In the wake of the Paris attacks on 13th November, my friend Anjali says on Facebook:
One thing that comes to mind Gandhi’s non violence practice. He was successful because the British enemies at the time also practised compassion, not all of them but the majority. Today I don’t see this.
Several people, myself included press the ‘Like’ button. Than after some thought I add this commentary:
Compassion is relating oneself to the suffering of a fellow being, sharing the most essential common values, those of life and love. But yes, Anjali, I also don’t see this in beings who subordinate and negate themselves to what they consider as ‘higher gods’, people who value power more than love. They can even accept that their very own wives, their children and families can be sacrificed. That is why I have great difficulty is accepting that, in the case of ISIS, one can apply Gandhi’s practice of non-violence. Perhaps outright war is inevitable, in some extreme cases, in order to save humanity.
Anjali:
I agree that is why I said Gandhi could only succeed because the enemy was compassionate. This is not the case now as we can see. Marches of non violence of Gandhi in this era would result in massive casualties
Me:
And that fact agreed, established, what do WE do, what does society do, how should “civilised” states react? Is war the only course?
Anjali:
Looks like it, already begun in a different way
Me:
Makes me think of abortion: sometimes we have to accept it despite our profond belief in the sanctity of life.
Anjali:
true
Me:
I’ll leave you now, (going to ramble in the thick fog here!) wishing that you and Gautam are keeping well and inspired. émoticône wink
Updated/maj. 15-11-2015
Vues : 2
