#11 The Dark Side of Mahatma Gandhi
From being an ally of Nazi Germany to sleeping with underage women, here are some ugly facts about Mahatma Gandhi
Hello everyone,
Hope you are having an amazing week. Today’s newsletter highlights the controversial side of Mahatma Gandhi, the leader popular for his saint-like values of tolerance and non-violence. This read mentions some of the many incidents of his shady life, including the racial insensitivity, sexism, and predatory behavior towards teenage women. Hope you find this information interesting!
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was born on the 2nd of October, 1869, to an affluent family in Porbandar, India.
He enjoyed the privilege of a comfortable childhood due to his father’s position of the Chief Minister of the State. It’s during this period of his upbringing that he acquired most if not all of his ethical guidance, under the mentorship of his devout Hindu mother.
His views on morality and his principles were largely influenced by Hindu doctrines and later became the basis of his activist career.
It is here where he developed his core values of non-violence and religious tolerance for which he is widely known for today.
Faith Put to the Test
Gandhi went on to pursue higher education in the field of Law in London, still adamant on upholding the beliefs fostered in him.
As a consequence of Industrialization, London’s socio-economic landscape was volatile at this time and was rooted in poverty and political disturbance.
Gandhi saw his principles challenged when he was subjected to acts of racism and social boycott for being an Indian, despite his status of an educated man.
Barred from hotels, public transport, and other commodities which were made available to the white population, he was deeply enraged.
This social segregation came as a revelation for the young Gandhi, as he had now found his life’s purpose: to fight for the rights of his people and combat the racial injustice brought about by the dominance of Imperialism.
He began his activism in London and later carried it to South Africa where he battled against the violence and intolerance towards people of color, with non-violence being a distinguishing factor of his practice.
It soon dawned on him that India was in dire need of such reform and made the decision to return to his homeland, where he played an instrumental role in shaping the socio-political climate of the nation and birthing the Indian Subcontinent that we know today.
However, these are all facts one you probably already know. But there’s a questionable side to this cherished humanitarian.
“The louder they claim sainthood, the bigger the horns they hide”
Gandhi’s Moral Absolutism
His steadfastness in his beliefs was questionable, even during his time. He wasn’t shy of publicly voicing his views on war.
His extremist approach towards non-violence led him so far as to claim that the Jews in Europe during the Second World War were required to lay down their arms and let themselves be slaughtered by the Nazis, and that Allied Nations should not interfere with the Fascist parties’ war efforts, but instead “let them take what they wish,”
You could say his stance on war was unorthodox. He was a firm believer that violence in no way aided humanity and one must put down their weapons if they wish to achieve peace.
Naturally, this view sparked controversy in the general public and many began to regard him as a servant of the Aryan Brotherhood, likely because of the anti-Semitic nature of his beliefs.
This controversy was in no way aided by his racially motivated campaigns in South Africa which had him labeled a racist and a purist of the Indian race.
Every Saint has a Past
You might be aware of his campaigns in favor of human rights during his time in South Africa, but it seems there’s a shady underbelly to his early legacy.
Many Africans have recently began calling out Gandhi’s ignorance and prejudice towards the black population of Africa. He has said and wrote questionable things in regards to this question and once claimed that “the Whites should remain the dominant race in Africa,”
His purist views may be considered a byproduct of his dealings with Europeans during his time in London, where he developed the belief that the European people were generally more civilized than the average African.
In an attempt to voice his views on Indian superiority in South Africa, he wrote to the British; “the prevalent belief in the colony seems to be that the Indians are slightly better than the savages of Africa.”
He wasn’t one to refrain from using language with racial connotations either, and was frequently seen using words like “Kaffir” to refer to the Blacks.
He remained express about his sentiment that the Indians were superior to the blacks and wrote letters explaining how he found the intermixing of Blacks and Indians in the colony unjust.
During a plague outbreak in Durban in 1905, he voiced his concern that “the problem shall not alleviate so long as the two people (Indians and the Native Africans) are intermingled.”
He even went as far as to propose to the Colonial Government that “Indians should not have to share queues with the native savages,” in an attempt to segregate the Indians from the native community.
It is quite odd that an individual spearheading one of the largest human rights and tolerance campaigns of his times held dichotomous views when it concerned people he deemed lesser than him. But the dichotomy doesn’t end here.
Hypocrisy in Bed
Gandhi claimed celibacy at a relatively young age and remained a staunch believer of the subjugation of carnal human desires as a means to achieve self-actualization , but his personal habits say otherwise.
He was known for frequently sharing beds with teenage women-many from his own immediate family-under the guise of “celibacy experiments.”
Critics have deemed it predatory behavior, claiming that it painting a rather dubious model for the treatment of women, especially when considering Gandhi’s influence over the public.
He held arguably sexist beliefs and on one occasion advised two women that had been sexually assaulted to “shave their heads to make themselves unappealing to men.” He identified the menstruation cycle of women as a physical manifestation of the women’s tainted soul due to uncontrolled sexuality.
One could argue that someone who claims to represent the voice of the oppressed, man or woman, would not be subject to such bigoted beliefs.
Do the Means Justify the End?
Much of the controversies from Gandhi’s life still prevail today and are a hot topic for debate. Some say that like many historical personalities, Gandhi wasn’t immune to the norms of his time, yet strove to do good despite opposing efforts and eventually succeeded in accomplishing something not many of us can achieve.
Other’s claim that intellect begets a deeper understanding of morality, and Gandhi being an intellectual should have distinguished the right from wrong despite prevalent societal standards. To this extent, people have recently began to question his “saintly” nature and infuriated by his hypocrisy, have resorted to boycott.
The statue of Gandhi in the University of Ghana was petitioned to be taken down and eventually was in 2019 on accounts of his racially charged campaigns in South Africa. Similarly, the re-erection of his statue in California was strongly opposed by the Organization for the Minorities of India.
The question of whether Gandhi should go down in history as a saint or a sinner remains arguable and one has the obligation to heed the evidence.
I’d love to hear from you. Please, comment below if you want to talk about anything related to this article or History.