Ghandi was a racist

[ghoti]

Ghandi was very racist towards black people so I was wondering why a statue of him was erected. Im busy watching a Penn & Teller on him, and he said some pretty nasty things.

Strange we were never taught this..

He even incited indians to go after black people in a newspaper he published in four languages.

[teraside]

Should this be in off topic Wizzard? ;)

[JK8]

Its just misinterpretation again, he fought for freedom, and he got it, everyone that benefitted should respect the man.

[Nick333]

Ghandi was very racist towards black people so I was wondering why a statue of him was erected. Im busy watching a Penn & Teller on him, and he said some pretty nasty things.

Strange we were never taught this..

He even incited indians to go after black people in a newspaper he published in four languages.

Which episode? I don't have that one.

[ghoti]

Which episode? I don't have that one.

Season 3 episode 5, "Holier than thou art" It deals with Mother Theresa, Ghandi and the Dali Lama.

[skoob]

I have huge respect for Ghandi! He fought for freedom, not just for indian people. He stood for non violence.

[ghoti]

I have huge respect for Ghandi! He fought for freedom, not just for indian people. He stood for non violence.

Yes, he did, but he wasnt no saint. He liked the K word a lot, and and has some quotes that would make Verwoed look tolerant.

This reminds me of Debbie2`s Mozart post that dealt with pieces that he came up like, "lick my 4sshole" and "lick my 4sshole again".

The real history of these people is normally more interesting than that propaganda would let us believe.

[phenom]

Im busy watching a Penn & Teller on him,w1z4rd, could i have the link to video that, please.

[skoob]

Yes, he did, but he wasnt no saint. He liked the K word a lot, and and has some quotes that would make Verwoed look tolerant.

This reminds me of Debbie2`s Mozart post that dealt with pieces that he came up like, "lick my 4sshole" and "lick my 4sshole again".

The real history of these people is normally more interesting than that propaganda would let us believe.

So he used the K word and that made him racist :confused: :confused:

[JK8]

Yes, he did, but he wasnt no saint. He liked the K word a lot, and and has some quotes that would make Verwoed look tolerant.

This reminds me of Debbie2`s Mozart post that dealt with pieces that he came up like, "lick my 4sshole" and "lick my 4sshole again".

The real history of these people is normally more interesting than that propaganda would let us believe.

I think Orangeman knows a little about the K-word and its meaning.

[ghoti]

So he used the K word and that made him racist :confused: :confused:

Ghandi wrote: "The k***** sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle and buy a wife with and then pass his life in indolence and nakedness. They're loafters... A species of humanity almost unknown among the indians""

Thats not racist?

[bwana]

Seems worthwhile noting
Some have interpreted statements made by Gandhi as offensive to Black South Africans, particularly, his use of the word "k*****", which today is considered a derogatory term. It is worth noting, however, that during Gandhi's time, the term "k*****" had a different connotation than its present-day usage. Former President of South Africa Nelson Mandela is an advocate of Gandhi, despite efforts in 2003 on the part of Gandhi's critics to prevent the unveiling of a statue of Gandhi in Johannesburg. Indeed, Mandela recently took part in the 29 January - 30 January 2007 conference in New Delhi which marked the 100th anniversary of Gandhi's introduction of satyagraha in South Africa. (http://www.answers.com/topic/mohandas-gandhi)

[phenom]

How could you fight for freedom and call youself a Muslim, as in ""Yes I am. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew.", Ghandi was one of the greatest idiots of all time

[Highflyer_GP]

How could you fight for freedom and call youself a Muslim, as in ""Yes I am. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew.", Ghandi was one of the greatest idiots of all time
Ermm I think he meant that he sees all faiths as equal to each other, no particular faith is more important than another.

Seems like you're the one who's prejudiced against Muslims and Jews...

Back on topic, the K-word was commonly used back then when referring to people of African descent. There are other words which were also commonly used when referring to people of other cultures which were seen as ok back then, but are derogatory now. I wouldn't look too deep into this.

[Alan]

Ghandi wrote: "The k***** sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle and buy a wife with and then pass his life in indolence and nakedness. They're loafters... A species of humanity almost unknown among the indians""

Thats not racist?

Seems like it to me.


Seems worthwhile noting

The term maybe but just look at what w1z4rd has quoted and it's pretty obvious IMO.

[Skeptik]

I have huge respect for Ghandi! He fought for freedom, not just for indian people. He stood for non violence.
I read some things about him recently too. Apparently during early old apartheid years he supported Indian rights OVER the rights of black people. It sounds like he didn't respect them at all. It rings true to me and what I observed myself during apartheid. The average Indian was no friend of the black man.(excuse the stereotype).

[bwana]

Seems like it to me.



The term maybe but just look at what w1z4rd has quoted and it's pretty obvious IMO.What w1z4rd has presented might very well be two unrelated quotes - the first
"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 ******, 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." has been attributed to Gandhi, speaking at Oxford, October 24, 1931 however the second
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.remains unsourced http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi so who knows when he said it or in what context.

[ghoti]

I quoted right out of Penn & Teller. They did mention some book that the guy for it out of. Ill give it another watch.

[GavinMannion]

Wow, if he did say them together then you could not deny that he was racist,

But if they where said as Bwana has posted them then Penn & Teller have got some explaining to do...

[phenom]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-QK35hYIWo
[PENN & TELLER VIDEO]

[ShaunSA]

Indians are not racist. We merely believe we are superior to every else :D

[JK8]

Indians are not racist. We merely believe we are superior to every else :D

Hey theres another indian on the forum!!:D

[Skeptik]

Indians are not racist. We merely believe we are superior to every else :D
The present day Indian caste system makes apartheid look like a children's picnic.

[caramel]

He fought for freedom of all man kind...

[Mr TB]

Hey theres another indian on the forum!!:D

S. A. Moosa and I curriecups are the greatest!

[kilo39]

Bull****! (also known as Penn & Teller: Bull****!) is an American, Emmy-nominated documentary television series, running since 2003 on the premium cable channel Showtime. It is hosted by professional magicians/comedians Penn & Teller. While many episodes aim to debunk pseudoscientific ideas, supernatural beliefs, popular fads and misconceptions, some episodes are devoted purely to promoting a Libertarian political view on certain issues. It criticizes proponents of such things, often citing ulterior or financial motives. The stated aim of the show is to apply critical thinking to misconceptions, and as is indicated by the show's title, the program inherits Penn & Teller's characteristically blunt, aggressive presentation.
Bull****! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bull****!)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullsh#t!

Replace # with i

Libertine Conservatives (http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory133.html)

[raoul]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullsh#t!

Replace # with i

Libertine Conservatives (http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory133.html)

Thanks for the link, looks like Penn & Teller have trashed Mother Teresa and Dalai lama as well

:(

[kilo39]

Gandhi's 9/11 (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1973628.cms)
The Times of India
Avijit Ghosh
9 Sep, 2006

When Osama bin Laden's men slammed aeroplanes into New York's Twin Towers on September 11, the day's abbreviated form, 9/11, immediately became shorthand for violence. And five years down the line, it continues to be so.

Few remember that the same day — 9/11 — was actually synonymous with non-violence. Exactly 100 years ago — September 11, 1906, to be precise — this day also marked the birth of satyagraha, although the term itself was coined at a later date (see box).

Over the next century, satyagraha — which literally means the force born of truth and love or non-violence — has been put to test in different political theatres around the globe. .

[pimal3]

Hey theres another indian on the forum!!:D

Let's kill him! Hi Ho Silver, away we go!

Honestly, what does a person's race matter when he posts?

[Rozier]

Thanks for the link, looks like Penn & Teller have trashed Mother Teresa and Dalai lama as well

:(

Goes to show things (and people ) are seldom what they seem.:rolleyes:

There are only two rational kinds of people --Racists and Liars

[HelloThere]

Ghandi was very racist towards black people so I was wondering why a statue of him was erected. Im busy watching a Penn & Teller on him, and he said some pretty nasty things.

Strange we were never taught this..

He even incited indians to go after black people in a newspaper he published in four languages.

Where are the sources to back this up?

[Tux]

Thanks for the link, looks like Penn & Teller have trashed Mother Teresa and Dalai lama as well

:(

Last time I checked they were human. Prone to human mistakes and errors in judgement.

[Tux]

Where are the sources to back this up?

And you sir, if you sourced another braincell, you might even have a synapse one of these days.

[Sweetlicks]

Ghandi wrote: "The k***** sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle and buy a wife with and then pass his life in indolence and nakedness. They're loafters... A species of humanity almost unknown among the indians""

Thats not racist?


*sigh*

In those days it was perfectly acceptable to call black people k's. Why can people not understand this very basic fact for cryin' out loud??

Ghandi was not a racist, he was a freedom fighter who believed in the dinity and rights of ALL men!!

[Soulsnatcher]

And you sir, if you sourced another braincell, you might even have a synapse one of these days.

bwhahaha :D roflmao

[jetpacman]

Penn and Teller should take a page out their own book, a lot of stuff on their show is just plain Bull****

[cerebus]

*sigh*

In those days it was perfectly acceptable to call black people k's. Why can people not understand this very basic fact for cryin' out loud??

Ghandi was not a racist, he was a freedom fighter who believed in the dinity and rights of ALL men!!

Sounds racist to me.

The problem is that at one time racism was ubiquitous and implicit. Nobody batted an eye about it. Today we're hyped up about it. I remember reading a children's book by beloved English writer Enid Blyton, written in the 1930's or so, and she called black people n*****s. Racism was just a part of society.

So it's hardly surprising to me that Gandhi should have held some dubious views towards another race. It doesn't detract from his life's achievement in every other way.

[Skeptik]

*sigh*

In those days it was perfectly acceptable to call black people k's. Why can people not understand this very basic fact for cryin' out loud??

Ghandi was not a racist, he was a freedom fighter who believed in the dinity and rights of ALL men!!
Partially true, whether hurtful or not, just a fact. He was a undoubtedly racist though, like many Indians of the time.

Mind you most black people were different in those days too. They didn't call white people UmLungu or whitey, only "Baas!".:D

[Sweetlicks]

Sounds racist to me.

of course it does... NOW!!

It was not then. As you said in the rest of your post.

[cerebus]

sweetlicks - it's one thing to use a single derogatory term which would have been in common use. My grandparents did the same (so embarrassing).

But the context of those quotes makes it clear that his feelings were deeper and more insidious than just some outdated vocabulary. It seems at least from a cursory look that he held views towards the whole black race of their inherent inferiority - that's racism in my books, justify it however you will.

[Sweetlicks]

cerebus of COURSE it is racism in your books, THESE DAYS.

At the time it was considered quite normal to hold that view of blacks, therefore was not considered derogatory or racist. How can I make you people understand this?

Step into the time machine, go back to that time; you would have been saying the same things with no twinge of conscience, I tell you.

[Sweetlicks]

cerebus of COURSE it is racism in your books, THESE DAYS.

At the time it was considered quite normal to hold that view of blacks, therefore was not considered derogatory or racist. How can I make you people understand this?

Step into the time machine, go back to that time; you would have been saying the same things with no twinge of conscience, I tell you.

[icyrus]

Penn and Teller should take a page out their own book, a lot of stuff on their show is just plain Bull****

Example?

[Highflyer_GP]

cerebus of COURSE it is racism in your books, THESE DAYS.

At the time it was considered quite normal to hold that view of blacks, therefore was not considered derogatory or racist. How can I make you people understand this?

Step into the time machine, go back to that time; you would have been saying the same things with no twinge of conscience, I tell you.

The point that I tried making earlier was that back then there were words for each race, which were accepted at the time but would be considered a racial slur these days. So while he may have used the K-word when referring to black people, people of other races probably used the C-word when referring to indian people, and nobody thought much of it because these words were accepted back then.

From what I've read, Gandhi didn't care about what people called each other back then (because the words were accepted), he cared about how people treated each other. And that to me is not racist.

[mercurial]

Should this be in off topic Wizzard? ;)

lol. dude is confused.



This reminds me of Debbie2`s Mozart post that dealt with pieces that he came up like, "lick my 4sshole" and "lick my 4sshole again".



LMAO that's just sick and perverted but i can't help laughing.


How could you fight for freedom and call youself a Muslim, as in ""Yes I am. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew.", Ghandi was one of the greatest idiots of all time

i'm not surprised at your response. it hasn't ever changed.

[cerebus]

Sweetlicks - how can you say that I would have said the same thing? Racism is racism - if you were living in slave-time Georgia and you had a cotton plantation, shouldn't history judge you as a racist even though everyone around you was doing the same? There were some in those times who stood consciously against the situation of institutionalized racism, and Gandhi, given that he was fighting against exactly the same situation with the English/Indians, should have had the conscience to do the same.

Even Shakespeare in his day and age wrote some very impassioned speeches against racism in Othello. Don't use culture as an excuse.

[mercurial]

And you sir, if you sourced another braincell, you might even have a synapse one of these days.

lmao

[mercurial]

why is it so hard for you people to understand that back in the day, that was the acceptable term that was used? seriously now. it's only a racist term nowadays. please man. show some maturity.

[cerebus]

^^is that to me? It's not the term I'm objecting to merc. It's everything else that he said. The whole tenor of his speech is racist. He appears to consider blacks as an inferior species of person to whites and Indians. In his attempt to make whites empathize with the Indian plight, he has used the deeply suspect method of uniting them both against blacks and comparing their virtuous characteristics against the sub-human characteristics of blacks. How is that not racist?

[JK8]

^^is that to me? It's not the term I'm objecting to merc. It's everything else that he said. The whole tenor of his speech is racist. He appears to consider blacks as an inferior species of person to whites and Indians. In his attempt to make whites empathize with the Indian plight, he has used the deeply suspect method of uniting them both against blacks and comparing their virtuous characteristics against the sub-human characteristics of blacks. How is that not racist?

lol so stupid...

Who was he manipulating at the time?

[Pixie22]

ghandi.... mandela... people wrote history and made them out to be more than they really were. More than mere men.. They are not. I dont believe they had even reached the pinacles or enlightenment that I have reached in my own life, and im only 25 and a nobody ^_^

[mercurial]

^^is that to me? It's not the term I'm objecting to merc. It's everything else that he said. The whole tenor of his speech is racist. He appears to consider blacks as an inferior species of person to whites and Indians. In his attempt to make whites empathize with the Indian plight, he has used the deeply suspect method of uniting them both against blacks and comparing their virtuous characteristics against the sub-human characteristics of blacks. How is that not racist?

o...m...g...

what part of "back in the day it was the accepted term" do you not understand? :rolleyes:

[cerebus]

o...m...g...

what part of "back in the day it was the accepted term" do you not understand? :rolleyes:


Give me a break. Gandhi was fighting against racism towards the Indians. Don't you think he could have gone one step further and extended that philanthropy towards blacks? He was clearly enlightened enough to realize that one form of racism was immoral, so why not another?

As I said above, just because it was accepted in his day doesn't make it any more acceptable in ours.


And jk8 - I don't think he was manipulating anybody. He just seemed to feel that the inferiority of blacks was axiomatic, and grounds for him to contrast against the superiority of Indians.

[Skeptik]

^^is that to me? It's not the term I'm objecting to merc. It's everything else that he said. The whole tenor of his speech is racist. He appears to consider blacks as an inferior species of person to whites and Indians. In his attempt to make whites empathize with the Indian plight, he has used the deeply suspect method of uniting them both against blacks and comparing their virtuous characteristics against the sub-human characteristics of blacks. How is that not racist?
Good summary.
He was being opportunistic - standing up with 'his people' over and above the k*ffirs. (his word, not mine :eek:) I remember black customers in Indian shops were treated extremely badly, even in the 70's and often even now. No love lost between those two colours of the rainbow.

[mercurial]

Give me a break. Gandhi was fighting against racism towards the Indians. Don't you think he could have gone one step further and extended that philanthropy towards blacks? He was clearly enlightened enough to realize that one form of racism was immoral, so why not another?

As I said above, just because it was accepted in his day doesn't make it any more acceptable in ours.


And jk8 - I don't think he was manipulating anybody. He just seemed to feel that the inferiority of blacks was axiomatic, and grounds for him to contrast against the superiority of Indians.

yes please do take a break. clearly you need one :rolleyes:

[cerebus]

yes please do take a break. clearly you need one :rolleyes:

So point out what's wrong with what I said instead of just being snarky.

[Sweetlicks]

...., shouldn't history judge you as a racist even though everyone around you was doing the same?

history may judge you as a racist yes, but I still maintain you were not one at the time as that was the norm at the time.

[Highflyer_GP]

Give me a break. Gandhi was fighting against racism towards the Indians. Don't you think he could have gone one step further and extended that philanthropy towards blacks? He was clearly enlightened enough to realize that one form of racism was immoral, so why not another?

As I said above, just because it was accepted in his day doesn't make it any more acceptable in ours.


And jk8 - I don't think he was manipulating anybody. He just seemed to feel that the inferiority of blacks was axiomatic, and grounds for him to contrast against the superiority of Indians.
Ok let's go through this (http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?p=1003012) again.

"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 ******, 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."This part can be attributed to what he said, the other part of the first post in the thread cannot because the source is unidentifiable.

Now then, don't you think he meant the struggle against the degradation inflicted by the Europeans, to prevent what they have already done to degrade the black people. Note the use of the word 'raw' and put it in context. 'Us' could then refer to non-Europeans of any colour, even black people. Therefore the struggle is to prevent everyone from being reduced to the 'raw' state in which one's life revolves around hunting (as the Europeans have done with many black people).

Come on dude, for somebody with a degree in English Literature, I thought that you of all people would have picked up on this ;)

[cerebus]

I think you're stretching there highflyer.


the level of the raw ******, 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."


That statement is nothing other than a tacit assumption about the innate character of a race of people. The Europeans did not bring the blacks into such a condition - what he is saying is that their way of existing is something dispositionally ingrained.

You're trying to twist it to suggest that it could mean something else, but it's plain as day. I suspect that if you looked at the rest of the quote, it would also be quite clear that 'us' refers to the Indians.

[Highflyer_GP]

Dude when you're reduced to a 'raw' state, that basically is your sole ambition - you've been reduced to a caveman.

I'm not trying to defend what he said, I just don't see anything racist about it when taken in context and taking into consideration the time period.

[JK8]

And jk8 - I don't think he was manipulating anybody. He just seemed to feel that the inferiority of blacks was axiomatic, and grounds for him to contrast against the superiority of Indians.

He was manipulating the people in power a that time.

[cerebus]

^^Nope. 'Raw state' simply means that it's their natural, unadorned character. Even that statement implies that the blacks are less disposed towards becoming civilized than Indians.

None of this detracts from Gandhi's accomplishment as a humanist, it just shows that he had ambiguities in his character like everyone else. If you don't want to recognize them because you are so keen to laud his virtues, you can't be an objective judge of history.


He was manipulating the people in power a that time.

Sure, by aligning them in unity against a common enemy.

[Eugene66]

Gandhi had no boudaries and no preferred religion. What he said about the K***s in those days wass merely an observation of how different they are in relation to what he was used to.

That being said. He was human and he grew up first before he became the Gandhi we praise.

Even Jesus had his moments of being human. He used his power to curse a fig tree for not bearung fruit. He was tired and roadweary at the time. What everybody forgot to mention was that it was out of season for figs in that area. Now a man who curses a fig tree for not bearing figs out of fig season? What can you say of such a man?

You see we grow into sainthood we are not born saints. We have to make mistakes to learn and become better. The person who claims he was a saint all his life is actually a politician, not a true saint.

So even if he was a racist at some point in his life, Its only human. Instaed of looking at what he was. Look at what he became.

[Rozier]

why is it so hard for you people to understand that back in the day, that was the acceptable term that was used? seriously now. it's only a racist term nowadays. please man. show some maturity.

To add another dimension to this debate but in the same vein. If Gandhi can be regarded as a racist (which would be his prerogative in any event) for refering to certain people as ******s, could not Mohammed be regarded as a child molester/pedophile for having a 6 year old girl as a wife (Ayesha)? Or would he not qualify as such on the grounds that having sex with infants was acceptable (if it indeed was) "back in the day" and he is not around today to be catagorized? :sick:

[mercurial]

Gandhi had no boudaries and no preferred religion. What he said about the K***s in those days wass merely an observation of how different they are in relation to what he was used to.

That being said. He was human and he grew up first before he became the Gandhi we praise.

Even Jesus had his moments of being human. He used his power to curse a fig tree for not bearung fruit. He was tired and roadweary at the time. What everybody forgot to mention was that it was out of season for figs in that area. Now a man who curses a fig tree for not bearing figs out of fig season? What can you say of such a man?

You see we grow into sainthood we are not born saints. We have to make mistakes to learn and become better. The person who claims he was a saint all his life is actually a politician, not a true saint.

So even if he was a racist at some point in his life, Its only human. Instaed of looking at what he was. Look at what he became.

100% spot on.


To add another dimension to this debate but in the same vein. If Gandhi can be regarded as a racist (which would be his prerogative in any event) for refering to certain people as ******s, could not Mohammed be regarded as a child molester/pedophile for having a 6 year old girl as a wife (Ayesha)? Or would he not qualify as such on the grounds that having sex with infants was acceptable (if it indeed was) "back in the day" and he is not around today to be catagorized? :sick:

are u sick :eek:
do your research properly before you post, else you'll just make a fool out of yourself.

[Skeptik]

To add another dimension to this debate but in the same vein. If Gandhi can be regarded as a racist (which would be his prerogative in any event) for refering to certain people as ******s, could not Mohammed be regarded as a child molester/pedophile for having a 6 year old girl as a wife (Ayesha)? Or would he not qualify as such on the grounds that having sex with infants was acceptable (if it indeed was) "back in the day" and he is not around today to be catagorized? :sick:
Uh, oh. I smell a new Jihad. The muslims won't like this little gem. Even he knew she was too young and waited a few years before consumating the marriage.

[Pixie22]

muslims are allowed to use the internet?

[JK8]

muslims are allowed to use the internet?

Just go back under my shoe.

[Pixie22]

Was a joke. You are very uptight. I bet you have irritable bowel syndrome

[JK8]

Was a joke. You are very uptight. I bet you have irritable bowel syndrome

Ye get out of bowels.

[Pixie22]

JK8 eat more curry to get the irritability up a notch then i will get out of your bowel ^_^

[cerebus]

Even Jesus had his moments of being human. He used his power to curse a fig tree for not bearung fruit. He was tired and roadweary at the time. What everybody forgot to mention was that it was out of season for figs in that area. Now a man who curses a fig tree for not bearing figs out of fig season? What can you say of such a man?


The cursing of the fig tree was symbolic Eugene. Israel in the OT was symbolized by a fig tree numerous times. Jesus' cursing the fig tree symbolized God's turning away from the nation of Israel because of their not bearing fruit for Him. That's fairly evident from the context of those verses. It's comparable to the passage at the end of Jonah when God withered a tree to make an illustration about the gospel.


And PS - those quotes were taken from his mature speaking. So they were what he became.

Rozier - that's difficult to answer. What can you say about someone who has such relations? How can it ever be justified?

Skeptic - yes a few years meaning she was 9 when he consummated. What a hero.

[JK8]

JK8 eat more curry to get the irritability up a notch then i will get out of your bowel ^_^

Oooh alittle race issue in the race thread....

[mercurial]

pixie sprinkle some of your magic dust over yourself and disappear. you are starting unnecessary friction and coming off as a racist. if hellothere got banned for being stupid and/or irrtating, then so could you.

[ghoti]

Dont feed the trolls.

[Pixie22]

"Gandhi had no boudaries and no preferred religion. What he said about the K***s in those days wass merely an observation of how different they are in relation to what he was used to."

It was merely an observation. Im like ghandi only im white. Apparently the white part makes me a racist, while if I was indian i would simply be making an observation about a races eating habits..

[Skeptik]

muslims are allowed to use the internet?
Not if you happen to be in certain muslim countries. In that case there can be restricted access.

[JK8]

"Gandhi had no boudaries and no preferred religion. What he said about the K***s in those days wass merely an observation of how different they are in relation to what he was used to."

It was merely an observation. Im like ghandi only im white. Apparently the white part makes me a racist, while if I was indian i would simply be making an observation about a races eating habits..

Ghandi did believe in something, otherwise he would be a K* himself.:rolleyes:

An observation or an association? You associated me with curry.:rolleyes:


Not if you happen to be in certain muslim countries. In that case there can be restricted access.

:rolleyes: They have access.

[Eugene66]

"Gandhi had no boudaries and no preferred religion. What he said about the K***s in those days wass merely an observation of how different they are in relation to what he was used to."

It was merely an observation. Im like ghandi only im white. Apparently the white part makes me a racist, while if I was indian i would simply be making an observation about a races eating habits.. In those days white people were also not racist when they used the K word. It was a name for all the black people. It had as much significance as saying Indian. The Indians also being many cultures in one word.

The way things have turned now it becommes very difficult to express what you want to say. I can make a casual observation about something and by using the wrong symantics I can be blamed of many things.

So like Pixie sometimes you see a black man or an Indian or a Brit do something. I can say about all the rest but I cannot use the word Black when in all honesty that is the only fast effective way to be understood and in the context of my words it could be anything but racist.

I grew up with black friends on the farm and I have always been friends with them. I have a compassion and understanding for them. I also have a dislike in the reverse racist ones but that's another story. I dont use the K word unless I am angry and then I use it on whites.

I suppose you have heard the term white K*****S

So when I do use the word black it is to be understood and not as any racist remark, but now its supposed to be a racist thing without exception.

Now to avoid using the K word I have heard even more disturbing words evolve. Carbon Copy. Coal priest. Dark greens Multi pigmented and so it continues.

[Aqua_lung]

If Ghandi were alive today(saying whatever racist things he said)he would be considered a racist and would be on CNN explaining himself and apologizing of course, but back in his day these "racist" views of his(I've only read some of them on wikipedia) were common regarding race.

It is impossible to judge the man today when he lived in very different times to ours.

[The Cosmos]

Ghandi was very racist towards black people so I was wondering why a statue of him was erected. Im busy watching a Penn & Teller on him, and he said some pretty nasty things.

Strange we were never taught this..

He even incited indians to go after black people in a newspaper he published in four languages.

Probably for his humanitarian work. :rolleyes: Not many people know about his racism.

[Rozier]

100% spot on.



are u sick :eek:
do your research properly before you post, else you'll just make a fool out of yourself.

If you don't know the answer to the question, just say so. :p

[Rozier]

Uh, oh. I smell a new Jihad. The muslims won't like this little gem. Even he knew she was too young and waited a few years before consumating the marriage.

I take it that you got this from someone who was on the "honeymoon"? So I guess that makes it all OK.:rolleyes:

[Rozier]

I gather from numerous postings in this thread that some folk conclude that it is possible to be a racist today for saying/doing "X" but not be a racist for doing exactly the same 10, 50 or 100 years ago, or maybe even last week. (I wonder who decides when the switch occurs?) For how long has the "K" word been outlawed? It would appear, according to the above notion, that prior the word's status being officially altered, it was not a racist term. Ergo whenever it was used during the apartheid regime it did not imply or covey racist connotations. Or do we make an exception in this case?

[BTTB]

Ghandi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi) was not a racist.

Ghandi merely fitted into the era and spoke accordingly imho.
The words he used would have been common slang words at the time and spoken by all. It is only in recent decades that those unspeakable words have been "removed" from our train of thought and thinking.
Ghandi was more than likely called a "Coolie" himself during that era?

Ghandi should be admired for his efforts in difficult times when being a Indian in a White Dominated Society could not have been easy.

Check out this time line entitled Anti-Indian Legislation (http://www.sahistory.org.za/pages/chronology/special-chrono/governance/anti-indian-legislation.html) starting with Law 14 of 1859, dubbed The Natal Coolie Law.
Indians may have been more persecuted than Blacks, at least from a legislative point of view?

[The Cosmos]

While doing a search on the topic, i came across this...

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2419

[Aqua_lung]

Just like war or military action in certain situations is acceptable today, once humans become more civilized and are able to look beyond aggression and find peaceful means to all situations and all war's fought before are seen as criminal and people who supported military action all these years are seen as barbaric, once this kind of civilization becomes a reality we will be seen as a barbaric civilization because we never questioned the morality of war and putting an end to it.

In short, we reflect the world we live in the way Ghandi reflects the society of the time, He's not a Racist.

[Rozier]

Just like war or military action in certain situations is acceptable today, once humans become more civilized and are able to look beyond aggression and find peaceful means to all situations and all war's fought before are seen as criminal and people who supported military action all these years are seen as barbaric, once this kind of civilization becomes a reality we will be seen as a barbaric civilization because we never questioned the morality of war and putting an end to it.

In short, we reflect the world we live in the way Ghandi reflects the society of the time, He's not a Racist.

Well we seem to be going backwards rapidly. There are more wars going on these days than ever before in the history of the planet.:( I agree war is a bitch but one must keep in mind that this Planet is not Shangri-La and never will be as long as it is populated by the human species. :sick:

You don't have to be poor to be stupid, but it helps

[Aqua_lung]

Well we seem to be going backwards rapidly. There are more wars going on these days than ever before in the history of the planet.:( I agree war is a bitch but one must keep in mind that this Planet is not Shangri-La and never will be as long as it is populated by the human species. :sick:

You don't have to be poor to be stupid, but it helps

Like I said once we are more civilized, it is possible but we need more civilized leaders in the world, unfortunately the US keeps breeding genetically inferior humans.