Why is Gandhi not worthy of the title of Mahatma? How terrible is his principle of nonviolence?

Gandhi did have a problem. In fact, his criticism never stopped. One of his critics is his student Nehru.

His views are inherently problematic, and people's criticism of him is not entangled in non-violence and non-cooperation.

Gandhi's view is really problematic: he advocates that India should return to the society of handicraft workshops in the past. Nehru strongly disagreed with this, and Nehru advocated learning from the big industry of the Soviet Union.

Isn't this against the historical trend?

Subsequently, the Indian side criticized Gandhi, mainly focusing on

First: Gandhi's style is not democratic enough. For example, even if a person is excellent, Gandhi will not support him because he disagrees with Gandhi. This happened to Chakravarti Rajagopalachari. At first Gandhi claimed that he was the only successor. Later, due to political differences (Cripps Committee incident), this person was kicked out of the conference. Gandhi's whole style is biased towards dictatorship rather than democracy.

Second: Chauri Chaura incident, which resulted in 19 people being sentenced to death, 1 10 people being sentenced to life imprisonment and 6 people dying in police custody.

However, Gandhi's behavior is very strange. Gandhi soon thought he was the chief culprit in the bloodshed. He felt that he was too hasty in encouraging people to resist and did not fully emphasize the characteristics of non-violence. Later, Gandhi was also arrested and sentenced to six years, but was quickly released at 1924. It is for this reason that the Congress Party stopped the nationwide non-cooperative movement.

Third, India and Pakistan split. Many Indians are still worried about the split between India and Pakistan and feel that they should be strongly unified at that time. This involves a Muslim problem. At that time, the agreement between Muslims and British colonists was that you supported my war and I supported your independence. As a result, Pakistan became independent. However, Gandhi did not vigorously promote national unity, at least not like Lincoln.

Fourth, Gandhi was hypocritical. For example, Gandhi agreed to recruit Indians as frontline soldiers, which in itself runs counter to the principle of non-violence.

Gandhi opposed imperialism, but in South Africa, he said that white people in South Africa should have the advantage. He opposes untouchability, but supports caste system.

Fifth: Gandhi's private life seems to be not as good as the media propaganda, so I won't write some gossip.

Sixth: the death of Mrs Gandhi. Okay ... how can I put it? Gandhi has been obstructing the treatment of his wife. Even in the end, he took out a specific medicine (penicillin) and injected it into his wife. He is against science. He thinks injection is violent.

Well, if you think I'm one-sided, let's look at the historical facts.

1940, the national government sent Dai, the president of the national examination institute, to visit India. Dai met with Gandhi and explained the situation of China people's war of resistance. Who knows that Gandhi made some surprising remarks:

"Anyway, China is not practicing non-violence. Being brave in resisting Japan shows that China has never been willing to be non-violent. It's just self-defense, not a reason from the principle of non-violence. From the standpoint of non-violence, I must say that it is inappropriate for China, with a population of 400 million, to use civilized Japan to deal with it, or to use the same means as the Japanese to resist Japanese aggression. If China people have my belief in non-violence, they don't need the latest means of destruction like the Japanese. China people can tell the Japanese,' Come with your means of destruction, we will give you 200 million people, but we will not give in to the remaining 200 million people.' If China really does this, the Japanese will become slaves of China. "

No, it's curry-flavored "You have a mace, I have a crown".

However, this kind of goods should really be regarded as "heroes" in India. Why are you tired? Because India has castes, high castes have the right to speak. Who doesn't respect saints in order to make the lower caste willing to be cattle and horses in this life?

I advise you to keep your eyes open and lead an honest and clean life, and not to be infected by the mutated Stockholm syndrome.