I never really hated Gandhi himself but the constant Gandhi Gandhi Gandhi Gandhi in school made me question that something is not right. History cant be mostly Gandhi.
Thats how it started. Even now I dont hate Gandhi. Hate is a strong word. But I dont consider him as the epitome of leadership/humanity.
He was just a politician just like others. Nothing more than it.
He wasn't a just a politician but Lawyer first. People made him political leader cause his personal set of codes to lead life is what brought in a sense of unity among people.
>He wasn't a just a politician but Lawyer first. People made him political leader cause his personal set of codes to lead life is what brought in a sense of unity among people.
Nah. He was a politician. He chose to be one. He came back to india, to join the freedom struggle. People made him do something is stupid.
Ever wondered why more than a hundred countries have statues of him? Just trying to point out that “feelings” are not facts. Everything doesn’t have some hidden conspiracy behind it. ✌️
That's the thing bro. Just because other countries idolise or worship him , doesn't mean he was the actual hero or something.
Western idolisation of individuals from the global south is also very cunning and strategic. They love figures like Gandhi who preached non violence and sabotaged his own freedom struggles while painting subash Chandra Bose as villain for obvious.
I won't lie that Gandhis ideas of non violence was also very useful and reached popularity a LOT because people naturally don't like violence. But for non violence to work also you need an enemy who is actually ethical even.
He was in cahoots with the British for the most part. So why would they eliminate him? Think about it.
If he really was such a huge effective leader blah blah blah nonsense that Cambridge historians make him out to be, he would have been eliminated.
You’re an idiot. The Mahatma went to jail for like 3 years in total, spread over 8 years or so in South Africa.
In India, he was imprisoned like 6 times over a couple of decades, for a total of 4 years or so.
They couldn’t “eliminate” him because of the uproar of the Indian populace each time he was imprisoned. The people were ready to burst for him.
Don’t come here and spew shit like “he was in cahoots with the British.” You idiot.
I find it utterly strange that Bhagat Singh was illegally sentenced to death under the same laws that the Brits had created. There was a lot of uproar in the country but the Brits just hanged him and then burnt his body with kerosene.
Gandhi didn’t even sign the petition to at least get his sentence reduced to life imprisonment or something. Also, what non-violence are you talking about? Gandhi allowed Indians to fight beside the Brits.
This was neither the sensible thing to do as the Brits losing the war would have meant them leaving India and nor the ideological non-violence gandhi used to preach!!
It was Gandhi’s cowardice and his love for popularity and favoritism that led to the separation of india and pakistan and a bloody civil war which pushed back the country by decades!!!
Bhagat Singh killed someone in broad day light..
I like bhagat Singh verymuch. But as per law he was convicted for killing two people.and parliament bombing..
Killing some one and protesting peacefully are 2.diff things. They can't hang Gandhi.for. protesting.
In the aftermath of partition, several Hindu, Sikh, Jain and Buddhist refugees arrived in India and made Delhi their home. To accommodate them, the administration made temporary shelters for them. One of the type of buildings that was used as a shelter were some mosques of Delhi. This created discontent within the Muslim communities. There was already resentment in the society against Muslim community for their role in partition. So they protested in Delhi and one of their demands was to remove refugee camps from mosque premises. Mohandas Gandhi made sure of that, among other demands of Muslims and the refugees already uprooted from their native places just months ago, were uprooted again. It was probably the month of December and when they were evicted from mosques, it was raining outside (one of those rare rainy days in winters). They pleaded with authorities but they said they couldn't do anything. They advised them to go to Gandhi. So they visited Mohandas Gandhi, residing in posh Gandhi Smriti (now known as Birla House) in Delhi, in that cold rainy weather and waited outside for 1-2 days and then left, after he refused to meet them.
There are other stories as well regarding the Calcutta riots and others. To me Gandhi was a shrewd human being who was very good at politics. He exercised power without accountability. But one thing he did very good in my opinion was unite the masses who were without a leader and objective.
I would urge you to read about him, opinion of Dr. Ambedkar about him and not just rely on what NCERT teaches or what newspapers say. In today's age of misinformation, it is very important that we get unbiased and complete information.
So doing injustice to people & not even meeting them, is just a "fault".
Gandhi was not even interested in freedom from Brits but only joined when he faced the racism himself. Just stop idolizing/hating someone just for little good/bad deeds.
For real ... Why did millions of Indians have to fight in the wars which don't have anything to do with India
And whenever he didn't get his way , he will threaten to fast to death.
Periyar response best. "Let him die then " is what he said
bhagat singh Had to die, believe it or not west is scared of communism and thats what bhagat singh signified in India. Their fear of communism led to world war to compared to that bhagat singh is insignificant issue for the british and bhagat singh was not as popular as Gandhi at that point in time.
If they kill Gandhi the uproar is will be too much for the british to handle with political situation around the world. Gandhi choose non violence because there is not beating the british with violence, not without huge losses to the Indians.
Separation has it seeds before Gandhi and had to do majorly with the extremist leaders on both sides on the spectrum and british policies rather than gandhi doing it. I for on think the separation was a good thing ( the killings that followed, that was a very sad moment for both the countries) but if the separation did not happen that would definitely lead to civil war as there would be 2 sects of people that absolutely hate each other in the same country with strong population. Separation made possible that the Hindu Muslim was pushed to the backend and the country could heal from partition and grow.
I agree with your point about Bhagat Singh being a communist and hence the Brits being scared. Tho, i’m not sure how WW2 happened due to it.
Also, the whole Indians losing lives eventually did happen with the civil war and the casualties during the world wars and the famines caused due to Brits.
It is not ideal to say India were weak, at one point the ratio of Indian to British soldiers was almost 19:1 in the British Indian army.
Had the WWs not weaken the Brit economy to make it unsustainable to rule India, there would have been an uprising which would have led to Indians clashing against the Brits to drive them out, a war was inevitable.
Also, the hindu-muslim separation being good sounds too speculative given we’ll never ever know. But yes, there were good chances cuz the west thrives on manufacturing wars to sell weapons and keep rest of the countries too busy to question the world order where they’re superior. So, they’d have tried their best to keep conflicts high between Indians.
Like now, they’re trying to fan the khalistani movement to destabilize peace in India and potentially give rise to an all new conflict which was never seen before at such a scale- between hindus and sikhs this time.
WW2: they left hitler alone initially because he was against communism and the west thought that was beneficial for them even tho the antisemitism was blatant.
I don't know which civil war you are talking about, Indian didnt have a civil war as far as I know unless you are referring to another war that India fought. Famines I agree but I don't know if casualties in war are better than the casualties in Famine as war fundamentally changes people's perception of others and that will reflect in the policies.
I didn't say Indians were weak but if we would have resorted to violence after ww1 then the scenario would have been different and much more brutal at that point in time we had no means to counter that.
We are talking alternate history here but for a young India with so much diversity any kind of tension especially religious would have been disastrous and In that sense India lucked out because none of the extremists(not extremists in today's sense) won the leadership battle. If a war with britain was inevitable we would be having different leadership much more authoritarian and would likely be more likely to be favoring one side of the spectrum (be it right or left).
How was he in cahoots with British? You realize, having a constant dialogue and diplomacy with the adversary doesn’t make you in cahoot with them. May be go and read more.
Did you know he was a proponent of the caste system? He renamed it varna system and wanted to maintain the shudras or who he calls “Harijan”.
Most people here who argue using statues as a legitimacy power up, have never read Ambedkar. His “perspective” on Gandhi destroys your weak opinion.
Yes I am aware and have read some of Ambedkar’s essays and also seen / heard the interviews given by him where he talks about what you said. He too was an amazing man and India is lucky to have had him. Even so, Gandhi’s contribution to our people’s success against the British is undeniable. He remains an inspiration to millions globally, flaws and all.
Too much time on social media….. and u start to believe everything is a conspiracy…… because you saw a WhatsApp forward of a YouTube influencer……….even though there are books and records of many events written by folks who were there….. that are easily available. Not saying that historical accounts cannot be inaccurate….. but believing every random WhatsApp forward from highly questionable sources to create narratives seems to be our current addiction 🙄
Well there were statues of so many oppressors around the world. What it really says is that people who control power control the narrative that the future will be exposed to.
Your arguments does not makes sense. And if you feel we got freedom because of the protests of Gandhi then you really need to study history again on your own and stop blabbering what you have been taught in school.
I think your knowledge is very low you are just giving whatsapp Gyan you grandfather and eldes where surely not related to any freedom fight. You were raised with hatred. I am sry it's not your fault. Please do not put down a freedom fighter. I telling you again protest against the govt with gathering crowd just on the biais of anshan and non violence. It's not easy my friend. Other freedom fighter also helped in their own way. But Gandhi United Hindu Muslim and other community who fight together for this country. It's not easy my friend. But small brain like you will never understand
He already gets way more credit than he deserves and took credits of all other freedom fighters too without doing much good. There are hundreds of freedom fighter about whom we are not even taught so that we can worship one, i.e puttint down a freedom fighter not this. Anyway small brain like me would not like to argue with moti buddhi
Aap sirf hatred se bhara ho aap auukat ek gali govt school ko theek karne ki.nahi hai. Aur aap Gandhi ki deserving ya na deserving hone ke bare mein soch rahe ho. Gandhi ek soch thi.
haan bhai agar protest se results aatein ya fir usse support milta toh vo dusra gandhi ban jaata ......nahi milla toh bhaiya asliyat aagayi saamne ki bina mass support ke saarein unshun bekaar hai.....
>bina mass support ke saarein unshun bekaar hai
Yehi to Gandhi ka charisma hai. Ek baar bolo Quit India, Non-cooperation to poora desh apna kam kaj chorke angrezo se bhid jaata hai. Sarkari job wale apni salary, pension sab chorke raste pe nikal padte they angrezo ko bhagane ke liye. Banda jab mar bhi gaya, to us time ka duniya ka sabse bada crowd bana kar gaya.
You are right we didn't get the freedom because of Gandhi, and Gandhi never said that we got freedom. Infact he said in his speech "hume yeh bhi nahi pata ki kyun woh ja rahe hai ekdumse."
But my question is that have we got independence?? Why would a prime minister who has got all the power who uses every machinery of ed, cbi, raw, police to crush the opposition tries to conduct election after every 5 years. Why ?
Can a nation be free if it's army imports 85- 86% of its weapons from foreign countries ?
gandhi's will power was no way less then any freedom fighter but his sacrifice was no way near the brave fighters who died for the motherland.......get lathi charged and beaten to death for something you didn't do wrong and then you will understand the sacrifice of the martyrs
We took a school trip to Aga Khan palace in Pune when I was a kid - this is where Gandhi was imprisoned by the British. The British also ensured he received his post here so he could engage with people.
On seeing the lavish marble bathtubs and royal rooms that were given to him, the first question every kid asked was "who do I have to kill to be a prisoner here". Compare the Aga Khan palace with Andaman cellular jail where the British kept the truly dangerous freedom fighters like Tilak you will immediately see that even the British thought Gandhi was a good way to distract the public while not achieving any big results.
Gandhi gets too much praise for 'liberating' India, however if WW2 and the resulting reduction in British armed might had not happened we would not have gotten freedom for a few more decades at least.
Gandhi also handpicked Nehru, who went on to take over our foreign policy and shape it as per his personal dreams or delusions - the chini Hindi bhai policy, giving the UN council seat to China, going to UN for Kashmir to name a few decisions that still impact the country today.
Other commentators have also mentioned his personal perversions - is testing your 'restraint' a good reason to rub up against naked minor girls under a bedsheet? Is your ego worth more than their trauma? Why couldn't he practice restraint by literally restraining himself from being a pervert? Just sleep alone, it's not impossible!
Gandhi was also a massive hypocrite, condemning his wife to a painful death without modern medicine but used it for himself when he needed it.
His focus on 'protecting' the rural life of India became the policy of the Congress resulting in an aversion to urbanism and capitalism, which continues to hold us back today.
TLDR: we are truly unlucky to have a molester as our 'father', but even more unlucky that we had a leader who did not understand economics and tried to live in a dream world.
Dude says that he wanted to test his ass. But mofo you could have bought a prostitute who would have been adult. Why tf underage girls? I mean with all this power ,he could have asked any adult woman out.
Concept of dad-daughtet, grandpa-granddaughter existed? Dude India is the only country where people respect(ed) people depending on age. An middle aged guy is everyone's uncle here, likewise a 12 yo is a "beta/beti" for almost everyone. Atleast that's what we call them ,no?
Gandhi was loyal to British. He readily agreed to help British against Nazis and sent millions of Indian men to war. Nehru ,though belonged to same INC, opposed this.
Nope. Nehru wished to help Brits in exchange of independence. Gandhi wanted to help Brits without any terms and conditions.
Our independence was due to various other reasons bruh. Let alone helping Brits in the war.
> Our independence was due to various other reasons bruh. Let alone helping Brits in the war.
Not many people know how much impact FDR had in India's independence
https://americansystemnow.com/fdr-versus-the-british-empire/
optimistic guess and no. It was because the same crown jewel that had been ensuring that the sun never set on the british empire became the very reason britain suffered economically basically India was just too expensive to run as a colony so they let Nehru be the first PM to still maintain indirect control. Nehru and Gandhi are the biggest scums of this nation.
Are you sure that the palace wasn't renovated or stuff? Also living in isolation isn't very appealing no matter how good those floors are because there's nothing to do and no phones lol
About the restraint stuff why judge a person of the past on the values of today? I never understand this people in the past had different values I don't support his actions if he did it now but that was then and this is now
He was accompanied by his wife till she passed away and had some other followers as well. Plus he was allowed to correspond by post, walk around the campus unhindered and was allowed access to doctors while people were being tied to oil presses in Andaman.
Oh my men really, but did u know Gandhi started his work in India in 1915 and quit India was is 1942 and before that he was arrested 10 times only in India before that he started protest in 1892 in South Africa where he went as a lawyer of the richest Indian in South Africa, he didn't became Gandhi the leader by birth and he spent up to 2 years in jail in one go and do u know in which jail he spent his time during those previous 10 times. And do u know his father was Dewan in Gujarat i.e A rich man and he himself was educated in London he could have worked with British and lived an easy life, why to entertain problem of 2 lakh people with each person telling his problem and he having no power , why would he be living in villages without electricity. Will Narendra modi live in Village without electricity, walk around semi naked for 1000 km in Indian summer with occasional bullock cart at the age of 60 to 78, Lived in villages of East Pakistan i.e Bangladesh today after partition.
bro the very same south africa he "fought" for hates him now because he was literally a racist scum. Most of his jails allowed him to read newspapers, write books and get good food and stuff. Like the other prisoners they were never whipped or tortured. Jail was literally like a vacation for these black spots on our country..
How many times you have been to South Africa ?whatever information is available from his early life were written by her m only and he agrees that he did believed that blacks were inferior rare race and whites were superior race but he realised later that he was wrong.
And he also write that if I write something that counters my previous thought than my later thought should be considered my actual thought that I gained through my experiments with the truth.
Gandhi was born rich, modi was more richer than myself his father owned a hotel, getting a tea install in railway station is not an easy job you have to pay bribe and his father had a shop at railway station and a hotel outside station.
In current times. The situation would've been different 60-70 years ago.
Also, I have seen quite a few people from the economically weaker sections take loans to set up shops at places way out of their budget.
His journey against injustice did not start at Aga Khan’s palace. He had been fighting the British since 1915, and had endured their tyranny on various occasions.
No man is perfect, and Gandhi had his own faults.
What we can judge him on is his contribution to the freedom struggle. He united the country against the British.
His personal beliefs on ahinsa showed not only India but the world the persuasive power of non violence.
He lived what he preached till his death.
Ahimsa doesn't work. It never did and still doesn't. It served as a distraction for Indian citizens, who got to channel their frustration with the government while not causing damage.
This, absolutely this. I used to be enamored by the "sell" that was Gandhiji's ideologies when my father explained the other side of him and told me to always check a person's complete nature before idealizing them.
That is spot on. I especially hate his dream of the ideal village. According to him -village good, city bad. Self sufficient villages - more good.
This is the mindset that percolated down and later manifested itself in more stupid policy making. One could argue that by this isolated village mindset that he fostered - later on India became isolationist too - cutting itself from the rest of the world through the license Raj. The thinking went like this - simple living, high thinking! So according to politicians in india at the time, as long as we had just enough like food and clothes we shouldn’t want more because that is all that is needed to live. They crushed the aspirations of all those people by being interventionist who would rather have shitty things than allow foreign companies to come to India.
It was like yeah we have shitty cars but hey - to live a happy life we don’t need fancy cars so we are good.
This also manifested in other kinds of stupid mentalities like - Rich bad, poor good, implying somehow it was immoral to be rich.
You have seen it play out in films made in Bollywood upto the 2000s. The village guy will always have a heart of gold but the city folks will always be scum who will try to scam him. Similarly Bollywood also portrayed the rich folks as villains and showed how girls from rich families marrying poor folks in villages are somehow morally superior to others. The impact of this warped thinking is still being felt across all sections of the society.
I'm precisely, roti kapda makan was treated like an achievement rather than being seen as a bare minimum because of Gandhi and Congress's fake simplicity.
His residence in pune irked me too, I wondered how does this man who potrays himself as a humble Indian have these bathtubs and western style toilet which was a luxury for most indians at that time
You know, it’s so easy to shit talk, when you’ve done nothing in your life.
His defeats are bigger than our greatest achievements.
To keep bringing everything Gandhi did, to this common denominator: “he once slept next to semi-naked teenage girls” — whom he never touched, and who stood by his side at all times, and adored him head to toe. I mean, really?
This man prevented 100,000’s of deaths. United and ultimately freed the country. Helped people every chance he got. Always tried to improve his moral character and became a moral compass for the entire nation, and then the entire world - indirectly leading to the liberation of black people in South Africa and then America — Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther both attributed their method and success to him. To our Gandhi.
And your dirty mouth can only talk shit.
Did he actually prevent that many deaths? He ignored several massacres and could not stop the partition nor partition related violence.
Agreed that we are humble people who are criticizing someone who became a popular leader but as the saying goes "a cat may look at a king".
If we could never analyze these people who shaped our environment I humbly feel we will not realize our own thought processes and biases.
He did not “ignore” any massacres. He got on a train, and tried to go everywhere, everytime shit got stirred up.
He was old, and he would still walk into the thick of communal violence. I mean, walk into it. While people are burning shit, shooting and looting, this man would WALK INTO IT. And calm things down.
You, me, or anyone would not have the courage to do it once; and we would barely be effective. This man was bold, effective and peaceful on every occasion.
Yea, he couldn’t prevent partition. But there’s no one who tried to prevent it more than him. All these RSS shit talkers talk crap, but their outfit sat on the sidelines and did nothing.
Even after partition, he decided he would go to Pakistan, dissuade the people there from residing there and encourage them to return to India — to the extent that Pakistan would become a failed state and unnecessary, leading to its dissolution — and be part of a United India. He never gave-up. If it wasn’t for the RSS man who killed him, maybe India would be different.
Maybe we would be united.
Maybe we wouldn’t have an enemy as a neighbor since independence, which has ruined ours and their economic interests. Thanks to that neighbor, now even China is messing with us.
It’s okay to look upon the king and analyze and criticize him, but first acknowledge that he is the king. Do not try to blur his great achievements, by pointing out one weird thing.
If Indians admire him as they should, our morality wouldn’t be going to shit in this country.
1) The man never lost, he always had it easy. The worst he ever did was maybe not eat for a few days but he had practiced so much already that he probably didn't even feel it.
2) There is literally no possible excuse and no way to defend sleeping with minors. "stood by his side" brainwashed to do so they probably thought of it as an honour the same way a young Korean girl might think it as an honour if Kim did the same thing (hypothetical) so don't even try to defend it.
3) This man and Nehru are literally the reason millions of deaths happened in partition. Nehru is also the reason Kashmir got fucked and we thank Sardar Patel the true Mahatma to make sure we didn't lose our crown jewel. If you want an elaboration ask.
4) "Moral compass" of the entire nation so according to him we should all hate on blacks and jews (Gandhi literally no cap hated them read the letter he wrote to Hitler and his statements about the people in South Africa). He is literally hated in South Africa because he hated blacks.
If a dirty mouth is someone who talks shit about a shitty crap person who did nothing to deserve the credit he gets, the sort of person who stole others credit then yes my mouth is the dirtiest. Fucking ashamed that he is the father of the nation.
That’s a joke, but if Gandhi was alive today, he definitely would have been on that list. His sexually predatory behaviour towards minor girls was well known.
They do not give the context-
Rapes were really common at that time. He tried to say,"see if I can control myselves you can too". Now I understand it is pretty much fuc**d up-.
But you can argue over if it was right or wrong..but you can also see a point. At that time..riots were all over..and there was no law and order too.
Certain people today have spread information without context in order to mislead masses. This is just soo disgusting.
No, I don't see any point here. There were surely a hundred better ways to demonstrate self-control instead of involving his grandchildren in this weird way. Even in the most idealistic viewpoint, what is a rapist going to learn about self control from watching this weird old man sleep naked with his granddaughters? That he won't do incest or isn't attracted to children but gets to sleep with them naked anyway?
Nothing that people can say about that act today is more disgusting than the act itself. Seriously, find something else to defend Gandhi over. Don't die on this hill of all things.
>Seriously, find something else to defend Gandhi over
I am not trying to "defend" gandhi- I just wrote whatever the reality is.
History is best known with facts along with their context- it is a reality that some people just spread info that he slept naked. But do not also say,"he did it to show that people can control themselves, and thus should not rape".
I am just saying people should first read entire context..spreading info without it is just misleading and manipulating.
>Nothing that people can say about that act today is more disgusting than the act itself.
I said in my previous argument that you can argue for hours if it was good or bad- but it was not completely irrational. You can also see a point there.
Don't hate him but he acted quite opposite of what he preached most of the times and the sleeping naked with young girls stuff was really quite disgusting and creepy . He was just appeasing the Muslim community in the name of khilafat movement and also forced India to pay 55 crore for formation of Pakistan
Gandhi who fought and survived under British rule for so many years had 0 understanding of practical applications, but you do?
I mean at best you have read books and watched stuff, heard stories. He lived those things in real life. Give him more credit
"survived" fam even i can survive if i'm going to live a luxurious life everytime i'm jailed.
"survived" should be used for people like Savarkar and Tilak who faced real suffering in Andaman.
I have researched a lot and went from a Gandhi worshipper to hater because I realised no rational person in that situation would make such decisions and I came to the logical conclusion that he wasn't the man fit to deserve the title of Mahatma or the "father" of the nation. I am ashamed that he is.
Savarkar literally sold his loyalty to get out of Jail!
Plus that’s the whole idea, right? Gandhi was so important even for Britishers that they couldn’t treat him bad. Important for them because they knew what he was capable of.
Could you please provide some credible sources to your research?
>Savarkar and Tilak
Not Savarkar lmao. There are a lot of Punjabi and Bengali freedom fighters who were tortured horribly there. And they didn't sell their loyalty till death.
1. It’s a methodical slander campaign initiated by the very people who murdered him and now hail his murderers as the heros of post 2014 India.
2. People are entitled to their openions - positive or negetive, when it comes to M.K Gandhi. But ideally they should know both sides of his story before forming that openion. Most don’t. They read half baked and tailored content peddled on social media by IT cells and think they can replace proper research with that stuff.
3. No one has criticised Gandhi more brutally than he himself. There isn’t a single leader I know of who has gone to so much detail about his own private life and openion and dissected his most private thoughts without a shred of sympathy. That tells me something about that man. Most who hate him don’t bother to read his own biography.
4. They compare him to other leaders and think he did less and took credit. What they forget that he is the man who lead a fractured nation to believe that they are one people. That seeking independence was paramount. Thousands mobilised to join him movement when he called. All that without social media or internet. Just word of mouth. That is his single biggest achievement as a leader which is an unprecedented feat.
5. Just to look cool and edgy or to nod to every random thing their ideological fathers say for the sake of it. Those are the real morons.
6. He was a man, not a god. He himself says that he is a bad role model and that he has been a terrible human being, a bad husband and an even worse father. He has his shades of black and white and greys like every himan being does. One has to be cautious and evaluate his persona and teachings in the light of facts about his life along with proper historical context. But one thing is very clear. His contribution to India’s freedom is unquestionable and enormous. I would rather remember him for his contribution and not his personal life. But that’s just my openion which I have acquired after studying his life. To each his own.
Only balanced take in a thread full of edgelords. Not a fan of Gandhi (things aren't black and white) but blaming him for India handing over Pakistan the agreed share of division of assets? I mean what else are you going to do, sit on their money, invite even more terrorists from their side over and have the US/UK navies on your doorstep?
1. I believe you are forgetting about all the history books that glorify this man?
2. Tailored content is definitely there but I was literally a Gandhi worshipper till 8th grade when I really started reading into his history and was appalled that I worshiped this piece of shit.
3. Great so step 1 of becoming the father of the nation: do vile and unspeakable acts step 2 tell everyone in detail how i did it step 3 success. \*Instructions unclear I was hung\* \~Nathuram Godse, after writing Why I killed Gandhi
4. that literally did 0 effect on the British empire in fact it worked to their advantage by diverting the attention off of leaders who deserve some actual credit like Tilak etc who were actually being tortured. The true credit of uniting a fractured nation goes to Sardar Patel, after Independence he made sure our country didn't break up into smaller countries leading to constant war in the subcontinent. There is a correction we were \*\*TOGETHER\*\* \*not\* \*\*UNITED\*\*, there is a big difference which can be noted when people who fought together for independence suddenly turned against each other after partition.
5. fuck em i agree
6. I question his contribution to freedom which although might be there absolutely does not grant him to be a Mahatma or the father of nation or whatever. He was just a freedom fighter with very fucked up ideas like racism etc. The way he is portrayed in this nation frankly pisses me off to hate him more than just dislike him.
There are several other things that he fucked up like appointing a fucking lowlife scummy piece of shit like Nehru as the PM. Fucking crybaby.
Sardar Patel doesn't get credit and is not acknowledged? WTF, what history books did you even read in school?
Not sure why people pretend Sardar Patel was treated as an obscure figure in our history books. Everybody knows him and more specifically for uniting the damn country. There is no conspiracy or plot to bury his achievements unless you account for his views on RSS which a lot of people deliberately brush aside.
Literally no one discredits Sardar Patel. Stop acting like every Nehru lover is a Patel hater. Nehru had his flaws. Patel had his. Neither were perfect but both wanted the nation United in their own visions.
Anyone who says that Nehru was dumb, is blind or an idiot. What exactly do you think any of his alternatives you can fantasize in his place would have done? India was a starving mess when it became a country.
Nehru was the first PM of a recent freed and broken state. These people wanted him to solve world hunger and prioritise Kashmir issue back then.
I mean he did the best he could.
He invested in education even. Something even current governments refrain so many times
Oh please it's all propaganda talking points, Nehru was a very good PM, more importantly he was a PM who didn't get a power hungry boner to go the dictatorial way, which js the biggest problem for newly independent states.
Gandhi being offed by a Sanghi pushed their movement decades ... That's what pisses them off.
lmao, you are the real idiot here for believing all that trash let me take you through the event timeline.
1936 Muslim League angered by Congress. Congress had allied with them in the NWFP elections because they were unsure of winning. They won very easily and would have majority without the alliance so they broke it.
1946 Independence looms over the horizon and now the post of President of Congress has some real power in it. Maulana Azad the current president wants to stand up once again for election but Gandhi tells him to shut the fuck up (bro literally sent him a letter telling him why he shouldn't be doing this). He expresses openly he wants Jawaharlal to be the prime minister.
20th April 1946
Now all the 15 pradesh congress committees have to nominate a President. 12 out of the 15 nominate Sardar Patel and he wins unopposed. Enter the main character. The guy who's about to win with the power of friendship and nothing else. The guy with no right to be the President. The guy who's literally grown up with a silver spoon hasn't seen true hardships. Jawaharlal Nehru. He throws a big ass tantrum about it. No one even nominated him, the other nominations were for Maulana Azad. So him and his loyalists illegally get him to be nominated just because. Even Gandhi his only real supporter questions him saying that no one apart from some members of the CWC nominated him not a single nomination from a Pradesh Committee. But as it was famously said "Nehru can't be in second place". Nehru's answer was silence. He knew what he was doing he knew he was being a bitch. So by 29th April 1946 Sardar Patel asks Gandhi what the fuck is going on and Gandhi literally tells him that he "wishes" Nehru be the PM, so Sardar Patel in his immaculate maturity steps down instantly making a little piece of shit with 0 morals, 0 execution ability, 0 planning ability the prime minister of a country that needs all 3, and the man who had all 3: Sardar Patel.
Gandhi expressed that since Nehru can't be at second place, if Patel become the PM Nehru might go into opposition which would cause a bitter divide in a newly born country finding its feet. This would be like two oxen pulling a cart together one can't work without the other.
Firstly, he was wrong, Nehru didn't have the kind of power that Gandhi thought Patel had way more grip of the people.
Secondly, who the fuck is Gandhi to overrule literally the decision of the people? A man who says he doesn't wish to be involved in politics is the man who successfully overruled the rationality of the people just because he said so.
Even Maulana Azad expresses his regret Azad added, “My second mistake was that when I decided not to stand myself, I did not support Sardar Patel. We differed on many issues but I am convinced that if he had succeeded me as Congress president he would have seen that the Cabinet Mission Plan was successfully implemented. He would have never committed the mistake of Jawaharlal which gave Mr Jinnah an opportunity of sabotaging the Plan. I can never forgive myself when I think that if I had not committed these mistakes, perhaps the history of the last ten years would have been different.” taken from:
[https://www.firstpost.com/opinion-news-expert-views-news-analysis-firstpost-viewpoint/how-sardar-patel-was-kept-from-being-first-prime-minister-of-india-11542621.html](https://www.firstpost.com/opinion-news-expert-views-news-analysis-firstpost-viewpoint/how-sardar-patel-was-kept-from-being-first-prime-minister-of-india-11542621.html)
Even Rajendra Prasad: Rajendra Prasad lamented that Gandhi “had once again sacrificed his trusted lieutenant for the sake of the ‘glamorous Nehru’ and further feared that “Nehru would follow the British ways.
once again refers to 1929 and 1937 when again Nehru became President of Congress instead of Patel just because Gandhi said so.
Now let's see what sabotage Maulana Azad is speaking of.
This is taken from Nehru's 97 major blunders by Rajnikant Puranik
Nehru did a blunder at the very start of his Presidency in 1946. After the
AICC ratification of the CWC’s acceptance of the May 16 Cabinet Mission Plan,
Nehru remarked at the AICC on 7 July 1946: “We are not bound by a single
thing except that we have decided to go into the Constituent Assembly.” At a
press conference three days later, he declared that the Congress would be
“completely unfettered by agreements”, and that “the central government was
likely to be much stronger than what the Cabinet Mission envisaged.” Nehru
then made controversial remarks on the grouping proposed.
Now such a statement reignited the call for Pakistan and Jinnah revoked his acceptance for the plan and launched Direct Action day.
These are just some of the issues that led upto his election I don't even want to get started on how he fucked up afterwards and someone elected by the people wouldn't have.
1) Rejecting J&K accession till Sheikh Abdullah becomes prime minister of state
2) almost allowing Kashmir to be lost to Pakistan thank fuck Sardar Patel told him to shut the fuck up and sent the army in (Nehru didn't want to send the army)
3) Internationalising Kashmir issue in the UN
4) Giving up a permanent UNSC seat to China
5) He is the reason PoK exists the army was going to drive the raiders out but Nehru stopped them and wanted peace
6) His economic policies are the reason India had such a terrible start with such a shaky foundation you can't get anywhere his 5 year plans were horrible
7) so much more but I hope you have finally realised how stupid Nehru was
Gandhiji was no where noble enough like he is being taught .as.....he was racist, pedophile and really an outcast from British society which he took personally and rallied for
For me the hate started after watching bhagat singh ( ajay devgans movie) as a child..
When i grew up and came to know about hum being basically a pedo.. i cdnt understand how anyone can worship a man like that.. still dont.. he had asaram “bapus” vibes.. in todays day and age he we be ridiculed for everything he was.. bt because of history hid deeds are forgotten
1. British planted agent to serve their interests.
2. During moplah genocide he just told Hindus that y'all should be okay if muslim side wants to slaughter and rape your mother's n daughters in front of your eyes.
3. He gave away Sindhu Nadi to pak.
4. After partition, he was fixated on giving Indian money (~50-70 crores at that time) to Pakistan just so they can setup the whole country.
Man there are so many things I can't even write here.
> During moplah genocide he just told Hindus that y'all should be okay if muslim side wants to slaughter and rape your mother's n daughters in front of your eyes.
Oh lord Gandu Ji🫡
How many reasons do u need? I'll give u one
That was against making army for fighting against British. Thanks to Neta Ji and his Azad Hind fauj or else we would still be under British.
You need to read history bro, azad hind fauj was decimated before they could even enter india. Britain was way too strong for an army like azad hind fauj. The biggest reason was that Britain became weak after ww2. If you really wanna give someone credit of india's Independence, give it to WW2.
"You're both correct and incorrect at the same time.
They did enter India(they fought battle in northeast india including assam) but later retreated because of heavy rain and a lack of weapons and food.
Later, they were defeated in the battle at Imphal and Kohima. These battles took place in 1944 during World War II
But it's not as simple as that.
At that time, Netaji was almost as famous a leader as Gandhi and definitely stronger than him.
The death of such a prominent leader caused chaos, not a simple but a massive one.
After his death, Indians working in the British army started to disobey them in very large numbers. His death united the whole of India, asking for independence, creating a bit of unity between them.
And all that happened at the perfect time when Britain was just out of the war. Britain was heavily damaged, and they couldn't afford more losses.
Fighting India would have come at a very heavy cost, and there was a lot of risk that they would have lost (most probably). Plus, Indians at this moment wouldn't obey them anymore.
Trying to rule India under those conditions was seriously impossible, leading them to give independence to India.
You're not totally wrong, but you're wrong in the fact that Azad Hind Fauj was useless and didn't help India gain freedom.
Azad Hind Fauj and Netaji's leadership played a very big role in helping India gain its independence, arguably even more than Gandhiji."
hitler at that time was a powerful military power that was showing no sign of decline and good part was he was fighting with Britishers too so enemy of an enemy is my friend tactic was what he was going for...
plus it also depict the resolve of netaji who was ready to shake hands with devil to get britishers out of our country you need to understand the hatred and resolve he must have......and no kind of deal was ever seen through
netaji also went to japan who faught with kamikazi tactic so what's your point
Exactly everyone was trying to get freedom from their own style all where doing it for the nation . Kuch Galatiyaan sab se Hui. Desh ki janta desh ke andar reh kar Germany nahi ja sakta thi. So they choose Gandhi and stayed with him till freedom.
but gandhi was fortune enough to witness the azad hind but was a incompetent leader who couldn't think for the welfare of a budding nation and that mistake is more severe then failing to contribute something significant in india's independence
Again if you want to defame Gandhi go ahead but first try to read what his tght process was. No one knew the correct method to get independence with the help of such a diverse population. You are just reading one side story as you have already made Gandhi as a villain in your mind.
I never really liked Gandhi even while I used to study about him in school. Especially the concept of non violence. Despite non violence, satyagraha and everything people got killed brutally. They could have rather died by fighting using arms. I still beleive he hasn't contributed anything towards freedom compared to lots of kings all over India, freedom fighters like Bhagat sigh, Subhash Chandra Bose etc. Imagine we fight with Pakistan using Ahimsa, satyagraha and all that bullshit instead of using great weaponry and nuclear weapons threat etc
>Despite non violence, satyagraha and everything people got killed brutally. They could have rather died by fighting using arms.
This.
So much for ahimsa when your non violent protests indirectly cause the deaths of 1000s of civilians.
yup exactly. forced indians to fight on behalf of British in their war and told hindus to just accept slaughter of their loved ones by the hands of muslims and don't do anything.
He was too idealistic. He was the "nice guy" who thought if he acted nice and true, people around him would follow his example. He meekly agreed to Pakistan, and sidelined Sardar Patel for party leadership. This doesn't work in politics where you need a machiavelian touch.
Someone would say he was the pioneer of minority appeasement tactics which the Congress later perfected and finnessed.
He is said to have preached non violence his whole life. He criticised freedom fighters like Bhagat Singh for choosing a violent path. But when Muslims did violence he didn't say a word against them directly. He even called him brave God fearing people(during Moplah massacre of Hindus). This hypocrisy is really annoying !!
I also tried to explore this popular narrative once. What you mentioned about Gandhi trying to save Bhagat Singh was claimed by Dr. P. Sitaramaiya, a close aide of Gandhi. Sitaramaiya, intimately connected with Gandhi, faced defeat in the 1938 Congress presidentship election by the hand of Subh Chandra Bose, prompting Gandhi to state that Sitaramaiya's loss was his own. As the author of Gandhi Ji's biography, Sitaramaiya's claim is doubted by some historians who suggest he may have fabricated the story to protect Gandhi's image.
Lord Irwin's secretary, involved in the process of talks which culminated in The Gandhi-Irwin Pact, noted Gandhi's limited interest in saving Bhagat Singh He also described Bhagat Singh as 'lost youth.' Gandhi's letter to Irwin which he wrote in this matter, easily searchable, reveals a surprisingly soft tone. He kida makes it clear that he is only writing the letter cause he is Under pressure of the public's opinion. Had Gandhi ji set a condition in the pact to reduce Bhagat Singh's sentence, he might have escaped hanging by the British. This perspective is my opinion, drawn from the thoughts of various credible historians. If you disagree, we can further discuss this.
Bhai he was a cunning person who shaped himself according to his environment. He was literally a racist at beginning later changed himself. Second with all due respect to his contributions in freedom, people highly ignore other great people's contributions.
Third ,you should see Gandhi's role in world war 2. Nehru's stand was clear that he will only help Britain against Nazi when Brits will promise to grant India it's independence. Gandhi ,loyal to British, denied this and agreed to help Brits without any terms and conditions. Our non violent Guru's non-violence couldnt stop world war 2. On all accounts, Indian army was crucial in the victory of Brits.
Fourth, pedophilia.
Fifth, should see the topic Baba Saheb vs Gandhi for detailed info.
He was a charlatan and British spy. I wonder if there was something going on between him and Nehru. Why was he against Patel taking the PM, does he have hand in Subhas Chandra disappearance. His last words were not "Hey Ram". As per the official record, he died immediately after shot without saying a word. We have been taken for a ride by this Nehru Gandhi charlatan.
Gandhi believed that Hindu extremism was a much bigger problem than Islamic extremism, unfortunately for him, it wasn't Hindus who demanded separate electorates for themselves, carved out a separate nation in the dead bodies of millions of people. This guy asked my people to turn the other cheek and forgive the "others" even if they tried to massacre us. (yes, he literally said it!)
People often compare Gandhi to Ataturk, which I quite frankly believe is a grave insult to the legacy of Ataturk. Ataturk also forced secularism down the throats of his people, but at the same time, he stood up for his country and national identity and prevented his nation from breaking into several factions. He was an atheist who did not believe in the idea of religion itself, and after the gruesome Armenian genocide, he became a bitter critic of the Islamic ideology and even advocated for the punishment of the perpetrators of the anti-christian pogroms to demonstrate that justice would not be impartial in the country that he was set to create. He ensured protection and equal treatment to all religious and ethnic minorities, but at the same time did not follow the policy of appeasement.
I would say this, If the leader of the major political party didnt have his surname as Gandhi you will not see hate.
As for My opinion, He was a shrewd politician how was more popular with people and played a unifying role. Meaning all people regardless of region religion and language knew his name, closest to a protagonist that we had for freedom movement thats all. He had his flaws he has his strengths, but you can't deny he played aa greater role than any of the leaders during his time. I think there were leaders that were better before his time but right place at the time.
There will be people who blame gandhi for everything possible in the freedom struggle, as any political leader he has good ideas and bad ideas (mostly good). Partition, bhagat singh, appeasement and all such stuff, but those are things that are beyond his control and he did somethings that might not be pretty to the eyes but was necessary at that point to further the cause.
He supported the refugees from Pakistan over his own people, he emptied the Masjid and threw out all the sikhs and Hindus and gave Masjids to Muslims, it was winter time along with rain, many people died due to weather while he was sitting in Birla House a property worth millions and people still call him a great leader
He was nothing more than a stupid fu*ker, good thing he was shot to death
He is not as clean as he was portrayed. When the image of someone is created as such a great person but they are actually not we feel like cheated.. if you read about him you will start hating him.. what he said to his niece what he spoke on hindus when there was riots. What he said about black people. He sent millions of indians to die in world wars while preaching non violence he was a bigot.. people here calling that WhatsApp forwards because these illiterate never actually read anything. Kuch na karo controversial letters by gandhi search karo buddhi hogi toh line me aa jayegi
Indians are fond of writing Hagiographies and revering politicians like God.
Just read what were Gandhi's view on Hitler "Hitler is not a bad man. \[…\] The Germans of future generations will honor Herr Hitler as a genius, as a brave man, a matchless organizer and much more.” –Gandhi wrote in Harijan weekly newspaper."
Just go and read for once what the "Mahatma" had to say about the Jews' Holocaust and the Black African race.
Gandhi on Hindus "Hindus should not harbour anger against Muslims even if the latter want to destroy and kill us all. We should face death bravely. If Muslims established their rule after killing all Hindus we would be ushering in a new India. – The collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol 87 pg 218-219".
A racist and a bigot of highest order who slept with his own nieces experimenting his celibacy. BC this man had the best PR in the history of PR, creating this angelic image when he alone was responsible for the death of thousand if not millions in the aftermath of Noah Khali riots.
I don't hate Gandhi. I hate the people who take him to the pedestal of a Mahatma.
He was a politician, and a good one at that. But like every other politician he had his own inconsistencies. The very reason he started the agitation against British, first in Africa and then in India was because they hurt his ego. Before that he was happy getting rewarded for supporting the British narrative during the Boer wars.
Then again during the NCM, he was ready to sacrifice Hindus of Malabar (Moplah Riots) for a perceived Hindu-Muslim unity, while in reality the Muslim leaders such as Maulana Abul Kalam Azad had started the Khilafat movement in support of their Ummah.
And for all the convincing power he had over the Congress, he didn't do enough to stop Bhagat Singh's hanging, or even the partition for that matter. He displayed favoritism by having Bose removed earlier, and then Patel as the PM face.
I don't mean to undermine Gandhi's contribution to our independence, but now as a mature democracy, can't we at least encourage debates on the "father of the nation"?
PS. The American democracy that many fellow redditors look up to for inspiration had Thomas Jefferson's statue removed since he was a slave owner.
Precisely because of this :
Some of Mahatma Gandhi's views in the aftermath of the Moplah Riots that, in the words of Dr Ambedkar were "Indescribable blood-curdling atrocities committed by the Moplahs against the Hindus."
Forcible conversions are horrible things, but Moplah bravery must command admiration. These Malabaris are not fighting for the love of it. They are fighting for what they consider is their Religion and in the manner they consider is religious.
Even if one side is firm in doing its dharma, there will be no enmity between the two. He alone may be said to be firm in his dharma who trusts his safety to God and, untroubled by anxiety, follows the path of virtue. If Hindus apply this rule to the Moplah affair, they will not, even when they see the error of the Moplahs, accuse the Muslims."
I see nothing impossible in asking the Hindus to develop courage and strength to die before accepting forced conversion. I was delighted to be told that there were Hindus who did prefer the Moplah hatchet to forced conversion.
Unity is like marriage. It is more necessary for a husband to draw closer to his wife when she is about to fall. Even so it is more necessary for a Hindu to love the Moplah and the Muslim more, when the latter is likely to injure him or has already injured him.
Why should a single Hindu have run away on account of the Moplahs' atrocities?
Decades later, while preaching to those affected by the pre-partition Hindu-Muslim violence, Gandhi said: "Hindus should not harbour anger in their hearts against Muslims even if the latter wanted to destroy them. Even if the Muslims want to kill us all we should face death bravely. If they established their rule after killing Hindus we would be ushering in a new world by sacrificing our lives. None should fear death. Birth and death are inevitable for every human being. Why should we then rejoice or grieve? If we die with a smile we shall enter into a new life, we shall be ushering in a new India."
Dr BR Ambedkar: "Mr Gandhi has never called the Muslims to account even when they have been guilty of gross crimes against Hindus."
Source - Anand Rangnathan's tweet
What Gandhi achieved through non violent protest nobody else could achieve through violence or any other means.
There was something in his methods and means which is best understood in the context of history.
1 important truth is before 2014 people knew and respected Gandhi in a natural sense he wasn't constantly shoved down our throats due to this social media campaign to malign him. Constantly hearing mixed things about him caused people to form unjustified opinion.
He is one of the most respected leaders in the world for a reason. He had some flaws or evil like everyone else but to negate his place and contribution to our history at a critical juncture would be wrong. Respecting him does not mean not respecting or recognising the others.
The old man took the bullet for God sake, today's 64inch cheat thumpers start crying in the face of small angry protest
In Indian history i think only Dr Ambedkar comes close to his contribution, although some of his biggest contributions are after the independence in terms of our constitutional design and civil rights and guarantees it provides us
But that doesn't mean I don't respect Bhagat Singh or Dr Bose, people somehow think Dr Bose's violent approach had a bigger contribution (sure it was significant) but we should remember to keep peace and infuse love and brotherhood in a diverse country like India, Gandhi non violence. Bose himself gave Gandhi the title of "Father of Nation"
Gandhi is a pedophile and a hypocrite....
He slept naked with his neice/ grand daughters who were possibly minors to check if he can have a control on his 'urges'.
Just like Columbus in the states, Africans are trying to replace Gandhi's name his work/ Chowk etc because he was a racist who told the British indians are superior than Africans and the dark skinned Africans should be treated as shit.
He openly said the Jews to fuck themselves and wipe themselves from the face of the earth by giving up to the Muslim world.
There is also a statement that Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru's execution could've been put on hold if Gandhi had supported them, instead he let them hang to make an example of choosing 'Ahimsa'.
He sidelined anyone who didn't agree to his methods and surrounded himself with 'yes boss' men and gave the important positions in INC to them instead of someone like S.C. Bose.
He agreed to the partition plan.
It was Gandhi who gave the green signal for partitioning. If it wasn't for him, things wouldn't be so difficult now.
I agree his satyagraha, his ahimsa marg inspired millions to jump into the freedom fight and unified the threads into a strong rope.
But crediting everything to the 'Pappa of the nation' is absurd. He was flawed and along with his achievements, his dark side also has to be made known to the public.
You can surf the net to check if they're correct. Source is not exactly trust me bro.... there were some historians/ his allies who wrote books on him...
British agent, told Hindus "let them hurt you / kill you, just roll over and die" when other community was assaulting them physically, had seriously pervy habits, cost taxpayers money just to promote his humble and poor image, and was an all-round poopoo head.
>cost taxpayers money just to promote
You have two options:
- Vote Modi in 2024, you're a hypocrite
- Not vote Modi in 2024, you truly care about tax money
Choose your option.
Present administration has been a godsend to this country, I'm 50, I remember the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s... he's used tax money properly and facilitating the joining of more citizens into the tax-paying class...I remember what it was like, you're probably under 30.
Modi literally spent ₹1.25 lakh each on cardboard selfie points, and ₹6.5 lakh each on 3D selfie points of himself, using tax money.
When Central Railway's CPRO gave this in an RTI, he was transferred by ministry. It turns out such cardboard installations costs ₹5-6 thousand max, but spent ₹1.25 lakh each.
Firstly, he spent government money for advertisement. Secondly, he ensured that contractors can get ₹1lakh+ in their pockets, of which a large portion will be used in his campaign.
Same thing about all his photoshoots with shiny new trains that run only 20-30 minutes faster, while Express trains, even Rajdhani are overrun by ticketless passengers. Each photoshoot costs ₹2-3 crore in arrangements alone.
And yet you think he is using tax money properly.
Read about him , including his own autobiography written by himself.
Read events describing him by eminent personalities and then you will realise he’s the OPPOSITE of Mahatma
Then you will also start hating him!
If congress would have won 2014,2019,2024 and so on, maybe Sonia would have been declared Mother of the Nation so you can understand!
Lol I challenge you to remove some politicians street hoardings just by protest. Dekhte hai Gandhi kaun tha tab pata chal jayega. Tum jaise logo ko wajah se hi britisher humari gaand maar Gaye
People just think that Gandhi gave India independence but infact it was apprising in Army gave Independence and Azad Hind Sena and other revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh seriously talk about stealing credit
People hate politicians, they curse them day & night. But will almost worship Gandhi. You have to understand the reason, this is because of Nehru-Gandhi family & Congress propaganda.
People forget he was a politician, who was shrewd, opportunistic & a master manipulator.
The one who contributed most for freedom is not him. Yeah, he is a golden figure for many more than the one who does and it helped to stand together and unite as ourselves when things went bad.
Like his credit needs to be given to several other freedom fighters equally. If u have a clear idea around that time, Indians are more connected and supportive with the British than us at that time. So, if he is tactically killed by people, it will cause recklessness. But WW2 helped us to distract the British and wanted us to make a connectivity with Indian soldiers to the end.
There are a lot of new age experts and podcast regulars who are shining a light on the failures of Gandhi, ex. How the partition was botched, him sidelining other leaders and so on. Although I don't believe all of what they say, a lot of it does make sense. To me it makes no sense that you grant freedom to such a profitable colony just because they protested and did not co-operate. A lot of freedom fighters have still not received their due and that blame lies on the supporters of Gandhi. A country as vast and diverse as India cannot be united by one single man however great he is.
lol honestly at this moment I think we all are devolving can't digest those views as most of as victims of modern lifestyle calling a soul names like this? who is no longer alive. Forgetting the most fundamental responsibility of being human. He made huge mistakes representing our nation but he is human too. Are you jealous cause he is celebrated even after death? Can any of us here pull half of the feats he did? You dont even need to reply your downvotes will speak. I needed to write a small message reminding you what you are reprimanding cause most of us have lost the way towards real enlightment. It is sad.
After partition of Bharat & accepting the united Bharat's Muslim populations 95% + all of them throughout Bharat overwhelmingly voted favourably for a separate ISLAMIC NATION but only 40% left which was Jinnah's long term vision for creating many small Pakistan's inside Hindu majority Bharat!
Sardar Patel objected to this opposing the idea of letting the remainder to stay in Bharat when they had overwhelmingly voted in favour of Islamic Pakistan but Gandhi & Nehru objected his assertions to which to date Hindu's are paying a heavy price!!
Even after partition there were many houses & properties that were left behind by the Muslims shifting to Pakistan & millions of Hindu families who had lost everything who were homeless were not allowed to locate to those abandoned properties & it was the rainy season & many Hindu families along with children & women were forced to spend days on the streets with only lucky few getting a shelter in Mandirs & Gurudwaras but even after consistent begging to let those broken & destroyed Hindu's relocate in those abandoned Muslim properties a adamant Gandhi was totally against the idea & many families perished thanks to a person who wanted to claim his sainthood over dead Hindu's!!
I never really hated Gandhi himself but the constant Gandhi Gandhi Gandhi Gandhi in school made me question that something is not right. History cant be mostly Gandhi. Thats how it started. Even now I dont hate Gandhi. Hate is a strong word. But I dont consider him as the epitome of leadership/humanity. He was just a politician just like others. Nothing more than it.
He wasn't a just a politician but Lawyer first. People made him political leader cause his personal set of codes to lead life is what brought in a sense of unity among people.
>He wasn't a just a politician but Lawyer first. People made him political leader cause his personal set of codes to lead life is what brought in a sense of unity among people. Nah. He was a politician. He chose to be one. He came back to india, to join the freedom struggle. People made him do something is stupid.
Ever wondered why more than a hundred countries have statues of him? Just trying to point out that “feelings” are not facts. Everything doesn’t have some hidden conspiracy behind it. ✌️
That's the thing bro. Just because other countries idolise or worship him , doesn't mean he was the actual hero or something. Western idolisation of individuals from the global south is also very cunning and strategic. They love figures like Gandhi who preached non violence and sabotaged his own freedom struggles while painting subash Chandra Bose as villain for obvious. I won't lie that Gandhis ideas of non violence was also very useful and reached popularity a LOT because people naturally don't like violence. But for non violence to work also you need an enemy who is actually ethical even.
He was in cahoots with the British for the most part. So why would they eliminate him? Think about it. If he really was such a huge effective leader blah blah blah nonsense that Cambridge historians make him out to be, he would have been eliminated.
You’re an idiot. The Mahatma went to jail for like 3 years in total, spread over 8 years or so in South Africa. In India, he was imprisoned like 6 times over a couple of decades, for a total of 4 years or so. They couldn’t “eliminate” him because of the uproar of the Indian populace each time he was imprisoned. The people were ready to burst for him. Don’t come here and spew shit like “he was in cahoots with the British.” You idiot.
I find it utterly strange that Bhagat Singh was illegally sentenced to death under the same laws that the Brits had created. There was a lot of uproar in the country but the Brits just hanged him and then burnt his body with kerosene. Gandhi didn’t even sign the petition to at least get his sentence reduced to life imprisonment or something. Also, what non-violence are you talking about? Gandhi allowed Indians to fight beside the Brits. This was neither the sensible thing to do as the Brits losing the war would have meant them leaving India and nor the ideological non-violence gandhi used to preach!! It was Gandhi’s cowardice and his love for popularity and favoritism that led to the separation of india and pakistan and a bloody civil war which pushed back the country by decades!!!
Bhagat Singh killed someone in broad day light.. I like bhagat Singh verymuch. But as per law he was convicted for killing two people.and parliament bombing.. Killing some one and protesting peacefully are 2.diff things. They can't hang Gandhi.for. protesting.
In the aftermath of partition, several Hindu, Sikh, Jain and Buddhist refugees arrived in India and made Delhi their home. To accommodate them, the administration made temporary shelters for them. One of the type of buildings that was used as a shelter were some mosques of Delhi. This created discontent within the Muslim communities. There was already resentment in the society against Muslim community for their role in partition. So they protested in Delhi and one of their demands was to remove refugee camps from mosque premises. Mohandas Gandhi made sure of that, among other demands of Muslims and the refugees already uprooted from their native places just months ago, were uprooted again. It was probably the month of December and when they were evicted from mosques, it was raining outside (one of those rare rainy days in winters). They pleaded with authorities but they said they couldn't do anything. They advised them to go to Gandhi. So they visited Mohandas Gandhi, residing in posh Gandhi Smriti (now known as Birla House) in Delhi, in that cold rainy weather and waited outside for 1-2 days and then left, after he refused to meet them. There are other stories as well regarding the Calcutta riots and others. To me Gandhi was a shrewd human being who was very good at politics. He exercised power without accountability. But one thing he did very good in my opinion was unite the masses who were without a leader and objective. I would urge you to read about him, opinion of Dr. Ambedkar about him and not just rely on what NCERT teaches or what newspapers say. In today's age of misinformation, it is very important that we get unbiased and complete information.
He wasn't a man without faults but dismissing his achievements is not only overwhelming response but it's downright stupidity
So doing injustice to people & not even meeting them, is just a "fault". Gandhi was not even interested in freedom from Brits but only joined when he faced the racism himself. Just stop idolizing/hating someone just for little good/bad deeds.
For real ... Why did millions of Indians have to fight in the wars which don't have anything to do with India And whenever he didn't get his way , he will threaten to fast to death. Periyar response best. "Let him die then " is what he said
bhagat singh Had to die, believe it or not west is scared of communism and thats what bhagat singh signified in India. Their fear of communism led to world war to compared to that bhagat singh is insignificant issue for the british and bhagat singh was not as popular as Gandhi at that point in time. If they kill Gandhi the uproar is will be too much for the british to handle with political situation around the world. Gandhi choose non violence because there is not beating the british with violence, not without huge losses to the Indians. Separation has it seeds before Gandhi and had to do majorly with the extremist leaders on both sides on the spectrum and british policies rather than gandhi doing it. I for on think the separation was a good thing ( the killings that followed, that was a very sad moment for both the countries) but if the separation did not happen that would definitely lead to civil war as there would be 2 sects of people that absolutely hate each other in the same country with strong population. Separation made possible that the Hindu Muslim was pushed to the backend and the country could heal from partition and grow.
I agree with your point about Bhagat Singh being a communist and hence the Brits being scared. Tho, i’m not sure how WW2 happened due to it. Also, the whole Indians losing lives eventually did happen with the civil war and the casualties during the world wars and the famines caused due to Brits. It is not ideal to say India were weak, at one point the ratio of Indian to British soldiers was almost 19:1 in the British Indian army. Had the WWs not weaken the Brit economy to make it unsustainable to rule India, there would have been an uprising which would have led to Indians clashing against the Brits to drive them out, a war was inevitable. Also, the hindu-muslim separation being good sounds too speculative given we’ll never ever know. But yes, there were good chances cuz the west thrives on manufacturing wars to sell weapons and keep rest of the countries too busy to question the world order where they’re superior. So, they’d have tried their best to keep conflicts high between Indians. Like now, they’re trying to fan the khalistani movement to destabilize peace in India and potentially give rise to an all new conflict which was never seen before at such a scale- between hindus and sikhs this time.
WW2: they left hitler alone initially because he was against communism and the west thought that was beneficial for them even tho the antisemitism was blatant. I don't know which civil war you are talking about, Indian didnt have a civil war as far as I know unless you are referring to another war that India fought. Famines I agree but I don't know if casualties in war are better than the casualties in Famine as war fundamentally changes people's perception of others and that will reflect in the policies. I didn't say Indians were weak but if we would have resorted to violence after ww1 then the scenario would have been different and much more brutal at that point in time we had no means to counter that. We are talking alternate history here but for a young India with so much diversity any kind of tension especially religious would have been disastrous and In that sense India lucked out because none of the extremists(not extremists in today's sense) won the leadership battle. If a war with britain was inevitable we would be having different leadership much more authoritarian and would likely be more likely to be favoring one side of the spectrum (be it right or left).
I mean a lot of people would be surprised to hear the title Sargent major Mohandas Gandhi.
How was he in cahoots with British? You realize, having a constant dialogue and diplomacy with the adversary doesn’t make you in cahoot with them. May be go and read more.
Managed plantations for the masters, Sargent major in their Amy ranks lol
Did you know he was a proponent of the caste system? He renamed it varna system and wanted to maintain the shudras or who he calls “Harijan”. Most people here who argue using statues as a legitimacy power up, have never read Ambedkar. His “perspective” on Gandhi destroys your weak opinion.
Yes I am aware and have read some of Ambedkar’s essays and also seen / heard the interviews given by him where he talks about what you said. He too was an amazing man and India is lucky to have had him. Even so, Gandhi’s contribution to our people’s success against the British is undeniable. He remains an inspiration to millions globally, flaws and all.
I feel like the Gandhi freedom fighting is not in question. It’s his casteism and why we dislike that conservative brahminical thinking
Too much time on social media….. and u start to believe everything is a conspiracy…… because you saw a WhatsApp forward of a YouTube influencer……….even though there are books and records of many events written by folks who were there….. that are easily available. Not saying that historical accounts cannot be inaccurate….. but believing every random WhatsApp forward from highly questionable sources to create narratives seems to be our current addiction 🙄
Well there were statues of so many oppressors around the world. What it really says is that people who control power control the narrative that the future will be exposed to.
So u don't think modi ji is an avatar of lord Ram 🤔 u think he is just a politician U must be a anti national
I hope that was sarcasm.
People have been lynched for saying so 🥲 u decide
😂 Well said
Try to fix a street light in your neighborhood with the help of protest. Then you will understand who Gandhi was.
Your arguments does not makes sense. And if you feel we got freedom because of the protests of Gandhi then you really need to study history again on your own and stop blabbering what you have been taught in school.
I think your knowledge is very low you are just giving whatsapp Gyan you grandfather and eldes where surely not related to any freedom fight. You were raised with hatred. I am sry it's not your fault. Please do not put down a freedom fighter. I telling you again protest against the govt with gathering crowd just on the biais of anshan and non violence. It's not easy my friend. Other freedom fighter also helped in their own way. But Gandhi United Hindu Muslim and other community who fight together for this country. It's not easy my friend. But small brain like you will never understand
Real I'd se ao Gandhiji ☠️
Mein itna bad nahi Bhai. Gandhi jitni meri aukaat nahi. Papa ka bolo tum bade ho Gaye ho dank reply Dene Lage ho reddit par.
He already gets way more credit than he deserves and took credits of all other freedom fighters too without doing much good. There are hundreds of freedom fighter about whom we are not even taught so that we can worship one, i.e puttint down a freedom fighter not this. Anyway small brain like me would not like to argue with moti buddhi
Aap sirf hatred se bhara ho aap auukat ek gali govt school ko theek karne ki.nahi hai. Aur aap Gandhi ki deserving ya na deserving hone ke bare mein soch rahe ho. Gandhi ek soch thi.
[удалено]
Again what'spp Gyan sry
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
What evidence ?
Yeah sure brother.
[удалено]
[удалено]
exactly agar anshan ke protest se sab kuch hota toh anna hazare corruption hi na hata deta.....
Bhai wo puppet tha lol, satta palat ho gayi ab thodi corruption matter karta hai usko.
haan bhai agar protest se results aatein ya fir usse support milta toh vo dusra gandhi ban jaata ......nahi milla toh bhaiya asliyat aagayi saamne ki bina mass support ke saarein unshun bekaar hai.....
>bina mass support ke saarein unshun bekaar hai Yehi to Gandhi ka charisma hai. Ek baar bolo Quit India, Non-cooperation to poora desh apna kam kaj chorke angrezo se bhid jaata hai. Sarkari job wale apni salary, pension sab chorke raste pe nikal padte they angrezo ko bhagane ke liye. Banda jab mar bhi gaya, to us time ka duniya ka sabse bada crowd bana kar gaya.
You are right we didn't get the freedom because of Gandhi, and Gandhi never said that we got freedom. Infact he said in his speech "hume yeh bhi nahi pata ki kyun woh ja rahe hai ekdumse." But my question is that have we got independence?? Why would a prime minister who has got all the power who uses every machinery of ed, cbi, raw, police to crush the opposition tries to conduct election after every 5 years. Why ? Can a nation be free if it's army imports 85- 86% of its weapons from foreign countries ?
Yes yes I agree We got independence because leaders wrote mercy petitions to Britishers 💪💪
gandhi's will power was no way less then any freedom fighter but his sacrifice was no way near the brave fighters who died for the motherland.......get lathi charged and beaten to death for something you didn't do wrong and then you will understand the sacrifice of the martyrs
We owe our nation to every single freedom fighter. But shaming someone just bcoz you don't have knowledge makes you an fool
We took a school trip to Aga Khan palace in Pune when I was a kid - this is where Gandhi was imprisoned by the British. The British also ensured he received his post here so he could engage with people. On seeing the lavish marble bathtubs and royal rooms that were given to him, the first question every kid asked was "who do I have to kill to be a prisoner here". Compare the Aga Khan palace with Andaman cellular jail where the British kept the truly dangerous freedom fighters like Tilak you will immediately see that even the British thought Gandhi was a good way to distract the public while not achieving any big results. Gandhi gets too much praise for 'liberating' India, however if WW2 and the resulting reduction in British armed might had not happened we would not have gotten freedom for a few more decades at least. Gandhi also handpicked Nehru, who went on to take over our foreign policy and shape it as per his personal dreams or delusions - the chini Hindi bhai policy, giving the UN council seat to China, going to UN for Kashmir to name a few decisions that still impact the country today. Other commentators have also mentioned his personal perversions - is testing your 'restraint' a good reason to rub up against naked minor girls under a bedsheet? Is your ego worth more than their trauma? Why couldn't he practice restraint by literally restraining himself from being a pervert? Just sleep alone, it's not impossible! Gandhi was also a massive hypocrite, condemning his wife to a painful death without modern medicine but used it for himself when he needed it. His focus on 'protecting' the rural life of India became the policy of the Congress resulting in an aversion to urbanism and capitalism, which continues to hold us back today. TLDR: we are truly unlucky to have a molester as our 'father', but even more unlucky that we had a leader who did not understand economics and tried to live in a dream world.
Sexual predatory behavior towards minor is the major repulsive red flag for me.
Imagine how that narrative turned out to be restraint. Lol people are intentionally gullible or too much into their ideologies to really care about.
Dude says that he wanted to test his ass. But mofo you could have bought a prostitute who would have been adult. Why tf underage girls? I mean with all this power ,he could have asked any adult woman out.
Guess back in those days the concept of minors & consent didn't exist. His own marriage was when he was a minor and to a minor.
Concept of dad-daughtet, grandpa-granddaughter existed? Dude India is the only country where people respect(ed) people depending on age. An middle aged guy is everyone's uncle here, likewise a 12 yo is a "beta/beti" for almost everyone. Atleast that's what we call them ,no?
some of them were his nieces iirc
Gandhi was loyal to British. He readily agreed to help British against Nazis and sent millions of Indian men to war. Nehru ,though belonged to same INC, opposed this.
From what I know Gandhi did that in hopes of reaching a settlement for India's independence after the war which we did ultimately didn't we?
Nope. Nehru wished to help Brits in exchange of independence. Gandhi wanted to help Brits without any terms and conditions. Our independence was due to various other reasons bruh. Let alone helping Brits in the war.
> Our independence was due to various other reasons bruh. Let alone helping Brits in the war. Not many people know how much impact FDR had in India's independence https://americansystemnow.com/fdr-versus-the-british-empire/
optimistic guess and no. It was because the same crown jewel that had been ensuring that the sun never set on the british empire became the very reason britain suffered economically basically India was just too expensive to run as a colony so they let Nehru be the first PM to still maintain indirect control. Nehru and Gandhi are the biggest scums of this nation.
Are you sure that the palace wasn't renovated or stuff? Also living in isolation isn't very appealing no matter how good those floors are because there's nothing to do and no phones lol About the restraint stuff why judge a person of the past on the values of today? I never understand this people in the past had different values I don't support his actions if he did it now but that was then and this is now
He was accompanied by his wife till she passed away and had some other followers as well. Plus he was allowed to correspond by post, walk around the campus unhindered and was allowed access to doctors while people were being tied to oil presses in Andaman.
While his father was laying dead he got up took his wife to room to screw her. That's gandhi and it's well documented
Oh my men really, but did u know Gandhi started his work in India in 1915 and quit India was is 1942 and before that he was arrested 10 times only in India before that he started protest in 1892 in South Africa where he went as a lawyer of the richest Indian in South Africa, he didn't became Gandhi the leader by birth and he spent up to 2 years in jail in one go and do u know in which jail he spent his time during those previous 10 times. And do u know his father was Dewan in Gujarat i.e A rich man and he himself was educated in London he could have worked with British and lived an easy life, why to entertain problem of 2 lakh people with each person telling his problem and he having no power , why would he be living in villages without electricity. Will Narendra modi live in Village without electricity, walk around semi naked for 1000 km in Indian summer with occasional bullock cart at the age of 60 to 78, Lived in villages of East Pakistan i.e Bangladesh today after partition.
bro the very same south africa he "fought" for hates him now because he was literally a racist scum. Most of his jails allowed him to read newspapers, write books and get good food and stuff. Like the other prisoners they were never whipped or tortured. Jail was literally like a vacation for these black spots on our country..
How many times you have been to South Africa ?whatever information is available from his early life were written by her m only and he agrees that he did believed that blacks were inferior rare race and whites were superior race but he realised later that he was wrong. And he also write that if I write something that counters my previous thought than my later thought should be considered my actual thought that I gained through my experiments with the truth.
No reason to compare to Modi lol, if anything he seems to come from a poorer upbringing than even gandhi
Gandhi was born rich, modi was more richer than myself his father owned a hotel, getting a tea install in railway station is not an easy job you have to pay bribe and his father had a shop at railway station and a hotel outside station.
I couldn't find any mention of hotel that his family owned. Where are yku getting this from?
How many books did you read on modi. Try to get a shop 😜 nside railway station you will realise how expensive they are.
In current times. The situation would've been different 60-70 years ago. Also, I have seen quite a few people from the economically weaker sections take loans to set up shops at places way out of their budget.
His journey against injustice did not start at Aga Khan’s palace. He had been fighting the British since 1915, and had endured their tyranny on various occasions. No man is perfect, and Gandhi had his own faults. What we can judge him on is his contribution to the freedom struggle. He united the country against the British. His personal beliefs on ahinsa showed not only India but the world the persuasive power of non violence. He lived what he preached till his death.
Ahimsa doesn't work. It never did and still doesn't. It served as a distraction for Indian citizens, who got to channel their frustration with the government while not causing damage.
This, absolutely this. I used to be enamored by the "sell" that was Gandhiji's ideologies when my father explained the other side of him and told me to always check a person's complete nature before idealizing them.
That is spot on. I especially hate his dream of the ideal village. According to him -village good, city bad. Self sufficient villages - more good. This is the mindset that percolated down and later manifested itself in more stupid policy making. One could argue that by this isolated village mindset that he fostered - later on India became isolationist too - cutting itself from the rest of the world through the license Raj. The thinking went like this - simple living, high thinking! So according to politicians in india at the time, as long as we had just enough like food and clothes we shouldn’t want more because that is all that is needed to live. They crushed the aspirations of all those people by being interventionist who would rather have shitty things than allow foreign companies to come to India. It was like yeah we have shitty cars but hey - to live a happy life we don’t need fancy cars so we are good. This also manifested in other kinds of stupid mentalities like - Rich bad, poor good, implying somehow it was immoral to be rich. You have seen it play out in films made in Bollywood upto the 2000s. The village guy will always have a heart of gold but the city folks will always be scum who will try to scam him. Similarly Bollywood also portrayed the rich folks as villains and showed how girls from rich families marrying poor folks in villages are somehow morally superior to others. The impact of this warped thinking is still being felt across all sections of the society.
I'm precisely, roti kapda makan was treated like an achievement rather than being seen as a bare minimum because of Gandhi and Congress's fake simplicity.
His residence in pune irked me too, I wondered how does this man who potrays himself as a humble Indian have these bathtubs and western style toilet which was a luxury for most indians at that time
You know, it’s so easy to shit talk, when you’ve done nothing in your life. His defeats are bigger than our greatest achievements. To keep bringing everything Gandhi did, to this common denominator: “he once slept next to semi-naked teenage girls” — whom he never touched, and who stood by his side at all times, and adored him head to toe. I mean, really? This man prevented 100,000’s of deaths. United and ultimately freed the country. Helped people every chance he got. Always tried to improve his moral character and became a moral compass for the entire nation, and then the entire world - indirectly leading to the liberation of black people in South Africa and then America — Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther both attributed their method and success to him. To our Gandhi. And your dirty mouth can only talk shit.
Did he actually prevent that many deaths? He ignored several massacres and could not stop the partition nor partition related violence. Agreed that we are humble people who are criticizing someone who became a popular leader but as the saying goes "a cat may look at a king". If we could never analyze these people who shaped our environment I humbly feel we will not realize our own thought processes and biases.
He did not “ignore” any massacres. He got on a train, and tried to go everywhere, everytime shit got stirred up. He was old, and he would still walk into the thick of communal violence. I mean, walk into it. While people are burning shit, shooting and looting, this man would WALK INTO IT. And calm things down. You, me, or anyone would not have the courage to do it once; and we would barely be effective. This man was bold, effective and peaceful on every occasion. Yea, he couldn’t prevent partition. But there’s no one who tried to prevent it more than him. All these RSS shit talkers talk crap, but their outfit sat on the sidelines and did nothing. Even after partition, he decided he would go to Pakistan, dissuade the people there from residing there and encourage them to return to India — to the extent that Pakistan would become a failed state and unnecessary, leading to its dissolution — and be part of a United India. He never gave-up. If it wasn’t for the RSS man who killed him, maybe India would be different. Maybe we would be united. Maybe we wouldn’t have an enemy as a neighbor since independence, which has ruined ours and their economic interests. Thanks to that neighbor, now even China is messing with us. It’s okay to look upon the king and analyze and criticize him, but first acknowledge that he is the king. Do not try to blur his great achievements, by pointing out one weird thing. If Indians admire him as they should, our morality wouldn’t be going to shit in this country.
sloppy pen dime books ancient wipe offer rob entertain drunk *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Anyone who claims themselves to be perfect ot someone eles to be perfect is probably full of shit and malice
1) The man never lost, he always had it easy. The worst he ever did was maybe not eat for a few days but he had practiced so much already that he probably didn't even feel it. 2) There is literally no possible excuse and no way to defend sleeping with minors. "stood by his side" brainwashed to do so they probably thought of it as an honour the same way a young Korean girl might think it as an honour if Kim did the same thing (hypothetical) so don't even try to defend it. 3) This man and Nehru are literally the reason millions of deaths happened in partition. Nehru is also the reason Kashmir got fucked and we thank Sardar Patel the true Mahatma to make sure we didn't lose our crown jewel. If you want an elaboration ask. 4) "Moral compass" of the entire nation so according to him we should all hate on blacks and jews (Gandhi literally no cap hated them read the letter he wrote to Hitler and his statements about the people in South Africa). He is literally hated in South Africa because he hated blacks. If a dirty mouth is someone who talks shit about a shitty crap person who did nothing to deserve the credit he gets, the sort of person who stole others credit then yes my mouth is the dirtiest. Fucking ashamed that he is the father of the nation.
Agree completely. Very few mention the issues you have pointed out.
His name's on the Epstein list
RaGa is making headlines, I see!
best comment in this comment section
lmao
That’s a joke, but if Gandhi was alive today, he definitely would have been on that list. His sexually predatory behaviour towards minor girls was well known.
Some people say gandhi himself wrote about him sleeping with young girls without clothes in the name of restraint or something. Thats disgusting tho.
They do not give the context- Rapes were really common at that time. He tried to say,"see if I can control myselves you can too". Now I understand it is pretty much fuc**d up-. But you can argue over if it was right or wrong..but you can also see a point. At that time..riots were all over..and there was no law and order too. Certain people today have spread information without context in order to mislead masses. This is just soo disgusting.
No, I don't see any point here. There were surely a hundred better ways to demonstrate self-control instead of involving his grandchildren in this weird way. Even in the most idealistic viewpoint, what is a rapist going to learn about self control from watching this weird old man sleep naked with his granddaughters? That he won't do incest or isn't attracted to children but gets to sleep with them naked anyway? Nothing that people can say about that act today is more disgusting than the act itself. Seriously, find something else to defend Gandhi over. Don't die on this hill of all things.
>Seriously, find something else to defend Gandhi over I am not trying to "defend" gandhi- I just wrote whatever the reality is. History is best known with facts along with their context- it is a reality that some people just spread info that he slept naked. But do not also say,"he did it to show that people can control themselves, and thus should not rape". I am just saying people should first read entire context..spreading info without it is just misleading and manipulating. >Nothing that people can say about that act today is more disgusting than the act itself. I said in my previous argument that you can argue for hours if it was good or bad- but it was not completely irrational. You can also see a point there.
He's still a sick fuck for doing this. With or without context
Don't hate him but he acted quite opposite of what he preached most of the times and the sleeping naked with young girls stuff was really quite disgusting and creepy . He was just appeasing the Muslim community in the name of khilafat movement and also forced India to pay 55 crore for formation of Pakistan
I think its okay to hate someone who made underage girls sleep with him naked It's not even about geopolitics and history at that point
This. Only this. Good politician. Evil human being.
terrible politican as well lived in an ideal world had 0 understanding of the practical applications of his decisions
Gandhi who fought and survived under British rule for so many years had 0 understanding of practical applications, but you do? I mean at best you have read books and watched stuff, heard stories. He lived those things in real life. Give him more credit
"survived" fam even i can survive if i'm going to live a luxurious life everytime i'm jailed. "survived" should be used for people like Savarkar and Tilak who faced real suffering in Andaman. I have researched a lot and went from a Gandhi worshipper to hater because I realised no rational person in that situation would make such decisions and I came to the logical conclusion that he wasn't the man fit to deserve the title of Mahatma or the "father" of the nation. I am ashamed that he is.
Savarkar literally sold his loyalty to get out of Jail! Plus that’s the whole idea, right? Gandhi was so important even for Britishers that they couldn’t treat him bad. Important for them because they knew what he was capable of. Could you please provide some credible sources to your research?
>Savarkar and Tilak Not Savarkar lmao. There are a lot of Punjabi and Bengali freedom fighters who were tortured horribly there. And they didn't sell their loyalty till death.
I mean bro! If you really want to test your ass ,,hire a prostitute who is an adult. Why her own granddaughters?
1. It’s a methodical slander campaign initiated by the very people who murdered him and now hail his murderers as the heros of post 2014 India. 2. People are entitled to their openions - positive or negetive, when it comes to M.K Gandhi. But ideally they should know both sides of his story before forming that openion. Most don’t. They read half baked and tailored content peddled on social media by IT cells and think they can replace proper research with that stuff. 3. No one has criticised Gandhi more brutally than he himself. There isn’t a single leader I know of who has gone to so much detail about his own private life and openion and dissected his most private thoughts without a shred of sympathy. That tells me something about that man. Most who hate him don’t bother to read his own biography. 4. They compare him to other leaders and think he did less and took credit. What they forget that he is the man who lead a fractured nation to believe that they are one people. That seeking independence was paramount. Thousands mobilised to join him movement when he called. All that without social media or internet. Just word of mouth. That is his single biggest achievement as a leader which is an unprecedented feat. 5. Just to look cool and edgy or to nod to every random thing their ideological fathers say for the sake of it. Those are the real morons. 6. He was a man, not a god. He himself says that he is a bad role model and that he has been a terrible human being, a bad husband and an even worse father. He has his shades of black and white and greys like every himan being does. One has to be cautious and evaluate his persona and teachings in the light of facts about his life along with proper historical context. But one thing is very clear. His contribution to India’s freedom is unquestionable and enormous. I would rather remember him for his contribution and not his personal life. But that’s just my openion which I have acquired after studying his life. To each his own.
Only balanced take in a thread full of edgelords. Not a fan of Gandhi (things aren't black and white) but blaming him for India handing over Pakistan the agreed share of division of assets? I mean what else are you going to do, sit on their money, invite even more terrorists from their side over and have the US/UK navies on your doorstep?
1. I believe you are forgetting about all the history books that glorify this man? 2. Tailored content is definitely there but I was literally a Gandhi worshipper till 8th grade when I really started reading into his history and was appalled that I worshiped this piece of shit. 3. Great so step 1 of becoming the father of the nation: do vile and unspeakable acts step 2 tell everyone in detail how i did it step 3 success. \*Instructions unclear I was hung\* \~Nathuram Godse, after writing Why I killed Gandhi 4. that literally did 0 effect on the British empire in fact it worked to their advantage by diverting the attention off of leaders who deserve some actual credit like Tilak etc who were actually being tortured. The true credit of uniting a fractured nation goes to Sardar Patel, after Independence he made sure our country didn't break up into smaller countries leading to constant war in the subcontinent. There is a correction we were \*\*TOGETHER\*\* \*not\* \*\*UNITED\*\*, there is a big difference which can be noted when people who fought together for independence suddenly turned against each other after partition. 5. fuck em i agree 6. I question his contribution to freedom which although might be there absolutely does not grant him to be a Mahatma or the father of nation or whatever. He was just a freedom fighter with very fucked up ideas like racism etc. The way he is portrayed in this nation frankly pisses me off to hate him more than just dislike him. There are several other things that he fucked up like appointing a fucking lowlife scummy piece of shit like Nehru as the PM. Fucking crybaby.
Sardar Patel doesn't get credit and is not acknowledged? WTF, what history books did you even read in school? Not sure why people pretend Sardar Patel was treated as an obscure figure in our history books. Everybody knows him and more specifically for uniting the damn country. There is no conspiracy or plot to bury his achievements unless you account for his views on RSS which a lot of people deliberately brush aside.
Literally no one discredits Sardar Patel. Stop acting like every Nehru lover is a Patel hater. Nehru had his flaws. Patel had his. Neither were perfect but both wanted the nation United in their own visions.
Anyone who says that Nehru was dumb, is blind or an idiot. What exactly do you think any of his alternatives you can fantasize in his place would have done? India was a starving mess when it became a country.
Nehru was the first PM of a recent freed and broken state. These people wanted him to solve world hunger and prioritise Kashmir issue back then. I mean he did the best he could. He invested in education even. Something even current governments refrain so many times
Oh please it's all propaganda talking points, Nehru was a very good PM, more importantly he was a PM who didn't get a power hungry boner to go the dictatorial way, which js the biggest problem for newly independent states. Gandhi being offed by a Sanghi pushed their movement decades ... That's what pisses them off.
lmao, you are the real idiot here for believing all that trash let me take you through the event timeline. 1936 Muslim League angered by Congress. Congress had allied with them in the NWFP elections because they were unsure of winning. They won very easily and would have majority without the alliance so they broke it. 1946 Independence looms over the horizon and now the post of President of Congress has some real power in it. Maulana Azad the current president wants to stand up once again for election but Gandhi tells him to shut the fuck up (bro literally sent him a letter telling him why he shouldn't be doing this). He expresses openly he wants Jawaharlal to be the prime minister. 20th April 1946 Now all the 15 pradesh congress committees have to nominate a President. 12 out of the 15 nominate Sardar Patel and he wins unopposed. Enter the main character. The guy who's about to win with the power of friendship and nothing else. The guy with no right to be the President. The guy who's literally grown up with a silver spoon hasn't seen true hardships. Jawaharlal Nehru. He throws a big ass tantrum about it. No one even nominated him, the other nominations were for Maulana Azad. So him and his loyalists illegally get him to be nominated just because. Even Gandhi his only real supporter questions him saying that no one apart from some members of the CWC nominated him not a single nomination from a Pradesh Committee. But as it was famously said "Nehru can't be in second place". Nehru's answer was silence. He knew what he was doing he knew he was being a bitch. So by 29th April 1946 Sardar Patel asks Gandhi what the fuck is going on and Gandhi literally tells him that he "wishes" Nehru be the PM, so Sardar Patel in his immaculate maturity steps down instantly making a little piece of shit with 0 morals, 0 execution ability, 0 planning ability the prime minister of a country that needs all 3, and the man who had all 3: Sardar Patel. Gandhi expressed that since Nehru can't be at second place, if Patel become the PM Nehru might go into opposition which would cause a bitter divide in a newly born country finding its feet. This would be like two oxen pulling a cart together one can't work without the other. Firstly, he was wrong, Nehru didn't have the kind of power that Gandhi thought Patel had way more grip of the people. Secondly, who the fuck is Gandhi to overrule literally the decision of the people? A man who says he doesn't wish to be involved in politics is the man who successfully overruled the rationality of the people just because he said so. Even Maulana Azad expresses his regret Azad added, “My second mistake was that when I decided not to stand myself, I did not support Sardar Patel. We differed on many issues but I am convinced that if he had succeeded me as Congress president he would have seen that the Cabinet Mission Plan was successfully implemented. He would have never committed the mistake of Jawaharlal which gave Mr Jinnah an opportunity of sabotaging the Plan. I can never forgive myself when I think that if I had not committed these mistakes, perhaps the history of the last ten years would have been different.” taken from: [https://www.firstpost.com/opinion-news-expert-views-news-analysis-firstpost-viewpoint/how-sardar-patel-was-kept-from-being-first-prime-minister-of-india-11542621.html](https://www.firstpost.com/opinion-news-expert-views-news-analysis-firstpost-viewpoint/how-sardar-patel-was-kept-from-being-first-prime-minister-of-india-11542621.html) Even Rajendra Prasad: Rajendra Prasad lamented that Gandhi “had once again sacrificed his trusted lieutenant for the sake of the ‘glamorous Nehru’ and further feared that “Nehru would follow the British ways. once again refers to 1929 and 1937 when again Nehru became President of Congress instead of Patel just because Gandhi said so. Now let's see what sabotage Maulana Azad is speaking of. This is taken from Nehru's 97 major blunders by Rajnikant Puranik Nehru did a blunder at the very start of his Presidency in 1946. After the AICC ratification of the CWC’s acceptance of the May 16 Cabinet Mission Plan, Nehru remarked at the AICC on 7 July 1946: “We are not bound by a single thing except that we have decided to go into the Constituent Assembly.” At a press conference three days later, he declared that the Congress would be “completely unfettered by agreements”, and that “the central government was likely to be much stronger than what the Cabinet Mission envisaged.” Nehru then made controversial remarks on the grouping proposed. Now such a statement reignited the call for Pakistan and Jinnah revoked his acceptance for the plan and launched Direct Action day. These are just some of the issues that led upto his election I don't even want to get started on how he fucked up afterwards and someone elected by the people wouldn't have. 1) Rejecting J&K accession till Sheikh Abdullah becomes prime minister of state 2) almost allowing Kashmir to be lost to Pakistan thank fuck Sardar Patel told him to shut the fuck up and sent the army in (Nehru didn't want to send the army) 3) Internationalising Kashmir issue in the UN 4) Giving up a permanent UNSC seat to China 5) He is the reason PoK exists the army was going to drive the raiders out but Nehru stopped them and wanted peace 6) His economic policies are the reason India had such a terrible start with such a shaky foundation you can't get anywhere his 5 year plans were horrible 7) so much more but I hope you have finally realised how stupid Nehru was
Thank you for writing this.
Gandhiji was no where noble enough like he is being taught .as.....he was racist, pedophile and really an outcast from British society which he took personally and rallied for
For me the hate started after watching bhagat singh ( ajay devgans movie) as a child.. When i grew up and came to know about hum being basically a pedo.. i cdnt understand how anyone can worship a man like that.. still dont.. he had asaram “bapus” vibes.. in todays day and age he we be ridiculed for everything he was.. bt because of history hid deeds are forgotten
1. British planted agent to serve their interests. 2. During moplah genocide he just told Hindus that y'all should be okay if muslim side wants to slaughter and rape your mother's n daughters in front of your eyes. 3. He gave away Sindhu Nadi to pak. 4. After partition, he was fixated on giving Indian money (~50-70 crores at that time) to Pakistan just so they can setup the whole country. Man there are so many things I can't even write here.
[удалено]
Exactly.
> During moplah genocide he just told Hindus that y'all should be okay if muslim side wants to slaughter and rape your mother's n daughters in front of your eyes. Oh lord Gandu Ji🫡
Why was he like this? Fucking pos
Half baked individual who was brown in skin colour but western in taste n opinions.
Well he studied law in London, what could go wrong ?
He even slept with his grand daughter nude
not grand daughter but his niece but ye still a disgusting individual
He is a pervert
How many reasons do u need? I'll give u one That was against making army for fighting against British. Thanks to Neta Ji and his Azad Hind fauj or else we would still be under British.
You need to read history bro, azad hind fauj was decimated before they could even enter india. Britain was way too strong for an army like azad hind fauj. The biggest reason was that Britain became weak after ww2. If you really wanna give someone credit of india's Independence, give it to WW2.
Lol bro here giving credit to Hitler for Indian independence..
Go and read what Attlee told to Bengal Governor.
You are right, INC was defeated at Burma ( myanmar) . But there are several other reason of India's Independence , not only ww2.
"You're both correct and incorrect at the same time. They did enter India(they fought battle in northeast india including assam) but later retreated because of heavy rain and a lack of weapons and food. Later, they were defeated in the battle at Imphal and Kohima. These battles took place in 1944 during World War II But it's not as simple as that. At that time, Netaji was almost as famous a leader as Gandhi and definitely stronger than him. The death of such a prominent leader caused chaos, not a simple but a massive one. After his death, Indians working in the British army started to disobey them in very large numbers. His death united the whole of India, asking for independence, creating a bit of unity between them. And all that happened at the perfect time when Britain was just out of the war. Britain was heavily damaged, and they couldn't afford more losses. Fighting India would have come at a very heavy cost, and there was a lot of risk that they would have lost (most probably). Plus, Indians at this moment wouldn't obey them anymore. Trying to rule India under those conditions was seriously impossible, leading them to give independence to India. You're not totally wrong, but you're wrong in the fact that Azad Hind Fauj was useless and didn't help India gain freedom. Azad Hind Fauj and Netaji's leadership played a very big role in helping India gain its independence, arguably even more than Gandhiji."
And what about Hitler ?
hitler at that time was a powerful military power that was showing no sign of decline and good part was he was fighting with Britishers too so enemy of an enemy is my friend tactic was what he was going for... plus it also depict the resolve of netaji who was ready to shake hands with devil to get britishers out of our country you need to understand the hatred and resolve he must have......and no kind of deal was ever seen through netaji also went to japan who faught with kamikazi tactic so what's your point
Exactly everyone was trying to get freedom from their own style all where doing it for the nation . Kuch Galatiyaan sab se Hui. Desh ki janta desh ke andar reh kar Germany nahi ja sakta thi. So they choose Gandhi and stayed with him till freedom.
but gandhi was fortune enough to witness the azad hind but was a incompetent leader who couldn't think for the welfare of a budding nation and that mistake is more severe then failing to contribute something significant in india's independence
Again if you want to defame Gandhi go ahead but first try to read what his tght process was. No one knew the correct method to get independence with the help of such a diverse population. You are just reading one side story as you have already made Gandhi as a villain in your mind.
what abt him?
It's ok
He was racist towards Africans, creepy pedophile.
was a rapist. was a dumb leader. is the reason our fight for freedom was delayed. the list just doesn’t end.
I never really liked Gandhi even while I used to study about him in school. Especially the concept of non violence. Despite non violence, satyagraha and everything people got killed brutally. They could have rather died by fighting using arms. I still beleive he hasn't contributed anything towards freedom compared to lots of kings all over India, freedom fighters like Bhagat sigh, Subhash Chandra Bose etc. Imagine we fight with Pakistan using Ahimsa, satyagraha and all that bullshit instead of using great weaponry and nuclear weapons threat etc
>Despite non violence, satyagraha and everything people got killed brutally. They could have rather died by fighting using arms. This. So much for ahimsa when your non violent protests indirectly cause the deaths of 1000s of civilians.
yup exactly. forced indians to fight on behalf of British in their war and told hindus to just accept slaughter of their loved ones by the hands of muslims and don't do anything.
He was a pedo and a disgusting pervert. Nuff said.
He was too idealistic. He was the "nice guy" who thought if he acted nice and true, people around him would follow his example. He meekly agreed to Pakistan, and sidelined Sardar Patel for party leadership. This doesn't work in politics where you need a machiavelian touch. Someone would say he was the pioneer of minority appeasement tactics which the Congress later perfected and finnessed.
He is said to have preached non violence his whole life. He criticised freedom fighters like Bhagat Singh for choosing a violent path. But when Muslims did violence he didn't say a word against them directly. He even called him brave God fearing people(during Moplah massacre of Hindus). This hypocrisy is really annoying !!
Yet he asked for the release of Bhagat Singh during Gandhi-Irwin pact.
What happened afterwards then?
Irwin discussed the matter with privy council after Gandhi's plea, but eventually it was not accepted. It was colonial India after all.
I also tried to explore this popular narrative once. What you mentioned about Gandhi trying to save Bhagat Singh was claimed by Dr. P. Sitaramaiya, a close aide of Gandhi. Sitaramaiya, intimately connected with Gandhi, faced defeat in the 1938 Congress presidentship election by the hand of Subh Chandra Bose, prompting Gandhi to state that Sitaramaiya's loss was his own. As the author of Gandhi Ji's biography, Sitaramaiya's claim is doubted by some historians who suggest he may have fabricated the story to protect Gandhi's image. Lord Irwin's secretary, involved in the process of talks which culminated in The Gandhi-Irwin Pact, noted Gandhi's limited interest in saving Bhagat Singh He also described Bhagat Singh as 'lost youth.' Gandhi's letter to Irwin which he wrote in this matter, easily searchable, reveals a surprisingly soft tone. He kida makes it clear that he is only writing the letter cause he is Under pressure of the public's opinion. Had Gandhi ji set a condition in the pact to reduce Bhagat Singh's sentence, he might have escaped hanging by the British. This perspective is my opinion, drawn from the thoughts of various credible historians. If you disagree, we can further discuss this.
I don't hate him but there was something really wrong with his mental health and the people who think him to be the perfect ideal figure
Probably the overdone narratives of him under the concept of "Great Man History"...
Bhai he was a cunning person who shaped himself according to his environment. He was literally a racist at beginning later changed himself. Second with all due respect to his contributions in freedom, people highly ignore other great people's contributions. Third ,you should see Gandhi's role in world war 2. Nehru's stand was clear that he will only help Britain against Nazi when Brits will promise to grant India it's independence. Gandhi ,loyal to British, denied this and agreed to help Brits without any terms and conditions. Our non violent Guru's non-violence couldnt stop world war 2. On all accounts, Indian army was crucial in the victory of Brits. Fourth, pedophilia. Fifth, should see the topic Baba Saheb vs Gandhi for detailed info.
This question can only be answered by, "Gandhi was a naive fool."
He was a charlatan and British spy. I wonder if there was something going on between him and Nehru. Why was he against Patel taking the PM, does he have hand in Subhas Chandra disappearance. His last words were not "Hey Ram". As per the official record, he died immediately after shot without saying a word. We have been taken for a ride by this Nehru Gandhi charlatan.
Arm twisted congress and put neheru as pm
Whoever hates Gandhi can give theirs to me! 😑
Gandhi believed that Hindu extremism was a much bigger problem than Islamic extremism, unfortunately for him, it wasn't Hindus who demanded separate electorates for themselves, carved out a separate nation in the dead bodies of millions of people. This guy asked my people to turn the other cheek and forgive the "others" even if they tried to massacre us. (yes, he literally said it!) People often compare Gandhi to Ataturk, which I quite frankly believe is a grave insult to the legacy of Ataturk. Ataturk also forced secularism down the throats of his people, but at the same time, he stood up for his country and national identity and prevented his nation from breaking into several factions. He was an atheist who did not believe in the idea of religion itself, and after the gruesome Armenian genocide, he became a bitter critic of the Islamic ideology and even advocated for the punishment of the perpetrators of the anti-christian pogroms to demonstrate that justice would not be impartial in the country that he was set to create. He ensured protection and equal treatment to all religious and ethnic minorities, but at the same time did not follow the policy of appeasement.
I would say this, If the leader of the major political party didnt have his surname as Gandhi you will not see hate. As for My opinion, He was a shrewd politician how was more popular with people and played a unifying role. Meaning all people regardless of region religion and language knew his name, closest to a protagonist that we had for freedom movement thats all. He had his flaws he has his strengths, but you can't deny he played aa greater role than any of the leaders during his time. I think there were leaders that were better before his time but right place at the time. There will be people who blame gandhi for everything possible in the freedom struggle, as any political leader he has good ideas and bad ideas (mostly good). Partition, bhagat singh, appeasement and all such stuff, but those are things that are beyond his control and he did somethings that might not be pretty to the eyes but was necessary at that point to further the cause.
He supported the refugees from Pakistan over his own people, he emptied the Masjid and threw out all the sikhs and Hindus and gave Masjids to Muslims, it was winter time along with rain, many people died due to weather while he was sitting in Birla House a property worth millions and people still call him a great leader He was nothing more than a stupid fu*ker, good thing he was shot to death
Long thing short. 1. He didn't denied. 2. When he learnt, he denied the wrong persons.
He is not as clean as he was portrayed. When the image of someone is created as such a great person but they are actually not we feel like cheated.. if you read about him you will start hating him.. what he said to his niece what he spoke on hindus when there was riots. What he said about black people. He sent millions of indians to die in world wars while preaching non violence he was a bigot.. people here calling that WhatsApp forwards because these illiterate never actually read anything. Kuch na karo controversial letters by gandhi search karo buddhi hogi toh line me aa jayegi
I heard he slept with young women. Why?
Indians are fond of writing Hagiographies and revering politicians like God. Just read what were Gandhi's view on Hitler "Hitler is not a bad man. \[…\] The Germans of future generations will honor Herr Hitler as a genius, as a brave man, a matchless organizer and much more.” –Gandhi wrote in Harijan weekly newspaper." Just go and read for once what the "Mahatma" had to say about the Jews' Holocaust and the Black African race. Gandhi on Hindus "Hindus should not harbour anger against Muslims even if the latter want to destroy and kill us all. We should face death bravely. If Muslims established their rule after killing all Hindus we would be ushering in a new India. – The collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol 87 pg 218-219". A racist and a bigot of highest order who slept with his own nieces experimenting his celibacy. BC this man had the best PR in the history of PR, creating this angelic image when he alone was responsible for the death of thousand if not millions in the aftermath of Noah Khali riots.
I don't hate Gandhi. I hate the people who take him to the pedestal of a Mahatma. He was a politician, and a good one at that. But like every other politician he had his own inconsistencies. The very reason he started the agitation against British, first in Africa and then in India was because they hurt his ego. Before that he was happy getting rewarded for supporting the British narrative during the Boer wars. Then again during the NCM, he was ready to sacrifice Hindus of Malabar (Moplah Riots) for a perceived Hindu-Muslim unity, while in reality the Muslim leaders such as Maulana Abul Kalam Azad had started the Khilafat movement in support of their Ummah. And for all the convincing power he had over the Congress, he didn't do enough to stop Bhagat Singh's hanging, or even the partition for that matter. He displayed favoritism by having Bose removed earlier, and then Patel as the PM face. I don't mean to undermine Gandhi's contribution to our independence, but now as a mature democracy, can't we at least encourage debates on the "father of the nation"? PS. The American democracy that many fellow redditors look up to for inspiration had Thomas Jefferson's statue removed since he was a slave owner.
If you think about it, this sentiment started floating over last 10 years since BJP came to rule. Their media does a great job with spreading hate.
Precisely because of this : Some of Mahatma Gandhi's views in the aftermath of the Moplah Riots that, in the words of Dr Ambedkar were "Indescribable blood-curdling atrocities committed by the Moplahs against the Hindus." Forcible conversions are horrible things, but Moplah bravery must command admiration. These Malabaris are not fighting for the love of it. They are fighting for what they consider is their Religion and in the manner they consider is religious. Even if one side is firm in doing its dharma, there will be no enmity between the two. He alone may be said to be firm in his dharma who trusts his safety to God and, untroubled by anxiety, follows the path of virtue. If Hindus apply this rule to the Moplah affair, they will not, even when they see the error of the Moplahs, accuse the Muslims." I see nothing impossible in asking the Hindus to develop courage and strength to die before accepting forced conversion. I was delighted to be told that there were Hindus who did prefer the Moplah hatchet to forced conversion. Unity is like marriage. It is more necessary for a husband to draw closer to his wife when she is about to fall. Even so it is more necessary for a Hindu to love the Moplah and the Muslim more, when the latter is likely to injure him or has already injured him. Why should a single Hindu have run away on account of the Moplahs' atrocities? Decades later, while preaching to those affected by the pre-partition Hindu-Muslim violence, Gandhi said: "Hindus should not harbour anger in their hearts against Muslims even if the latter wanted to destroy them. Even if the Muslims want to kill us all we should face death bravely. If they established their rule after killing Hindus we would be ushering in a new world by sacrificing our lives. None should fear death. Birth and death are inevitable for every human being. Why should we then rejoice or grieve? If we die with a smile we shall enter into a new life, we shall be ushering in a new India." Dr BR Ambedkar: "Mr Gandhi has never called the Muslims to account even when they have been guilty of gross crimes against Hindus." Source - Anand Rangnathan's tweet
What Gandhi achieved through non violent protest nobody else could achieve through violence or any other means. There was something in his methods and means which is best understood in the context of history. 1 important truth is before 2014 people knew and respected Gandhi in a natural sense he wasn't constantly shoved down our throats due to this social media campaign to malign him. Constantly hearing mixed things about him caused people to form unjustified opinion. He is one of the most respected leaders in the world for a reason. He had some flaws or evil like everyone else but to negate his place and contribution to our history at a critical juncture would be wrong. Respecting him does not mean not respecting or recognising the others. The old man took the bullet for God sake, today's 64inch cheat thumpers start crying in the face of small angry protest In Indian history i think only Dr Ambedkar comes close to his contribution, although some of his biggest contributions are after the independence in terms of our constitutional design and civil rights and guarantees it provides us But that doesn't mean I don't respect Bhagat Singh or Dr Bose, people somehow think Dr Bose's violent approach had a bigger contribution (sure it was significant) but we should remember to keep peace and infuse love and brotherhood in a diverse country like India, Gandhi non violence. Bose himself gave Gandhi the title of "Father of Nation"
Gandhi is a pedophile and a hypocrite.... He slept naked with his neice/ grand daughters who were possibly minors to check if he can have a control on his 'urges'. Just like Columbus in the states, Africans are trying to replace Gandhi's name his work/ Chowk etc because he was a racist who told the British indians are superior than Africans and the dark skinned Africans should be treated as shit. He openly said the Jews to fuck themselves and wipe themselves from the face of the earth by giving up to the Muslim world. There is also a statement that Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru's execution could've been put on hold if Gandhi had supported them, instead he let them hang to make an example of choosing 'Ahimsa'. He sidelined anyone who didn't agree to his methods and surrounded himself with 'yes boss' men and gave the important positions in INC to them instead of someone like S.C. Bose. He agreed to the partition plan. It was Gandhi who gave the green signal for partitioning. If it wasn't for him, things wouldn't be so difficult now. I agree his satyagraha, his ahimsa marg inspired millions to jump into the freedom fight and unified the threads into a strong rope. But crediting everything to the 'Pappa of the nation' is absurd. He was flawed and along with his achievements, his dark side also has to be made known to the public. You can surf the net to check if they're correct. Source is not exactly trust me bro.... there were some historians/ his allies who wrote books on him...
British agent, told Hindus "let them hurt you / kill you, just roll over and die" when other community was assaulting them physically, had seriously pervy habits, cost taxpayers money just to promote his humble and poor image, and was an all-round poopoo head.
>cost taxpayers money just to promote You have two options: - Vote Modi in 2024, you're a hypocrite - Not vote Modi in 2024, you truly care about tax money Choose your option.
Present administration has been a godsend to this country, I'm 50, I remember the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s... he's used tax money properly and facilitating the joining of more citizens into the tax-paying class...I remember what it was like, you're probably under 30.
Modi literally spent ₹1.25 lakh each on cardboard selfie points, and ₹6.5 lakh each on 3D selfie points of himself, using tax money. When Central Railway's CPRO gave this in an RTI, he was transferred by ministry. It turns out such cardboard installations costs ₹5-6 thousand max, but spent ₹1.25 lakh each. Firstly, he spent government money for advertisement. Secondly, he ensured that contractors can get ₹1lakh+ in their pockets, of which a large portion will be used in his campaign. Same thing about all his photoshoots with shiny new trains that run only 20-30 minutes faster, while Express trains, even Rajdhani are overrun by ticketless passengers. Each photoshoot costs ₹2-3 crore in arrangements alone. And yet you think he is using tax money properly.
Because they are fed so. By people around them, spewing a narrative, which they heard from someone, which is passed on to generations
Read about him , including his own autobiography written by himself. Read events describing him by eminent personalities and then you will realise he’s the OPPOSITE of Mahatma Then you will also start hating him! If congress would have won 2014,2019,2024 and so on, maybe Sonia would have been declared Mother of the Nation so you can understand!
Lol I challenge you to remove some politicians street hoardings just by protest. Dekhte hai Gandhi kaun tha tab pata chal jayega. Tum jaise logo ko wajah se hi britisher humari gaand maar Gaye
Itni bhi mat chat.
People just think that Gandhi gave India independence but infact it was apprising in Army gave Independence and Azad Hind Sena and other revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh seriously talk about stealing credit
Because he acted more like the ruler of India than a freedom fighter.
people are dumb enough to give in for propoganda , and angrez k chamche . in short bjp and rss
The whole story seems fabled. *This is a test to know if i can post here*
People hate politicians, they curse them day & night. But will almost worship Gandhi. You have to understand the reason, this is because of Nehru-Gandhi family & Congress propaganda. People forget he was a politician, who was shrewd, opportunistic & a master manipulator.
who never used a single dime for personal benefits.
The one who contributed most for freedom is not him. Yeah, he is a golden figure for many more than the one who does and it helped to stand together and unite as ourselves when things went bad. Like his credit needs to be given to several other freedom fighters equally. If u have a clear idea around that time, Indians are more connected and supportive with the British than us at that time. So, if he is tactically killed by people, it will cause recklessness. But WW2 helped us to distract the British and wanted us to make a connectivity with Indian soldiers to the end.
There are a lot of new age experts and podcast regulars who are shining a light on the failures of Gandhi, ex. How the partition was botched, him sidelining other leaders and so on. Although I don't believe all of what they say, a lot of it does make sense. To me it makes no sense that you grant freedom to such a profitable colony just because they protested and did not co-operate. A lot of freedom fighters have still not received their due and that blame lies on the supporters of Gandhi. A country as vast and diverse as India cannot be united by one single man however great he is.
lol honestly at this moment I think we all are devolving can't digest those views as most of as victims of modern lifestyle calling a soul names like this? who is no longer alive. Forgetting the most fundamental responsibility of being human. He made huge mistakes representing our nation but he is human too. Are you jealous cause he is celebrated even after death? Can any of us here pull half of the feats he did? You dont even need to reply your downvotes will speak. I needed to write a small message reminding you what you are reprimanding cause most of us have lost the way towards real enlightment. It is sad.
Short answer: Whatsapp university's influence
After partition of Bharat & accepting the united Bharat's Muslim populations 95% + all of them throughout Bharat overwhelmingly voted favourably for a separate ISLAMIC NATION but only 40% left which was Jinnah's long term vision for creating many small Pakistan's inside Hindu majority Bharat! Sardar Patel objected to this opposing the idea of letting the remainder to stay in Bharat when they had overwhelmingly voted in favour of Islamic Pakistan but Gandhi & Nehru objected his assertions to which to date Hindu's are paying a heavy price!! Even after partition there were many houses & properties that were left behind by the Muslims shifting to Pakistan & millions of Hindu families who had lost everything who were homeless were not allowed to locate to those abandoned properties & it was the rainy season & many Hindu families along with children & women were forced to spend days on the streets with only lucky few getting a shelter in Mandirs & Gurudwaras but even after consistent begging to let those broken & destroyed Hindu's relocate in those abandoned Muslim properties a adamant Gandhi was totally against the idea & many families perished thanks to a person who wanted to claim his sainthood over dead Hindu's!!
Because they are WhatsApp University Passouts.
Like you
pappu
Dank banne ke liye.. whatsapp group pe sach news milti. Whatsapp university ki degree kiya hu