Wednesday, May 4, 2011

A Leader’s Actions; Thoughts & Perspectives












In as Barack Obama is an admitted student of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, I then can only suppose he has come to the conclusion that the people he leads, although self proclaimed and oft times demonstrated as being brave, are not yet ready to explore its greatest depths.

However, I am most heartened and hopeful, prompted by his decided action, in placing himself and his own at greater risk than other options presented as being available and therein minimizing the risk to those in a land of which it was carried out. This then should have it known to the world, that is at least for those who consider things more deeply than a headline, to then perhaps find him and many of his people as still being brave; even if not as yet able and quite prepared to being the bravest.

" If the people are not ready for the exercise of the non-violence of the brave, they must be ready for the use of force in self-defense. There should be no camouflage... It must never be secret. "

-Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

“Cowardice is wholly inconsistent with non-violence.....non-violence presuppose the ability to strike.”

-Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

“ A non-violent man or woman will and should die without retaliation,anger or malice, in self-defense or in defending the honour of their womenfolk. This is the highest form of bravery. If an individual or group of people are unable or unwilling to follow this great law of life, retaliation or resistance unto death is the second best, though a long way off from the first. Cowardice is impotence worse than violence. The coward desire revenge but being afraid to die, he looks to others, maybe to the government of the day, to do the work of defence for him. A coward is less than a man. He does not deserve to be a member of a society of men and women.”

-Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

6 comments:

Neil Bates said...

Phil, I accept the legitimacy of worrying if it was appropriate to shoot Bin Laden now hearing he was unarmed. The European press is fretting over the legality of it. I felt misgivings just on principle, bad a person as he was. However, aside from worrying what would happen if he was taken alive: I have seen various reports that OBL's associates were sworn not to let him ever be taken alive, that they were to shoot him if he would be compromised. Hence, this wasn't in principle like charging into a bunker in WWII and having the squadron and their leader surrender. Any attempt to take OBL out would have been dangerous, everyone else they would keep resisting regardless of how subdued he was. Also as said today, OBL might have had a bomb on him, trackers to help confederates, etc.

Plato said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Plato said...

Phil:In as Barack Obama is an admitted student of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

This is news to me.

But Neil will know that I had great hopes for the United States, but this has become less so in that the directions of late that Barack has had to compromise.

Compromise Health care.

The change has to be total and effective and this change has to be fought in our own backyard as well. The direction our own Federal government has shown has been criminal in that it "failed to act on law" and let it's principle chosen the direction of that of the United States current positions. The landscape of politic has changed in Canada and even though given majority Harper as king, must pay very close attention to the opposition. The undertones of our society.

"Politic Leaders" Barack placed in position, that were the architects of the economic disaster that took place? I do not understand his logic as to the administrations determination concerning Barack's principles as to then surmise that having made "the mistake," that these leaders could fix it?

Best,

Phil Warnell said...

Hi Plato,

What I meant is Obama is a student of the teachings of Gandhi and the one he inspired being Martin Luther King. It should also be reminded that he being only one man and if you read the passages I provided one's course of action is dictated as to be limited not only by ones convictions, yet those of the people you lead and those who oppose you.

“No doubt the non-violent way is always the best, but where it does not come naturally the violent way is both necessary and honourable. Inaction here is rank cowardice and unmanly. It must be shunned at all cost.”

-Mohandas K. Gandhi

“In the composition of the truly brave there should be no malice, no anger, no distrust, no fear of death or physical hurt. Non-violence is certainly not for those who lack these essential qualities.”

-Mohandas K. Gandhi

Best,

Phil

Phil Warnell said...

Hi Neil,

What my focus being, was not to question if OBL provided resistance or not, yet rather if the cycle of violence can ever be broken with such actions. Basically I was agreeing that Obama’s course of action was the best he could have done, given both the nature of the adversary and those he is sworn to protect. That is actually I was sympathizing with Obama and wondered what it would be like to have been forced to make such a decision, knowing there was only one he could possibly arrive at and still hold to his principles.

I equate such a dilemma to being similar to the one Einstein faced when he was deciding whether to sign the letter to Roosevelt which was instrumental in him initiating the Manhattan project. The bottom line being, is to wonder if the world will ever progress to the point where people like Obama and Einstein will be no longer be forced to take what Gandhi would agreed was the only course of action available, even though knowing it being the second best.

Best,

Phil

Plato said...

Phil:I provided one's course of action is dictated as to be limited not only by ones convictions, yet those of the people you lead and those who oppose you

Sort of like developing parameters "around" the space you live in?

Yet in conviction, the dichotomy extends the parameter of that space? Forces one toward new thoughts and things?

Just trying to grasp the full intent and extent of your thinking?

What came to mind is the story about the Freedom Riders I had the privilege of viewing on Oprah yesterday.

Breaking down "the resistance to change" was the choice of the youth at the time and those who stood up. They were willing to die for doing the right thing by ending segregation. By writing their own wills. By practising Non violence.

Segregation is an interesting thing when it comes to "for profit schemes" that polarizes society into two categories too?

Why not make the Health care/education system "the best in the world" then, but by providing means as to who shall be allotted to those who have money and those who do not.

Bring down wait times? How foolish an application but more to drive the point about how all are equal in the eyes of who?

Become "a light" onto the world as well then?

This, has been many years in the making as well and the forces strong for the principal to make it profitable off the backs of the sick. Inherently transforming a life's work, to the demise of all that had been worked for and sanctioned direct toward the elderly and aged, as well as those who must experience the misfortune of illness and disease.

One learns well that dignity must be provided to those in these times that they can walk out of this world in a way that love will have shown no boundaries to what love can encompass, rather then, writing the destiny as to the despair of loosing all that had been gained in life, as the final exit.

The final "mental state" is very important in my views:)One can practice it in their whole life too.:)

Best,