At a critical and rather dark time in history, Mahatma Ghandi did what most would consider unthinkable or even too idealistic. He went out of his way to write letters to Adolf Hitler. To the misfortune of Ghandi, the letters never made it to Hitler's hands because the British intercepted it and considered it a communication with the enemy or sympathizing with the enemy when he called him "friend." We will analyze this letter together.
Consider these questions for the task afterward: would you ever consider writing to a dictator with the intent of telling them to stop their crimes of humanity and expect the dictator to stop? Do you believe or feel words or speech have impact? If these letters came to Hitler's hands, what do you think he would have said? Do you think there's value enough in Ghandi's letter that he would have changed Hitler's mind? Why or why not?
After reading an analyzing the letter, write your own letter to Ghandi stating your opinion about his efforts to communicate to Hitler and Mussolini. Use quotes and references from his own letter to communicate your point. Your letter should be about 3 Paragraphs to solidly make your point and communicate your views.
Example:
Dear Ghandi,
I commend you for the efforts you took, however well or not they may have been received, to make strides towards a better future and call for an end to the war. I can honestly say, with all sincerity, that Hitler is no real friend to mankind with exception to those who follow closely next to him to help him achieve his agenda of European control and dominance. With all due respect, I do not honestly think you can call such a figure your friend, especially when you have not met him personally in the slightest. At a time like this and under the conditions and circumstances, you can easily be considered a sympathizer to the party. While you said, "I own no foes," your words can be comfortably and conveniently twisted into the minds of many into thinking you simply are on his side despite your condemnation of Hitler's draconian treatment of neighboring countries in Europe. Many people are not of the mindset that, "one negative thing should not negate all of the positives." But, unfortunately that's not the case. In many cases of trial and tribulation, it is easy to become too idealistic, to the point of our detriment. It is possible that upon receiving your letters, Hitler can claim alliance with the British, and further aid their destruction of your own country whilst managing to destroy Great Britain itself and take over India by proxy. Your kindness and compassion are commendable, however, you may want to consider delaying your naiveté and focus on the capacities of which you may be able to redirect your compassion and kindness to your own country within your current circumstances first before intervening with the status quo of other countries. Do note, it is recognizable that you truly do care for the nations of the world and peoples of the world by calling an end to the atrocities and genocides. For the sake of mankind, make aim to not sabotage your leadership in India by forming, or giving the appearance of forming a friendship or alliance with a tyrannical leader such as Hitler.
Kindest Regards,
Steve
DEAR FRIEND, That I address you as a friend is no formality. I own no foes. My business in life has been for the past 33 years to enlist the friendship of the whole of humanity by befriending mankind, irrespective of race, colour or creed. I hope you will have the time and desire to know how a good portion of humanity who have been living under the influence of that doctrine of universal friendship view your action. We have no doubt about your bravery or devotion to your fatherland, nor do we believe that you are the monster described by your opponents. But your own writings and pronouncements and those of your friends and admirers leave no room for doubt that many of your acts are monstrous and unbecoming of human dignity, especially in the estimation of men like me who believe in universal friendliness. Such are your humiliation of Czechoslovakia, the rape of Poland and the swallowing of Denmark. I am aware that your view of life regards such spoliations as virtuous acts. But we have been taught from childhood to regard them as acts degrading humanity. Hence we cannot possibly wish success to your arms. But ours is a unique position. We resist British Imperialism no less than Nazism. If there is a difference, it is in degree. One-fifth of the human race has been brought under the British heel by means that will not bear scrutiny. Our resistance to it does not mean harm to the British people. We seek to convert them, not to defeat them on the battle-field. Ours is an unarmed revolt against the British rule. But whether we convert them or not, we are determined to make their rule impossible by non-violent non-co-operation. It is a method in its nature indefensible. It is based on the knowledge that no spoliator can compass his end without a certain degree of co-operation, willing or compulsory, of the victim. Our rulers may have our land and bodies but not our souls. They can have the former only by complete destruction of every Indian-man, woman and child. That all may not rise to that degree of heroism and that a fair amount of frightfulness can bend the back of revolt is true but the argument would be beside the point. For, if a fair number of men and women be found in India who would be prepared without any ill will against the spoliators to lay down their lives rather than bend the knee to them, they would have shown the way to freedom from the tyranny of violence. I ask you to believe me when I say that you will find an unexpected number of such men and women in India. They have been having that training for the past 20 years. We have been trying for the past half a century to throw off the British rule. The movement of independence has been never so strong as now. The most powerful political organization, I mean the Indian National Congress, is trying to achieve this end. We have attained a very fair measure of success through nonviolent effort. We were groping for the right means to combat the most organized violence in the world which the British power represents. You have challenged it. It remains to be seen which is the better organized, the German or the British. We know what the British heel means for us and the non-European races of the world. But we would never wish to end the British rule with German aid. We have found in non-violence a force which, if organized, can without doubt match itself against a combination of all the most violent forces in the world. In nonviolent technique, as I have said, there is no such thing as defeat. It is all ‘do or die’ without killing or hurting. It can be used practically without money and obviously without the aid of science of destruction which you have brought to such perfection. It is a marvel to me that you do not see that it is nobody’s monopoly. If not the British, some other power will certainly improve upon your method and beat you with your own weapon. You are leaving no legacy to your people of which they would feel proud. They cannot take pride in a recital of cruel deed, however skillfully planned. I, therefore, appeal to you in the name of humanity to stop the war. You will lose nothing by referring all the matters of dispute between you and Great Britain to an international tribunal of your joint choice. If you attain success in the war, it will not prove that you were in the right. It will only prove that your power of destruction was greater. Whereas an award by an impartial tribunal will show as far as it is humanly possible which party was in the right. You know that not long ago I made an appeal to every Briton to accept my method of non-violent resistance. I did it because the British know me as a friend though a rebel. I am a stranger to you and your people. I have not the courage to make you the appeal I made to every Briton. Not that it would not apply to you with the same force as to the British. But my present proposal is much simple because much more practical and familiar. During this season when the hearts of the peoples of Europe yearn for peace, we have suspended even our own peaceful struggle. Is it too much to ask you to make an effort for peace during a time which may mean nothing to you personally but which must mean much to the millions of Europeans whose dumb cry for peace I hear, for my ears are attuned to hearing the dumb millions? I had intended to address a joint appeal to you and Signor Mussolini, whom I had the privilege of meeting when I was in Rome during my visit to England as a delegate to the Round Table Conference. I hope that he will take this as addressed to him also with the necessary changes. I am, Your sincere friend, M.K. GANDHI
Student Anon:Dear Gandhi,
I think you had the guts to send a letter and befriend a sociopath. If I'm being completely honest, I would have done the same thing too. I would have fought him, I would have explained how I can take him down or how I can help him while I help my people. This means that I would have used our friendship as an advantage. We would have a bigger army, more people, and more peace than before, unless someone were to cross me and start bringing things up again. I would have gone and handed him the letter myself to make sure he would get it.
I am the type of person that will not put up with being looked down at. So, if someone were to cross me, they would regret it because I would have sacrificed my freedom to stop him from ruining my country. Also, I don't let people disrespect me, and I will do everything in my will power to save my country even if it ends with me being dead. In the end, I would make sure that the only way for my country to go down would be to kill me. In that case, I would not let it happen. At the end of it all, there would be a lot of destruction if someone were to get in my way, whether or not they realize what I'm doing. I will not be sacrificing my life for a bunch of people just to have them be stupid and interfere with my plans. In conclusion, Sir, I think you should have done something like this and write what you want, then send it to him directly in person.
While I think Gandhi is an amazing example of a leader he did have some faults that can me anaylized through his letter to Hitler. Gandhi has a very interesting world view that revolves much around kindness and respect. While it is good to try and be respectful to people not everyone deserves that respect. I think one of the biggest faults in Gandhi letter is that he addresses Hitler as a friend and states that he has no foes. This can be seen as a fault because it can be taken wrong and Hitler could twist his words and abuse his original intentions. I believe Gandhi is trying to come of as someone who wants to help Hitler see the error in his ways but to say something to a man of such power it could be taken as a treat being imposed on his power. However there is also a side of good to Gandhi approach because some people might view it as a letter that might be trying to extend an offer of friendship and change. However I do think that Gandhi needed to realize that it was not very likely that his effort would make a difference to Hitler for he was consumed by his own need for power not with the concerns of those who he viewed as beneath him. Another part that could be viewed as something that should be changed is where he states Hitlers injustices that could be dangerous because Hitler could then see him as a foe rather than a person who is trying to do good. ( not that I think it would have mattered much to Hitler anyways). I think that overall Hitler would view Gandhi as a foe rather than friend and view him as a threat for the way he has spoken of some of the horrible things Hitler has done but in all there are pros and cons but unfortunately for the letter the cons outweigh the pros.
Dear Ghandi,
While your efforts were there in your letter, you went about it wrong. Hitler in my eyes is the biggest coward, I could destroy him easily in a 1v1. He’s definitely not a friend to me, more of a beta male loser. I know more about European control, dominance of Europe and the invasions of Poland. There is no respect for you here. It has come to my attention that you are verbally on your knees to Hitler in this letter, making you even more of a beta male than Hitler ever was. I can consider you without a doubt a picket fencing beta male, you cannot please everyone, it doesn’t work. Defending somebody as beta as Hitler is just irrefutable. I could have done what HItler did and have done it better. You know what you just did in that letter you troglodyte? If I didn’t know any better, I’d say you sided with that jackass. “ESTIMATION OF MEN LIKE ME WHO BELIEVE IN UNIVERSAL KINDNESS”! You don’t understand how the world works do you? Not everyone is going to be on board with universal kindness, let alone one of the most powerful dictators of all time who has the power and intentions to rule the whole world. I’m not throwing you a bone here, you’re not getting sympathy from me or from anyone who can think this through reasonably. Genuinely some people should be revoked from their rights to freedom of speech, just because the amount of stupidity in “your” letter, could have led to the downfall of “your” own country. You’re a nice guy trying to please both sides, sucking up to Hitler despite his awful crimes against humanity. How can you praise a man who literally commits mass homicide on a daily basis? At night, I look back on things i’ve said, things i’ve done and told people. I always find something at night that makes me feel edgy or unsettling and cringy, something that I regret saying. But I don’t think there’s anything I can say to somebody that would make me cringe harder than if i were in your shoes writing this letter. If I wrote that letter and was awake at night, I would be miserable.