Do we respect them?

[Deimos]

do you guys respect people like Ghandhi, Bhutto, Mother Theressa, Nehru and other humanists? yeah, might seem like a stupid qustion but on the other hand I've heard people complain about those people being ''pussies'', and trying to handle the things with words and not the act.

i mostly respect Ghandhi and admire him for his will and struggle against what he believed was the best.

anyone who dismisses the achievements of historical icons because they are "pussies" isnt worth arguing with.

i respect people of that calibre for their achievments and views... but i also think violence is sometimes a necessary evil.

[Jae]

For arguments sake I'll say,

Ghandi didn't accomplish jack shit

[Syetactic]

When Ghandi didn't fight back and so many of his people died... thats when I didn't like him.

[Deimos]

When Ghandi didn't fight back and so many of his people died... thats when I didn't like him.

when was that, the partition of indiawith all the muslims and sikhs?

[Fuxey]

anyone who dismisses the achievements of historical icons because they are "pussies" isnt worth arguing with.

i respect people of that calibre for their achievments and views... but i also think violence is sometimes a necessary evil.[/

yep... maybe more of an ''evil circle''.

When Ghandi didn't fight back and so many of his people died... thats when I didn't like him.

if that actualy happend ( i think you are refering to the split between India and ****stan, but nvm) then let me tell you that, that was Ghandi's whole point. it wasnt his intentions to kill. if he would fight he would have taken India in no time. he had the backup of the Indians, and thats also why the Indians didnt fight- they believed in him, and with good reasons, we can say today.

[Vesper]

yep... maybe more of an ''evil circle''.

An evil circle jerk?

[Deimos]

yep... maybe more of an ''evil circle''.

well you cant protest peacefully in a society where the means to do that dont exist.

i mean look what happened in 1905 on bloody sunday.

[Marineking]

I haven't done a whole lot of research on these guys, so I can't say for certain whether I like or dislike them specifically. But I will say that, be it values, beliefs, treasures or people you care about, if something is worth fighting for, then I think it's wrong to not fight for it. Although, I'll admit that there are situations when fighting is the least effective action. You just have to look at it from every angle, with reason.

[Ronin]

well you cant protest peacefully in a society where the means to do that dont exist.

i mean look what happened in 1905 on bloody sunday.

That is such a very delicate and saddening issue, you talk about.

There is only a slim difference between nonviolent and pacefull protest. I think those 2 words describe it pretty well. I do rather believe, that in this conflict, there was no possibility of nonvielent resistance, because it needs strict and more importantly central organisation to establish trust.
If that trust is not established, nonviolent resistance cant be sucessfully carried out.

That such a situation arrises, where one side manages, to get consensual to the point, where the opposing rulers are forced to believe in their consens, they cant avoid giving in to them.

As you see, the opposing side was right, to believe that this wont be the case.

@Marineking: It is always wrong to fight. How do you value your own freedom by harming another person with force?
What you talk about is only selfishness that you mistake for values and believes.

I believe Gandhies argumentation to be very powerfull and far, far ahead of even our times.