• vin@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Gandhi had trouble convincing the British to even consider independence until widespread communal violence swept the nation in the aftermath of WWII.

    What are you talking about?

      • vin@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Where do you get that from? All the violent resistance like Subhash Chandra Bose and revolutionary movement were not big enough to be a major concern. Civil disobedience was more concerning given how widespread it was.

        • Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Civil Disobedience was the peaceful alternative; it is a show of force that only works if it carries the implication of a more violent alternative. Nobody ever won their freedom by appealing to the morality of the oppressor.

          • vin@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            22 hours ago

            Nope, nope, nope. It is not a show of force, it’s making the society ungovernable, like not paying taxes, growing/making/selling anything to anyone etc. There was no implication of anything more violent. It is not appealing to the morality of the oppressor.

            • Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              21 hours ago

              If that was true, the British would have had their puppets shoot and starve them until they were governable.