what were the differenes between ghandi and kemals attitudes toward the west?
536837
Although Ghandi had a Western type education he did not preach adoption of the western models to overcome poverty and backwardness. Kamel saw salvation in imitating the West
260364
There are some political conflicts between the two countries and there were some conflicts in the history but poeople these days are just fine. One can always find someone to hate some other person or people, but in the level of individual people we get along just fine. As a Turk, we do not care much about them couse we believe that we are superior so we do not care much about any one who dislikes or hates us.
265363
Are you kidding???\nNon-violence is the policy of Martin Luther King and of Ghandi. The thing they had in common was a principled desire to change oppressive laws and treatment against the powerless.\n\nBush comes from a position of power, and is quite willing to use power in the form of violence, as in Iraq, to achieve his ends.
1088671
mahatma ghandi\nprime minister nehru\nbenazar bhutto\nghatama buddah\nqueen victoria
1000441
Karma - East meets West.
890716
There are no "radical right" critics of international aid. There are "conservative" nationalists, and there are "conservative" capitalist globalists. Just as there are "liberal" national socialists and "liberal" global socialists. Then there are social conservatives, and social liberals, and  they are quite different animals.\n\nBut the real short answer:\n\nThere are a lot of traditionalists of a religious leaning, who do much to help others  throughout the world. They are not necessarily conservative or liberal. They do it willingly, without government mandate. And these people do the lion's share of the work...bless them and help them as much as you can. It's money efficiently spent...
637980
Ghandi.  He suffered for mankind, to bring peace in this world.\n\nHe went on many food fasts almost dying a few times.\n\nHe was a very strong man, all for the sake of humanity.
86274
Versus the Kenyans from Asian countries?\nPower is a corrupting force and has been a part of most civilized peoples interaction with government.  Whether it is cronyism or selling your vote ot embezlement, you can find it almost everywhere, it is just more stark in Africa as the news most western nations recieve abour Africa is negative and the differences in the income levels, a poor person there versus a rich persus is quite vast.
76022
Disagreement in the Middle East degenerates into conflict as a result of the fact that society there is like most of that in the rest of the non-European world - that if you want to change something you cause change to happen by physical means. Example: if you do not like your leader, you kill him. If your neighbor steals from you, you cut his hand off at the very least. This is why generally only despots can rule there. The mindset is that a system like ours where you vote people out is not a viable alternative or is a laughable one. This is why US citiznes are held accountable for their governments - passivity is generally not understood in terms of politics. Countries like India, etc., though seem to have a little of both cultural ideals and embody a mix.\nAlso there is such dire poverty in the M.E. that many have nothing to risk or lose when doing things for a cause and so do not hesitate to risk everything.
196326
they are talking about Sufi heritage i would say. except a few most of the sufi saints were quite liberal specially whom we know in India. but they were always in minority. \n\nDara Shikoh, son of Tajmahal fame shahjahan, was not only tolerant he was a scholler. he read all kinds of relegious philosophies and was not a bit fanatic. he was killed for the crime of being liberal though he was the declared heir of delhi throne. The king Iltutamish though muslim  declared her daughter as his heir. she proved to be a worthy general but "chihalghani" or group of 40 powerfull knights did not accept her and ultimately killed her. \n\neven at the time of partition there were muslim leaders who were against at this division on the basis of relegion. many from the Pak area. they just loose in their own society.
626169
a letter by Ghandi:\n\nSeveral letters have been received by me asking me to declare my views about the Arab-Jew question in Palestine and the persecution of the Jews in Germany. It is not without hesitation that I venture to offer my views on this very difficult question.\n\nMy sympathies are all with the Jews. I have known them intimately in South Africa. Some of them became life-long companions. Through these friends I came to learn much of their age-long persecution. They have been the untouchables of Christianity. The parallel between their treatment by Christians and the treatment of untouchables by Hindus is very close. Religious sanction has been invoked in both cases for the justification of the inhuman treatment meted out to them. Apart from the friendships, therefore, there is the more common universal reason for my sympathy for the Jews.\n\nBut my sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of justice. The cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me. The sanction for it is sought in the Bible and the tenacity with which the Jews have hankered after return to Palestine. Why should they not, like other peoples of the earth, make that country their home where they are born and where they earn their livelihood?\n\nPalestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct. The mandates have no sanction but that of the last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home.\n\nThe nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of the Jews wherever they are born and bred. The Jews born in France are French in precisely the same sense that Christians born in France are French. If the Jews have no home but Palestine, will they relish the idea of being forced to leave the other parts of the world in which they are settled? Or do they want a double home where they can remain at will? This cry for the national home affords a colorable justification for the German expulsion of the Jews. \n\nBut the German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history. The tyrants of old never went so mad as Hitler seems to have gone. And he is doing it with religious zeal. For he is propounding a new religion of exclusive and militant nationalism in the name of which many inhumanity becomes an act of humanity to be rewarded here and hereafter. The crime of an obviously mad but intrepid youth is being visited upon his whole race with unbelievable ferocity. If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified. But I do not believe in any war. A discussion of the pros and cons of such a war is therefore outside my horizon or province. \n\nBut if there can be no war against Germany, even for such a crime as is being committed against the Jews, surely there can be no alliance with Germany. How can there be alliance between a nation which claims to stand for justice and democracy and one which is the declared enemy of both? Or is England drifting towards armed dictatorship and all it means?\n\nGermany is showing to the world how efficiently violence can be worked when it is not hampered by any hypocrisy or weakness masquerading as humanitarianism. It is also showing how hideous, terrible and terrifying it looks in its nakedness.\n\nCan the Jews resist this organized and shameless persecution? Is there a way to preserve their self-respect, and not to feel helpless, neglected and forlorn? I submit there is. No person who has faith in a living God need feel helpless or forlorn. Jehovah of the Jews is a God more personal than the God of the Christians, the Musalmans or the Hindus, t
147243
I think an interesting comparison - in the spirit of Hitler vs. Saddam; would be comparing Neville Chamberlain and Bill Clinton. \n\nChamberlain was the English Prime Minister before Churchhill in WW2, who proclaimed "peace in our time" when he negotiated with Hitler - right before Hitler invaded Poland. He was trying to appease Hitler - believing that they would be able to "talk out" germany's aggression. \n\nClinton - much in the same spirit - tried to take the same approach to the middle east and Saddam Hussein after the Gulf War. \n\nNeither approach was ultimately successful, and ended up costing more war and ending more lives in the end.
611166
Tough call... I'm going to say Ghandi, I think he did the most good for the most people.
804700
A great many of Achebe's proverbs concern matters of power and politics, particularly where related to the effects of colonization. Thus, "If one finger brought oil, it soiled the others" (89) shows the effortless spreading of anarchy among the natives after the advent of the white man.
495691
Founder of the modern Turkish democracy.
141367
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk
599424
I won't be surprised (I am an Egyptian), but would experience all the hatred, disgust and horror I could ever feel. The problem is that US people believe in this mission whole-heartedly and they find it sacred, whereas we, Middle East people, are absolutely sure this is the modern age expansion, policy for a better economy in new colonies but in a new style. None of the two versions is invalid. It all depends on how good the person in charge is good at mustering votes and gaining people to their side. Yeah, I know, a long answer that would bring me criticism.