Page 1 of 5
European Journal of Applied Sciences – Vol. 13, No. 02
Publication Date: April 25, 2025
DOI:10.14738/aivp.1302.18543.
Manfred, D. (2025). Did Gandhi Never Exist? Or: Can You Defend Yourself to Death? European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol -
13(02). 304-308.
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
Did Gandhi Never Exist? Or : Can You Defend Yourself to Death?
Manfred, Doepp
HolisticCenter, 13 Haupt St., Abtwil 9030, Switzerland
ABSTRACT
War has become acceptable again. People are talking about it as a different form of
politics, as if the wars of the past decades had not brought death and misery to many
populations. And as if a nuclear war would not mean the annihilation of entire
peoples. This is based on a friend-enemy mentality. Alongside Jesus the Christ, it
was above all Mahatma Gandhi who contradicted this. He not only called for non- violent resistance, but was also successful in South Africa and India. Passive social
resistance can checkmate an aggressor or dominator, as this implies cultural
superiority. If we want to maintain our civilizational status, we urgently need to
return to Gandhi.
INTRODUCTION
Defended to death? "Never again war!" was the slogan in Germany in 1945. It is a noble
intention - but the time to put it into practice never seems to come.
"Do not resist evil", it is written in the Sermon on the Mount in the New Testament. (1) If Jesus
the Christ were to say this on a talk show today, he would immediately receive a verbal rebuke:
impossible! He would be labeled an illusionist. Perhaps the founder of Christianity simply could
not have imagined the extent of evil that we are confronted with today. But there is a surprising
reason why it is wrong to defend ourselves against attackers. It doesn't have to have anything
to do with love and mercy, but rather with self-preservation. After all, let's take a look at what
the countries at war recent decades have achieved by fighting back. Only devastated
landscapes, strife and many thousands of deaths. If what is supposed to be defended is
destroyed as a result of this resistance, shouldn't we even think about the principle of "defense"
Let's use an overarching logic: the Old Testament principle of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a
tooth" leads to an endless spiral of violence. So-called evil can never be finally defeated or
forced to give up. The spiral of violence can only be broken if at least one side renounces
violence and forgives the opponent.
Nowadays, a country cannot be defended militarily. You have to read that sentence twice. Of
course it is not true that a country cannot be defended. It is quite possible, possibly even
successfully. But the difference between a defense and a military defense is a fundamental one
that cannot be glossed over, no matter how many embellishments. Strictly speaking, it is no
longer possible to defend a country militarily, at least not in the 21st century.
Let us first look at what is actually to be defended. The landscapes, towns, villages, forests, lakes
and floodplains, rivers, meadows, heaths? Of course, but if you defend them militarily, they will
be devastated afterwards, and a defense that destroys what is supposed to be defended is
nonsense. Defending the population of a state territory militarily is just as nonsensical, because
according to current plans, military defense of the population would consist of killing the
Page 2 of 5
305
Manfred, D. (2025). Did Gandhi Never Exist? Or: Can You Defend Yourself to Death? European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 13(02). 304-308.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.1302.18543.
population, if necessary by bombing them with nuclear bombs. If the enemy is in the country,
it can also be nuclear bombs from the Allies.
One could argue that they want to defend the population against subjugation and enslavement
and thus their freedom. Can you be free when you are dead? Hardly. The very fact that military
conscription is one of the oldest and most effective forms of subjugation and enslavement
makes the matter illogical. There are currently two world powers whose governments are
actively working to eliminate the infiltration of the "Deep State": Russia and the USA under
President Trump. These two "Christian" states of all countries are waging a proxy war in
Ukraine. Russia claims that during the years of American rule over Ukraine, a Wild West system
has taken root there, in which everything conceivably evil has been able to spread, including
"Nazis" ("Azov troops"). (2)
It will take a generation of historians, sociologists, political scientists and psychologists to find
out why a certain group of self-appointed leaders, in a kind of transgenerational repetition
compulsion, eighty years after the Soviet flag was raised on the Reichstag in Berlin, have once
again come up with the idea of finally closing the bag. Perhaps this is really due to the subliminal
fear that has been fermenting and smouldering over the centuries that the mythical Russian
bear will one day finally take revenge for what the Germans have put him through all this time.
GANDHI HAS GIVEN IT
Mahatma Gandhi (* October 2, 1869 in Porbandar, Gujarat; † January 30, 1948 in New Delhi),
was an Indian lawyer, publicist, moral teacher, ascetic and pacifist who became the spiritual
and political leader of the Indian independence movement (Figure 1). The independence
movement, which took up Gandhi's ideas of non-violent action and civil disobedience, brought
about the end of British colonial rule over India in August 1947. Without military defense? From
today's perspective, this seems impossible.
Fig 1: Gandhi, portrait from 1931
He set out his basic attitude of Satyagraha, the persistent adherence to the truth, in numerous
writings and continued to develop it further. In addition to ahimsa, non-violence, it also
Page 3 of 5
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom 306
European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 13, Issue 02, April-2025
includes other ethical demands such as swaraj, which means both individual and political self- control and self-determination. In London, Gandhi studied a lot of religious literature. In India,
he had developed reservations about Christianity, partly due to the presence of the British
military and Christian missionaries. Now he began to engage with the content of this religion.
The Old Testament repelled him, but he felt addressed by the Sermon on the Mount. He
declared: "I will tell the Hindus that their lives are incomplete if they do not reverently study the
teachings of Jesus." (3) During this time, he also read the verses of the Hindu holy scripture
Bhagavad Gītā ("the song of God"), which was to become the most important book for him
throughout his life. He also studied Buddha and Mohammed, the founder of Islam. He was of
the opinion that the true faith unites the members of the different faiths. (4)
Another important basic concept in Gandhi's ethics was his neologism satyagraha ("adherence
to truth"), a term he coined to avoid speaking of passive resistance. (5) He thus pursued an
active strategy of non-cooperation, i.e. transgression of unjust laws and orders, strikes,
including hunger strikes, boycotts and provocation of arrests. For him, satyagraha was closely
linked to non-violence: "Truth excludes the use of violence, since man is not capable of
recognizing the absolute truth and is therefore not entitled to punish." (6)
During his time in prison, Gandhi read an essay by the American Henry David Thoreau from
1849, in which the strategy of civil disobedience is discussed. (7) In it, Gandhi found his
philosophy again. Gandhi had also studied the trial of Socrates, discovered Socrates as a kindred
thinker and translated his defense speech into the Indian language Gujarati. (8)
Gandhi also encouraged his fellow countrymen in South Africa to engage in passive, non-violent
resistance. He formulated eleven self-commitments for life in his ashram: "Love of truth, non- violence, chastity, disinterest in material things, fearlessness, vegetarian diet, non-stealing,
physical labor, equality of religions, commitment to the "untouchables" and exclusive use of
domestic products (Swadeshi)". (9) In order to force the British to leave the Indian subcontinent,
Gandhi established the concept of non-cooperation: all Indian employees and sub-officials
should no longer work for the colonial rulers, any cooperation should be refused without
violence in order to disempower the British. In August 1920, Gandhi officially proclaimed the
campaign of non-cooperation. He believed that non-violence was far superior to violence.
HIS IDEAS
Gandhi also developed his own idea of democracy: democracy must mobilize the entire
physical, economic and spiritual sources of all the different areas of people's life in the service
of the common good of all. (10) The country should be organized in a decentralized manner,
with the village at the center, with local self-sufficiency and self-government. These villages and
other communities were to elect their own representatives by consensus and thus form the
state as a "community of communities", which Gandhi saw less as a nation state than as a social
and cultural unit. Whether Gandhi's methods could be successful in any liberation struggle is
debatable. Matthias Eberling (2006) assesses Gandhi's role in India's independence from the
British Empire:
"A totalitarian dictatorship would have simply broken and obliterated a tender
figure in a loincloth like him (Gandhi). But in a democracy with a critical press -