They believe Gandhi is s*x addict or womenizer but keep forgetting all these allegations were made by BBC news paper back then. Gandhi was main figure who was fighting against British Empire. There is high chance for it being propaganda. Even today BBC is full of propaganda against India.
Gandhi(1982 film) is required viewing. Else you won't believe this man did what he did. As Albert Einstein said: "Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth."
B.S. Gandhi was a great man and united a very diverse divisive India but he did not get India it's independence. Please read some history, please stop being ignorant. World War 2, USA's stance against colonialism (Marshall plan funding for Europe by USA was on the line) , UK's debts from fighting a long war of survival not fully paid until 2007, Subhash Chandra Bose's Indian national army's many victories in Burma /Myanmar and Japanese army's victories denting British forces superiority sense, Feb 1946 Indian navy mutiny of 80,000 soldiers, unpopular Delhi trials of INA heroes, collapse of global colonialism everywhere (UK quit almost all of its colonies in the 15-20 years after world War 2) , got India its freedom!!! Gandhi played a role but its blown out of proportion. PLEASE read history people of India.
Of course MK Gandhi was great personality but He was not the cause of our independence. There's a lot unsaid and unceremoniously buried burnt hidden and deliberately suppress history. Clement Atlee the former pm of England once conceded that it was the after effects of WWII and SC Bose INA. For very long we were taught history the way the English wanted. To show case us a loosing and a defeated nation. We need to rewrite our history the Indian way.
@Rajveer Singha Whats with the use of the word "best" . Is it a list of cartoons , you immature punk ? Can they all not be great ? What have you ever accomplished in this tiny , hateful , childish life of yours ?
the conductor kicked him out. years later, the conductor's generations to come won't be able to buy anything in India without the authentication of Gandhi's picture on the country's currency note. Never look down on anyone
This film was made by a British, and if you see the world without racist eyes, you will find that there are racists among all of us--Racism and prejudice is, ironically, colour-blind. What is surprising though, is that they--the 'Whites'-- have again and again made documentaries, essays, films depicting the injustice they did to the "others"; i wonder how many other sociopolitical entities, be it Indians, Russians, Chinese, etc make films depicting the wrongs they did to "others". Interesting...
You guys quite creatively find new ways to support your bloody inhumane history......You would kill a boar and would quietely say.. "it's your fault you looked tasty."
Well a film made by british.. Had you read the books they teach .. They say that british empires benifitted us. Still you have our wealth in your museums shut up your mouth.. I know how many folks out there are racist ..
There are british movies which imply that India was given independence once the British decided they had learned enough from them - You people use these movies to improve your own image. GTFO
"White people" didn't collectively come together to produce this film. It was written by independent artists, who happened to have certain amount of melanin in their system. They also didn't commit these atrocities. It's unlikely even their forefathers did. At most you can blame them for benefiting them many generations later. Labeling people race this and religion that is how all the violence starts. Acknowledge individuals, not their people. Hate individuals, not their people.
@@MrSamulai I agree so much with this. But it seems we are on the path of punishing people for things that happened in the past, in a time where morals, rules and values were different yet they are judged from a modern perspective.
@@allengreene9954 That's too bad and it's not right. I sometimes think that the British "steer" US foreign policy too. Ever heard of the Council of Foreign Relations?
@@jamallabarge2665 Sadly yes. The Commonwealth of Nations is Neo-Colonialism as well along like Françafrique and the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie.
Thanks for this clip I had homework about writing a script on an incident in which Gandhiji fights for the unprivileged, i have been checking for all day and could not find it anywhere
Who ever r criticising Gandhi ji perhaps they do not know d diversities india was facing that time. The path taken by Mahatma is very intelligent and d british had to give a way. Had we used violent means we would have been utterly defeated as Britan was one of d major military power. So do not degrade d noble Soul. Entire world respect his principles.
What would have happened to India had they violently resisted would greatly depend on when it happened. A little alternative history: Thirty to forty years or more, prior to both World Wars, the British would crushed India as you pointed out. Post World War I but within 15 years of World War II, the British alongside their allies despite being one of the victors, would be licking their wounds but still more than a match, the British still win. World War II starts and in full swing up to before 1941, the garrison in India would likely be committing a good bit of resources to fighting the Japanese since they are geographically closer to China and Japan The British still wins but it would be by no means a stomp. I'd say 60-40 in their favor. Up to 1945, odds shift slightly less to 55-45 in Britain's favor but the margin is narrower. Stalin isn't dead yet, but he would see the opportunities of possibly replacing the British with the Soviets. They'd likely would be sending India Soviet weapons, ammunition, advisors, training, and the means to clandestinely implement, indoctrinate, and the means to reproduce said hardware, as they later did for their nominal allies and later satellite countries. 1946 or later, with the assistance of the Soviets, Chinese or both now, the margin moves to India's favor I'd guess, 75-25. At this point, Britain is in no position to bring anyone to heel by force and they'd too busy helping the U.S. and the Soviets clean up the mess Hitler and company left and created some of their own. So had India chose violent revolution at or after 1946, with Soviet and/or Chinese support, they would have a decent chance of winning. The unfortunate catch is they'd likely would have made it one of if not the largest satellite country under a regime who had no qualms whatsoever to killing thousands to millions in order cower the survivors into obedience and didn't care what the rest of world thought of them. Even if they threw the Soviets and/or Chinese out too, I seriously doubt India want to be the fifth major member of the "Violent Revolution Worked Club", of which there are currently four major power members of that club: France, the U.S. , Tsarist Russia/the USSR/the Russian Federation and Mainland China. I also don't see India adopting Soviet-style Communism, much less an Indian Tito telling Stalin and later Khrushchev what to do with themselves in no uncertain terms. Gandhi was the best possible outcome for India, even with Partitioning. The alternative would be trading one power in charge for one or two powers who were even worse than the British ever thought about being and didn't care about what the world thought of them Even if India won a violent revolution, they still lose. I'm not trying to offend anyone. If I have i apologize in advance. This just my guess if they took the violent road and possible outcomes.
Some of these movies done decades ago were far more realistic then what's produced now with all the special effects. The burning of the passes scene has always been hard to watch.
The man tried everything to play by the British rules. Became a lawyer and was a good citizen. Understood Christianity and was principally a good Christian too. All he needed was to be treated as an equal citizen of the empire.
THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN AN ACCENDED MASTER OR SAINT INCARNATES UPON THE EARTH , LIKE THE NAZZERINE WHO WAS NAILED TO A CROSS , OR DR KING ...... HUMANITY IS PRIMITIVE AND ANIMALISTIC, AND THESE ADVANCED SOULS PAY A HIGH PRICE
Gandhi was a great man and united a very diverse and divisive India but he did not get India it's independence. His and his political party Congress are given way too much credit. World War 2, USA's stance against colonialism (Marshall plan funding for Europe by USA was on the line) , UK's debts from fighting a long war of survival not fully paid until 2007, Subhash Chandra Bose's Indian national army's many victories in Burma /Myanmar and Japanese army's victories denting British forces superiority sense, Feb 1946 Indian navy mutiny of 80,000 soldiers, unpopular Delhi trials of INA heroes, collapse of global colonialism everywhere (UK quit almost all of its colonies in the 15-20 years after world War 2) , got India its freedom!!! Gandhi played a role but its blown out of proportion. PLEASE read history people of India.
But without Gandhi .. that is the giant first leap .. India could have been wiped away with violence , British raj .. etc., you can also kindly understand ESSM.. if Gandhi would have thought why should revolt with non violence in SA then so called India would been wiped away in map or India would have become 500 countries...
But it couldn't help the British themselves in doing the right thing, could it? You need an Indian man to educate them on doing the right thing. Why did it take till 1994 for South Africa to do the right thing?
@@Vivenk88. South Africa still isn’t doing the right thing unfortunately. Most of the Land (80 Percent) is still owned by White People and the ANC has lost its Revolutionary Fire and have become Greedy, Shortsighted and Sadly Corrupt. Colonialism in Africa never really ended😢😢😢😢
Sure it wasn't always there. I remember reading about the Sepoy Rebellion. I suspect that quite a few Indian peoples, of all of the nations, were not happy with British 'stewardship'.
What is amazing is that if Gandhi had not gone to South Africa for a case (a country he otherwise would never have visited), the entire world-shaping sequence of events would not have occurred.
MY WIFE..... MAMI.... SAYANG KU AKU MENCINTAIMU..... MAMI.... PRINCESS ALEXIA OF NETHERLAND..... MAHATMA GANDHI.... MAHATMA ERWIN DULMIN GANDHIJI......
First, they talked to Nehru, who told them "whatever you do, dont deify him; show him warts and all". Yes, you wouldn't get that from today's generation of leaders OR people,but they were freedom-fighters, remember--they believed in ideas of freedom of speech and opinion; not in the post-modern rhetoric of tribalism. 2nd, Westerners have made countless films and other stuff exploring their prejudices, not just one film funded by India. You are missing my point here, i think, but no matter.
Hate the hate. Hate not the haters. Nelson Mandela once said that the oppressors are prisoners of their own hate and prejudice. Revenge will generate nothing. Freeing the haters is equally important as freeing the discriminated.
Finding race is easy, how did they find the caste and practice discrimination to this extent? In the 18th century, anyone could've resembled an "upper" caste person.
South Africa was the crucible of racism. Hence, it created the juggernaut that ultimately dismantled not just British India, but most of the British Empire outright.
British Army would finish and destroy Netaji's army in 1 hour. That's why, remember: Pen is mightier than the sword. Thats the reason why the whole world remembers Gandhi and not Netaji. Violence will take you nowhere!
There is a lot of fiction in this scene. When you read Gandhi's autobiography there was never a discussion on whether he was an attorney or about the number of colored attorneys in South Africa. No derogatory terms are mentioned in the autobiography in the arguments that followed. He does mention that he refused to buy the bedding ticket required to overnight in first class. He was thrown off because of his stubbornness and not because of his color. He was allowed to carry on with his journey on the next available train after he bought the bedding ticket, if it was about color he would not have been allowed to carry on. Some additional facts. According to various references the railway line between Durban and Pretoria was only completed in 1895, two years after Gandhi claimed to have made this trip. At the time the city where he was thrown off was part of the British Empire. So this scene may very well have happened in the UK or Canada.
Mr. Gandhi was very disrespectful to the staff. It was quite understandable that the gentlemen politely asked him to leave the next station. They even kindly offered help with luggage. At the time good manners were valued.
I think u didn't watched it correctly. Coz what I saw was ghandhi refusing to take away his luggage. There was no clash btw ghandhi or that crew. The problem was with the white crew. And they were disrespectful towards ghandhi.
"Mr. Gandhi was very disrespectful to the staff. " He did refuse to accept his subordinate status, yes. They were probably vexed that he had the "cheek" to ride in the 1st class cabin with "whites". "They even kindly offered help with luggage. At the time good manners were valued." I hope that you're being sarcastic, facetious or ironic. One hundred years before? Irish would have been kept out of 1st class too. Irish were not considered "respectable" people. They were considered animals who drank, procreated and could not control their own impulses. Many died of famine, at about the same time as the Indian famines. The British were just into famines in those days. The British Empire had a Caste system. Their higher caste people, British Nobility, were amongst the most malignant creatures to ever breathe God's clean air. The average British subject? Depended.... some of them were as decent a people as you could find. Others was as unpleasant as British aristocracy.
Gandhi was ahead of his time. A section of Indian youth love to abuse him as they think that he was a coward. I pity them.
Only rss andhbakhts and cunning congis
He was not a coward. He repeatedly got his ass beat again and again and still never broke
The words Gandhi and coward should never again be used in the same sentence.
They believe Gandhi is s*x addict or womenizer but keep forgetting all these allegations were made by BBC news paper back then. Gandhi was main figure who was fighting against British Empire.
There is high chance for it being propaganda. Even today BBC is full of propaganda against India.
@@alisheriff9289 I agree. Taking beatings to show moral superiority takes a lot of moral courage.
They threw him out of the train...…later he threw all of them out of India!
@@veergujral6517 but the people who colonized us were the same...
Very interesting contrast and comparison.
O really then, who is Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose,
He was thrown off a train in South Africa.
These guys weren’t British. They were Boers. The Boers hated the British.
Gandhi(1982 film) is required viewing. Else you won't believe this man did what he did.
As Albert Einstein said: "Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth."
Bullsh*t
That line is applies to Michael Jackson, Princess Diana and Steven Spielberg
And that’s how we got independence...The power of one man who couldn’t travel first class.
B.S. Gandhi was a great man and united a very diverse divisive India but he did not get India it's independence. Please read some history, please stop being ignorant. World War 2, USA's stance against colonialism (Marshall plan funding for Europe by USA was on the line) , UK's debts from fighting a long war of survival not fully paid until 2007, Subhash Chandra Bose's Indian national army's many victories in Burma /Myanmar and Japanese army's victories denting British forces superiority sense, Feb 1946 Indian navy mutiny of 80,000 soldiers, unpopular Delhi trials of INA heroes, collapse of global colonialism everywhere (UK quit almost all of its colonies in the 15-20 years after world War 2) , got India its freedom!!! Gandhi played a role but its blown out of proportion. PLEASE read history people of India.
Of course MK Gandhi was great personality but He was not the cause of our independence. There's a lot unsaid and unceremoniously buried burnt hidden and deliberately suppress history.
Clement Atlee the former pm of England once conceded that it was the after effects of WWII and SC Bose INA.
For very long we were taught history the way the English wanted. To show case us a loosing and a defeated nation.
We need to rewrite our history the Indian way.
@Rajveer Singha Whats with the use of the word "best" . Is it a list of cartoons , you immature punk ? Can they all not be great ? What have you ever accomplished in this tiny , hateful , childish life of yours ?
@Rajveer Singha 😂😂how
He showed us the power of TRUTH. Something that left our shores in 2014.
You never throw young men out of trains. There will be severe consequences !!!
Throwing anyone off of a train is serious business. Better be a good reason.
@@jamallabarge2665 Do you like this movie?
@@TheFunnyDictator I don't care for how Ghandi was treated.... especially that wanker with the night stick. Beating someone for burning things....
Young men do not suffer humiliation with grace. After their anger passes resolution can appear.
@@jamallabarge2665 or reject them from Art School or punish them severely most of their lives.
the conductor kicked him out.
years later, the conductor's generations to come won't be able to buy anything in India without the authentication of Gandhi's picture on the country's currency note.
Never look down on anyone
True, but this part of the movie took place in South Africa.
@@Mrraugut I'm aware of that, but i referring to a moment when the Conductor's generations decide to come to India on vacation
@@Gabyrock89 I don’t think Boers go to India very often.
This film was made by a British, and if you see the world without racist eyes, you will find that there are racists among all of us--Racism and prejudice is, ironically, colour-blind.
What is surprising though, is that they--the 'Whites'-- have again and again made documentaries, essays, films depicting the injustice they did to the "others"; i wonder how many other sociopolitical entities, be it Indians, Russians, Chinese, etc make films depicting the wrongs they did to "others". Interesting...
You guys quite creatively find new ways to support your bloody inhumane history......You would kill a boar and would quietely say.. "it's your fault you looked tasty."
Well a film made by british..
Had you read the books they teach .. They say that british empires benifitted us. Still you have our wealth in your museums shut up your mouth.. I know how many folks out there are racist ..
There are british movies which imply that India was given independence once the British decided they had learned enough from them - You people use these movies to improve your own image. GTFO
"White people" didn't collectively come together to produce this film. It was written by independent artists, who happened to have certain amount of melanin in their system. They also didn't commit these atrocities. It's unlikely even their forefathers did. At most you can blame them for benefiting them many generations later. Labeling people race this and religion that is how all the violence starts. Acknowledge individuals, not their people. Hate individuals, not their people.
@@MrSamulai I agree so much with this. But it seems we are on the path of punishing people for things that happened in the past, in a time where morals, rules and values were different yet they are judged from a modern perspective.
And then British Empire paid the heavy price for this
It was time for the UK to go home. Long over due.
@@jamallabarge2665 The Empire never really ended. Many African and West Indian Countries are still decimated by their doing to this day🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢
@@allengreene9954 That's too bad and it's not right.
I sometimes think that the British "steer" US foreign policy too. Ever heard of the Council of Foreign Relations?
@@jamallabarge2665 Sadly yes. The Commonwealth of Nations is Neo-Colonialism as well along like Françafrique and the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie.
Amrish. This is the movie that made a moshin for him to do indy/tod
Thank you Richard. Im forever thankful.
Thanks for this clip I had homework about writing a script on an incident in which Gandhiji fights for the unprivileged, i have been checking for all day and could not find it anywhere
Who ever r criticising Gandhi ji perhaps they do not know d diversities india was facing that time. The path taken by Mahatma is very intelligent and d british had to give a way. Had we used violent means we would have been utterly defeated as Britan was one of d major military power. So do not degrade d noble Soul. Entire world respect his principles.
What does the ji mean?
What would have happened to India had they violently resisted would greatly depend on when it happened. A little alternative history:
Thirty to forty years or more, prior to both World Wars, the British would crushed India as you pointed out.
Post World War I but within 15 years of World War II, the British alongside their allies despite being one of the victors, would be licking their wounds but still more than a match, the British still win.
World War II starts and in full swing up to before 1941, the garrison in India would likely be committing a good bit of resources to fighting the Japanese since they are geographically closer to China and Japan The British still wins but it would be by no means a stomp. I'd say 60-40 in their favor.
Up to 1945, odds shift slightly less to 55-45 in Britain's favor but the margin is narrower.
Stalin isn't dead yet, but he would see the opportunities of possibly replacing the British with the Soviets. They'd likely would be sending India Soviet weapons, ammunition, advisors, training, and the means to clandestinely implement, indoctrinate, and the means to reproduce said hardware, as they later did for their nominal allies and later satellite countries.
1946 or later, with the assistance of the Soviets, Chinese or both now, the margin moves to India's favor I'd guess, 75-25.
At this point, Britain is in no position to bring anyone to heel by force and they'd too busy helping the U.S. and the Soviets clean up the mess Hitler and company left and created some of their own.
So had India chose violent revolution at or after 1946, with Soviet and/or Chinese support, they would have a decent chance of winning. The unfortunate catch is they'd likely would have made it one of if not the largest satellite country under a regime who had no qualms whatsoever to killing thousands to millions in order cower the survivors into obedience and didn't care what the rest of world thought of them.
Even if they threw the Soviets and/or Chinese out too, I seriously doubt India want to be the fifth major member of the "Violent Revolution Worked Club", of which there are currently four major power members of that club: France, the U.S. , Tsarist Russia/the USSR/the Russian Federation and Mainland China.
I also don't see India adopting Soviet-style Communism, much less an Indian Tito telling Stalin and later Khrushchev what to do with themselves in no uncertain terms.
Gandhi was the best possible outcome for India, even with Partitioning. The alternative would be trading one power in charge for one or two powers who were even worse than the British ever thought about being and didn't care about what the world thought of them
Even if India won a violent revolution, they still lose.
I'm not trying to offend anyone. If I have i apologize in advance. This just my guess if they took the violent road and possible outcomes.
@@chrismc410 It's a well reasoned analysis. Thank you.
@@chrismc410 it's a term of respect, somewhat similar to sir. We mainly use it for greeting people who are older than us.
At least I know now what the grudge match between India and Pakistan is about. If I know Gandhi, he’d be sad to see history repeating itself. 🇮🇳🇵🇰
A story for eternity 🥲.
The actor playing the conductor was the comic lead in "The Gods Must Be Crazy." Very stark difference!
Is that right? I knew I'd seen him somewhere.
The guy who keeps saying ay ya ya ya yay? 😅
@@joetrump7527 it's a interesting psychological phenomenon ;)
He also played in The Power Of One
The name of the actor who is the baggage handler in this scene with Gandhi is South African actor John Kani. I’m glad I can give you his name. ☮️
Some of these movies done decades ago were far more realistic then what's produced now with all the special effects. The burning of the passes scene has always been hard to watch.
The man tried everything to play by the British rules. Became a lawyer and was a good citizen. Understood Christianity and was principally a good Christian too. All he needed was to be treated as an equal citizen of the empire.
That was the reason why u lost the British empire
@@gulamchoudhruy8872a retard, not a revolutionary
@@niranjansrinivasan4042. I always wonder how Different would be if the more Radical Members got ahold of the Freedom Movement.
@@allengreene9954 India would have got freedom earlier and there would have been a total rehaul of Government system
THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN AN ACCENDED MASTER OR SAINT INCARNATES UPON THE EARTH , LIKE THE NAZZERINE WHO WAS NAILED TO A CROSS , OR DR KING ...... HUMANITY IS PRIMITIVE AND ANIMALISTIC, AND THESE ADVANCED SOULS PAY A HIGH PRICE
Gandhi (1982 film)
MY WIFE..... MAMI... SAYANG KU... KAI MADISON TRUMP GANDHIJI.... MAHATMA ERWIN DULMIN GANDHIJI.... MAHATMA ERWIN DULMIN GANDHIJI... MAHATMA ERWIN DULMIN GANDHIJI... MAHATMA ERWIN DULMIN GANDHIJI
...
MY WIFE..... MAMI...,.. SAYANG KU... KAI MADISON TRUMP GANDHIJI..... MAHATMA ERWIN DULMIN GANDHIJI...... MAHATMA ERWIN DULMIN GANDHIJI..,. MAHATMA ERWIN DULMIN GANDHIJI.....
Gandhi was a great man and united a very diverse and divisive India but he did not get India it's independence. His and his political party Congress are given way too much credit. World War 2, USA's stance against colonialism (Marshall plan funding for Europe by USA was on the line) , UK's debts from fighting a long war of survival not fully paid until 2007, Subhash Chandra Bose's Indian national army's many victories in Burma /Myanmar and Japanese army's victories denting British forces superiority sense, Feb 1946 Indian navy mutiny of 80,000 soldiers, unpopular Delhi trials of INA heroes, collapse of global colonialism everywhere (UK quit almost all of its colonies in the 15-20 years after world War 2) , got India its freedom!!! Gandhi played a role but its blown out of proportion. PLEASE read history people of India.
But without Gandhi .. that is the giant first leap .. India could have been wiped away with violence , British raj .. etc., you can also kindly understand ESSM..
if Gandhi would have thought why should revolt with non violence in SA then so called India would been wiped away in map or India would have become 500 countries...
@ESSM Gandhi wasn't all that great tbh
Wait a minute so Mandarin was once 'the MAHATMA' GANDHI?... What the hell happened to him on the earth-616?...
Either you Die as a Hero or you live long to see yourself as a villain
Its bravery to scream & fight back.
But it take immense courage to stand still and not give up... no matter how hard u r being hit.
To realize that the class separation still exist.. in these times the separation even grows larger do to economic downturn..
Gandhi's western education helped him a lot.
But it couldn't help the British themselves in doing the right thing, could it? You need an Indian man to educate them on doing the right thing. Why did it take till 1994 for South Africa to do the right thing?
@@Vivenk88. South Africa still isn’t doing the right thing unfortunately. Most of the Land (80 Percent) is still owned by White People and the ANC has lost its Revolutionary Fire and have become Greedy, Shortsighted and Sadly Corrupt. Colonialism in Africa never really ended😢😢😢😢
The fire for liberty and Equality began from here..
Sure it wasn't always there. I remember reading about the Sepoy Rebellion.
I suspect that quite a few Indian peoples, of all of the nations, were not happy with British 'stewardship'.
Hello 8KHB
What is amazing is that if Gandhi had not gone to South Africa for a case (a country he otherwise would never have visited), the entire world-shaping sequence of events would not have occurred.
MY WIFE..... MAMI.... SAYANG KU AKU MENCINTAIMU..... MAMI.... PRINCESS ALEXIA OF NETHERLAND..... MAHATMA GANDHI.... MAHATMA ERWIN DULMIN GANDHIJI......
Throwing him out of train was grave mistake
Afrikaners were brutal
First, they talked to Nehru, who told them "whatever you do, dont deify him; show him warts and all". Yes, you wouldn't get that from today's generation of leaders OR people,but they were freedom-fighters, remember--they believed in ideas of freedom of speech and opinion; not in the post-modern rhetoric of tribalism.
2nd, Westerners have made countless films and other stuff exploring their prejudices, not just one film funded by India. You are missing my point here, i think, but no matter.
Nice to see a upper caste feel the discrimination they did to lower castes in India
So what shall we do now?
Gandhi was not ‘upper caste’ to begin with
@@ishaandgreat3887 he is brahmin or bania. Only those castes had money for sending foreign during that time.
Hate the hate. Hate not the haters. Nelson Mandela once said that the oppressors are prisoners of their own hate and prejudice. Revenge will generate nothing. Freeing the haters is equally important as freeing the discriminated.
Finding race is easy, how did they find the caste and practice discrimination to this extent? In the 18th century, anyone could've resembled an "upper" caste person.
South Africa was the crucible of racism. Hence, it created the juggernaut that ultimately dismantled not just British India, but most of the British Empire outright.
😎😎 britishers don't know that he is gandhi 😎😎they throw him out of train and he threw them out of india
😎😎Don't mess with a indian
in india any change will come through protest and it will take many years as per history though change should be quick
I couldn’t tell if he was Gandhi or Sam Waterson-aka a Young Jack McCoy.
Nowadays there are ambulances and paramedics at public demonstrations right? Is it a Prerequisite?
I was betten like Gandhi once a save by a woman in the pre millinium.....
Gandhiji realised from every incident from his childhood that made him to be Satyagrahi and moved this nation
this one incident changed history & did british leave India on their own , lol
Random comment. : (
That was the stupidest thing a British can do, because that resulted in the end of the British empire
They were Dutch-Boers not British
What film is this
Gandhi (1982)
Feckin Boer
It need power to stand.
699
I'm 8MSB, not 8KHB but hello just the same.
Good
just wow
India got independence due to netaji not gandhi
British Army would finish and destroy Netaji's army in 1 hour. That's why, remember: Pen is mightier than the sword. Thats the reason why the whole world remembers Gandhi and not Netaji. Violence will take you nowhere!
😂😂anyone asked you?? That prove you people are from it cell😂😂
@@gormint3997 jai mahatma gandhi 🙏🙏
From WhatsApp University
@@rohita6275 Me Delhi Technological University me hu....soo apni aukat yaad rakho
🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
There is a lot of fiction in this scene. When you read Gandhi's autobiography there was never a discussion on whether he was an attorney or about the number of colored attorneys in South Africa. No derogatory terms are mentioned in the autobiography in the arguments that followed. He does mention that he refused to buy the bedding ticket required to overnight in first class. He was thrown off because of his stubbornness and not because of his color. He was allowed to carry on with his journey on the next available train after he bought the bedding ticket, if it was about color he would not have been allowed to carry on. Some additional facts. According to various references the railway line between Durban and Pretoria was only completed in 1895, two years after Gandhi claimed to have made this trip. At the time the city where he was thrown off was part of the British Empire. So this scene may very well have happened in the UK or Canada.
Mr. Gandhi was very disrespectful to the staff. It was quite understandable that the gentlemen politely asked him to leave the next station. They even kindly offered help with luggage. At the time good manners were valued.
I think u didn't watched it correctly. Coz what I saw was ghandhi refusing to take away his luggage. There was no clash btw ghandhi or that crew. The problem was with the white crew. And they were disrespectful towards ghandhi.
Watch it again correctly, Silas
"Mr. Gandhi was very disrespectful to the staff. "
He did refuse to accept his subordinate status, yes. They were probably vexed that he had the "cheek" to ride in the 1st class cabin with "whites".
"They even kindly offered help with luggage. At the time good manners were valued."
I hope that you're being sarcastic, facetious or ironic.
One hundred years before? Irish would have been kept out of 1st class too. Irish were not considered "respectable" people. They were considered animals who drank, procreated and could not control their own impulses.
Many died of famine, at about the same time as the Indian famines. The British were just into famines in those days.
The British Empire had a Caste system. Their higher caste people, British Nobility, were amongst the most malignant creatures to ever breathe God's clean air.
The average British subject? Depended.... some of them were as decent a people as you could find. Others was as unpleasant as British aristocracy.
@@jamallabarge2665 "I hope you're being sarcastic, facetious or ironic." *YES*
@@waldemarsilas6675 where you dropped on your head as an infant or what?
Bloody coolie
Have you no shame?
Bloody Neanderthal
No wonder you destroy history when a jew is the director.