A of 1930, a group of 200A of 1930, a group of 200

A study by Stuart Laycock, a British historian, was made where he went to all the countries Britain has invaded. He traveled all around the world and came back with the actuality that 90 percent of the world was at some point invaded by the British Empire. He states that even though he is proud on the behalf of his nation, “but clearly there are parts of our history that we are less proud of” (qtd. in Copping). March of 1930, a group of 200 Indians marched towards the sea, where Gandhi scooped up a handful of salt, finally standing up to the Empire on the behalf of his country. It was illegal to gather salt by oneself, you had to buy it from the government. This set off a chain reaction that led to around 10,000 arrests. Social movements affect change in many ways, many organizations see a cause worth campaigning for, practical wins around that issue will, hopefully over time, steadily achieve social change (Engler). “For momentum driven mass mobilizations” it is different; they must decide on the best possible solution that is in line with their principles. The most important thing is to dramatize the public by revealing to them what is possible and what is reality.  Biographer Geoffrey Ashe says that Gandhi’s choice for a campaign was “the weirdest and most brilliant political challenge of modern times.” Salt is one of the most important minerals in everyday lives, which the government took over and drenched it in legislation. Salt could be viewed as a symbol of this act, just as Gandhi says, “Next to air and water, salt is perhaps the greatest necessity of life” (Engler). In spite of the fact that some believed this was a failed attempt, Gandhi believed that it ended in a dignifying way, and gave a path to future fights. This campaign was a small start that caused many people to talk about Gandhi. If you dramatize the public, more and more activists will come out and the government will have to do something about it, and yet they can’t do something that would take away the benefits of the Indians, or else an unwanted war could start. Louis Fischer writes, “it was inevitable that Britain should someday refuse to rule India and that India should someday refuse to be ruled” (qtd. Engler).Despite the fact that the Indians didn’t have much power against the British, there is no way of knowing if India would have survived if they didn’t come and take over. Yes, their somewhat ruthless way was dehumanizing, but in the long run, they did give India what they needed. The remorseful answer to the question, ‘could the Indians prevent colonization?’ is mostly due to the disunity and military weaknesses of the country. This era was the peak of the British Empire and it is not surprising that they skillfully overtook so many colonies. Britain does owe a debt to India, and furthermore, it is also not something bizarre, Britain has already paid reparations to New Zealand Mallory’s. There is an expression from Texas, “all hat and no cattle” that describes this issue. On a psychological perspective what this says about human nature is that once you get control over something somebody else wants, the priority will be to think about the outcome and pay no mind to the consequences. It also may not be that people in power think of themselves at the top of the food chain, but they just don’t think of them at all. This can be an example of ‘Power getting into people’s heads’. Some also define power to be the true form of a human being, where once they get in a dominant position, they can do whatever they want to to whomever they please. In a study done by Berkeley, “drivers of high-status cars like Mercedes and BMWs cut off other drivers 30% of the time, compared to only 7% for the lowest-status cars” (qtd. In Gillett). All in all the reparations that England might owe India are not to be viewed as something of a propaganda, but as something that is used for atonement. The act of acknowledging the wrongs been done, and even saying sorry will go a long way than anything anyone can think of.  One of Dr. Shashi’s best quotes in the debate in the Oxford Union Society, “no wonder the sun never set on the British Empire, because even God couldn’t trust the English in the dark”.