Why this adulation for Ghandi, this fraud?

[Brenus]

A question: Am I the only one irritated when people put Ghandi as a political model, a racist, deeply Hindu so believing in the natural inequality and supporter of the Caste system, paedophile and incestuous, the man who always supported the strongest and the richest? The man who told the Jews to obey to Hitler? His politic was a complete and total failure, but he got credit for the Independence (allegedly peaceful, of you don’t count the hundreds of thousands who lost their lives during the process) against a Power that was ready to give it if you were not Communist (and Ghandi was far of it).

[HoreTore]

You're kidding, right?

He's adored because of his immense contribution to, you might say foundation of, the theory of non-violent resistance.


It's no different from people admiring Henry Ford for his contribution to industrialization even though he was a rabid anti-semite and the US publisher of the protocols.

[Slyspy]

Is it because he decided that the path to independence needn't be covered in blood?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'll give you racist, but the rest is a joke.

[Major Robert Dump]

I thought Ben Kingsley did a fabulous job and doubt that just a mere movie could cause all the effects listed in the OP.

[Greyblades]

I knew ghandi. He was a prick.

[Papewaio]

Sources?

Calling him a pedophile... I assume you are referring to him marrying a 14 year old... Or is there something else darker then that you can reference?

Is this tongue in cheek or a real in depth look at the Sikh side of independence... Gandhi was the speak softly option, the Sikhs the stick.

[Hooahguy]

I hate Ghandi. I always try to wipe him off the map as soon as I can. Cant let him get nukes or he goes all trigger-happy. Better to put him down early than deal with a nuclear India later on.

[rajpoot]

Gandhi was deeply flawed and can be criticised due to a wide variety of reasons, but the ones you mention are not even close.

deeply Hindu so believing in the natural inequality and supporter of the Caste system

Let's begin with this. Gandhi coined the term Harijan (translates to God's people). He used it to refer to the lowest of the Indian castes who were shunned by everyone else. He was vehemently against untouchability and the persecution of lower castes. So this, is pretty much entirely wrong.

paedophile and incestuous

Source?
What is known is (through his autobiography no less) that he was married off as a kid, as was prevalent in those times. And he was already doing stuff with his wife before either of them were 18.

the man who always supported the strongest and the richest?

I don't know what you mean by the strongest and the richest. Specific examples would be welcome.
People here, specially Hindus, criticise him because he was too supportive of Muslims, and at some level was partly responsible for sowing the seeds that lead to the partition of India.

All that said, I do agree giving Gandhi full credit for independence is unfair. While he played a considerable role, but other factors and other people, contributed just as much.

[Brenus]

I have to go so not so much time:
But:
Peaceful and non-violent: 9 millions Refugees from India going to Pakistan. 5 millions from Pakistan to India. Eatimated death tolls: 500,000. Is it a very succesfull policy or a complete failure? Followed by wars, one still active.
Ghandi: Bath by his nieces.
Ghandi: Fight temptation having virgins in his bed.

That is: "Perform sexual activities with under aged girl 33-15 without penetration" in the modern Crown Court Language, crime classified 3.

Have to go, will be back for the rest of the myth.

[Fragony]

Down with us-syndrome

[Sarmatian]

I have to go so not so much time:
But:
Peaceful and non-violent: 9 millions Refugees from India going to Pakistan. 5 millions from Pakistan to India. Eatimated death tolls: 500,000. Is it a very succesfull policy or a complete failure? Followed by wars, one still active.

Well, considering we're talking about a region as ethnically and culturally diverse as Europe almost, with huge differences in education, quality of life, full of religious strife, where 600-700 millions live...

Not that bad...

Ghandi: Bath by his nieces.
Ghandi: Fight temptation having virgins in his bed.

That is: "Perform sexual activities with under aged girl 33-15 without penetration" in the modern Crown Court Language, crime classified 3.

Have to go, will be back for the rest of the myth.

Considering the rest, I don't believe actually sleeping beside another person is considered a sexual activity. Bathing can be, in theory, but we have to consider the context. Old people being bathed by nurses in homes sexual? Or people in hospitals?

[rajpoot]

Even though I think non-violence is over-rated, myself. Its basically just asking to be assassinated, if history is any indication.

True dat.

[TinCow]

This thread reminds me of something I ran across while writing my undergrad thesis.

“Mr. Ghandi and Herr Hitler were two hardly distinguishable specimens of the same species of foreigner… both of them superlatively exotic, and the average member of a British Cabinet may have reasoned in November 1937 that the guileless tamer of Ghandi [Lord Halifax] had at any rate ‘a sporting change’ of taming Hitler likewise. Were not both these political ‘mad-mullahs’, non-smokers, non-drinkers of alcohol, non-eaters of meat, non-riders on horseback, and non-practicers of blood-sports in their cranky private lives?” (Arnold Toynbee, Survey of International Affairs, 1937, vol. I, p. 338)

[PanzerJaeger]

Just like with MLK in the US, unsuccessful groups often seek a hero. When a genuine one does not present him/herself, any scumbag with a bit of political skill often suffices.

[Sarmatian]

Even though I think non-violence is over-rated, myself. Its basically just asking to be assassinated, if history is any indication.

Really? As a soldier, would you be able to shoot an unarmed person?

[HoreTore]

Really? As a soldier, would you be able to shoot an unarmed person?

I think he's referring to how all the figureheads associated with non-violent protest have "assassinated" listed as their cause of death(MLK, Ghandi, etc).

[Rhyfelwyr]

Ghandi, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King Jr, Nelson Mandela - all deeply flawed and even reprehensible characters who gained a misplaced 'hero' status because of the fact that they happened to oppose some sort of 'Imperialist' order.

I don't know how much truth there is in many of the particular accusations surrounding Ghandi. But sleeping naked with young women screams abuse of power to me, whatever he claims to have been doing.

[Greyblades]

When I think of Ghandi I cannot help but say; meh.

Okay more like I have a level of ambivalence that is generally a stalemate between "great that he managed to start a precident of great change without bloodshed" and "did he really have to campaign for independence, what's wrong with emancipation and equality in a joined India and Britain?"

[Empire*Of*Media]

A question: Am I the only one irritated when people put Ghandi as a political model, a racist, deeply Hindu so believing in the natural inequality and supporter of the Caste system, paedophile and incestuous, the man who always supported the strongest and the richest? The man who told the Jews to obey to Hitler? His politic was a complete and total failure, but he got credit for the Independence (allegedly peaceful, of you don’t count the hundreds of thousands who lost their lives during the process) against a Power that was ready to give it if you were not Communist (and Ghandi was far of it).

I hate Ghandi. I always try to wipe him off the map as soon as I can. Cant let him get nukes or he goes all trigger-happy. Better to put him down early than deal with a nuclear India later on.

hahaha !!!! these Loyalist British and Americans just love to Colonize and plunder !! and When Great Gandhi wiped them in their 300 years of colonization of India with just peaceful words, not even rebellion, they are just on too much heat of wrath and anger!!!!
WHO are you to Insult and tell some lies of others and yours from hatred to Gandhi That Shaked the World and puted a cruel Imperialist Empire to its Knees?!! have you seen him personally?!! what have YOU done for the world?! WHICH GREAT PERSON DID YOU HAVE IN YOUR USA & BRITAIN & EUROPE?!!! Calling Gandhi Racist !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! oh my god !! what should i say to you Imperialists & RACISTS & IGNORANTS & HATERS !!!! it was your USA & BRITAIN that tortured non whites and then non Europeans with their Racism & Segregation Idealogies and supportions and depleted the poor countries resources of the world !! it was your Colonist Imperialist Governments (USA & BRITAIN & FRANCE&....) that raped women and sold them to slavery!!

and the Sex Matter??!! oh dont want me to bring a large scroll of Peviations and Perversions even sex scandals of your abhorrent peoples in your Imperialist governments & Military, because this thread will be completely full !!!!

Oh my god what a disgusting thread !!!!! what a Disgusting World !!!!!

[rajpoot]

Okay more like I have a level of ambivalence that is generally a stalemate between "great that he managed to start a precident of great change without bloodshed" and "did he really have to campaign for independence, what's wrong with emancipation and equality in a joined India and Britain?"

JFR crediting Gandhi with beginning the struggle for independence of India is wrong. Political leaders, even before Gandhi had entered the scene, had been struggling to get some sort of autonomy for India.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

JFR crediting Gandhi with beginning the struggle for independence of India is wrong. Political leaders, even before Gandhi had entered the scene, had been struggling to get some sort of autonomy for India.

And they had been getting it - the Indian Parliament was created under the Raj, the argument was over the timetable, Ghandi and others wanted to go quickly and were insulted by the British Administration telling them India wasn't ready to be self-governing.

The British were dead right - which is why today Imperial India has been split into three belligerent nations, one of which has only just had it's first peaceful (relatively speaking) democratic transfer of power.

Brennus may have a point - that Ghandi's non-violent agitation was largely a hastening which was ill-advised. Rather like the US before it, India insisted on a violent transformation to self-rule rather than a managed one. On the other hand, without Ghandi it would have been the same, but with a war.

[Brenus]

“these Loyalist British and Americans just love to Colonize and plunder” Dam right. And what is this in relation with my point of an overrated hero?

“not even rebellion” You should read more about recent history of India.

“what have YOU done for the world?!” Personal Attack: Well, I could point out that I went to Kurdistan after Desert Storm Operation and Provide Comfort, and I (not only) save the life of a small girl in giving my blood in a village near Erbil.
I, with others, refurbished the Local health Centre and I, with others, had a vaccination Campaign for the young Children for the valleys in the neighbourhood. Ah, I was near to forget: evacuation of the injured civilians during the Turkish Air Attacks against the so-called bases of the PKK..
For the rest of the World, I went in 2 others countries in war (Bosnia & Yemen), and help to organised 2 vaccination Campaigns (the then Zaire and Niger). Next questions?

You approve the fact that an old man, in order to test himself asked to sleep with naked (very) young virgins is ok for you, then you claim a moral superiority…

“it was your USA & BRITAIN”: ?

“And his views were not always popular; "abnormal and unnatural" was how the first Prime Minister of independent India, Jawaharlal Nehru, described Gandhi's advice to newlyweds to stay celibate for the sake of their souls.” “(which included, alongside his famed chastity, sleeping naked next to nubile, naked women to test his restraint)” The Independent, 07 APRIL 2010. Article from Jad Adams, Book: Gandhi: Naked Ambition is published by Quercus .

“Eighteen-year-old Abha, the wife of Gandhi's grandnephew Kanu Gandhi, rejoined Gandhi's entourage in the run-up to independence in 1947 and by the end of August he was sleeping with both Manu and Abha at the same time.” “While in Bengal to see what comfort he could offer in times of inter-communal violence in the run-up to independence, Gandhi called for his 18-year-old grandniece Manu to join him – and sleep with him”. Great. No?

About Ghandi and the Non-violence: George Orwell had to say about him:
Gandhi has been regarded for twenty years by the Government of India as one of its right hand men. I know what I'm talking about-I used to be an officer in the Indian police. It was always admitted in the most cynical way that Gandhi made it easier for the British to rule India, because his influ#ence was always against taking any action that would make any difference.
The reason why Gandhi when in prison is always treated with such lenience and small concessions sometimes made when he has prolonged one of his fasts to a dangerous extent, is that the British officials are in terror that he may die and be replaced by someone who believes less in "soul force " and more in bombs.

[rajpoot]

And they had been getting it - the Indian Parliament was created under the Raj, the argument was over the timetable, Ghandi and others wanted to go quickly and were insulted by the British Administration telling them India wasn't ready to be self-governing.

Most 18-year-olds would feel offended if someone was to tell them that they weren't ready to face life and start making their own decisions. Saying that to an entire nation had a good chance of offending the majority of the populace.
The British might have been right, I agree. A more gradual approach towards independence might have led to a more peaceful future. But then it is in the nature of man to want to make their own mistakes and learn from them the hard way instead of just accepting someone else sage advice. Had it not been so we wouldn't have been men at all.

[Strike For The South]

Just like with MLK in the US, unsuccessful groups often seek a hero. When a genuine one does not present him/herself, any scumbag with a bit of political skill often suffices.

I love you

[Sarmatian]

Ghandi, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King Jr, Nelson Mandela - all deeply flawed and even reprehensible characters who gained a misplaced 'hero' status because of the fact that they happened to oppose some sort of 'Imperialist' order.

I don't know how much truth there is in many of the particular accusations surrounding Ghandi. But sleeping naked with young women screams abuse of power to me, whatever he claims to have been doing.

In what way "deeply flawed"?

When I think of Ghandi I cannot help but say; meh.

Okay more like I have a level of ambivalence that is generally a stalemate between "great that he managed to start a precident of great change without bloodshed" and "did he really have to campaign for independence, what's wrong with emancipation and equality in a joined India and Britain?"

Your idea of emancipation and equality of joined India and Britain would have been - British PM sitting in London, parliament in London and government in London. All British naturally, with an Indian or two thrown in to "represent" them.

True "joined India and Britain" would be the exact opposite - but naturally no one in Britain would accept to be governed from New Delhi by Indians.

[Slyspy]

In what way "deeply flawed"?

I think he means that they turned out to be just people after all.

As for Greyblades' "joined India and Britain" I can't even imagine how that would have worked.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Most 18-year-olds would feel offended if someone was to tell them that they weren't ready to face life and start making their own decisions. Saying that to an entire nation had a good chance of offending the majority of the populace.
The British might have been right, I agree. A more gradual approach towards independence might have led to a more peaceful future. But then it is in the nature of man to want to make their own mistakes and learn from them the hard way instead of just accepting someone else sage advice. Had it not been so we wouldn't have been men at all.

Compare With Canada, which severed it's final formal ties with the British Parliament in the 1980's. Bear in mind that Canada had/has similar ethnic and religious issues to pre-Independence India and concerns were expressed explicitly by British officials.

Maybe it's because the British were seen as White - which feeds back to Brennus' point, we were assumed to have ulterior motives because we were seen as filthy barbarians.

[Sarmatian]

I think he means that they turned out to be just people after all.

And tell me a person in politics (of note) who didn't? By that reasoning everyone is a deeply flawed character, from Caesar to Obama, making the point moot.

[rvg]

Gandhi was a great man, far greater than most leaders of today.