View Single Post
Old January 11th, 2010, 08:48 AM
landyaBhai's Avatar
landyaBhai landyaBhai is offline
Proud LLKC member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Here-Now
Posts: 6,423
landyaBhai has a reputation beyond reputelandyaBhai has a reputation beyond reputelandyaBhai has a reputation beyond reputelandyaBhai has a reputation beyond reputelandyaBhai has a reputation beyond reputelandyaBhai has a reputation beyond reputelandyaBhai has a reputation beyond reputelandyaBhai has a reputation beyond reputelandyaBhai has a reputation beyond reputelandyaBhai has a reputation beyond reputelandyaBhai has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The Gandhian Penis

Originally Posted by landyaBhai View Post
So basically it was a straightforward deal ... a bargain ... kill Gandhi and be ready for being maligned in history ... That is what terrorists are doing to the world today ... whoever who disagrees with their ideology they are willing to kill them and be ready to suffer the consequences ...
godse was hardly a terrorist .he had seen was happening to his community at the hands of muslims ,and gandhi's weak-kneed reaction to it.

in bengal hindu women were kidnapped and paraded naked before being raped by their muslim captors ,and his friend karkare had personally seen this in noakhali in what is now bangladesh and showed him photoes of the atrocities.

and what was gandhi's reaction to this ........doses of more ahimsa.....!!.......and going on a fast to prevent hindus from retaliating !!

yet godse did not take the desicion to kill gandhi until gandhi undertook a fast to give pak 55 crores of rupees ,which would be used promptly by pak to buy weapons to killl indian soldiers in kashmir

AshDoc pai please dont conclude on behalf of what other personalities really thought or believed in ... you are saying that for Chandrashekar and Bhagat Singh, popularity was the encouragement to lay down their life?

i am saying nothing like that.........

what i am saying is that ,for godse the situation was much worse and even his family was going to suffer fact ,the whole maharashtrian brahmin community to which he belonged suffered for this ,as they were attacked and killed by the other castes.

Good logic AshDoc pai ... So you are saying that a woman who got raped should be married off to someone (even if that someone is willing to marry her but not be able to be a regular husband) and this is just because the society is cruel and illogical ... technically the practice of Sati has also been justified by the Brhmans in their scriptures ... but only when one is being satieed does one realize that it is all BS ... Also, there were other ways Krishna could have taken care of these ladies in distress ... he could have considered them to be his mother or sister or just friends and may be get them married to whoever they really wanted to ... may be Krishna would have been better off leading a crusade against the same society where these ladies would have been ostracized after rape ... may be he could have stopped the rapes (just as he did for Draupadi) ... Also, you have said it yourself here that it is OK to accept a set of women as your wives if they have no objection ... So then what is wrong with Gandhi sleeping nude with two girls ... Also, if a girl has agreed to be a wife or a friend, would you still rationalize that it is not wrong ... Only a person who cares about the society (which is basically the politics of numbers) will rationalize ... if they cant they will exalt or condemn the person depending upon how the numbers add up to ...
you are forgetting that the women had no one to turn to as their families had been killled by the rakshashas and were alone in the world.

the women themselves asked krishna to marry them.

and in the society of those times krishna could not carry out a social reform movement like today as the people were hide-bound with tradition.

modern times were yet to come....

krishna was not an old man like gandhi ,doing some bullshit experiments like sleeping naked with his own grand -neice just to see if she aroused him or not.

he was an eminently practical person ,who offered practical solutions to problems and did not hesitate to kill and used violence when necessary.

A one person who is a terrorist is a freedom fighter for another and vice-versa ... We Indians always take a short cut solution ... You have said it right, we are not brave ... Godse took an approach which anyone would have taken .. had he tried a non-violent way, I am sure it would have been the most difficult task to do ... but we take the easy way ... and you are saying there was courage in it ... heck the person is ready to die, how do you deal with the society after you are dead ... You cant ... even when he was alive he took the shortest approach acting on the impetus of the society and accepting that the non-violent way would have been the difficult ...

There are three ways of interacting with a person like Gandhi:

(1) Join him
(2) Go your own way
(3) Condemn him

All the three if pursued non-violently are difficult and impossible ... The short cut is to just kill ... But people forget you cannot kill an ideology (however correct or incorrect it is by killing the person or the whole clan) ... The fact that India has been spineless is just because of folks like Godse who took the shortest approach (or folks like Nehru lala who just sat on things and did nothing) ... You cannot transform the society of its prejudices (even if they are coming from Gandhi or Krishna) just by killing Gandhi or Krishna ... infact after someone is killed, he gets famous ...and automatically the words from that person become a religion ... hence as of now, nobody can question Gandhianism ... it is still popular ...

Regarding Krishna, he was a man in his own might ... If raas leela and his other past times were to be read by a close-minded society, it will be outrageous for anyone to accept him as a sane person ... even if Krishna were to do a raas leela today outside your apartment complex, the society will reject him if not pelt stones at him ...

So please dont use the same reasoning to justify one and malign the other ... for all you can do is read about these persons and still not be able to know the person for real ... Godse did not kill Gandhi ... he wanted to kill Gandhianism ... Godse can never have known Gandhi as he is as a person ... Just as you and me cannot know exactly who Godse was in reality ... We just want to commit a person's nature by looking at his acts .... Godse concluded that Gandhi needed to be killed by his acts ... He was not aware of what Gandhi actually wanted ... Gandhi on the contrary might have assumed Godse act as violent ... and people like you and me who are sitting on the ropes are deciding from our little understanding of these two personalities as to who was Great ... Gandhi or Godse?

Plus looking at the state of affairs of the Pakistanis who have been mired in Violence since their inception, as of now, Gandhi seems to be more rational and even-minded ... Godse short cut solutions would have been more detrimental to India ... But you should realize that these things change with situation ...
The Quieter You Become, The More You Can Hear
Reply With Quote