I'm sorry guys, it's on government and politics again, but I had to do it for a class, so I figured I could get some feedback on it? And I'd prefer not to hear about my views being wrong or unethical - they're my opinion, and i'm entitled to them, just constructive critiscism about the essay, please.
Mohandas Gandhi’s Political Significance
Perhaps one of the most influential leaders of his time, Mohandas Gandhi sought reform among the Indian government. Though not a politician, he was an important political leader. He organized non-violent movements such as the satyagraha, which started in South Africa regarding Indians’ rights. The Asiatic Law Amendment Ordinance was close to passing, and would require that all Indians register with the government, submit their fingerprints, and carry a registration certificate at all times. Most Indians saw this as the beginning of slavery; Gandhi organized a mass protest meeting and influenced thousands of Indians to resist the unjust law, even though they understood they would be attacked and arrested. In fact, it was in jail that Gandhi first read Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, and his beliefs were validated: every person has the right and obligation to resist unjust law and a single determined person can effect a change in even the most powerful government. Gandhi did just this, and not only that, he did it in a non-violent manner. Thus, Gandhi would be my choice as a modern-day president of the United States, in an effort to achieve a more peaceful diplomatic government.
There are several issues that political leaders must address, and as president, he must be able to identify with what the public demands. A daunting task, no doubt, yet many great men have been able to accomplish to an extent. One of these political issues that are so difficult in not only interpreting, but also enacting is national defense. “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice”. Goldwater cried these momentous words nearly 45 years ago, yet many agree with him still today. Yet, if the people could have a leader who was capable of defending them without extreme acts of violence, would they accept this? Couldn’t non-violent defenses also be an effective method of protecting the country? Gandhi, in the United State’s current bellicose situation, would have agreed that a non-violent diplomacy would be most successful. Terrorism is a large factor of our national defense, and in the latter part of the 19th century Gandhi himself experienced a terrorist movement among Indian nationalists. He did not favor military action, but rather the application of a non-violent alternative in which war and other types of political violence were usually used; Gandhi had dreamed that a free India would be able to defend its freedom without military means.
One of the political battles currently underway between John McCain and Barack Obama deals with the matter of whether or not to maintain Roe v. Wade. Though Gandhi believed that everyone deserved to live, he also stood for the belief that everyone deserved to live freely. My personal stance regarding the issue is freedom of choice – a person should be able to make their own decisions without government approval. The argument that abortion is unconstitutional is outrageous because no here in the Constitution is it stated that your personal choice or choices are wrong. In fact, your personal freedoms are granted in the 9th amendment, in the unenumerated rights. Gandhi worked to protect these rights for the people of India, therefore he would want to maintain the court decision and allow people to freely think for themselves.
It cannot be argued that the environment isn’t in danger (that is, unless you are Michelle Bachman, a Minnesota republican who believes that global warming is a hoax). Gandhi definitely cared for all living things as well as the environment that all living things lived in. In seeing what the world has become 60 years later, Gandhi would be significantly disappointed. The average American disposes of 3.5 kilograms of garbage everyday. The total distribution of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2006 was 5,934.4 million metric tons. The contributions to global warming and the decrease of natural resources are worrisome dilemmas. Yet, probably the most major factor influencing the growth of environmental downfall is not even an environmental dynamic – humanity. The carelessness of the people is especially disturbing. From my own personal experience, I know that not enough people care about the environment: littering, lack of voluntary action, such as recycling, and greedy waste. A great leader can influence others; Gandhi did just that in and even after his lifetime. Gandhi’s loving care for the planet alone would be enough influence and motivation for the people to become involved in projects to save the planet. Today all anybody cares about is the money that can be made or spent; because Gandhi is a wholesome leader, and not gluttonous, new innovations such as electric cars and solar-powered electricity would be effective solutions to the global energy crisis, as well as protecting the already fragile state of the environment.
Even as Gandhi worked to correct the injustice of Indian government and British tyranny, he began to feel personally responsible for the sins of Hinduism, and thus fasting to discipline himself for these sins. Although this aspect of his life sounds somewhat absurd, it shows that he was willing to take the responsibility for not only his own actions, but for those of others, solely because he felt guilty in some way. The problem with current society is that no one wants to take the blame for their actions; and so, they blame it on someone else, who in effect, blames it on someone else, and so on and so forth. Gandhi was a huge influence in his time, and still continues to be a great influence today. He wanted peace; his views were open, fair, and diplomatic; yet sadly, not all had thought so. On January 30, 1948, Gandhi was assassinated by a Hindu fanatic who could not understand Gandhi’s respect and love for all faiths.
