Since a majority of individuals only know one side of the story to Gandhi's life--his accomplishments and sacrifices--I feel that it is important to shed light on Gandhi's 'darker' side as well.

Gandhi’s most far-reaching impact on both India, and the rest of the world, was his exceptional use of non-violence as a tool to give India its independence from British rule in 1947. About ten years later, Martin Luther King Jr. adopted Gandhi's nonviolent methods in his struggle to win civil rights for African Americans. In the 1960's, Cesar Chavez organized a campaign of nonviolence to protest the treatment of farm workers in California (Jenkins). Nonviolence, the idea Gandhi so fervently preached, was at times unreasonable. On July 4, 1940 Gandhi wrote an open letter to the British people, urging them to surrender their bodies, not their minds and souls, to the Nazis (Thompson). According to him, Britain’s resistance would only lead to greater bloodshed. In another letter, Gandhi asked British government officials to stop the manslaughter by surrendering themselves to the will of the Nazis. In concluding he stated, “Hitler is not a bad man (Thompson).” In giving such terrible advice, he ignored the atrocities Nazi Germany was perpetuating throughout Europe, thus condoning an atmosphere that would help to further sustain the inhumane activities of the Nazis.



“The Jews died anyway, didn't they? They might as well have died significantly (Grenier).” Another little known fact is that once the full extent of the holocaust was known, Gandhi actually criticized the Jews who escaped or fought for their lives in Warsaw and Treblinka. “The Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher’s knife,” he said. “Collective suicide,” he told his biographer Louis Fisher, “would have been heroism (Grenier).” Evident in the case of Britain and the Jews, Gandhi’s literal, rigid idea of non-violence clouded his judgment and prevented him from seeing that it was simply not an option in many circumstances. Even in cases that could potentially accentuate human suffering, Gandhi stood tall and mighty with his ideal of passive resistance.

Gandhi’s ideals also included celibacy, but it is quite unknown as to why he proclaimed he was renouncing sexual activities altogether. Interestingly, Gandhi was politically active at the time he renounced sexual activity and had already begun to develop the image of a holy man. The maintenance of this saintly image, appearance, or maybe even a facade, was in mind when he declared celibacy. Of course, the timeliness of such events is purely speculation and coincidental, but what can not be refuted is the strangeness and absurdity with which he disciplined himself to be celibate. In one instance, his interpreter Nirmal Bose, wrote that Gandhi would test his celibacy by sharing his bed naked with his grand niece. And yes, she was also naked (Mehta). If thought about in another light, Gandhi was only testing his celibacy so it is safe to assume that there was a possibility that the test would have failed. If so, Gandhi's teenage grand niece would have been raped. After news of these celibacy experiments were released, seventy-five percent of India's citizens, admitted that they were most upset about the appearance of hypocrisy that Gandhi began to represent (Levine). Although Gandhi claimed he never had sexual relations with women after his vow of celibacy, the news of his experiments damaged his image nonetheless. His other principles were crucial to his appearance as well, but celibacy single handedly set him apart from the politicians of his time.

To understand the degree of influence Gandhi held, it is important to realize that he was venerated as the Father of a Nation. The citizens of India, and numerous others across the world, sought and still do seek moral guidance and direction from his beliefs and ideals. Yet his eldest, out of four sons, stated that he wished he never had Gandhi as a father (Buncombe). Even though Gandhi routinely preached freedom to millions of eager onlookers and admirers, he exhibited, and I dare say it, dictator-like characteristics in raising his sons. Take for example when Gandhi refused his eldest son permission to study law in England, even though Gandhi had once done the same (Manzoor). He believed his son required no legal preparation for a life he thought would be devoted to the fight for freedom. And take for example the time Gandhi asked someone to pass up that same son for a scholarship to study law in England, so that it could be given to a more deserving student (Manzoor). His role as father of the nation simply overshadowed his role as a father to his sons. In order to uphold his image, and claim legitimacy as a resolute man who stood by his principles, Gandhi chose to sacrifice his paternal role for his ideals.

References:

Grenier, Richard. "The Gandhi Nobody Knows." Commentary Mar 1983.

Jenkins, J. C., Perrow C. Insurgency of the Powerless: Farm Worker Movements (1946-1972) American Sociological Review, Vol. 42, No. 2 (Apr., 1977), pp. 249-268.

Levine, Art. "Gandhi's Girls." Washington Monthly 01 July 1987

Manzoor, Sarfraz. Father to a Nation, Stranger to his son. 07/08/1007. Guardian News and Media Limited. 10 Oct 2008
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2007/aug/10/india>.

Mehta, Ved. Mahatma Gandhi and His Apostles. 2. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993.

Thompson, Fred. "Gandhi's Way Isn't the American Way." 15 Mar 07. National Review Online. 15 Oct 2008
<http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTM1NTg1YjFhMGE5MzZjZDUzNzNhNzdkMjE2YmEyNTY>.