New book about Gandhi
Thu, 03/31/2011 - 7:49pm
Turns out he was a little more of a complicated fellow than most people thought...
"Among the juicier tidbits: Gandhi routinely slept nude with his teenage great-niece and other young women. He didn't think much of black people, referring to South African natives as "Kaffirs" (a term today regarded as highly offensive) and complaining that "they are troublesome, very dirty and live like animals." He seemed weirdly okay with fascists, praising Mussolini and addressing Hitler as "my friend" in a letter."
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2011/03/new-biography-sugge...
Fri, 04/01/2011 - 7:18am
#2
I was going to sit this one out entirely,
but instead I will sit it out somewhat, and type a few things as well.
Most of us who have read about Gandhi at almost any level know of these sorts of things.
To the level at which a person is dishonest and has ulterior motives is to the extent that that person probably questions M. K. Gandhi's motives.
The level Gandhi operated on (regarding his honesty about his sex life, or lack thereof), and the way that he used words, makes me believe that there was probably no homosexual relationship, even of the mind.
I don't know how it is now, but it used to be common in India for men to hold hands as they walked down the road.
I saw this same thing in Georgia, where guys from Africa would touch each other's leg and hold each other's hand as they conversed on the bus (and even if I had no examples as such it would not equate to Gandhi not doing so).
These assertions and assumptions are just that.
As far as inconsistencies, that depends.
He consistently said that he was open to redirecting his course any time something unexpected made it necessary and wise to do so.
Dr. King did not lead the protesters over the bridge one day as had been planned because the guards/cops unexpectedly moved out of the way.
King saw this as surrender, or at least compliance in this case and so having won a victory for his cause he saw no need (and rightfully so in my view) to see the old plan through.
This is good leadership, not a fault.
That having been said, there is a great possibility that Gandhi was hypocritical from time to time, perhaps not living up to what he believed to be true, but when a man does the right thing 99 times out of 100 he is not necessarily a bad man.
Regarding the milk issue, I am not sure how in depth it goes in the book, but I know of this as well.
I will say regarding myself that I was vegan for 16 years because I believed it was the right thing for me to be (and perhaps it was), but when faced with the realization that I needed some animal fat if I was going to be able to physically take care of my karmic obligations, I had to let veganism (and all the "oohs" and "wows" and pats on the back and misguided praise that came with it) go and drink some milk--albeit raw.
I read this same sort-of thing with John Lennon.
This is enough.
I need not keep going.
PS If the Catholic church had been more honest regarding Jesus of Nazareth and the early disciples, you'd see far less inconsistencies and far more humaness in their Bible and other texts.
Sat, 04/02/2011 - 2:45am
#3
Gandhi
Barry's right--those things about Gandhi were already pretty well known--the South Africa stuff is extensively known. He certainly wasn't perfect. And the sex stuff is a little odd, but whatever. Its not his moral failings that have kept me from being a Gandhi fan, it was the limitations of his vision for India.
The India that we have today was more or less what he was going for. India was a hotbed of radical resistance in the 1920s and 30s, but instead of following true radicals like Bhagat Singh, Gandhi turned India's "revolution" into an anti-British reform movement that stopped well short of any truly radical change.
It may not have been his fault exactly, but the legacy is there all the same.
Its like in the US--if Martin Luther King's leadership had won out during the Civil Rights movement instead of the Black Panther Party or Malcom X, the US would pretty much still be as fucked up as it was then. Oh, right--that is what happened.
i've heard of this before. he claims he slept with nude girls/women to test his purity and develop it. he was trying to not get aroused, supposedly. i think calling hitler a friend may have had more to do with trying to connect and reason with him then actually agreeing with his politics and violence. i'm not positive but i would imagine gandhi's elevated status of "great soul" has very little to do with his own doing and desire, and much more to do with the people who admired and followed him. few people are always perfect. however, to achieve even just one moment of perfection can still be powerful enough to change the world for the better. sometimes doing this causes you to be mythologized into something that is impossible to live up to. the truth coming out is always good, whatever it is...jen fool