An Important Quote From Ghandi That Should Never Be Forgotten.

“Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” – Mohandas Gandhi, an Autobiography, page 446.

I post this quote because, where its possible, it is being censored across the internet. For me this is one of the most important quotes from one of the bravest and most intelligent men who ever walked the earh.

Originally posted by TheMindWar
it is being censored across the internet.

From google,

About 94,500 results

But what I'd really like to know is - what is the CONTEXT of this quote?
A quote without context has no meaning.
Rather similar to cherry picking the data you like and ignoring the rest.

reply to post by alfa1




Well its clear to see that it was something having to do with restricting arms.

reply to post by TheMindWar


here is another one I like.

"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence."

Ghandi was not some push over. He was a realist, not a delusional masochist.

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by TheMindWar
it is being censored across the internet.

From google,

About 94,500 results

But what I'd really like to know is - what is the CONTEXT of this quote?
A quote without context has no meaning.
Rather similar to cherry picking the data you like and ignoring the rest.

As for cherry picking a quote, i thought this quote was quite significant in the current climate would you not agree?
I hear facebook are suspending accounts of those who have a big following who dare to out this quote up.

here is the full quote

In reference to his youth.
"I used to issue leaflets asking people to enlist as recruits. One of the arguments I had used was distasteful to the Commissioner: ‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act of depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn.’ The Commissioner refereed to this and said that he appreciated my presence in the conference in spite of the differences between us. And I had to justify my standpoint as courteously as I could."

yahoo answers, sometimes they come though.

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
here is the full quote

In reference to his youth.
"I used to issue leaflets asking people to enlist as recruits. One of the arguments I had used was distasteful to the Commissioner: ‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act of depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn.’ The Commissioner refereed to this and said that he appreciated my presence in the conference in spite of the differences between us. And I had to justify my standpoint as courteously as I could."

yahoo answers, sometimes they come though.

He was dreaming if he thought the government would ever withdraw the arms ban.

And look at this country. We have done just about everything asked us with taxes, wars ect and rendered voluntary help to our govenment...sent our youth out to die for it, pay and pay and pay taxes, suffered other things to many to name......and they still want us to give up a weapons ban, they still dont 'trust" us.

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
yahoo answers, sometimes they come though.

Actually, I've just spent some time reading whole pages from the book, at google books

As explained on this page, the context appears to be that Indians were not allowed to serve with the British army in WW1, but that Ghandi felt they should be allowed to do so.
To this end, he went on a "recruiting" campaign to show the British that there was indeed a desire for Indians to sign up to the British armed forces.
The British of course were rather reluctant to accept this, because having armed Indians could be troublesome for them as they ruled over India. Dont want any armed insurgents rising up against the foreign rulers now, do we?
So to me, Ghandi's quote is a line intended to show, as he expressed in other writings, that Indians were being held down unfairly and not being allowed to rule their own country, and that if they had guns, they would not subservient to foreign rule.

But I'm not convinced he had the idea that the NRA have, that your average citizen should be allowed to be packing a gun as they go about their normal daily life.

Originally posted by alfa1


But I'm not convinced he had the idea that the NRA have, that your average citizen should be allowed to be packing a gun as they go about their normal daily life.

edit on 28-12-2012 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)

He may not


But at least I know my Founding Fathers did

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
yahoo answers, sometimes they come though.

Actually, I've just spent some time reading whole pages from the book, at google books

As explained on this page, the context appears to be that Indians were not allowed to serve with the British army in WW1, but that Ghandi felt they should be allowed to do so.
To this end, he went on a "recruiting" campaign to show the British that there was indeed a desire for Indians to sign up to the British armed forces.
The British of course were rather reluctant to accept this, because having armed Indians could be troublesome for them as they ruled over India. Dont want any armed insurgents rising up against the foreign rulers now, do we?

So to me, Ghandi's quote is a line intended to show, as he expressed in other writings, that Indians were being held down unfairly and not being allowed to rule their own country, and that if they had guns, they would not subservient to foreign rule.

But I'm not convinced he had the idea that the NRA have, that your average citizen should be allowed to be packing a gun as they go about their normal daily life.

edit on 28-12-2012 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)

so wouldn't taking our guns away kinda put us in the position that the indians were under britsh rule?? it seems that more and more our leaders stray from the foundations on which this country was founded on.

Originally posted by votan


so wouldn't taking our guns away kinda put us in the position that the indians were under britsh rule?? it seems that more and more our leaders stray from the foundations on which this country was founded on.

No, because just like the post you quoted said, the quote comes the context of Indians serving in the British army.

there's only one quote that matters

"shall not be infringed"

Originally posted by SpectreDC

Originally posted by votan


so wouldn't taking our guns away kinda put us in the position that the indians were under britsh rule?? it seems that more and more our leaders stray from the foundations on which this country was founded on.

No, because just like the post you quoted said, the quote comes the context of Indians serving in the British army.

The Indian soldiers already were serving in the British Army, Ghandi meant the people had a right to be armed.

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by TheMindWar

 

here is another one I like.

"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence."

Ghandi was not some push over. He was a realist, not a delusional masochist.

edit on 28-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

Dude you've been watching too much a-team lol

Wow anoher thread on this. Quite so soon!

Why can't this quote mean it is intended both ways. Gandhi also wanted his fellow indians to be fully trained to the level of the Brits. A trained armed populace is a much more dangerous prospect than gun owners without skills.

The reason TPTB take gandhi quotes so seriously is that gandhi made a difference, he adversely affected an empire and an agenda. That scared TPTB and they have never forgotten.

Originally posted by alfa1
...
But I'm not convinced he had the idea that the NRA have, that your average citizen should be allowed to be packing a gun as they go about their normal daily life.

edit on 28-12-2012 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)

It is very clear what Ghandi wrote....

...depriving a whole nation of arms...

He didn't say it was ok to deprive some people, or only a few should have arms... He mentions the WHOLE/ENTIRE NATION...

That was his autobiography, later on in the book he writes the many mistakes he made, but NOT ONCE did he write that it was a mistake for him to believe people should be armed...

Just like our second amendment says... "The right of the PEOPLE to own and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED (RESTRICTED)..."


BTW, do you all also forget the quote from another pacifist on the right of people to defend themselves with arms?...

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun."

quotes.liberty-tree.ca...

And that was in response to a girl who ahd asked him what should she do if she was ever in a situation in which someone pulled a gun at her and her classmates or something like that...

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
yahoo answers, sometimes they come though.

Actually, I've just spent some time reading whole pages from the book, at google books

As explained on this page, the context appears to be that Indians were not allowed to serve with the British army in WW1, but that Ghandi felt they should be allowed to do so.
To this end, he went on a "recruiting" campaign to show the British that there was indeed a desire for Indians to sign up to the British armed forces.
The British of course were rather reluctant to accept this, because having armed Indians could be troublesome for them as they ruled over India. Dont want any armed insurgents rising up against the foreign rulers now, do we?

So to me, Ghandi's quote is a line intended to show, as he expressed in other writings, that Indians were being held down unfairly and not being allowed to rule their own country, and that if they had guns, they would not subservient to foreign rule.

But I'm not convinced he had the idea that the NRA have, that your average citizen should be allowed to be packing a gun as they go about their normal daily life.

edit on 28-12-2012 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)

He also believed that Germany was going to advance upon India, and that the British Army alone would not be able to quell the tide. While he was firm in his non-violence stance, he was also a pragmatist. It would be preferable for India to survive with arms than to fall without.

/TOA

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
yahoo answers, sometimes they come though.

Actually, I've just spent some time reading whole pages from the book, at google books

As explained on this page, the context appears to be that Indians were not allowed to serve with the British army in WW1, but that Ghandi felt they should be allowed to do so.
To this end, he went on a "recruiting" campaign to show the British that there was indeed a desire for Indians to sign up to the British armed forces.
The British of course were rather reluctant to accept this, because having armed Indians could be troublesome for them as they ruled over India. Dont want any armed insurgents rising up against the foreign rulers now, do we?

So to me, Ghandi's quote is a line intended to show, as he expressed in other writings, that Indians were being held down unfairly and not being allowed to rule their own country, and that if they had guns, they would not subservient to foreign rule.

But I'm not convinced he had the idea that the NRA have, that your average citizen should be allowed to be packing a gun as they go about their normal daily life.

edit on 28-12-2012 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)

Actually the context fits perfectly if you realize the US government is no longer for the people and by the people...the US government being similar to a "foreign" nation ruling the people who live here....a government in a sense gone rogue reneging on its principals and duties to the people can be considered "rogue" and therefor the average citizens of the country are their own militia. The removal of the guns from the people of the US is akin to the British removing arms from the Indians...in so as the British and US government don't want the people their occupying to "up-rise" against their unjustified rule and oppression.

The basic point is that an unarmed people can't do anything about anything...

someone show me where in history a nation of unarmed people claimed their independence from occupying oppressing rulers? whether those rulers be one or many with one name or many names....whether it be King Moronius the III to Government XXX...

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by alfa1

 

Well its clear to see that it was something having to do with restricting arms.

I pick this response to the thread to quote because it is the dumbest that I will allow myself to read. This poster has no clue of his/her enormous display of ignorance of fairly recent world history with those few words.

I suppose that he/she is an American like myself. I can give him/her a bit 0f a break on that score. Such knowledge usually comes from schooling in history and that is missing from most schools today. "Adventures in living" classes today tend to teach "Pet Grooving" and other nonesense courses.

I swear, I don't know why I even dared to open a thread today. I've been trying to break my addiction to ATS and have been pretty good about it too.

reply to post by TheMindWar


It is amazing to me how many people do not understand what 'control' means. To try and place the fear this nation is going to be disarmed, in peoples heads is pretty much lying, and an attempt at manipulation.

I stop to think - why lie? NRA pressure to do so is one reason and some are truly fearful of getting their guns removed...some unfortunate trauma in youth, overpowered and violated. It might be comforting now to be armed. A fear of being without firepower equates to being without a means of "retaliation" if something like "that" should happen again. Smallish and vulnerable men are often the first to seek solace in metal weaponry. Naturally, there are true out doors men and hunters who truly need the equipment - but they are few and rare.

Fighting and killing, is the way the animals and tyrants solve problems. Brute force first. Some say we evolved and are evolving, gradually leaving our uncivilized ways behind. Ghandi's call for arms was for self defense.
It takes human intelligence to work great differences out peacefully for HARMONIOUS co-habitation on the planet. Until our collective IQ raises a bit - We will never see that "Peace on Earth "we sing about around Christmas time and in sappy songs. It's a mindset we hold on to. Your name pretty much says it all.