Stock

1. For Gandhi, the concept of civil disobedience non-violence was extremely important. In what ways is it more powerful than guns? What are its drawbacks, that is, in what types of situations is it not appropriate?

1. Even though gun can kill people, killing isn’t going to solve the cause of the problem and it’s not a sustainable solution. By being non-violent, he gains empathy from the spectators across the world. Also, the opponent will respect him and hatred will decrease and whether you win or lose compromising will create a win-win situation because neither will lose anything. However, there are drawbacks of using non-violent method. First, Non-violence takes time and to make it effective everybody needs to participate. Start by having the right attitude; you need to understand that not fighting back doesn’t mean you are weak, It’s the best way to show your strength by enduring your physical and motional pain. It’s not easy to make everybody follow the non-violence because it’s against human nature to keep anger, sadness and hatred inside or express it in soft side. Second, sometimes you have to self-sacrifice. Renounce everything, endure every pain and let go. Compromising means give and take. While we get some it also means we lose some benefits.

1.  Gandhi said, “English factories make the clothes that make our poverty.” What does he mean by this and what are its implications as they relate to globalization?

1. From my understanding, this is an example of a negative side effect of globalization to country that has no competitive advantage over another country. In this example, Gandhi was saying that poverty is the worst form of violence. English used Indian as labor and while indigo growers (Indian) could not sell crops, Landlord (English) demand some amount of rent. All profit went to British and they refused to pay labor costs to Indians. Further more, globalization can create unfair competition between  developing countries (such as Thailand, Cambodia and India) and developed countries (such as America, France and English) because the market in those developed countries is bigger. People who immigrate from their own country to find new job mostly end up working as a labor and doesn’t create benefits for themselves but the country they are living in.

Overall, globalization helps the world economic flow and expand.

1. Explain the following quote and relate it to situations in Thailand “an eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind.”

1. “An eye for an eye” means that if someone did something bad to you, you will do something bad back at that person. And if this continues, there will be no such thing as peace. In Thailand, people tend to seek for revenge. This really deteriorate the country. In the past 10 years, Thailand has experienced way too many bloodshed demonstration, coups, and unrests. This really disturb the country not only politically, but also economically.  All  the political problems make Bangkok and other cities in Thailand are less desirable to travel to. Sometime, people need to learn to forgive and forget. While this may be not just to a certain group, it might be the best way to make the country move forward.
2. Another example is a conflict between mechanical students from different institution in Thailand. This is a chronic issue in Thailand for so long. Students from different institution fight each other back and forth. They fix the problem wrongly using violence and lead to chaos. The real solution are they have to fight against their own anger, start negotiate and compromise using non-violence.

1. Gandhi believed that non-violence resistance can set as a minor to the opponent and awaken their sense of moral shame. The opponent will then act with justice and both sides will reach agreement. Do you agree that this true? What problem do you see this philosophy?  

1. I totally agree with this. I deeply believe that people are good in nature just like “The basic nature of human” philosophy: man as animal is violent, but in spirit he is nonviolent. However, sometime they may be blind by their surroundings, which cause people to do horrible things. So, I really like this philosophy. For people who disagrees that all humans are good in nature, they would not agree with Gandhi’s method of non-violence. If we respond to our opponent with non-violence. They will start to feel guilty and realize that what they did was unreasonable and inappropriate. Moreover, Non-violence teaches us to compromise with the opponent. We have to be open-minded and easily accept others’ view point by thinking of yourself in one’s situation will help us understand his reasons behind every action.