Little is talked about James Otis's negotiations with the indian government on pulling out gandhi's personal effects from the auction.
One of them was a demand to increase india's budget for poverty eradication, and another asking india to fund a world wide exhibition on pacifism.
The indian government responded that this whole endeavour was "Crass commercialization of a great man's legacy". How? Even if it was, would this even come close to what's done by the indian government.
Gandhi's picture is everywhere to be seen in india, on currency, and government office walls. His birthday is a holiday. Government buildings are named after him. His autobiography is compulsory reading in most schools. Politicians emulate his style, by wearing khadi clothes, and sitting on hunger strikes. But, no one talks any more about "What made this little man move the world in ways it has not seen itself shaken". Pacifism and the principles of non-violent movement are not studied in indian schools or society as much as they should be.
