One Common Agreement Between Gandhi And Marx

47. Which of the following statements on the general difference between plant and animal cells are correct? (Response C) The flow of political influence and the process of moral awareness between the different groups took place in both directions. The great bourgeoisie certainly influenced The Congress and enjoys a certain political power, as the Marxists assert, but they were also obliged to recognize the legitimate demands of the poor and oppressed. The peasantry of the middle and upper class allied from time to time with the great bourgeoisie, but also maintained its independence, launched leaders of status and loyalty from class to height, and influenced congressional policy on important issues. Many of these leaders had not been created by the great bourgeoisie or had not been engaged in any way to the great bourgeoisie and had come to power because of their personal sacrifices and the conduct of peasant struggles. They had constituencies that they could not ignore lightly and which they could not subordinate the interests to those of another class. Marxist commentators exaggerate the situation by claiming that Gandhi delivered the peasantry to the capitalists. This line is Ashoka`s aedile. According to him, the contact between the different religions is good and one must also be open to the teachings of other religions. Gandhi`s own ambivalence and confusion also played a role.

Nehru was rightly his elected political heir, and Gandhi spent the last months of his life pushing his supporters to leave Nehru and his colleagues alone when it came to designing and consolidating the Indian state. For example, when they complained that the Constituent Assembly had not made arrangements for Panchayat Raj, it asked them to be patient, to stay away from political activity and to focus instead on the constructive agenda. He intended to cover the programme far more than its traditional content and to promote voter registration, highlight local abuses and even peaceful satyagrahas. However, he had neither the time nor the energy to spell all this, with the result that many of his supporters accepted his advice to involve a good division of labour between politics and social work, one to leave to the government and its « political » heir, the other to its ashrams and volunteers led by its « spiritual » heir Vinoba. Since Gandhi had no difference between politics and spirituality, it was an understandable but totally erroneous interpretation of his post-independence project.

Comments are closed.