Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
Like Tree2Likes

Thread: Gandhi a racist?

  1. #1
    Toppa_Toppa
    Guest

    Gandhi a racist?

    I've heard it been mentioned before so I decided to look it up and came across these excerpts.

    Addressing a public meeting in Bombay on Sept. 26 1896 (CW II p. 74), Gandhi said:

    Ours is one continued struggle against degradation sought to be inflicted upon us by the European, who desire to degrade us to the level of the raw Kaffir, whose occupation is hunting and whose sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle to buy a wife with, and then pass his life in indolence and nakedness.

    In 1904, he wrote (CW. IV p. 193):

    It is one thing to register natives who would not work, and whom it is very difficult to find out if they absent themselves, but it is another thing -and most insulting -to expect decent, hard-working, and respectable Indians, whose only fault is that they work too much, to have themselves registered and carry with them registration badges.

    In its editorial on the Natal Municipal Corporation Bill, the Indian Opinion of March 18 1905 wrote:

    Clause 200 makes provision for registration of persons belonging to uncivilized races (meaning the local Africans), resident and employed within the Borough. One can understand the necessity of registration of Kaffirs who will not work, but why should registration be required for indentured Indians who have become free, and for their descendants about whom the general complaint is that they work too much? (Italic portion is added)

    The Indian Opinion published an editorial on September 9 1905 under the heading, "The relative Value of the Natives and the Indians in Natal". In it Gandhi referred to a speech made by Rev. Dube, a most accomplished African, who said that an African had the capacity for improvement, if only the Colonials would look upon him as better than dirt, and give him a chance to develop self-respect. Gandhi suggested that "A little judicious extra taxation would do no harm; in the majority of cases it compels the native to work for at least a few days a year." Then he added:

    Now let us turn our attention to another and entirely unrepresented community-the Indian. He is in striking contrast with the native. While the native has been of little benefit to the State, it owes its prosperity largely to the Indians. While native loafers abound on every side, that species of humanity is almost unknown among Indians here.

    In the Government Gazette of Natal for Feb. 28 1905, a Bill was published regulating the use of fire-arms by the natives and Asiatics. Commenting on the Bill, the Indian Opinion of March 25 1905 stated:

    In this instance of the fire-arms, the Asiatic has been most improperly bracketed with the natives. The British Indian does not need any such restrictions as are imposed by the Bill on the natives regarding the carrying of fire-arms. The prominent race can remain so by preventing the native from arming himself. Is there a slightest vestige of justification for so preventing the British Indian?

    Commenting on the petition, the Indian Opinion of March 24 1906, declaring that "British Indians have, in order that they may never be misunderstood, made it clear that they do not aspire to any political power," added:

    It seems that the petition is being widely circulated, and signatures are being taken of all coloured people in the three colonies named. The petition is non-Indian in character, although British Indians, being coloured people, are very largely affected by it. We consider that it was a wise policy on the part of the British Indians throughout South Africa, to have kept themselves apart and distinct from the other coloured communities in this country.

    In a statement made in 1906 to the Constitution Committee, the British Indian Association led by Gandhi (CW. V p.335) said:

    The British Indian Association has always admitted the principle of white domination and has, therefore, no desire, on behalf of the community it represents, for any political rights just for the sake of them.

    Commenting on a court case, the Indian Opinion of June 2 1906, in its Gujrati section, stated:

    You say that the magistrate's decision is unsatisfactory because it would enable a person, however unclean, to travel by a tram, and that even the Kaffirs would be able to do so. But the magistrate's decision is quite different. The Court declared that the Kaffirs have no legal right to travel by tram. And according to tram regulations, those in an unclean dress or in a drunken state are prohibited from boarding a tram. Thanks to the Court's decision, only clean Indians (meaning upper caste Hindu Indians) or coloured people other than Kaffirs, can now travel in the trams. (Italic portion is added)

  2. #2
    Registered User Tha Biz is offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    rack city
    Posts
    1,790
    Credits
    1,575,969
    some ppl may vex when me say this...but fuk ghandi

  3. #3
    Toppa_Toppa
    Guest
    Though Gandhi was strongly opposed to the comingling of races, the working-class Indians did not share his distaste. There were many areas where Indians, Chinese, Coloured, Africans and poor whites lived together. On February 15 1905, Gandhi wrote to Dr. Porter, the Medical Officer of Health, Johannesburg (CW. IV p.244, and "Indian Opinion" 9 April 1904):

    Why, of all places in Johannesburg, the Indian location should be chosen for dumping down all kaffirs of the town, passes my comprehension.

    Of course, under my suggestion, the Town Council must withdraw the Kaffirs from the Location. About this mixing of the Kaffirs with the Indians I must confess I feel most strongly. I think it is very unfair to the Indian population, and it is an undue tax on even the proverbial patience of my countrymen.


    Dr. Porter replied that it was the Indians who sub-let to Africans.

    Commenting on the White League's agitation, Gandhi wrote in his Indian Opinion of September 24 1903:

    We believe as much in the purity of race as we think they do, only we believe that they would best serve these interests, which are as dear to us as to them, by advocating the purity of all races, and not one alone. We believe also that the white race of South Africa should be the predominating race.

    Again, on December 24 1903, Indian Opinion stated:

    The petition dwells upon `the comingling of the coloured and white races'. May we inform the members of the Conference that so far as British Indians are concerned, such a thing is particularly unknown. If there is one thing which the Indian cherishes more than any other, it is the purity of type.

    In his farewell speech at a meeting held in the house of Dr. Gool in Capetown, which was reported in the Indian Opinion of July 1 1914, Gandhi said:

    The Indians knew perfectly well which was the dominant and governing race. They aspired to no social equality with Europeans. They felt that the path of their development was separate. They did not even aspire to the franchise, or, if the aspiration exists, it was with no idea of its having a present effect.

  4. #4
    TC
    Steuuuupssss! TC is offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In de sky
    Posts
    16,101
    Credits
    1,296,732
    Undeniably racist comments.

  5. #5
    TC
    Steuuuupssss! TC is offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In de sky
    Posts
    16,101
    Credits
    1,296,732
    Undeniably racist comments.

  6. #6
    Earth Angel dollbabi's Avatar dollbabi is offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Music City
    Posts
    36,627
    Credits
    74,804,093
    Gandhi was no saint and did expouse racist ideas. This comes as no surprise though since he was a strong believer in the caste system and didn't advocate for equality for all Indians. So it follows that he would not do it for Africans. He spoke many wise words, but was in many ways, a walking contradiction.
    TC and mz_JazE like this.

  7. #7
    Registered Member VINCYPOWA's Avatar VINCYPOWA is offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    ISLANDMIX DOT COM
    Posts
    89,615
    Credits
    47,006,995
    VINCYPOWA back in 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by VINCYPOWA View Post
    MARABUTA, are you a BLACK NATIONALIST of INDO BACKGROUND?

    I am ASKING because I NOTICE how you TEND to be SILENT on these MATTERS.

    GHANDI was a RACIST towards AFRICANS, so how come you're not TRUMPETING the CAUSE of your AFRO TRINI BROTHAS n SISTAS?

    WAIT a SECOND, there is a GHANDI SQUARE?

    Is there any AFRICAN SQUARE in TRINIDAD?
    INDIA HIGH COMMISSIONER ask T&T GOVT to declare GANDHI Birthday a NATIONAL HOLIDAY

  8. #8
    Toppa_Toppa
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by VINCYPOWA View Post
    What an outrageous request. Even if the man wasn't a racist.

  9. #9
    Earth Angel dollbabi's Avatar dollbabi is offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Music City
    Posts
    36,627
    Credits
    74,804,093
    Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar was a true champion of human rights, not Gandhi.

  10. #10
    Toppa_Toppa
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrs. Vega View Post
    Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar was a true champion of human rights, not Gandhi.
    I am not familiar with him...

  11. #11
    Earth Angel dollbabi's Avatar dollbabi is offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Music City
    Posts
    36,627
    Credits
    74,804,093
    Quote Originally Posted by Toppa_Toppa View Post
    I am not familiar with him...
    There are so many websites with info on him, but the setupon many is messy. So guess the best place to start is Wiki for a decent summary.

    B. R. Ambedkar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    It sheds a different light on Gandhi's objectives or his "fights on behalf of others." It is said the Gandhi began to change his views closer to the end of his life but who really knows...

  12. #12
    Gladiator
    Guest
    Indian governments tried their best to conceal Ghandi racist ideologies. Everything will be revealed in portions..

  13. #13
    Registered User Ananci_7 is offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    San Fernando Trinidad & Tobago
    Posts
    2,302
    Credits
    1,191,592
    Quote Originally Posted by Gladiator View Post
    Indian governments tried their best to conceal Ghandi racist ideologies. Everything will be revealed in portions..
    Things will only be revealed when WE reveal them, when WE openly confront them, when WE challenge them.

    It's high time we start (back) lighting the fires instead of watching and waiting for them to ignite
    Create your own university; develop and encourage a culture of critical thinking and action

  14. #14
    Earth Angel dollbabi's Avatar dollbabi is offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Music City
    Posts
    36,627
    Credits
    74,804,093
    Quote Originally Posted by Hello BKLYN View Post
    was about to ask this, at what point of his life did he hold these sentiments...

    If you like at Che Guevara, he said something similar about black people but as his life progressed, he did things like go into the Congo and assist Patrice Lumumba...

    Malcolm himself was a staunch separatists, but towards the end of his life he apologized for his attitudes towards whites he had earlier in his life...

    I wonder if you asked a young MLK before he studied Ghandi what he thought about Whites while growing up in Jim Crow South what he would have said
    Yes, but in the case of Gandhi, it appears that major work he was championed for in India was actual to the detriment of the lower castes or those with no caste.. For example, the fast that was labeled as "on behalf of the Harijans" (his name for Dalits/Untouchables) was actually to keep them from achieving needed political representation.

    That is why signs like this exist:

    Last edited by dollbabi; 07-14-2012 at 10:21 PM.

  15. #15
    Registered User Ananci_7 is offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    San Fernando Trinidad & Tobago
    Posts
    2,302
    Credits
    1,191,592
    On the question of Che Guevara, it should be noted that the remarks he made were directed towards the corrupt and inept African leaders of revolutionary movements who spoke a lot of rhetoric but lived in opulence while the people they claimed they were fighting for remained in poverty. For many of them there was no question of sacrifice or leading by example. Remember Che was a doctor who gave up a life and career -- that would have been very lucrative for him and his family -- to champion causes in Africa and the Americas.

    As for Malcolm X, the late Prof John Henrik Clarke who was his history researcher argued that that was not so. His views on whites and separatism did not change. He did, however, understand that there were many whites who were as committed to fighting the system of racism and imperialism. But he had stressed that there must be first black cohesion before any question of whites joining black revolutionary movements. He never lost sight of the fact that even among the most liberal whites there were (and still are) ideas and beliefs based on strong racist undercurrents
    Create your own university; develop and encourage a culture of critical thinking and action

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •