Brave is a word I definitely would apply to him, philosopher is not.MJA wrote:I think Julian Assange is One of our bravest philosophers of our time.
=
He was active well before the US civil rights got going having died from an Islamic bullet in 1948.reasonvemotion wrote:Ghandi's memory has been relegated to that of the Messiah. Behind this glorious facade, Ghandi held racist views, in particular those of the Black South Africans. This may explain why he never met with African American civil rights leaders. Perhaps if this was known, Ghandi would not have been so admired. So Bill, I am with you.
reasonvemotion wrote:Nevertheless, we cannot eliminate part of his history and choose to remember another.
But you should at least understand it properly and put it in its historical context, rather than dismiss him out of hand as you seem to have.
The earlier period of the African-American Civil Rights Movement (1896–1954)
You have no basis for your assertion concerning a thing he did not do for some thing he was supposed not to have believed in.
That is purely an assumption and a demand to respond as you would have. I do appreciate the historical importance. I read your passion and interest in Gandhi, my passionate interest lies with the African American Civils Rights Movement. I equate it to our own Aboriginal people.Nevertheless, we cannot eliminate part of his history and choose to remember another.
CW:
But you should at least understand it properly and put it in its historical context, rather than dismiss him out of hand as you seem to have.
The earlier period of the African-American Civil Rights Movement (1896–1954)
CW:
You have no basis for your assertion concerning a thing he did not do for some thing he was supposed not to have believed in.
reasonvemotion wrote:That is purely an assumption and a demand to respond as you would have. I do appreciate the historical importance. I read your passion and interest in Gandhi, my passionate interest lies with the African American Civils Rights Movement. I equate it to our own Aboriginal people.Nevertheless, we cannot eliminate part of his history and choose to remember another.
CW:
But you should at least understand it properly and put it in its historical context, rather than dismiss him out of hand as you seem to have.
An extract of the text of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's speech to Parliament
13th February, 2008
I move:
That today we honour the indigenous peoples of this land, the oldest continuing cultures in human history.
We reflect on their past mistreatment.
We reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those who were stolen generations - this blemished chapter in our nation's history.
The speech is nine pages long.
I take it you are from Australia then?
FIne words, about 200 years too late.
The earlier period of the African-American Civil Rights Movement (1896–1954)
CW:
You have no basis for your assertion concerning a thing he did not do for some thing he was supposed not to have believed in.
That was a time reference only, relating to what was happening at the time when Gandhi was alive. I should have made that clear.
That was clear enough. But you have no right to assert that his "failure" to meet with the negroes of the USA during his life-time was related to an assertion about his alleged racism concerning the negro race.
You would have to prove a negative. Did they ever invite him? Did he refuse?
It is you now, who I perceive to cast aside the importance of this event.FIne words, about 200 years too late
Yes, Gandhi and MLK put their lives on the line and you wrote some rubbish about the people that make Fairy Liquid.bobevenson wrote:I'm the bravest philosopher of our time, and I can prove it. When the Procter & Gamble Company was suing people for millions of dollars for connecting their company to Satan, I published "That Infamous Logo" (http://church-of-ouzo.com/pdf/infamous-logo.pdf).
They were politicians, not philosophers.John wrote:Yes, Gandhi and MLK put their lives on the line and you wrote some rubbish about the people that make Fairy Liquid.bobevenson wrote:I'm the bravest philosopher of our time, and I can prove it. When the Procter & Gamble Company was suing people for millions of dollars for connecting their company to Satan, I published "That Infamous Logo" (http://church-of-ouzo.com/pdf/infamous-logo.pdf).
Gandhi's victory is yet to happen in many ways,reasonvemotion wrote:It is you now, who I perceive to cast aside the importance of this event.FIne words, about 200 years too late
I agree, 200 years is such an immeasurable amount of suffering. You ask an Aboriginal person if they think the apology is too late, some may agree, but the vast majority have said it was imperative. I spoke with two women about this recently. They both agreed it was a vast weight lifted from their shoulders. They could hold their heads high and feel respected, it was the recognition that they had to have. It was an emotional day for many many people.
An apology, which all previous governments refused to give them. It was a long time coming, but never too late for them.
If you say it was 200 years too late, then you must agree that Gandhi's victory was about 300 odd years too late also.
bobevenson wrote:I'm the bravest philosopher of our time, and I can prove it. When the Procter & Gamble Company was suing people for millions of dollars for connecting their company to Satan, I published "That Infamous Logo" (http://church-of-ouzo.com/pdf/infamous-logo.pdf).
