Homestead mailing list

[paxamicus AT earthlink.net]

Well. I guess I'd be hard pressed to point out someone a lot more  
pacifist than Ghandi. : )   I didn't say he was a perfect pacifist,  
but as a case study in someone who made a pretty full evolution, from  
soldier to statesman, he's pretty much right up Gene's alley in terms  
of the discussion.

Besides, I don't think it was his acts that caused the real issue. If  
the Brits hadn't been there, a perfectly respectable Indian sitting  
crosslegged on the Ganges was hardly going to start a war. Maybe if  
he'd marched into Parliament and sutteed himself it'd have been a  
problem for the housekeeping staff but that's about it.




On Mar 8, 2008, at 6:40 PM, Lynda wrote:

> I have a real problem believing that Ghandi was a true, dyed in the  
> wool
> pacifist.  When you stir things that you know will result in death,  
> then I
> think you've crosed the line from pacifist to simply a political  
> activist.
> Just because he didn't carry a gun and fight a war and had a belief in
> *supposedly* peaceful demonstrations didn't make him a truly peaceful
> person.  He knew that his acts would result in violence.  I think he
> suffered more from martyr syndrome more than having a true belief in
> pacifism.
>
> Lynda
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <paxamicus AT earthlink.net>