The work which Gandhiji had taken in hand was not only the achievement of political freedom but the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of freedom. In the political struggle, the fight was against a foreign power and all could and did either join in it or at least wish it a success and give it to their moral support. In establishing the social order of his pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people.Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival through his descendants after his body is reduced to ashes. That new order cannot be established without radically changing men's mind and attitude towards property and at some stage or other, the haves has to yield place to the havenots. We have seen in our time attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it in action after it was achieved But this was done by and large by the use of physical force in the result, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse form under a different face It may even be that like gas kept confined within metallic containers under great pressure, or water held behind a big dam that breaks the barrier, a reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form This enforced egalitarianism contains in its bosom the seed of its own destruction.The root cause of class-conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct So long as the ideal that is held up to be achieved is one of the securing the maximum of material satisfaction. Possessiveness is neither suppressed nor eliminated but grows by what it feeds upon. Nor does it cease to be such, it is possessiveness still whether it is confined to a few only or is shared by many. If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum of material goods whether by few or by all but on voluntary enlightened renunciation denying oneself what cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi showed us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who have for the benefit of all those who have not so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive to the amelioration and progress of society.
Answers
Answer:
The work which Gandhiji had taken up was not only achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. In the political struggle, the fight was against a foreign power and all one could do, was either join it or wish it success and give it their moral support. In establishing the social order of his pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former, he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his decendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the “haves” have to yield place to the “have-nots”. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that, it will not reappear in an even worse form under s different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier brakes, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains in its bosom the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So
Long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness is neither suppresses nor eliminated but grows on what it feeds. Nor does it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideals of trusteeship by those who “ have” for the benefit of all those who “have not” so, that instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of
Explanation:
The work which Gandhiji had taken up was not only achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his
In the ultimate analysis it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that s bosom the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So
Long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness is neither suppresses nor eliminated but grows on what it feeds. Nor does it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If he expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by