|
Topics:
|
|
|---|---|
Words: |
1331 |
Pages:
|
3
This essay sample was donated by a student to help the academic community. Papers provided by EduBirdie writers usually outdo students' samples.
|
Cite this essay
Download
Hypothesis- India’s persistent motivation to gain independence from Britain and the innovative events that took place, reflect the resilience of Gandhi as a leader, despite the controversial topic of whether his leadership was a successful or dismal failure.
(Sources gathered from William Shirer’s book “A Memoir.” Published in 1980. Specific references in the reference list.)
Gandhi’s reputation for many years has always held an underlying controversy of whether the non-violent civil disobedience campaign of 1930 – 1931 was a true successful indication as to whether Gandhi’s leadership was a triumphant success or a dismal failure. His leadership played a key role in the Independence Movement in India. One person and another can have a different interpretation of success, but for a leader who lived in a ‘world of possibility,’ his forefront intent was to free India of British imperialism. This wasn’t Gandhi’s only aim, they wanted to transform the Indian culture and overall make India a better place to live. People who think without depth and understanding will view Gandhi’s campaign to be a failure.
Multiple viewpoints make out Gandhi to have fulfilled a successful leadership position, he virtually transformed the victims of the Salt Tax protest. His power and presence could demolish any sense of British Imperialism superiority, that they withheld over his people. The Indians had proven to have had the ability to drive events, for example when the British lost control of Peshawar for 10 days at the end of April. The Salt Tax Protest completely altered the Indian psyche, although it “did not change the minds of the British, it did change the minds of the Indians about the British.” (Source 12) An undertone of opinionative bias is evident, as the secondary source originates from a text that passionately promotes non-violent action. However, the source also recognizes that there was strength in Gandhi’s non-violent resistance. “Non-violent action did not work the way Gandhi had expected- but it worked: (Source 12)
The British were triggered by the non-violent campaign, to take violent action, ironically. This violent dispute showed the British people's true colors. Showcasing the ferocity of the British rule over India. The ugliness of the British is demonstrated in Source 3; “The survivors, without breaking ranks, silently and doggedly marched on until it was struck down… Although everyone knew that within a few minutes he would be beaten down, perhaps killed, I could detect no signs of wavering fear.” The morals and beliefs of the British are consistently questioned, as the recorded first-person account of the Dhar asana Saltworks (1930) shows an interesting perspective on the true values of the British people. The supposed ideology of altruism that the British withheld was demolished.
Gandhi continued to succeed in realms other than just gaining independence for India, by also forcefully introducing the idea of equality of Indian leaders to the British and taking Congress seriously. In Gandhi’s letter to Lord Irwin (British viceroy) Gandhi’s objective was to “open a way for real confidence between equals…” This ambitious approach was certainly successful. William Shirer, an American journalist, who wrote “A Memoir” on Gandhi’s life quotes; “For the first time, since the British took away India from the Indians they had been faced, as Churchill bitterly complained to deal with an Indian leader as an equal.” It is evident that the campaign had many triumphs and brought significant change.
People who like to think simply, still look at Gandhi’s leadership to be an utter failure. The Delhi Pact, was made following the escalation of tension between India and Pakistan, sparking from economic relations between the two countries. Seemed to be when people felt that Gandhi failed as a leader, completely disregarding any of the other positive things he did to gain India’s independence. Irwin comments on the situation in source 5, “Looking over the whole thing, I do regard it as a very astonishing thing that Gandhi should have been so far persuaded to come into line.” People close to Gandhi, felt as though he surrendered. Indian historian Majumdar, comments that “It is hard to defend his pact with Irwin on any national ground unless it were a tacit admission of failure and inability to continue the civil disobedience movement any further.” After the campaign, Gandhi’s only success seemed to lie in relieving the Salt Tax. There is a continuation of opinionative explanations regarding whether not Gandhi was a successful leader or not. Communist, Namboodiri Pad also supported the perspective that Gandhi’s weaknesses denied India of its Independence; “his insistence on a scrupulous adherence to what is called a non-violence, which in effect, served to the mass of workers.” This source reflects an opinionative point of view, it is to be understood that this perspective is reflecting on the ideologies that it was the birth of those who are oppressed to act violently to those who ‘exploit.’ Shallow minds who tend to measure success on a scale, backed up by one-sided perceived opinionative sources, could deem Gandhi to be a failure in this instance.
Different arguments can see two sides to Gandhi, either as a success or a failure in gaining independence in India. However, he has left an everlasting effect on a nation of people. The reality is that Gandhi failed to achieve results from the “Delhi Pact”. Nevertheless, Gandhi’s ongoing positive outlook changed the lives of many. Gandhi strongly believed that “suffering has its well-defined limits. Success can be both wise and unwise”. He continually enforced his values and beliefs, his argument remained ‘You cannot get everything in one stroke, you must gather yourself and take the next step.’ His leadership had a long-lasting effect on India’s people, giving them a sense of belonging and relief from the falsity of British Imperialism. It is undeniable that Gandhi had failed to a certain extent on a scale of measurable results. Gandhi had greater success in a larger field, successfully altering and changing the lives of a nation of people.
‘“England can hold India only by consent,” he conceded “We can’t rule it by sword” The British lost that consent.’ (Source 12)
Get your paper done in as fast as 3 hours, 24/7.
Fair Use Policy
EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via support@edubirdie.com.
Stuck on your essay?
