but it is a false security. It is a bad thing for any country thus to be lulled into security. . . .
I agree with what he is saying here, I think it was important for each country to weight the pros and cons in this situation because aligning yourself with one side rather than remaining neutral limits freedom in the same way it grants it
History has proved that exploitative and oppressive ruling classes do not abandon their class privileges voluntarily, that is, without a bitter fight
This can be connected to the same attitude that we saw during the Vietnam war. Extreme determination for liberation
We notice that the mind is a restless bird; the more it gets the more it wants, and still remains unsatisfied. The more we indulge our passions, the more unbridled they become.
This relates to the way Gandhi wanted society to be structured. One way to describe him is a luddite who hated productivity of any sort. However i can understand the fear he had after seeing what imperialism, factories and modernization as a whole did to India. I believe he could not see a way to integrate his cultural with industrialization.
For the sake of the Fatherland we must make sacrifices and endure hardships for a certain time.
This goes to show the mentality of the people of Vietnam and how badly they wanted their independence. Even common people needed to make sacrifices for the sake of freedom. This is also very tragic, as many innocent people including children lost their lives in this war for independence.
Nevertheless, for more than eighty years, the French imperialists, abusing the standard of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity, have violated our Fatherland and oppressed our fellow-citizens. They have acted contrary to the ideals of humanity and justice.
Relates to the idea of nationalism we talked about in class. This statement really identifies a "them" and an "us". Really focused on banding the people of Vietnam as one people with a common goal.
The situation is the same in regard to what we understand by the word ‘propaganda.’ The purpose of propaganda is not the scientific instruction of the individual, but rather to attract public attention to certain facts, events, urgent needs, and so on, the importance of which can be brought home to the masses only by this means.
This frustrates me and reminds me of things we see today. Often we see things in our own media that are emblematic of propaganda. When in reality even when one reports the news. Even if one reports facts, the matter in which it was reported skews the perspective of the viewer. For example: the US has a sizable trade deficit. This is a fact. However, politicians like to use this statement as leverage, because to the average American it seems like a very scary and negative thing that slows GDP/hurts the economy. When in-fact this is not true and if you were to ask an Economist about this they could explain why this isn’t big scary danger, and how it is typical of developed countries with advanced economies. My point is that this is common/easy to take advantage of viewers even when you aren't technically lying about facts.