FREE Two-Day Shipping for students on millions of items. Learn more |
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A great book,
By Anand Nair (India) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Glimpses of World History: Centenary edition (Hardcover)
Nehru was in prison when he wrote these series of letters. His vision of history and of contemporary events had a sweep and genuineness that had nothing to do with pleasing powerful allies, or with wooing of voters. Nehru's views on secularism and Palestine -so passionately expressed in the early thirties- give lie to the Hindutva propaganda that these are "pseudo" positions cunningly devised with Muslim "vote bank" in mind. Today, it is fashionable to hold that a nation's foreign policy is to be decided based on "self-interest" rather than on lofty principles and the like. As if there is a great contradiction between self-interest and principles. Indeed when principles are given the go by, and the game is played exclusively with an eye on each player's self-interest; it is obvious that the only interest that would be served is that of the most powerful among the players. It is definitely not in the self-interest of the poorer and weaker nations of the world to abandon principles. But this paradox is quite lost on the petty minds that fashion our foreign and trade policies, 50 years after independence. On Palestine this is what he wrote on May 29, 1933, "The people inhabiting it are predominantly Muslim Arabs, and they demand freedom and unity with their fellow Arabs of Syria. But British policy has created a special minority problem here- that of the Jews- and the Jews side with the British and oppose the freedom of Palestine, as they fear that this would mean Arab rule". About the Jews, spread and persecuted in Europe and other parts of the world, Nehru wrote, "And yet these amazing people not only survived all this, but managed to keep their racial and cultural characteristics, and prospered and produced a host of great men. Today they hold leading positions as scientists, statesmen, literary men, financiers, businessmen, and even the greatest socialists and communists have been Jews. Most of them, of course are far from prosperous; they crowd in the cities of Eastern Europe and, from time to time, suffer "pogroms" or massacres. These people without home or country, and especially the poor among them, have never ceased to dream of old Jerusalem, which appears to their imaginations greater and more magnificent than it ever was in fact. Zion, they call Jerusalem, a kind of Promised Land, and Zionism is this call of the past, which pulls them to Jerusalem and Palestine. Towards the end of the nineteenth century this Zionist movement took gradual shape as a colonizing movement, and many Jews went to settle in Palestine... During the World War the British armies invaded Palestine and, as they were marching on Jerusalem, the British Government made a declaration in November 1917 called the Balfour Declaration. They declared that it was their intention to establish a `Jewish National Home' in Palestine. This declaration was made to win the good will of international Jewry, and it was important from the money point of view... But there was one little drawback; one not unimportant fact seems to have been overlooked. Palestine was not a wilderness. Or an empty uninhabited place. It was already somebody else's home. So that this generous gesture of the British Government was really at the expense of the people who already lived in Palestine, and these people, including Arabs, non-Arabs, Muslims, Christians, and, in fact, everybody who was not a Jew, protested vigorously at the declaration." Let us take another example of intellectual regress since the days of Nehru. Today's peddlers of "Globalization" would have us believe that inviting foreign investments is the "mantra" that can deliver the third world from poverty and backwardness. If indeed it is a fact that within the structures of capitalism and "free" trade, the nations of the third world can attain prosperity, then what was the raison detr? of the British Empire? Why did the Empire emerge as an instrument of economic exploitation, in the first place - if there was such a simple means for Britain to get and stay rich, without exploiting her colonies? Wasn't the East India Company the ultimate in "foreign investments"? To quote what Nehru wrote on February 28, 1933, "...In this way, the American capitalists gained effective control of these smaller countries of the south and ran their banks, railways, and mines, and exploited them to their own advantage. Even in the larger countries of Latin America they had great influence because of their investments and money control. That is to say, the United States annexed the wealth, or a great part of it, of these countries. Now, this is worth noting, as it is a new kind of empire, the modern type of empire. It is invisible and economic, and exploits and dominates without any obvious outward signs. The South American republics are politically and internationally free and independent. On the map they are huge counties, and there is nothing to show that they are not free in any way. And yet most of them are dominated completely by the United States. Most of us think of empires... like the British in India, and we imagine that if the British were not in actual political control of India, India would be free. But this type of empire is already passing away, and giving way to a more advanced and perfected type. This latest kind of empire does not annex even the land; it only annexes the wealth or the wealth producing elements in the country. By doing so it can exploit the country fully to its own advantage and can largely control it, and at the same time has to shoulder no responsibility for governing and repressing that country. In effect both the land and the people living there are dominated and largely controlled with the least amount of trouble."
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Truly an extraordinary book....,
By kate (Maryland) - See all my reviews
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Glimpses of World History: Centenary edition (Hardcover)
Without question one of my all time favorite books. Nehru wrote the book while in prison with the idea that it is what he would have imparted to his daughter Indira (Ghandi)were he at home with her. Despite some very minor factual errors (precise dates, etc.), the fact that the book was written under prison conditions, without any available reference material available to him, speaks to Nehru's incredible mind and grasp of history, as well as to the depth of his love for his young daughter. I find it to be one of the most remarkable works ever written and have given it as a gift more times than I can count. How many current world "leaders" do you think could produce something even close?
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Sweeping world history from a prison........,
By
This review is from: Glimpses of World History: Centenary edition (Hardcover)
One of the most readable histories ever written. To even think that it was done without notes is just wonderous. The grasp and width of knowledge and vision is palpable in every page.
Ironically written to his daughter who did not share either his breadth of knowledge or his leadership skills. Some are born great and others have greatness thrust upon them willy-nilly. To think that his family has taken Indian politics to its present nepotism -laden state is sad.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
|
|
