Gandhi and Change by Alberto - Friday, 10 August 2012, 08:55 PM

I would like you to share your views on this topic. What did you learn from the readings and Tom Weber's seminar about Gandhi and change?

Really engaging seminar and while I left feeling like my head was going to explode - in a good way, as it's given us plenty to think about. What stood out was when Tom spoke about reconceptualising the world. His example of why should a doctor get paid more than a kindergarten teacher?? Arguably there are more skills involved involved in being a kindergarten teacher, such as empathy, nurturing the young. What are the values we hold dear as a society?? Is it only money, career, education (where and how long you study for). Others would say providing for their family, keeping them safe. It seems to me many people are also concerned with where you come from, what you do for a living, where you live, all ties into notions of status, class and wealth. It might seem unrealisitc and almost impossible to conceieve another way. But things weren't always like this. For instance my grandparents only bought their house when they could afford it and still live there. Many of my friends have followed the conventional path of borrowing more than they should, to pay for one or several investment propertys, because that's what you do. I've read a bit about debt.. the fact that housing prices are 4 times what they were 2 decades ago. And many may think this is just a natural progression, that their house has shot up in value, never questioning it. The amount of money in circulation, as many more people are borrowing means the housing market has beome a form of asset speculation in itself. I understand poeple wanting to own their own home and not rent but this system is not working for the people, people work for it, (Toms reference to machines springs to mind). I can't help feeling like this is maddness and consumerism and debt has become a form of modern slavery. Do others feel like this?? I realise that where I am at, might not be where others are. My version of the truth could be different and coercing someone to believe it will not have very long lasting effects. It's arguable there are not many alternatives to living in a modern city, than the lives we lead. Gandhi said, 'man (or woman!)' become what he believes himself to be...if i have the belief I can do it, I shall surely aquire the capacity even if i did not have it at the beginning'. So if we start to believe another world is possible, surely our ability to re-conceptualise and re-create it together will be greater. (had to end on a good note! )

I also found the seminar really interesting. I'm a big Gandhi fan so I easily could have sat and listened to Tom talk about him for another 3 hours. Haha.

Don't worry Becca, you're not the only one who feels that way about the world. At times it can feel quite overwhelming, I know, but at least in this class we're surrounded by like minded people so the possibility for change doesn't seem so unattainable.

What I found interesting was Gandhi's concept of Satyagraha and the different principles that form the basis for this approach to conflict resolution. One such principle that stood out to me was the need to always trust your opponent despite any wrongdoings they may have committed against you in the past. I think it would take incredible strength for someone to do this sincerely and I admire Gandhi for his more positive view of humanity. But I know that if I were in a conflict situation similar to the ones he experienced I would certainly struggle to do so. Nevertheless, I wish this form of conflict resolution was more widespread. Then perhaps there would be less violence in the world, everyone could have a voice and our efforts could be refocused on solving more important issues.

Hi! I found the last week class very interesting, also Tom's wide knowledge about Gandhi is really inspiring. I especially liked Gandhiji's concept of ashram, where constructive work was introduced into community, sharing, making all people to participate in labour, including the ones from higher cast and the untouchable as well. He managed to unify people whose strong traditions does not let to change their criteria of living. However Gandhi managed to make all people to work together, including himself, erasing borders between the socials classes within hindu and islamic communities.

Catherine, good point on the concept of "truth" perceived by Gandhi. I thought that nowadays some of developing methods (like participatory rural appraisal) took some tools from Gandhi as they also apply Truth as a fundamental element in order to achieve effective research. Participatory method is based on building truth as in consequence only the truth can bring true responses and can create sincere relationship between researcher and the local people.

I also agree with Becca that nowadays people live over their possibilities. However I think that this way of living has its "expiring date", some of the countries like Islandia, Spain, Italy or Greece are already good examples of what can happen when we take credits in a bank in order to buy an expensive car, house or simply to go on holidays to Mexico instead of going to some place within their country, encouraging local tourism.

It was a really interesting seminar and the way Tom inspired the audience shows his contiguity to Gandhi and his philosophy.

My concerns of the Gandhian philosophy are on the contemporary practice of Swaraj and Non-violence strategies. India, as the largest democracy in the world deserves much recognition and respect in the world for Gandhi’s navel political and economic philosophy. She is about to commemorate her Independence Day just in couple of days (15th of August) and Mahathma Gandhi will be one of the heroes commemorated on the top.

India has overwhelmingly benefitted from the Gandhian philosophy when they fought against the British for independence. But has they benefitted from the Economic aspects of his philosophy? When the current Indian way of politics and economic order is taken into consideration, there is a big question mark as to whether India is still adhering to Gandhi for several reasons.

1. No one can believe that India has any faith on Gandhi’s concept of “Non-violence”. It maintains the world’s fourth largest military power with an annual budget allocation of $36,030 million. In terms of different military categories, India has the second largest Army, fourth largest Air Force, and Seventh largest Navy. Who believes military power is for ‘non-violence’ (source: http://www.globalfirepower.com)

2. India highly focuses on a large scale industry and agriculture based economy something Gandhi did not promote. Gandhi, on the contrary, promoted Swaraj living in an Ashram promoting self sufficiency which uplifts the rural poor. Statistics show that India currently has a rural population of almost 70%. India’s national poverty headcount ratio (PHR) is 29.8% while rural PHR is 33.8% (Population Census of India 2011). Large scale industrial orientation normally tends to keep away the poor while grabbing their opportunities due to high mechanization.

3. India suffers from a high income inequality. For example India’s slum population is 42.4 million that forms 15% of the total urban population (Steering Committee on Urbanization Planning Commission, New Delhi accessible on [http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp12/hud/wg_Final_Urb_Pvt.pdf]). At the mean time Billionaires like Mukesh Ambani spends $ 700 million on a “personal residential” of 27 floors (actual height is 60 floors) just for 5 people (with 600 full time staff). [More details found on googling “Ambani House”].

There May still be Gandhian activists in India, but it seems that it only holds a ceremonial value. Is it because Gandhi himself did something wrong when he popularize his teachings? Or, Gandhian philosophy is outdated in the contemporary political and economic arena? Or is it because the then leaders used Gandhi to come to power and did nothing to preserve his unique way of politics for the sake of the future of the country?

Myths about Gandhi by Mark Shepard would be a good piece of reading! http://acorn.sbu.edu/xSpring97/Mahatma%20Gandhi%20and%20His%20Myths.pdf

Some Gandhi speeches, comprehensive texts and information are found at http://www.indiavideo.org/text/gandhi/ and http://www.mkgandhi.org/faq/faq.htm

The comment that sticks in my mind the most from Tom's most inspiring session is that Gandhi was not perfect. He was a man of sound principles and morals and insight. But he was not perfect. He had the benefit of an education yet denied his children the same opportunity to learn as he had and experience life.

I use the word opportunity deliberately as so much change is only possible because of the opportunities that we are afforded in our lives.

I would love to say that if we had more Gandhi in us we'd be more tolerant to others differences and respect their choices in their life, but would we all be?? Even Gandhi inspired the change he believed in, to the seeming detriment of those closest to him. He led by example at huge cost to himself for what he believed in and others had the choice to follow and be seen to do the right thing, to truly believe that following was the right thing or to disagree with the example and continue with their own life.... The black and white are the truth - at the opposite ends of the spectrum. Those in the shades of grey - were they being true?? Just following to be part of the greater whole??

My mind was very much on social issues having been in class on Friday and it was with that mindset I sat down to breakfast on Saturday morning and turned on the tv. It was 0900 and there was a PG warning - relating to violence, language, sexual and drug references... at 0900 on a Saturday morning.... The show - video clips..... Society in general follows the greater whole and when that is violence, where is the role of inspiring non-violence. As Ajantha says is is all a bit outdated?? Do we need to modify the construct to make it essentially more palatable for those who are already consumed by greed, consumerism, getting ahead - no matter what impact or hurt they may cause along the way?

The process of change that we are considering faces enormous insidious challenges. When did we condone the use of explicit language in our entertainment? When did drugs and sexual references become so mainstream?? Having lived out of Australia for ten years from 2000 to 2010 I can attest to returning to a different place.

How do you make tradition, simple living, respect, tolerance and non-violence sexy enough for people to look at that as opposed to a new phone with better apps that enables them to speak to their 654 facebook friends simultaneously while not knowing their neighbours name???

Thanx ya'll for good comments on both lecture and readings.

To my mind two things come to mind when reading and learning about Gandhi. First off, a thought that I've had for a while, which is about moral. When looking into any ideology, both Gandhi, Marxists, capitalist, communist, it all sounds really awesome. It is not the ideology that is messed up, but the executors (believe I read something similar recently). The reason 'democracy' has sprung out to be seen as the best, is the collective deciding. Regardless, Gandhi’s line of thoughts is intriguing, and I do not believe it is outdated.

My second thought is linked to what Tom said in the lecture, about Gandhi being inspired by the New Testament in the Bible. During class I could not stop thinking that what Gandhi stood for is the strikingly similar to my interpretation of the Bible. The same message about the foundation for a good inter-development is the moral behind it, everyone is equal. I suspect the Qur'an, the Tanakh and other holy scriptures also contains these messages. Religion is something we in the western part of the world continue to alienate us from perhaps due to the belief in humanity as almighty. As I recall from the lecture, religion was the reason for Gandhi’s fight for a more equal world, his search for reason.

Thanks for the interesting comments guys. I found Tom’s seminar really motivating and felt that it gave a really good insight into Gandhi the man as a whole, flaws and all. It also struck me how much our experiences at an early age can influence our path in life (e.g. the influence of Jainism, experience at university in Gandhi’s life).

What I took from the seminar was that Gandhi was a man who led by example, and did not expect others to do what he was not willing to do himself. He was also someone who held true to his principles, even if they caused physical or social discomfort or alienated his family – a difficult path to choose.

On a different note, I agree with Becca, I feel like people in ‘caring’ professions are completely undervalued in our society, and that our priorities as a society are skewed. We’re encouraged to and are rewarded for achieving material success, whatever the cost. But whenever people are asked what they value most in life, its things like family and friends, not their house or car or mobile phone.

I thoroughly enjoyed Tom’s seminar, even though it was a lot of information in a short amount of time! It gave me a lot to think about in regards to what I value most in life and at a greater level, what society in general holds most important. In our consumerism society, it seems that it is always a competition about who has the newest car, or the biggest TV; the way our economy is today makes it easier to be greedy and legitimises unlimited consumption. It seems that when we get something we keep wanting more and more, which means we have to work more to get it. People in general are never happy with what they already have. Society and modern civilisation has dictated the value of things in our world, as well as what is seen as being more valuable and what is not. What did stay with me was what Tom said in his lecture about how we have to believe that people are good and can change. Gandhi saw the good and had faith in people and I think we all have to believe this as well for positive change to be created (this can be very hard at times though!)

Great discussion! Let's compile a list of Gandhian values and visions. Peace, nonviolence, sustainability, respect for other humans and creatures, courage. What esle? Oh one more thing: we ought to be cautious of the pitfalls of essentialism. Gandhi was an Indian but his philosophy is not 'essentially' Indian. Not all Indians are Gandhians and not all Gandhians are Indians. Can we separate the values and visions from the person? Now here's a report of a wonderful story; a lesson on how to make change happen: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/the-hero-too-many-of-us-still-dont-know-20120813-244vg.html

As Tom said, not only his political and social ideology makes Gandhi a great philosopher, he also deserves much recognition for his Economic thinking. His vision of economy, of course influenced by his main line of thinking, Swaraj, has been conceptualized in his concept of Sarvodaya. Sarva means “all or universal” and Udaya means to “uplift”. He has mostly been influenced by John Ruskin and his essays compiled in “Unto This Last” (see attachment). Gandhi has translated this into Gujarati in 1904 when he first used the term “Sarvodaya”. It assumes a process that begins with the most downtrodden group in a society and it moves on toward the Ram Rajya (Kingdom of God) as stated in one Orissa state govt. publication (http://orissa.gov.in/e-magazine/Orissareview/2010/October/engpdf/36-39.pdf).

In creating a Sarvodaya society, Gandhi had an objectively lined up programme in which Communal Unity, Removal of untouchability, Khadi movement (boycotting imports), Adult education, women empowerment, and Nai Talim (Nai means “new” and Talim means “education”) (as I understood this is education vocational basis). He has also established higher education institutes based on his idea of Nai Talim. Gujarat Vidyapith is one of them (http://www.gujaratvidyapith.org/history.htm).

I agree with Emil that there have been many wonderful theories throughout the history. Very few of them have been fully realised however. Usually wealth, greed and the addictive trip of power take people over and turn brilliant theories into totalitarian realities. I don’t believe Gandhian principles are outdated. On the contrary they are very poignant and relevant still to this day. It is very sad however, when a government, for example the Indian, celebrate the life of a great person, for example Mahatma Gandhi, because it will please the crowd and win them a few popularity points. Meanwhile, this government has no intention of actually taking on board and putting into place any of Gandhi’s teachings, as Ajantha pointed out with their military spending etc.

Constructive information on human behaviour, put in the wrong hands, can become a very destructive tool. Check out this link to a 4 part doco series, A Century of the Self, that starts with Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud's nephew, and the beginnings of consumerism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjFL02NmBrc He’s the man who invented the concept “sex sells” and used it to revolutionise advertising and start the greedy wheels of consumerism and materialism into motion.

Going back to the beginning of the discussion from Beka, alternative realities are very much possible and in some cases already available! The main limitations to me realising this and acknowledging this is my own imagination. I have not taken my imagination out for a walk or had conversations with it in a while. While attempting to take responsibility for my own situation, ( as one of my “change challenges”) here I will put a little blame onto the social construct of Australia’s spoon-fed society.

While we are on the topic of non-violence and peaceful protests, I cannot go past the plight of the Tibetans who are currently under the brutal opression of the Chinese government.

Please have a look.

http://standupfortibet.org/enough/dk-speakup-petition-1/

It was very interesting listening to Tom talk about Gandhi and reading everybody's responses about what stood out for them. What stood out for me was, as for others, trusting opponents and not exploiting a position of weakness. In our competitive world, exploiting a weakness is a way to get forward, a window of opportunity to achieve your goals. It would require a lot of strength to help your opponent in a time of need. It makes sense that this would create co-operation and trust but not always so easy to do.

I also liked his statement in regards to his construction program about working with the people and not just for the people. Enables the poor to self-respectingly help themselves. There is a group called SEWA, in Gujarat, who follow Gandhi's principles, including local employment and self reliance. www.sewa.org On the housing page, http://www.sewahousing.org/, there are some pictures drawn by the women of how they view their city and in the videos under other links on this page there is a woman saying how she has gained a voice and can now speak about her needs which I found really powerful. As Ajantha showed it is hard to see Gandhi's principles in the modern Indian Government, but he is still an inspiration for many.