ tune is same with 'Indria' or 'Indrian' name.
It is also very Indian name. ‘India’ was completely British name. But 'Indria' sits nicely between an Indian name and a British name.
So what do you think?
You can choose disagree with me.
But end of the day, it is just a creative thought.
Human beings are born to be free. Freedom is a perception to every single person. It is a concept to every one. Freedom is ability, it is a feeling. Freedom may be physical, mental or social. We lead everyday life with some basic question in our mind. At least once these questions have crossed every person's life i.e “Who we are?”, “What are we made of?”, “Are we really Free?”. Perhaps thousands of years have passed we are still searching for the answer.
Who are we?
Who we are? What makes us? That is the question of millennium. The simple answer is 'we are human being'. We have evolved from cro magnon through biological evolution. But are just human , just another species!? In my opinion we are more than just another species,we are unique. Everyone of us has different physical structure, different behaviour,different perceptions, different feelings, various cultural background and appearance. Nature has made us what we are today. In us each egg and sperm contains 23 chromosomes and when sperm penetrates an egg 23 chromosomes pairs with another 23 to produce 46 chromosmes. Each chromosomes carries genes,segment of DNA. DNA synthesizes protein, that is what makes us.
What are we made of?
From the dawn of the time, we have questioned ourselves. 'who are we?', 'what are we made of?'. I think these questions do not have any definitive answer. It is the matter of individual's perceptions of their life. In my opinion everybody is made of the belief of their own. I was brought up into a Hindu family. No one is born with their own belief. Beliefs are fed to people with time. In our world everything was supposed to be the same, but due to different religion, beliefs, culture that has not been possible. As I was growing up I was raised Hindu. But it was not my belief, it was fed to me. We should not let anyone else to take decision in our life, we must take the bull by the horns. Life is what we make of it.
Human beings have the ability to do whatever they wist to do. We have the power of our own destiny. We have resources, ability, and potential . So we must make our own belief. Only the belief will make us what we really are.
Are we really free?
As human beings, we really like the idea of 'freedom', being 'free'. But what is freedom? The answer has various form and means. Freedom is an idea, practice. Freedom is the act of free mind. Freedom is a bird flying in the sky without the fear of being shot down . Freedom is the ability to decide the course of my daily schedule and overall life course. Lastly freedom is having what is rightfully yours.
Now the question, are we really free, in my view in most of the forms we are not really free. We are bound by some rules set by others irrespective good or bad. As we are indian citizen, if you don't take our newly formed laws and rules into account, most of our acts are inspired by British acts. British ruled our country for more than 200 years in a way that they only trained us , they did not educate us. So how could we have our own view. Everything are inspired by them. Here 'inspired' is mostly in 'negative' way. Everything they had done in our country was for their own good. Article 10 of our constitution provide us freedom. But i don't take it into account. I am not talking about individual's freedom, I am talking about freedom on a whole. For that kind of freedom our life will be worth living. Till one single person is oppressed , one single community is repressed, we are not free, the genuine meaning of freedom is farce. We can't enjoy our freedom till someone is deprived of it.
Freedom is our birth right. Human have born with freedom. But according to our constitution everybody has the right to be free, but we don't live into the short boundary of constitution, do we? We live in our real world. Being free is not easy, but it is not difficult also, we have to achieve it in long run.
The Cobra effect-
When a solution to a problem makes the problem even worse, it is known as cobra effect.
This term is commonly used in politics and economics and was originated in British India
Story behind it -
The British government was very concerned about the growing numbers of cobras in Delhi.
They decided to pay money for every cobra that any person brings to them.
Initially the program was very successful.
But sooner, some people started breeding cobras for additional income
Soon, the government became aware about the tricks people were playing.
The program was ended and cobra breeders were left with surplus cobras, which were of no use now.
As a result, the solution of the problem made problem even worse!