Mahatma Gandhi's Ideals and Philosophies In Today's World?

Question: Mahatma Gandhi's Ideals and Philosophies In Today's World!?

I just finished researching Mahatma Gandhi's life, and his philosophies!.
From what I read, he used his life to serve as a message of nonviolence!.
I was pleasantly surprised to see that he understood that he had feet of clay, and stressed the fact of changing ourselves!.

Martin Luther King Jr!. was a student of Gandhi's and allowed his philosophies help guide his movement!.

So what say you!?!.!.!.Do you think that it would be possible to integrate Gandhi's philosophies in today's world!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

Re: Paul's comment

Gandhi and India believed England to be safe to deal with!. Someone could look into the history of the English people and interpret their dealings as anything but safe!. The safety is not in the human but in Creation!. All Creation is made peaceful "from the beginning"!. It is our misperceptions that distort this and think our happiness and peace is dependent on people who we perceive as non peaceful!. When we love, nothing can touch us because love returns!. When we think we are being caused pain, we are seeing the justice of the universe showing us that we need to be loving, but we only cause pain to ourselves when we try to cause it to others!.

So, how do we integrate it!? We have to see it in our own lives individually!. When you feel safe, unconditionally, you will support peace for all your brothers, not just yourself!. To me, this safety had to have been proven in many areas: nature, finances, relationships, any location I lived, to realize God has made all life safe!. Perhaps, also, I have had to quit huring others and learned the lessons from that to realize the hurting that seemed to come to me came from myself!. I say "seemed" because the pain must have been an illusion because I don't feel it now and only sometimes think I remember itWww@QuestionHome@Com

!.
Not only is it possible, many DO integrate the messages and teachings of Martin Luther King, Gandhi, various philosophers, etc!.

Teachings of such persons as those are messages of "native wisdom"!. !. !. It's natural!. Many have those messages "covered with dust" within!. That natural way of thinking, relating and being is there none the less!.

When "normal" every day people reflect wisdom, awareness, kind, helpful, compassionate, etc!. it's often commented on being such a rarity, or big deal!.
That way of relating is actually normal, natural way of relating, yet so many don't behave that way that it's seen as being "rare", unusual or "not the norm"!.

Those as Gandhi, Martin Luther King, etc!. are normal and natural to me!.

Will be nice one day to more-so hear comments as!. !. !."People are so aware, open minded and kind!. Can you imagine the possibility of people behaving as selfish, close minded, cruel!?
!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

From what I can tell, Gandhi's ideals and philosophies are integrated in today's world to the extent that they are, and since we are really talking about timeless principles, they will never go out of style!. I do not know if Gandhi came up with any new ideas or concepts, but, rather, I think that we're dealing with wisdom that's as old as the idea that love is an extremely powerful concept that's available to all of us!. It takes a strong person to offer nonviolence and love in the face of anger, hate and negativity, and Gandhi's willingness to love was strong enough to change the entire world!. There are lots of other people who are familiar with the teachings of Gandhi and others who know that love is much stronger than hate; in fact, I can't find anything that's more important, powerful or wonderful than love!. Here's hoping that together we can help create a kinder and more compassionate world for all of our brothers and sisters!. Best wishes to you! Www@QuestionHome@Com

I agree with Paul, your first poster!. Gandhi knew England as a civilized people just as Martin Luther King saw the US as a civilized people!.

What is generally overlooked is that Gandhi had to employ nonviolence because he realized the plurality of India and it's people!. And the possible outbreak that might come with waring factions that could divide a nation!. He polarized their diversity into one singular goal!. And to enable them to see a vision of peace while using that same unity and non violent methods for India to become united in its diversity to function as a single state!.

That almost worked however the two religions were at war so it did break apart but yet they remain somewhat free today!.

Can it happen today!? It could but nobody knows where or when!.

Any nation looking for a pattern of this type of warfare could use both Gandhi and King as models and use them depending on the circumstance!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

No Peace !.!.!. actually the Mahatma's morals are really fully above tiniest reproach and todays man lacks the integrity and courage to follow them !.He was unfinchingly righteous and moralistic!. So much that he would encourage people to bear even terrible physical torture with extreme patience and total ahimsa!.It takes a person made of iron to believe and follow such in todays world!. Mahatma Gandhi did that which he preached despite everything and till this date he is abused by his own countrymen but few others would have the love for morality, truth and the courage
So he is called mahatma which means great soul and it takes a great soul to follow all tht philosophy and great souls are rare

Its possible for an equally rigteous person- so its possible at an individual level but not in any other way- i mean not on a bigger scale!.Todays world is far too full of decadence 4 thatWww@QuestionHome@Com

It is sad to say that there are always bad people and bad leaders in the world!. I would love to see "passive non violent resistance" take over the world but sad to say there are still the Kim Jon Ils, Vladimir Putins, Hugo Chaves's and the huge hungry Communist Chinese that have no concept or idea of ever practicing non-violence!. They kill their own citizens if they do not need them!.

Gandhi won because he took on a weakening colonial government and King won because of his purity of soul and an growing revulsion in mainstream America and the government for the haters in our countryWww@QuestionHome@Com

i think it's possible!. if those who truly grasp their meaning can be persuasive enough to excite the interest of those who are not as familiar with them!. if martin luther king was able to accomplish what he did, who is to say what the following person who becomes inspired, in this age of easier and faster access to information, might do!? so, i think it possible!. ask me whether i find it likely!. not in the near future!. i'm optimistic about our ability to surpass ourselves and the limits of our expectations!. look at how long we survived in such hostile environments and look at where we are now! granted, we may be foolish and excessive in our success as a species and this may lead us to be the cause of our own downfall, but our instinct for survival is quite something!. our impulse to over-reach (not just physically) can, unless we tie its hands, take us on a good journey :)
thank you for your question!. Www@QuestionHome@Com

I think when the powers are in eating and swoling world and when all people are in fighting with each other, his philosopies is not applicable!. If any one of us in allover the world become a Muhatma, then Muhatmas' philosophy may be applicable!. We do not still know that every one of us is a power and when all of us being united, then we will become and act like an atomic bomb,Www@QuestionHome@Com

Ghandi was dealing with a "civilized government" England!.!.!.!.to try to apply the same principles to fundamental extremists like radical Islam, or white racists, would be to accept slavery, and domination by a terrible despot!.!.!.think about it!. England was shamed by the relative non-violent response to violence!. The radicals would merely see this as a convenient shortcut!.!.!.!.have they shown any shame for their barbaric acts, heretofore!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

Yes, I think we have to stay focused on all the people that are doing this!. There is so much always that goes on that causes people to think that peace is not happening!. It is only not happening for those that are not focused on it!. You just chose to integrate it now & it is done that is it!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

This principle only works if you assume the opposition has some sort of humanity in them, a consciences that would trouble them!.
Terrorists today don't have this, they kill themselves so they don't live to see the consequences or to regret their acts, and rethink things!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Definitely, and they are being integrated slowly but surely!. The end of Apartheid and Wars , the election of Obama, the defeat of Bush's Wars!. We will eventually reach Gandhi's dreamWww@QuestionHome@Com

I will say yes but it is going to take a huge shift in consciousness for most people from there old closed, enslaving and dogmatic beliefs to the open, freedom giving and enlightening presence of their own Divinity!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Yes his ideals suit modern world!.
examples non-violence, brahmachariya, No meat, no alcoholWww@QuestionHome@Com

It depends who employed them!. Gandhi himself never professed pacifism as an end unto itself!. He stated that it was simply the most effective way of achieving his (i!.e!. India's) political goals (i!.e!. independence from Britain)!. According to Gandhi himself, were violence more effective, he would have advocated rioting and terrorism!.

It is sheer nonsense to suppose that a nation like the USA ought to practice nonviolence against Islamic extremism!. I don't think that bombing Muslim countries indiscriminately will solve any problems -- I'm inclined to think that radically altering our foreign policy would probably have a greater effect on limiting terrorist activity!. But practicing nonviolence against terrorist activity is simply misunderstanding the role of nonviolence!.

It does seem plausible to suppose that something like nonviolent protest would work for the Palestinians in their fight for nationhood!.

I don't think that pacifism as a tool for affecting social change will ever go "out of fashion" or become obsolete!. But the conditions wherein such a strategy would be effective have to be right if it is to have any relevance or chance of success!.

Generally, it works for oppressed populations, demanding some sort of political recognition, freedoms, or rights from a more powerful political entity (e!.g!. African Americans in the USA, the Indians under British colonial rule)!. It does not generally work when an already powerful entity practices nonviolence (e!.g!. If the USA practiced nonviolence against the Soviet Union, then it would have failed) against another powerful entity, or when a more powerful entity wants something from an oppressed group!.

Which is not to say that I think powerful entities should practice violence!. The truth is that when some group already possesses great power (it needn't be military power -- it could just be economic power), they can do what they like, and they have no need to protest or demand rights!. They are the ones making the rules, so it is not sensible for (for example) the American government to adopt Gandhi's philosophy as their foreign policy!.

The question is which groups are oppressed in today's world -- and are the one's who have power to grant them greater rights, freedoms, or recognition likely to be swayed by nonviolent protest!. I think that might apply to (as I said before) Palestinians, as well as homosexuals, and maybe Basque separatists!. It would not apply to Chechnyans or Georgians!.Www@QuestionHome@Com