Gandhi in The Handmaid’s Tale

Re: # 46

behram:

Gandhi espoused various ideas. Some worked some didn`t. He is known for civil dosobedience not for his ideas on international trade. What he achieved at that time is considered unbelievable, even today. Today after 60 odd years how many leaders you see that can move millions with just one word? How many riots can be stopped by one mans fasting? He had a great influence on indian people (atleast the hindus). He was no politician, but a leader of the masses. He didn`t occupy any political positions.
India could have achieved independence by revolution, by eye for an eye, but the way it was achieved makes it and gandhi as an inspiration. I am quite surprised that you think gandhis non-violent movement has become irrelevant today. this methodology has been used at several places throughout the world. gandhi has been translated into arabic to teach the palestanians non-violence.
Regarding comments by gandhi about africans, yes they were objectionable. But gandhi was no god/prophet. He was the product of his time. Also this were seen until 1908. gandhis thinking grew and developed a lot after that. probably if he were not thrown out of the train, he would never have returned to india. being called ``kaffir`` in 1905 was the least of the things an african was worried about in south africe. until 1990 the S.A. gov was proudly a racist society. Can manto show how many time gandhi repeated the same later in his life?
Regarding aishas post, she is herself quoting contradictory statements. If it satisfies you let me tell you that Gandhi wasn`t a good father. his idea of home schooling his children, his failure to reconcile with harilal doesn`t make him a ideal father. so what are we going to do, malign him for his other actions too?
i asked aisha about the founders of u.s. most of them werre slave owners, some even owned slaves when they were presidents. so are we going to discredit Thomas Jeffersons contribution to teh creation of u.s? even for the great emancipator, freeing the slaves was not the reason to fight the confederates.

may be manto/aisha should write another post maligining gandhi because he could not probably dance well.

No netizen his racism against black people, his bigotry, casteist ideology and his anti-women ideas are enough.

Re: # 96

miya manto:

why don`t you quote sarojini naidus remarks on gandhi. she had known him very closely, didn`t she? also in your previous posts you have quotes her saying that jinnah was the ambassador of hindu-muslim unity. so i don`t think you should have any problem with her

Re#93

[....I cannot claim to have read or studied Mahatma Gandhi’s philosophy, nor claim to be his follower.]

Yes, my sweetheart, the twinkle of my eyes! There is a concept called humility especially peculiar to ladies from the Indian subcontinent (including the self-sacrificing social worker whose speech has been quoted) so that the first thing such individuals do is to admit that they don`t know everything under the sky!

A concept totally alien to you and your ilk - even though I am sure you fully meet all the other feminine attributes!

[I rest my case.]
Not so fast, my dear pathetic excuse of specimen of that dishonorable occupation (only one level lower than the most ancient occupation)! I am not done with you yet!

yes why not...

``Millions are spent to keep gandhi in poverty`` Sarojini Naidu.

Beej..

My dear dishonest Gandhian...

The fact is that she is probably right... she probably never studied Gandhi`s philosophy or ideas especially those that said that women should stay indoors ... be the Queens of the household..

But keep posting more my friend... I am really enjoying thios.

YLH - you found your match in Beej..... Fight on fellas....

There is actually a very good question raised here by Netizen. To paraphrase:

How do we integrate the contradictions in a visionary leader and thinker`s philosophy with actions that are inconsistant and/or discriminatory?

Do we acknowledge the limitations of those contradictory actions and, fully realising the shortsightedness of them, address them and use them to address populations who were marginalized in these contradictions? In other words, having completely acknowledged where the philosophy fell short, is it our goal to use the principles that are NOT discriminatory? Do these principles lack meaning because the actions of the thinker/leader were contradictory or discriminatory towards less empowered populations? Are we responsible for the further evolution of these visionary ideas?

Beautifuly put Saminasha.

Please refer to post 34 on the other board.

correction:

is it our goal to use the principles that are NOT discriminatory? Or to revision them so that they are completely inclusive?

Manto,

Well, this has become an interesting kind of example.

This particular question is relevant in so many ways; how do you reconcile anti semitic artists who produced art during the Holocaust? How is Thomas Jefferson on one hand, a visionary and on the other, someone who found the ideals of the Enlightenment inapplicable to enslaved African Americans. Ironically enough, the art, intellectualism and labor of the Black American community itself addressed that huge contradiction-which is my question-

how do we continue to evolve Gandhi?

Ok, so we are back with these silly, historically ignorant analysis...

Dear author.

How do you think most indian women, especially those with a little money, lived in the late 1800s and eary 19th century? Obviously, we are not talking about poor working people (90% of population) whose women worked anyway they could for survivial.

If at all possible they were locked up at home. My grandmother who was born in 1899 to a prosperous lahore family was considered ``liberated``: she actually knew how to read and write at about 3rd standard level !!! But as she said to me once, when I asked her opinion on some family dispute

---

``What did I know about these matters? We were sent to manage the kitchen and that was the end of it``.

Gandhi may have been a personal whacko, he may have treated his wife badly (and his children even worse!) but he had a positive effect on all indians, including women. Many educated indian women participated in the freedom struggle, in many cases stepping out of the home for the first time. No end of ``proof`` that the man secretly wanted to have sex with his nieces, was crazed with guilt about sex etc. can change that.

[Note: Dr. Shall Sinha does presentations in the character of Mahatma Gandhi and, in costume, carries a remarkable resemblance with the real Gandhi.

He also possesses a library that contains over 50,000 pages of collected works of Mahatma Gandhi, and is the author of 4 books including, ``Words of Wisdom from Mahatma Gandhi``.

From his web site “http://ssinha.com/crusader.htm”.]

…Mahatma Gandhi was a ceaseless crusader of women`s equality. He brought the women out of their homes and made them equal participants in all walks of life – social as well as political. His entourage always consisted of several women and many of his closest associates were women.

Under Gandhi`s leadership thousands of women took leading roles in several movements. Gandhi never considered women to be unfit for any position or task.

Because of Gandhi`s support, women`s groups were formed all over India and there was hardly a week when Gandhi did not address a women`s group. It was mainly because of Gandhi that the first Cabinet of Independent India consisted of two women ministers.

Nice article..

Now a sample of Muhammad or Allah`s views on women..

---

Have sex with your women whenever and as often as you like. 2:223

Women have rights that are similar to men, but men are ``a degree above them.`` 2:228

A woman is worth one-half a man. 2:282
4: The Women

Marry of the women two, or three, or four. 4:3

Males are to inherit twice that of females. 4:11

Lewd women are to be confined to their houses until death. 4:15

You may not forcibly inherit women, unless they flagrantly lewd. 4:19

Instructions for exchanging wives 4:20

You can`t have married women, unless they are captives. 4:24

Men are in charge of women, because Allah made men to be better than women. Refuse to have sex with women from whom you fear rebellion, and scourge them. 4:34

Don`t pray if you are drunk, dirty, or have touched a woman lately. 4:43

They invoke in his (Allah`s) stead only females. 4:117

A man cannot treat his wives fairly. 4:129

``Unto the male is the equivalent share of two females.`` 4:176

---

I did not find in your article about Gandhi an inkinlg of the abuse of women found abundant in Quran..

If you find Gandhi`s views disgusting about women, that`s a good sign.. I`d say..

Beej... for the last time... no amount of hagiography can beat what is straight from the horse`s mouth...

Gandhi`s real views about women:


This civilization is irreligion, and it has taken such a hold on the people in Europe who are in it appear to be half mad. They lack real physical strength or courage. They keep up their energy by intoxication. They can hardly be happy in solitude. Women, who should be the queens of households, wander in the streets or they slave away in factories. For the sake of a pittance, half a million women in England alone are labouring under in factories or similar institutions. This awful fact is one of the causes of the daily growing suffragette movement


--

Saminasha,

Indeed... but that can only happen after everyone is on board with the contradictions.

Re: # 108

I think the answers might be in this wide range of agency among women during this period. And that would be completely feasible in how social action/agency is a response to the philosophical principles of a movement. Gandhi may have had ridiculously insecure notions about women, sexuality, etc., but the women who acted as an integral part of this movement were ALREADY evolving Gandhi and his ideas at that moment.