Where it all began was with a simple man named Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Gandhi’s belief was that accepting non-violence would get rid of the hatred and animosity in the world. His belief is, and was, NOT passive. It’s important for us to be clear about this: There is nothing passive about Gandhian nonviolent action. After Mohanda has become the Indian Independence Movement leader, his belief was heard and passed on by countries all over the world. Many of them have accepted it, and have actually tried them out against their tyrants and ruthless dictators with shocking success. Some examples are: The Americans that lived in the early colonies stopped the British with nonviolence in many different situations. Some examples are the colonists against the Stamp Acts of 1765, the Townshend Acts of 1767, and the Coercive Acts of 1774). All these, and many more, helped nine colonies gain independence by the year 1775. Another good example is the German resistance of the Ruhr. The French and the Belgums wanted to take over and occupy the Ruhr, which belonged to Germany. Germany resited with non-violence, making it really hard for French and Belgums to get in. After a while it got so costly, the French and Belgums retreated. The Russian revolution that occured in 1917 also was nonviolent. most of the fights that went on were nonviolent, which lead to the fall of the czarist system. If the Jews at the concentration camps would have reacted earlier than right before they faced the gas chambers, or before they had actually gone into the carts that would take them to certain death, they would have accomplished what others have and maybe there would never be a Holocaust in the first place. What Jews should have done is right when Hitler gave commands about anti-semitism and hatred, they Jews should have reacted. When the government told the jews to give the German government the guns, they should have acted against it, and the moment Hitler ordered all the Jews to get registered and move to the ghettos the Jews should have started nonviolence against it. If people actually found out about the 500 jews that got killed because they would not follow what Hitler did, or that the Jews were killed by thousands just because they would not turn in their weapons when asked upon, even thought they were part of the army, or that German soldiers would just normally walk into the Jewish houses and kill more than twenty families just because they did not want to leave their house, BEFORE the end of the war, this would have uncovered the truth of the Nazi Germany. Many people did not even know about the holocaust until after the war. If people in Germany would have heard about the animosity that the Nazis showed towards the Jews, they would for sure try to do something that would help save that race. Gandhian philosophy is not used right before the certain death that the Jews had when standing in front of the gas chambers or the firing squad. The correct application of Gandhian philosophy is when the German government actually started hating Jews, when they started sorting the Jews in the ghettos, when the government took away their guns and sent them to concentration camps.
Word Count: 556
This actually makes alot of sence. You would expect that Jewish people doing Satyagraha toward all the Nazi actions would overall hurt the Jews. For example, i first thought that it would make the job for the Nazis easier if Jews never fought back. However, like you said, this nonviolent action could have exposed Hitlers cruel plan of killing the Jewish race to the rest of Germany before it was too late. Nice job!
ReplyDeleteI think that if the jewish people would have begun Satyagraha against the Nazis, that would have been the most effective. This is because if they tried to shoot them or start a war with the Nazis the Nazis would have killed them all because they were so outnumbered, but the jewish people did not do Satyagraha and it came with a large cost.
ReplyDeleteWow this article was really interesting. I never really have looked at the Jews as having a choice whether or not they could fight back because of how powerful Hitler was. And just like any situation today, if someone harms you, you can just fight right back. But to do the exact opposite sounds strange, but it actually does make a lot of sense.
ReplyDeleteVery interesting. It isn't really mentioned on why the jews didn't fight back. Maybe there would have been a diffrence if the jewish population had taken a stand and fought back. Very good job!:)
ReplyDeleteOne thing that is not addressed is probably the most key component of non-violent resistance. Media coverage. In India and in the 1960s American South, the press exposed the cruelty of oppression. This might have proved much more difficult in Nazi Germany where there was such a tight control over information. If the world never found out about the protests, they would have failed. The camps were in remote areas for this very reason.
ReplyDeleteit is very interesting but why didnt the jews fight back?
ReplyDelete