CUL:GANDHI Movie Review by Albert James Dager -- MEDIA SPOTLIGHT 1983

   Mohandas K. Gandhi (1869-1948) has come to be revered by the world
as the personification of peace and love. His life story is portrayed
in epic proportion in Sir Richard Attenborough's GANDHI, a Columbia
Pictures release.

   Gandhi traces the Indian fakir's life from his activist days in
South Africa during which he led a pacifistic rebellion against British
authority, to his assassination in 1948. The brutality of British rule
is graphically illustrated and, of course, considered to be "Christian"
in its origins. As is usual with mass media productions, the
delineation between this brutality and true Christianity is not
forthcoming.

   GANDHI, in fact, is a film that champions Hinduism. And the lie of
Satan is evidenced in a remark by Gandhi (portrayed by Ben Kingsley)
that, "We are children of God like everyone else." During a perilous
moment a Hindu peasant exhorts a "Christian" missionary - a follower of
Gandhi - "Pray to God, Sahib; now is when it is best to be Hindu."

   God's Word tells us that no man can come to the Father except
through the Son (John 5:19-23; 14:6,7); and no one is a child of God
without adoption by God through faith in Jesus (John 12:35, 36; Gal.
4:4-7; Eph. 1:3-5). Yet the world wants to believe otherwise and
Gandhi, as sincere a man as I'm certain he was, was in darkness to
God's truth in these matters.

   While GANDHI is a remarkable achievement in its condensation of so
significant a life into three and a half hours, Attenborough's effort
is somewhat simplistic in its account of how Gandhi rose to the
position of India's greatest "holy" man / politician - the single
greatest force in India's bid for independence.

   There have been through the ages many men of remarkable courage and
conviction. Certainly Gandhi was one of these. Yet what is it exactly
that marks the difference between one such as he and the uncounted
others who, in spite of their best efforts, are relegated to obscurity,
managing little more than the assimilation of a small band of
followers? How could one person move an entire nation the size of India
to rebel against a foreign master? Certainly Britain had the military,
commercial, and monetary advantage. And in spite of occasional
atrocities committed on the part of individuals, her rule was, for the
most part, benevolent and civil; India, on the other hand, was and
still is a backward nation with class distinctions and religious
factions that would have prevented any real progress toward unity.

   The only way nations are moved is through money and the cooperation
of the mass media. The only money alluded to in this film is that
offered to Gandhi by the rag-tag Indian National Congress. And the mass
media coverage portrayed is that of a few starry-eyed British reporters
who follow him around like puppies and wait upon his every word.

   No, nations are moved by far more than these pittances of filmdom's
imagination. The fact is that only cooperation from the highest
authorities in the mass media (who sent the reporters in the first
place) as well as huge sums of money could accomplish the overthrow of
British rule. All these were in British hands. Is there more to
Gandhi's story than we've been told?

   The money powers that move governments and control their populations
through the mass media were the real powers behind Gandhi. And, while
we can certainly sympathize with the plight of his people, and properly
abhor tyranny from any government, we shouldn't allow naivete to cloud
our understanding of the real forces that work in the world to maintain
spiritual darkness.

   For centuries international banking powers, who worship Mammon, have
worked to manipulate every government currency to their own advantage
with the end in sight of instituting a one-world government. In order
to accomplish this it has been necessary to undermine the power of all
monarchies and dictatorships through "people's movements" spawned in
treachery.

   This results in the movement of the world's masses from under
several tyrannies to under a single tyranny which will be headed by the
anti-Christ.

   Paul said in Ephesians 6:12: "For we wrestle not against flesh and
blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers
of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high
places."

   We might sympathize with the political causes of men like Gandhi;
but, in the long run, they are all part of this world system and are
used to effectively shut out the Gospel - mankind's only real hope for
freedom.