Gandhi, perhaps Hitler for the workers.

 Gandhi, was it Hitler for the workers, Gandhi, who advocated no possession and class harmony, a lamp of spirit or a confused sacrament, asked the angel, "Which would you choose between heaven and hell?" "I can show you anywhere, so just make a decision," Lam hesitated. It was beautiful, clean and full of flowery scent, but it was not fun. "Don't you like it?" asked the angel again. "Well, people are pure, but they're too old-fashioned." I don't know how to enjoy it. "How's hell?" Gandhi and Monroe, the conquest of heaven? So, to Ram, who came down to hell again, said, "It would be a little unpleasant to have to pay for the crime, but you have the freedom to choose the punishment you want to receive." Ram, looking all over the place, was stunned to see roasted men and frozen women. I saw Adolf Hitler coming in and out of the gas chamber, and Genghis Khan, Hirohito, and Golda Meyer, who were being tortured. But suddenly Lam's eyes opened wide. The naked Mahatma Gandhi and Marilyn Monroe were on the same wavelength! "Wow, Mahatma is a lucky man. It looks like you're getting something good back, but that's it. The punishment I want...." Then the angel gave him a tip. "That's not Gandhi being punished, Marilyn Monroe being punished." Gandhi, who is revered as the greatest man in human history as the driving force behind India's struggle for independence. However, even his negative aspects cannot be concealed (SYGMA), a famous joke that people around the world enjoy talking about his fateful death, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, nicknamed him Mahatma for "great soul." Gandhi, the political engine of India's struggle for independence, has become one of the greatest human spiritual coordinates in world history and earned numerous nicknames such as the messenger of freedom, the bold soul, the gentle giant, the nonviolent apostle, the sea of peace, the prophets of society, and holy beings. with the impression that he was only pure and unspoiled. Is there anyone else in history who has been perfectly purified like Gandhi? Afraid of refuting Gandhi's greatness, he has become a "great man who cannot quarrel" without even properly aiming at the heart of Gandhi's thoughts and actions. Perhaps the "father of India" was not enough, Gandhi inspired everyone in the world who groaned under colonial rule. His call for liberation from oppression, political freedom, personal purity, compassion for poverty, protection for losers, community of love, grassroots democracy, non-religiousism.... The immeasurable ideals continue to travel throughout the world from generation to generation. Gandhi is already well known, so there is nothing new or more to discover, but today, let's look at Gandhi with a "crunchy eye" according to the constitution of the "Asia Network." In conclusion, Gandhi was, at least, like Hitler to those who aspired to be equal to the workers. Gandhi's eyes on the nation and Gandhi's eyes on the individual were not well focused, so Gandhi's own movements were socially and personally unclear. Therefore, Gandhi, contrary to his claim, has often taken a strange step backward in social, cultural, political, and gender, and all of these facts have been concealed. experiment "desire" with young women Gandhi suffered from a terrible obsession with suppressing sexual desire and tried hard to reach purity (SYGMA), a good example. Gandhi shouted for the unification of Hindu and Islamic. He even wrote a song in which Ram (Hindu) and Raheem (Islam) become one. The people of the world praised Gandhi as a Hindu who truly respected Islam. However, he did not allow his son to marry a Muslim woman. What about this? Gandhi, who suffered from a terrible obsession with suppressing sexual desire, tried hard to reach purity. He also gave a lengthy description of how he restrained himself while putting a charming young lady to sleep next to him. Gandhi preached the self-control gained from the experiment in the spirit of a winner, but I think most men can tolerate it if it's that much. Even if you're not an adult or superhuman beings. So what is the woman who was the subject of the experiment? Is it okay not to ask how the woman feels? Let's take a look at how Gandhi influenced the labor movement. This is the biggest controversial aspect of Gandhi's social role and at the same time a negative aspect of the working class. Gandhi became involved in the new labor union movement in Ahmedabad, Gujarat in 1917. Ahmedabad was a place where cotton and manufacturing flourished since the 1870s, comparable to Manchester, England. As the textile industry peaked in World War I, Ahmedabad's economy soared. Nevertheless, Ahmedabad's workers were rather forced to cut wages. The angry workers rose up. As things got worse, manufacturers approached Gandhi. Gandhi proposed to manufacturers to support the formation of Major Mahajan Sangh, which stipulates workers' obligations and rights. However, his plan contained only cooperation and coordination, and industrial activities such as strikes were fundamentally prohibited. It thoroughly excludes conflicts and struggles for the true rights of workers. As a result, weaving and dyeing workers, who are mostly Islamic or belonging to the poorest Hindu class, returned to the Middle Ages. MMS was a partnership based on religious and identity differentiation, not a labor union. Gandhi, a labor activist who served the ruling class, preached religious tolerance and expressed affection for the poor, but never attempted to break down the religious and hereditary class system. Instead, he built his great castle on the firm caste. Manufacturers only understood the function of MMS as incorporating workers into industrial expansion plans. Therefore, for manufacturers, MMS was a tool to impose strong discipline and control working conditions for wage recovery. In fact, after MMS was created, manufacturers made rather huge profits, while only a small amount of money was returned to workers. This means that as a result of Gandhi's "no-ownership" philosophy driving MMS's "class harmony" ideology, large corporations have expanded their wealth, and workers who practiced no-ownership have become broke. Gandhi's ideal of wealth as a property of society is the result of disarming workers by forming the framework of MMS leadership. While MMS was stagnant, playing into the hands of manufacturers, Mumbai workers secured wage increases and eight hours of work through a series of struggles and improved various working conditions. Mumbai, which grew the power of its workers through the struggle, gradually expanded its influence throughout India. Gandhi's defeat to the workers continued. In 1935, Gandhi accepted a conventional proposal from a British colonial ruler. The so-called "family wage" of these colonial rulers meant raising wages in the name of survival costs for working families and unemployed people. However, within one person per family, people without jobs could benefit from this system. This eventually resulted in the expulsion of all women from the workplace. The negative view of the people and the compromising labor movement led capitalists throughout Gusrat, including Ahmedabad, to build strong ruling castles that refused to yield their hegemony or recognize liberal culture. This closed social structure of the Gujarat region, coupled with religious fundamentalism, eventually served as a major factor that enabled the most vicious slaughter of Islam in March. What was the root of the tragedy, in Gujarat, India's only region dominated by the ruling Bharthiya Janata Party (BJP), in which more than 2,000 citizens were killed at the hands of ruling Hindu fundamentalists? It's something that makes Gandhi think again. Coincidentally, today's Bartya Janata Party is very similar to the Hindu fundamentalist forces responsible for the murder of Gandhi in 1948. For Gandhi, who advocated non-ownership and class harmony, was the struggle for emancipation of workers a vicious condition for prolonging colonial rule? Where were the positions of the workers in the community or even the concept of the state he wanted? In order to put his philosophy into practice, Gandhi concealed, or at least ignored, India's unequal hierarchical social structure and flaws dominated by the birthplace system. The process of establishing a state ignores the great principle that any price must be paid for integration and homogenization. Gandhi's view of the impossible was the same. In order to fight colonialism, we must unite, but Gandhi's idea was that untouchable people divide society. Gandhi's position began to conflict with the Darit movement (the poorest class, including the untouchable people), which advocated their identities in the 1920s and 1930s. At that time, Ambedkal, who became the leading inventor of the Indian Constitution (which refused to recognize the invincible as a member of Hindu society), grew enormously, and its substance continues to this day in areas alienated from mainstream Hindu society. Darit demanded things like hourly labor standards and parliamentary separation of voters. Contrary to their demands, Gandhi staged a hunger strike in 1932 and pressured Darit leader Ambedkal to abandon the separatist election. In the end, a compromise was reached in the line of devoting 15% of the seats to Darit and allowing the untouchable to enter the school. Of course, there is a great deal of difference from Darit's demands. The concept of village autonomy (Gram Swaraz) advocated by Gandhi, the price of India's contradictory Gandhi, was the same as the perspective of the founding of the state. This ideal of local autonomy democracy was merely a pretense of allowing Darit, who was unwilling, to sit in the village council. From today's point of view, it is somewhat unreasonable to see it as a beacon of social liberation. Of course, Gandhi's legacy was undoubtedly the heart of the struggle for freedom, and Gandhi was an indescribable leader.

However, while they were clamoring that the construction of the state of India took precedence over the character and freedom of workers, freedom of status and equality of rank of workers became farther away. In the end, India has paid dearly for this contradictory Gandhi. The historical problems of Gandhi's days, such as internal division, continue to this day. Praful Bidwai, former editor of Time of India, and a nuclear columnist. Source: Hankyoreh 21 They said it was Gandhi or Cast System, so I moved it. Well, it's not a spiritual pillar for the Indians, is it?