Should have let this run another 45 seconds or so. I love when he gets the audience to stand in solidarity against the government, then starts singing "God Save the King", forcing the government officials to stand also.
I am not a fan of everything Gandhi Ji did. I also under no condition will deny that he contributed massively on how the Society must rebuild itself and a violent beginning would have been the end of Bharat as we know it. His contribution is the way to build the society with lawful means. That share of credit goes to him.
Some commenters seem to be unaware that all Indians were British subjects under the rule of the empire. That does not make them agents, particularly not Gandhi when he is advocating the disobedience of those British laws he finds unjust.
I will NEVER go into law as I have complete disrespect for everything law-related in the United States. My record MUST be cleared, or I will never work again because I ONLY work in education, post-secondary education, a handful of non-profit office positions, or university libraries -- ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE EVER! Does someone need to translate this for you?
His actions served the britishers more than us indian hence I call him a British agent .His so called ‘non violence’ crippled contemporary revolution and he always became a barrier in front of real freedom fighters like Bhagat singh and Netaji Subhas Bose. British always seemed to love him and tend to give everything gandhi wanted (i.e fame, popularity , ‘mahatma’ status through media, sponsored his ashrams monetarily through then Indian industrialists) The problem is that Gandhi is portrayed as a epitome of masiah of the indian society. He was just a member of the congress party who so he could get fame and recognition that's the way it is
India seems to be doing so much better since Britain abandoned rule. They have a thriving economy, super healthy society, clean streets, top notch medical care, and they are a very hygienic people ……
@@rntablette9388 Why blame Gandhi for that when he opposed the idea of partition with all his mind, body and soul. Sadly, his views of one united India were ignored by his Congress colleagues including Nehru and Gandhi, who too very reluctantly were getting old and wanted to just get on with it.
@@t.b.adenwalla it wasn't a 1 or 2 people decision like media potrays it , both British and Indians voted for it, avoiding a civil war was a major reason
@@michas891 Very very unlikely. As you must have seen in the movie of the gathering in the Town Hall, the vast majority of Indians there were uneducated labourers who were brought from India to perform farming and menial tasks. Hence, one or more Indian languages like Hindi (most likely) or Gujarati would have been used by him to communicate to the masses. Gandhiji could converse in English with educated Indians and of course the Europeans there, no doubt.
@@t.b.adenwalla Interesting what was the exact ethnic mix of Indian labourers in South Africa and what was the best comprehensible language for their gatherings. Hindi? Gujarati? Marathi? Bengali? Or English? :)
That’s a common misconception. Gandhi opposed untouchability and worked to uplift marginalized groups, but he did support the varna system as a division of labor-not the rigid caste system as practiced. His views were complex and often criticized, especially by Ambedkar, but he fought tirelessly against caste-based discrimination.
@ Opposed it? From what I understand, he fought against the idea of untouchability in a very superficial manner meaning the performative end of the caste system aka keeping the structure in place but not the behaviour… the caste system seems to operate on entitlement and ancestral occupation - a few privileged while the majority were and are kept low.
Shame for India as Indians like you have failed to understand Gandhi. Never seen someone from South Africa do the same for Mandela or US for Washington. It happens only in India.
Should have let this run another 45 seconds or so. I love when he gets the audience to stand in solidarity against the government, then starts singing "God Save the King", forcing the government officials to stand also.
But they cannot take away our self respect, if we do not give it to them.
I am not a fan of everything Gandhi Ji did. I also under no condition will deny that he contributed massively on how the Society must rebuild itself and a violent beginning would have been the end of Bharat as we know it.
His contribution is the way to build the society with lawful means. That share of credit goes to him.
Some commenters seem to be unaware that all Indians were British subjects under the rule of the empire. That does not make them agents, particularly not Gandhi when he is advocating the disobedience of those British laws he finds unjust.
Protest against General Smits of South Africa!
Gandhi was not human being but saint God.
I will NEVER go into law as I have complete disrespect for everything law-related in the United States. My record MUST be cleared, or I will never work again because I ONLY work in education, post-secondary education, a handful of non-profit office positions, or university libraries -- ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE EVER! Does someone need to translate this for you?
His actions served the britishers more than us indian hence I call him a British agent .His so called ‘non violence’ crippled contemporary revolution and he always became a barrier in front of real freedom fighters like Bhagat singh and Netaji Subhas Bose. British always seemed to love him and tend to give everything gandhi wanted (i.e fame, popularity , ‘mahatma’ status through media, sponsored his ashrams monetarily through then Indian industrialists) The problem is that Gandhi is portrayed as a epitome of masiah of the indian society. He was just a member of the congress party who so he could get fame and recognition that's the way it is
Today we indians should not surrender our self respect to the tyrannical though elected government... Don't speak ill of Gandhiji it is a sin to do so
India seems to be doing so much better since Britain abandoned rule. They have a thriving economy, super healthy society, clean streets, top notch medical care, and they are a very hygienic people ……
and millions of deaths at the partition of India-Pakistan
@@rntablette9388 Why blame Gandhi for that when he opposed the idea of partition with all his mind, body and soul. Sadly, his views of one united India were ignored by his Congress colleagues including Nehru and Gandhi, who too very reluctantly were getting old and wanted to just get on with it.
Partition was done to stop Indians from fighting after the British leave, but we did it anyway.
@@Jar4495 Possibly. Many reckon it was made by demands of Jinnah.
@@t.b.adenwalla it wasn't a 1 or 2 people decision like media potrays it , both British and Indians voted for it, avoiding a civil war was a major reason
Why gandhi is speaking in English
This is Attenborough's movie Gandhi. Made in English. Also dubbed in Hindi
@@t.b.adenwalla Gandhi qualified as English barrister and may have used English while in South Africa
@@michas891 Very very unlikely. As you must have seen in the movie of the gathering in the Town Hall, the vast majority of Indians there were uneducated labourers who were brought from India to perform farming and menial tasks. Hence, one or more Indian languages like Hindi (most likely) or Gujarati would have been used by him to communicate to the masses.
Gandhiji could converse in English with educated Indians and of course the Europeans there, no doubt.
@@t.b.adenwalla Interesting what was the exact ethnic mix of Indian labourers in South Africa and what was the best comprehensible language for their gatherings. Hindi? Gujarati? Marathi? Bengali? Or English? :)
Fascinating that so many people continue to ignore that Gandhi approved of the caste system, a system which kept people segregated…
That’s a common misconception. Gandhi opposed untouchability and worked to uplift marginalized groups, but he did support the varna system as a division of labor-not the rigid caste system as practiced. His views were complex and often criticized, especially by Ambedkar, but he fought tirelessly against caste-based discrimination.
@ Opposed it? From what I understand, he fought against the idea of untouchability in a very superficial manner meaning the performative end of the caste system aka keeping the structure in place but not the behaviour… the caste system seems to operate on entitlement and ancestral occupation - a few privileged while the majority were and are kept low.
Now look at India. Lol.
For over years we have over glorified gandhi he was a british agent and India would have been in a much better place without him.
Shame for India as Indians like you have failed to understand Gandhi. Never seen someone from South Africa do the same for Mandela or US for Washington. It happens only in India.
Ignoramus
Moron.
Did a pony kick you in the head Boris?
Typical RSS member reply. Always choosing the wrong side.