One Common Agreement Between Gandhian And Marxism Is

You will have noticed that these two readings of Gandhi, which I pass off as absurd, are made for each other. Both deny exactly what I call his “integrity”, the latter believing that he is everything and that he is only a philosopher with no serious interest in politics, the former claiming that our interest in him is due only to his political successes, not to his distant philosophy. Therefore, the idea of “integrity” is precisely intended to make it clear that these two points of view, despite their open opposition to each other, have a common fundamental error, because they do not perceive what I call Gandhi`s integrity. There is a great resemblance between Mahatma Gandhi and Kart Marx. But if the end goal of these two, the seventh of a stateless and classless society, is different, their means of achieving this goal are different. Mahatma Gandhi wanted to achieve this goal by non-violent means, but Marx wanted to achieve it by violent means. 26 degrees isotherm is observed at a depth between 50 and 100 meters, and therefore testimony 1 is not correct. Gandhi`s Marxist interpretation contains important and valid insights; but it`s too simplified, and the image is complex and chaotic. The congress under Gandhi`s leadership was not a party of the great bourgeoisie. Although it did not reject the institution of private property, it gave the state a considerable role of regulation and redistribution, stressed the search for social justice and was not a defender of unbridled capitalism. To say, as some Marxists do, that The Congress, not being in favour of the abolition of the capitalist mode of production, was therefore its spokesman, it is all too easy to consider the range of political possibilities open to radicals. The Congress was essentially a bourgeois party that constantly gained access to new groups and interests on both sides of the economic consensus, which was neither entirely capitalist nor entirely socialist, and which was not strongly oriented towards a particular group. The ideas of the right and the left grew around their bourgeois and petty core, and were shaped by it.

Nehru said: “Even our most reactionary people are not as rigid as in Europe and America. And even our most advanced people are somehow influenced by Gandhiji. It has created links between conflicting interests. No philosopher or system of thought has shaped my thinking, although Marx`s thought has created, in a casual sense, a framework in which one can think of politics and society. I was very interested in politics and society when I was studying in Bombay [now Mumbai] and Oxford, and then in the late 1980s. In between, I studied almost exclusively first, then I wrote about questions of language and mind, and I was relatively apolitical while doing this scientific work, even though I kept myself informed and, I suppose, I judged myself on politics during this period of distant study.