I say this at the end of the video, but for those who are already commenting: Many of the arguments I use here are the same ones used to attack Columbus; and many of the defenses used for Gandhi are dismissed when talking about Columbus. These two videos are a pair, designed to get you thinking about historical good guys and bad guys and how we fictionalize them both.
Gandhi is a disgrace to India because he didn't do anything expect make Indians look bad by his racism. Hitler liberated India by bankrupting the British Empire.
I have a poster of Gandhi up on the wall in my classroom. Now I will be taking it down. I mean, it's not like I did not know Gandhi was racist or did extremely inappropriate things, but goodness I just realized I need to stop singling out individuals as if they need to be glorified. I need to have posters that glorify ideas/ideals, not people.
He was quite ahead of his time. It's not like he invented racism, and he did manage to unlearn his views evidenced from him taking up the cause of untouchability (leaps ahead of his time). He's definitely a better role model than other powerful men* of his time -- most of them tyrants. But you're right; we're not in that time anymore so let's bring out the new posters. I recommend Peter Singer. Ninja Edit: typo in my excuse
Read my comment to this "Knowing Better" fellow pinned above. The whole Racism charge against Gandhi for using the word "Kaffir" has been cooked up by the blacks. The truth about what the blacks and whites did to Indians over the last 300+ years will start coming out soon. This constant negative propaganda against Indians needs to end.
If you have any of Churchill you might want to take them down too, guy instituted a man made famine. Kind of lumps him in that rare famine club along with such illustrious individuals as Mao Zedong and Stalin.
@@AownAli-xi8jq Because he helped India fuxk up the brits and motivated them (he wasn't the main reason I know but he was a big motivation) and brits colonized Canada and I don't think anybody likes being colonized.
@@SaraH-jn5db Not really, you gotta think of historical figures in the context that they lived in. Getting people to convert to Christianity was more important than healing them, because treating their spiritual ills was more important than treating their physical ills. If your view is that the soul last for eternity but the flesh lasts temporarily, and you have limited resources - then you yourself would try and tie these together; let me treat your spiritual woes and I'll treat your physical woes. She wasn't vile, she was just operating under a different moral preset than modern people.
Well you'll be surprised to see how many Indians, themselves, hate Gandhi. I'm Indian but born in England, and Gandhi was portrayed to me as this god-figure, the perfect human being. I went to India during my secondary education, and i always thought the last thing you should do here is speak negatively about the Father of the Nation, Gandhi. But surprisingly, when i questioned my friends about him, they all said they hated him! This was schocking to me. But it's true, Gandhi was not only creepy in his personal life (being racist against blacks, sleeping with teenagers), but he also halted India's independence, and his, and Nehru's role in the partition was terrible.
Indians hating Indians is not surprising. Especially hating frauds like Gandhi. By the way, teenagers have reached puberty in most cases, which according to science makes them adults. Think for yourself. Your society's opinions are libtarded. That same society says Gandhi was noble.
@@barbatvs8959 According to science, humans are considered as adults when their brain has fully developed which is 25 years old. Puberty is only the first step to adulthood.
@@dropmelon Brains always evolve. And many children are wiser than some adults. Compare Bush to you as an old child. Are you dumber than Bush? Make me laugh.
@@dropmelon PS The brain is a SLAVE to physics so it is not the mind that is FREE to think. That's an atheist materialistic lie. Spirit thinks. The brain is equivalent to a video game controller, not the real player.
BARBATVS 89 I was only correcting what you said. In science, puberty is not considered as adult yet. 25 years old is just the average age for people to fully grown their brain.
I think he deserves all the dislikes one can get, but looking at the comment section it seems like he has been teaching to the choir. This video was trash and a literal abuse to Mahatma Gandhi's legacy.
@@CEO_Of_Racism-fk3qv It is Gandhi, not ghandhi. Plus, he achieved 100x times whatever anyone on this comment section did or would ever achieve. If you don't actually study history then please shut the fuck up.
@@ishanbajpai6940 actually u should learn history more than those learned from school. Wht u learned from school r pure shit... Do some research and then bark. Against others...just congress made him look better
Even I as a Pakistani didn't know he did this crap.our leader jinnah is portrayed as some new age borderline prophet but the dude drank alcohol owned dogs ,wore western clothes and couldn't even speak Urdu.admittedly he wasn't completely bag suit crazy like Gandhi.
He was most likely a freemasonic agent for the British. Just look at what’s happened to India (yes it probably wasn’t entirely him, but he was a key part). Of course the greatest manipulators don’t need violence. They’re more sinister and cunning than that.
@@SunnySide388 Really? You do know that he was active in the free India movement during the interwar period. Also, he had been championing Indian rights in the empire since before the late 1800s in South Africa and India, his work even reached the eye of the folks in the UK themselves. Also, if it hadn't been popular support for Indian independence that he helped formed, India will not gain independence in 1947. Yes, it is a shared effort, but if he had no influence, why is he well-regarded by the nation not only after independence, but during WW2 and before? And why is he the face of Indian independence from that same time period?
@@alexanderchristopher6237 oh God. India owes its independence largely to Subash Chandra Bose. And he never got credit for it because he disagreed with Gandhi's views on politics. I believe India would have gained independence a long long time ago if it had not been for Gandhi and his willingness to cooperate with the British. He definitely had influence, but is absolutely overrated.
OMG what a genius with words you are NOT HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA His joke was better then your comeback man. What's your problem anyway? Edit: Fixed after @kiwii was kind enough to point out mistakes
No, the Indians held very little power in comparison to the the powers which were fighting the war for the cause, so if they didn't fight for the British other powers might had invaded them.
@@akashekhar arya just means people with high morals, great scientific knowledge, and who are in the path of truth aka dharma. Bharatvarsh called aryavarta because of that. Arya isn't any race as told by false western historians.
He says the Aryans he's talking about are also known as the Indo-Europeans. We now know these people as the Yamaya. These people spoke the common ancestor language of English, Hindi, Latin, Greek, Persian, Russian, Gaelic etc. (known as Proto-Indo-European). Around 1900, people thought that this also meant people from Ireland to (northern) India were largely descended from these people. With modern genetics, we now know that the Yamnaya account for about 10% of our DNA.
Every historical character should be evaluated in their original historical context. This aplies to Gandhi and Columbus. This point was kind of made in the video, but wanted to make it clear.
But you’re assuming everyone was like that. In the future more advanced people will probably look back and think overall that most of us were whiny, violent, twisted and backwards too. In reality, that’s just too many people that gain a lot of publicity and support as this is a cold world. Often the better you are, the more of a minority you are.
He said Ghandi spoke modern English so there isn't much room for interpretation. I do understand what you mean about historical context for a frame of reference.
@@Elite7555 Very true, if you are gonna make someone a hero or a role model, then you have to test him against modern morals. Which is not the same as demonising them, obviously.
In late May 2020, this information is incredibly relevant to the people who claim that Gandhi’s protests were non-violent and he was successful. It puts him and his movement into a new perspective. Thank you for making this video.
Regarding Gandhi's racism vs. Columbus' racism: Our modern concept of race wasn't nearly as 'developed' in Europe during the Renaissance. I believe it was well into the colonial period, when countries relied more heavily on black African slave labor, that people saw race as more "important". I'd argue that western society was more racist in the year 1900 than it was in the year 1500.
@@Jake007123 Kinda? It was weird. At the very least, slavery was a very different concept during the Classical Period. There wasn't nearly as muhc of a racial connotation when it came to slavery or forced servitude as there was back then.
One of the conquistadors was Juan Garrido from the Congo, showing how nice Spaniards were to other races. Also, demographics prove that the Spanish did not commit genocide like the macro-evolutionist British tended to do. Most Spanish speakers are one hundred percent Native American as you can tell just by looking at them. The Black Legend, propaganda of Britain, has deceived millions into hating and belittling the great Spanish Empire the first to go around the world, and the first on which the sun never set. You enjoy chocolate because of my people, and there would be no British Empire nor US and thereby no youtube, without the Spanish expeditions and the conquest of América and beyond.
@lelennyfox34 Atheists preach that we come from these contrived subhuman proto-blacks like Lucy (a reference to LSD and both to Lucifer the author of the racist myth that a race can become superiour by isolation and evolution), yet try to say Christianity is evil even though it says man comes from Adam regardless of race meaning all races are intellectually equal.... and Christianity also says that some people have cursed their bloodline which is not the fault of the race but of the individual ancestor that God hated enough to curse that much. I'm not a Catholic. They are heretics who worship Mary as the "Queen of Heaven." I did a video called and delivering: "Proof Macro-evolution is IMPOSSIBLE."
I'm Indian and I have been binge-watching your content over the last couple of days. I like your channel. About Gandhi: Your fear of a billion dislikes is unfounded. There is size-able and growing rabid anti-Gandhi sentiment in India (Especially the younger generation and the current establishment). But not for reasons you might think. He is perceived as having acquiesced to Muslim demands for a separate homeland without putting forth strong resistance. And I can't say that that perception is baseless. (In fact, that was the reason for his assassination at the hands of a fellow-Hindu)
Yes, I totally agree. An additional point would be his notorious Poona pact in which he forced Dr B R Ambedkar to not take the communal awards for dalits
Sai J, very true. The younger generation of india understands and can sort out its own priorities. Gandhism forces us to act like cripples although we r not and undergo 'sanyas' although we don't want to. Thats why there is opposition otherwise who don't want peace ? Bloody gandhians like nehru hv supressed the expanse of our national honour by limiting india into an anti martial and all tolerant state. How countries like pak and bdesh and china dare to try offend india now ? Its bcoz of us sticking to the gandhian ideology and not trying to deviate from it. Extreme violence or extreme tolerance is not an option for india and it never was.
Sai J All agreed! But somewhere, we fail to realise that inspite of all his flaws and mistakes, the people of India got something that kept them united. Even if it was a tainted person like Gandhi, he was the binding force of the millions of oppressed people of India which lead to our independence. We can speak and debate as much as we want regarding his misdoings and perverted views, but all we will be doing is giving one less reason for our people to unite as a whole.
The younger generation in India increasingly identifies with nationalists like Subhas Chandra Bose and great economists and social reformers like Dr. B R Ambedkar, who was once a student at Columbia University.
WRONG!! They identify with mass murderer and human rights abuser narinder modi, who is hindu extremist and nazi sympathizer Please stop spreading lies.
Subhas Chandra Bose was also flawed, he actually allied with Nazi troops against the British rule. Moral is to not idolize anybody and be your own person.
No lie, I was watching this video as I walked into my apartment building, and the guy in front of me recognized your voice and said "hey, I know that guy. Knowing better?" And I replied with "yeah, I just found his channel today!" And we exchanged a high five. :)
While one might find his statements on Muslims racist-ish, I was surprised by your surprise at the fact that he wrote those things in a “pre 9/11” world “before the first suicide bombing,” that’s an agonisingly America centric view of an Indian figure. Muslims have lived here much before even Colombus’s voyage to America. There is no doubt that compared to the Indian religions, Islam is more aggressive and warlike. I’d like to clarify I’m talking about the values and doctrines, not individual Muslims. In that context, and the fact that the Muslim elite of that time had started to view themselves as closer to the Arabs, Persians or Turks because of the so-called ‘common Islamic connection’ being stronger than centuries of being part of Indian civilisation, his comments are not racist but criticism of a religion and the views held by the religious elite-as is acceptable in any modern society…I hope. The man was literally assassinated for being too pro-Muslim. He held prayer meetings where gods of all religions were prayed to, but that can only work so well when one religion recognises many gods and the other believes their god is The Only True God. So that went as well for Hindu-Muslim unity as you’d think.
Your comment about how ‘starting an independence movement during wartime is ridiculous’ makes sense out of context but it’s important to note that the British declared martial law in the Raj on the 29th of September 1939 and stripped all power away from the elected provincial governments to give power back to the British government in India. This was justified as a necessary measure to ensure the colony contributed the maximum amount to the war effort, however this did not sit well with the people. The British government’s detached way of running the nation led to famines in the past, and many other problems, and their mismanagement of food supplies would be a major factor in how devastating the Japanese invasion of Burma was to the Bengal region. Also, you said the British promised independence during the war and that was just a lie. They did send the Cripps mission in which a representative (Stafford Cripps) gave vague promises of future dominion status, but that was all, and this was really only to appease the Americans who were anti imperialism. To Indian officials in the 1940’s, fighting a war against fascists to uphold the dominance of the imperialists simply wasn’t justifiable. That was the reason for Quit India, and I will add that Quit India was not led by Gandhi or the Congress. It was so massive in scale that it was pretty much just led by whoever was around at a particular protest. It grew out of the control of Gandhi’s political group. The final decision to leave India was also only taken because the British literally couldn’t afford to pay the people they needed to run the country after being bankrupt by the war. Also, most of what you said about the All-India Muslim League wasn’t really that accurate and could definitely mislead some people.
True man . Also , some points didn't make sense to me. Historically, form what I know, aren't untouchables basically a part of shudras ?The ones who cleaned and stuff. That's why they were "untouchables" because they were too "dirty" to touch or socialise
"Gandhi thought that Muslims were too intolerant of criticism and that they should welcome criticism of the Qur'an" That's not Islamophobia, that's having a reasonable and accurate stance on the issue.
I had the same thought. Presumably Knowing Better is already aware of the Danish cartoon riots, the Charlie Hebdo massacre, etc. If he's _really_ plugged in then he might be aware of strong-arm tactics used by on-campus orgs such as the MSA against pro-Israel activists.
@@sajidteg4682 Of course not. When i say "catholic priests should molest children less" i'm not saying ALL catholic priest molest children, but a worrying number of them. Seemingly more catholic priests molest children than priests of other religions. Calling them out isn't saying that all catholics condone it, but it saying that catholics should own up to the fact that there is an issue within their community. Change needs to come from within. Criticism of Christianity is accepted and widely spread throughout Christian nations. We have criticised christianity so much that people don't even realise it when i happens, it's normal life for western countries. South Park have had Jesus Christ in the show many many times. They have made fun of basically all religions. But once they made fun of Islam and Muhammad they suddenly got death threats in the thousands and the episodes had to be pulled and you can no longer get a hold of them. This is unlike any other religion.
i agree with you. to take some understandable meaning from 2 or more group society. we need some argument base on fundamental book. but the majority people in my group just bunch of stupid. they cant satify your question and anybody who has some sharp question and need much detail information.
I have only one problem with the video , when you say Gandhi was racist against Muslims ( I ain't supporting Gandhi here in any way , whatever he said was terrible) but Muslims aren't a race , they are a religious community like Christians , Hindus , etc.
@@toonsvoons9478 Muslims in India aren't Arabs all right they are south asian in origin and not all Arabs are Muslims , there are small minorities of Christian and Jewish Arabs ( I know that because I live in India).
Great video! One thing I found especially interesting is the fact that 'Kaffir' was apparently an Indian slur for black people. In Afrikaans (That Dutch daughter language in South Africa) the most common racial slur for black people is (or was) "Kaffer", which also found its way to The Netherlands, where some have used the word "Kaffer" as the closest thing to "the N-word" in Dutch. Never knew that word had its origins in the Indian communities of South Africa. Edit: forgot to add, the word is also used as a non-racial insult in some regions. I didn't originally explain this because I didn't think of it as relevant.
Ghipoli, This kind of media propaganda is nothing short of a criminal behavior and needs to be addressed. These videos are being made to pull in Indians to these videos and increase the number of hits. We have taken this up with Google to see how they are allowing such videos to monetize on such blatantly wrong propaganda. I have written a rebuttal to this moron to his pinned comment above. Its time to expose the reality of how Indians were treated by both Blacks and Whites. Read my comment above addressed to "Knowing Better" who ironically doesn't know any better.
"All of his pent up... power." 🤣 I just started watching your videos and I can't get enough. So informative, comical and fundamentally memorable. Thank you so much for everything you post for us, your viewers!
A Hindu Indian hating on Muslim Indians isn't racism because they're the exact same race. It's religion-based bigotry (I hate the term "Islamophobe" because it's far too ill-defined to be used in intellectual discourse).
Shuaib Ahmed Syed Gilani I'm not sure you understand what a 'race' is. Then again, the term 'race' is extremely ill-defined, so I'm not sure I understand it either. But I know enough to know that Indians are all the same race. There are many ethnicities and even a variety of skin tones, but they're all the same race. In fact, I'm pretty sure Indians and Europeans are the same race. Africa is the same way--the Koi-San people of South Africa, for example, are much lighter-skinned than the Bantus of east Africa, but they're also considered to be the same race.
As far as I know, there are three races in the world: African, Asian, and White. As I said, that's a bad definition for race, since it doesn't account for, what, 2 or 3 billion people? If you're using a different definition from the one most people think of that's fine, but maybe you should lead with that. That said, I still don't see what any of that has to do with the main point of my original comment. Hating someone because of their religion is not racist. Even if the two people are different races. Although in that case, racism could be a part of it.
I was watching a video on the origin of Civilization's nuke-happy version of Gandhi. There was a comment war on whether Gandhi was a racist pervert or a saintly man. There was a lot of rage. I think someone called someone else a heretic over this.
it's youtube comments, what do you expect? In fact, if "heretic" is the worst thing someone said to someone else then that comment section is one of the nicest political debate comment sections on this website.
Thank you for this video. I used to idolize Gandhi. My first introduction to him was through Richard Attenborough's 1982 film "Gandhi" which completed sanitized Gandhi and made him appear to be a saint. It made it seem as if he stood for civil rights for all and was always kind and considerate. In recent years I found out that was not true. He truly was racist and was also manipulative and arrogant. I can still admire him for pushing for non-violent solutions but I no longer consider him a role model.
Dude you do not get enough views. Tremendous editing, calm voice, relaxing background music that isnt too high, and insane attention to detail. You also explain everything so well. I wish I had you as a history teacher in school
I have long ago came to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a Good Guy and a Bad Guy...just people that are generally better or worse than others. All the heroes have an alterior motive, and all the villains have honest motivations. So we can't ever catagorize anyone as being one or the other, but we can judge for ourselves whether we are willing to love them for their qualities or hate them for their flaws.
The worst bit about the "Aryan Brotherhood" thing is that it's actually half-right, since English and Hindi are both Indo-European languages. However this doesn't work on a more general racial level (because race as an idea is a crock of shit), and doesn't work for all Indians (because southern Indians such as Tamils and Malayalees are Dravidian-speakers, and there are loads of non-Indo-European speakers in the north-east).
@@psi9899 this guy made the same video as "you don't see in 4k" his channel is based on talking trash while sounding really smart. He does research equivalent to a 4th grader searching for how to overclock a GPU. His content is trash.
As an Indian i already know some of this..he was never my idol (not for a lot of Indians actually) I was rather surprised that he is famous outside of India. We all know he did almost nothing for freedom from Britain...he was just a bit smarter and educated than most people back then and played his game well
Well, Gandhi did a lot but he was a politician more than anything. The stabilisation of India also depended on him and other intellectuals. Independence could have been delayed even longer, the country could have been fractured and India could have become much more nationalistic.
I agree with this video but it does have one flaw . And that’s you can’t be racist against Muslims because Muslim isn’t a race idk how you can put that against him, he was just being critical of Islam
Out of interest, who (if anyone) do you consider it to be? I'd put Nehru at the top of the list, but of course there were other important players such as Jinnah and even Cripps, though neither were Indians at their time of death.
The Pirate Persian India was always a hindhu nation, why else do everyone convert to Christianity and Islam in India to gain minority benefits. Cuz it's a hindhu majority country. And past Congress members weren't all bad it's just a few that ruined it's reputation. Lal bahadhur sastry was a Congress party member and we ain't bashing on him. It's just a few that screwed up big time just like other members of other parties. Why do you have to involve religion into this, us hindhus don't care about other religions as long as they stop converting our people. We are cool with sharing our space with everyone.
As a citizen of India, I fully endorse what was said in this video, Gandhi was a shrewd man who only brought disaster whereever he went. We can all see the current state of Africa, that was only because people failed to criticize his viewpoints there but India is recovering for the nationalist didn't buy into his false ideals of non-violence which led to the death of millions of Dharmic people and resorted to just violence or else our current state would have been despicable.
The big reason seems to be people jump in thinking its another anti-SJW party when really it's just all common sense and then they hit a gun control video...
There's also a super complex perception of Gandhi in India. There's a faction of centrist-ish liberals who view him pretty highly and might defend/disregard valid criticism. Then, there's the right wing that hates him - not because of the valid criticism, but because of his affiliation with the Nehru family and his centrist-liberal political stance. And finally, there's the faction I agree with, which strongly dislikes him for all the critique, especially his stance on the caste system and the role of liberal caste-privileged Hindus in the continuation of the caste system in direct and indirect ways. Personally, I'd much rather see a pan-national lauding of figures like Dr. B R Ambedkar, rather than just Gandhi and other caste Hindus actively interested in perpetuating caste.
@@rohittantia4020 All he said was very true. But we should never forget that he had a lot of positive sides too. Instead of either idolizing Mahatma Gandhi or throwing him in a ditch, keep him just as other freedom fighters...
As an Indian, a few points on the video: Good: 1. Thanks for covering the "dark" bits of Gandhi. In our history books, he is portrayed as a saint who could do no wrong. His racist sentiments towards Africans is totally glossed over in India. 3. His weird fetishes are also never mentioned in our books 2. Gandhi was a transparent man. His writings are exhaustive and available freely online. 3. His role in our freedom movement is exaggerated due to whitewashing of our history books by the Congress Party (his old party) 4. His ideals for a modern India were antiquated and called for a return to the old Vedic ages. Bad: 1. He was soft towards Muslims. He was even killed by a Hindu extremist because of the same perceptions. His "criticism" of Islam was that it takes itself too seriously, which is not Islamophobia. In a modern society, nothing is above criticism,. 2. Muslim league was a minor player in Indian politics of the time. The two state theory was advocated by both Hindu and Muslim extremists and was seen as the best way to avoid a massive civil war. Even so, the partition of India was a brutal time, involving displacement of millions of people. 3. He never directly advocated violence. In 1921, he called off the Non-Cooperation movement precisely because people burned policemen for firing at them. His snake-oil of Satyagraha led to several thousand Hindus being killed by Moplas (muslims) in Kerala. 4. What is not mentioned in the video is that he was an incredibly populist figure throughout the India of 1930-1940s. This was why the Brits were cautious in dealing with him. His words could sway people regardless of religion. PS: If you want a billion dislikes, do a video critical on Narendra Modi, our current PM :P He is being propped up into a demi-god just like Gandhi was.
Dude, I agree with most of what you say but the part about Gandhi talking about criticism of Islam thing is spot on and shouldn't be considered racist. I mean, how many Islamic countries you know allow criticism of the religion?? NONE. They all severely punish those who criticized Islam or anything related.
True, Islamism as a national ideology is fucking cancer. Islam as a religion, I couldn't care less, but when they make Sharia law the country's law, now that's when shit goes to storm.
Yeah muslims are the most intolerant , yet when they come over to Canada or us because they are sick of living in fear they want to bring all their bullshit they left over hear , and we get called racist for telling them to not try and change our traditions
This channel is amazing! I always thought I was at the very least semi-educated but here I am learning a metric fuck ton of new information in just a day of learning of this channels existence.
@@gabrielfraser2109 that single thing keeps him in the grey area as well. In his mind he never wanted bad things for his people but all these don't justify or rationalize his actions.
I just did an a-level project on Gandhi, so it was important that you got that right, and you did pretty well. The thing that people don't get about Gandhi was that he was a religious man first, and a good man second. Everything he did was religious. However, two things. With regard to the Muslim thing... there is context. Hindu-Muslim relations were on par with Protestant-Catholic relations in the middle ages. Arson and murder were incredibly common, and that's why many wanted a two state solution. Really, the only argument against was that the populations were mixed in some places. You really made this sound awful when it wasn't. Secondly, you needlessly hate on Gandhi's non-violence. Gandhi knew he couldn't always stop violence, but when his first independence movement turned violent, he immediately called it off and relented. Also, the Quit India movement, while ill-advised, was non-violent. Also, you completely ignored the salt March.
Gandhi is human as we all are, he was born into a super rich minister family but he became something else and he had his ups and downs both as a person and as a politician or leader.. All our leaders across the world are presented towards us as polished good deed generators but thats not true. Just good examples.. And i have to admit this video has some truth to it but be wise not to completely ignore the greatness of Gandhi. Nobody is born great not even the gods
Sleeping with underage girls, bathing with them .... Yeah that's human isn't it? Forbidding his ailing wife to use penicillin as treatment, causing her death, and then using penicillin himself when he was sick, yeah of course that's so human. Leaving his father's funeral to have fornicate with his wife, yeah, of course that's normal and human. Gandhi was a sick man, who disguised himself as a simple beautiful person. Period.
Shubham Bhushan Che was a tyrant. This bizarre worship of Che Guevara in certain circles on the left is something that warrants an anti Che video in its own right.
Che Guevara was an overrated one hit wonder. Helped overthrow Batista in Cuba, and it was downhill from there. Tried to help overthrow several other governments and failed. He was a smart and photogenic pretty boy who took a great pic that made the girls wet their panties. I believed his so called buddy Fidel sold him out in Bolivia, after Che mouthed off about the Russians.
Shubham Bhushan In addition to suppressing free speech and executing hundreds of people without trial during the Cuban Revolution, and that's not to mention the hard-on he got for nuclear weapons. Che Guevara was trash.
The religious Indian "Caliphate Movement" DID NOT want a separation, they were for unification. But, they collapsed and gave way to the All India Muslim League, which was secular and for separation (ironically) and for the creation of Pakistan.
14:45 The George Washington and the cherry tree business is not a complete lie. As we see in the final episode of Ben 10 Omniverse, the cherry tree was an analogy for Vilgax's spaceship, so it has basis in truth.
I haven't even watched it yet, but thank you! I'm tired of being the only jackass in the room willing to say that Ghandi was a creepy dude. Now I have somewhere to send people who argue with me.
My first game of Civ. 6, I was going for a religous victory (as Saladin), India spammed apostles, I did the next best thing and went crusading, needless to say, I didn't have friends afterwards.
It is in the habit of people to glorify those who liberated their country. In a sense this is what Gandhi did but without starting a war. I actually recall hearing this story in a book about the Gandhi movie where one of his followers wanted them to include the darker aspects of his nature simply to keep it from glorifying him because he preferred it that way. In a sense it is better to include these things because we need to remind people that you don't need to be a saint to do a great good or to help people. Incidentally I think the Indian/African racism went both ways. In Uganda at one point Idi Amin deported everyone of Indian descent from his country and seized their property - an act of genocide - which I believe had great support at the time in Uganda. It didn't help matters in the country but these things are not uncommon as we might believe.
Ghandhi was not against giving voting rights to dalits he was against giving them a seperate electoral system where in all dalits would have had to vote seperately from all other indians he believed that this would slow down the merging of dalits into society as it would have. That is what he protested against and not segregating them entirely
Hey mister we all make mistakes, and Gandhi was no different in his young. He descended from a family where untouchability was practiced, considering that, the efforts he made to change his world view and that of others was commendable. I just cannot fathom why are you attacking the idea of untouchables being called as Dalits (Dalit is not a derogatory term). After India got its independence, because of this characterization through caste certificates given out by the government of India, Dalits had special privilege, which continue in modern India to this day. They got special reservation in public jobs, universities where they were not even required to pay their tuition fees after admission. Any Indian staying in India would know, the work that the government has done and continues to do so in order to protect the rights of the Dalit community and other minorities and uplift their social status. You should do your part of the research before hurling accusation about the caste categorization system in India and its motive (not for discrimination, but to provide disadvantaged communities more benefit) You said that 2 million people were killed in Bengal, under the order of Winston Churchill was necessary, as Bengal was in the front line and Japanese occupation would have killed people anyway. This is the worst ever excuse I have heard from a Churchill fanatic? Do you know the number of zeros there are in 2 million. Even the Japanese didn't kill so much citizens during their seize of Manchuria and Nanking combined. The British didn't try to uplift the lower castes in Hindu society or the poor in the Indian subcontinent, they ossified caste and religious divisions further and induced more and more inequality. They used to charge exorbitant tax revenues from the Zamindars(land-owners) that led poverty to go rampant in the country. Before British Raj India was one of the best performing countries in the world in trade and export of finished products and even had one of the highest GDP. The torture that the British did on Indians for 200 years is no less than what the Hitler did in Europe. This mentality of brtish towards Indians could be understood by one of the quotes that their high-ranking officers made on amritsar in 1919, “We hold India by the sword and rule her by fear” with respect to the incident of Jallianwala Bagh massacre.
Considering how many were killed in India by muslims and the world as a whole for religious reasons Ghandhi put it quite softly when he said that they don't take critisism
wut? what about the muslims killed in india and the rest of the world for religious reasons (like the forced conversion of arabs and moor muslims in spain)? have you missed the message of the video that there is no pure "good" and "evil"? his comment was stupid and not justified at all,in the times of the caliphate,people from different religions would debate about them and science related topics all the time,christians contributed in the islamic golden age in arabia and the jews had their golden age under islamic rule,not to mention that in the lifetime of the prophet (pbuh),arab pagans would write poems to defame him and insult him all the time and he did nothing to them...
Prior to the reconquest of Granada, the Moors tried to conquer all of Iberia and convert the people to Islam. The Arabs never even belonged in Spain. They were essentially colonizers. Much of North Africa and the Levant used to be mostly Christian before the Muslim armies conquered it. It's why there are still Coptic Christians living as a minority in Egypt and are being discriminated against.
The moors and arabs didn't try to convert anyone,that time period is famous for the piece between the three abrahamic religions,and was a time of prosperity,conquered and probably enslaved people upon conquering? sure,but that's what people did back then,also,the christians and muslims are living together fine in egypt and there's muslim coptics and arab christians there too,they all celebrate together and help each other and live in harmony (besides the strictly political problems),before christianity,much of north africa and the levant were pagans,so? peoples beliefs change and for the most part there were no forced conversions in islam (besides the seljuks I believe),do you know what happened in lebanon a few weeks ago? a guys fb got suspended for a month (and was about to be put in jail) for making a joke about a christian saint,that same judge that did that to him,shares super islamophobic stuff on her page all the time,christians are fine in the middle east and north africa.
Sila That period of tolerance and advancement was short-lived. It only lasted until the Umayyad Caliphate fell apart. Many of the states and rulers that replaced it were far less tolerant and more fundamentalist and desperate as the Christian north started making gains, especially the Almoravids and Almohads.
He also oppressed and shamed a girl who was raped. Not only that but he wrote two letters to Hitler addressing him as “Friend” and Hitler wrote back!!!
because if an independence movement rises up during a war, they get accused of being aided by the enemy... which at lot of times is true such as hiw the Soviet Union rose up during WWI due to german support
To be honest, fighting for independence is also fighting for economic freedom, safety, freedom from racism, ability to choose who makes your laws, freedom from arbitrary arrests and a lot of things (The colonialism had sucked away much of the industry and arts native to India, not to mention the famines). The second world war was more like a phase in history for England, but under British Occupation, India was at war for 200 years. If someone thinks that we should wait till it's a better time for the English and take an appointment to discuss our country our people's future, they're coming from a very privileged position. Being under occupation is not easy.
I agree with you that WW2 was the only time India could fight for freedom as it was when Britain was at it's absolute lowest point. The British were in desperate need of resources, the Indians took advantage of the situation by lending them soldiers, clothes and food at the cost that they let India go. (Edit: my horrible grammer)
I'm of the Christian race myself, sub-race Protestant of the family Calvinist. I find most youtubers and commenters to be extremely racist against my people.
As an Indian, Gandhi with all his racist xenophobic ideas and inconsiderate ill-will to maintain his influence in politics by disregarding other really sincere freedom fighters, remains as a subject of great shame and disgrace for Indians.
"Anti-imperialist movement lead by the United States." Let me ask you this, have talked to any Latin American? The only major power with a commitment to anti-imperialism was the Soviet Union.
“ with a commitment to anti- imperialism is the soviet union” 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Which is why they invaded every nation in Eastern Europe, The caucuses, and invaded Afghanistan in the 80’s to right ?
There are some discrepancies in this video regarding the views of Gandhi towards the Muslim League, the awarding of the title of Mahatma and his preaching of non-violence. This is kinda a one-sided video (though I must admit we all have seen the ‘Gandhi is a saint’ trope too many times) and I think a slightly more detailed analysis of arguably the most famous person on the planet would have been better.
I say this at the end of the video, but for those who are already commenting: Many of the arguments I use here are the same ones used to attack Columbus; and many of the defenses used for Gandhi are dismissed when talking about Columbus. These two videos are a pair, designed to get you thinking about historical good guys and bad guys and how we fictionalize them both.
Thanks paul, really makes me think.
Do you have any more sources regarding Gandhi's hate for muslims/Islamophobia?
Why is Gandhi wrong in his observations? Is it because you feel that he is wrong?
PS people can tell when you delete comments. You intellectual coward ahahaha
Genghis Khan would be a great topic for future videos
I understand Gandhi having monuments in India since he was a political giant for the nation, but having them in South Africa is absolutely absurd
There's a ghandi's statue in GHANA
Gandhi is a disgrace to India because he didn't do anything expect make Indians look bad by his racism. Hitler liberated India by bankrupting the British Empire.
@@barbatvs8959 Hitler didn't. Subhas Chandra Bose did, by being the final nail in the coffin.
@@SamvedIyer Nazis bombed London. Bose didn't even come close to taking down the British. You are quite deluded.
@@barbatvs8959 Not directly. Indirectly.
Read "Bose or Gandhi: Who Got India Her Freedom?" by Major General G D Bakshi. You'll get my point.
I have a poster of Gandhi up on the wall in my classroom. Now I will be taking it down. I mean, it's not like I did not know Gandhi was racist or did extremely inappropriate things, but goodness I just realized I need to stop singling out individuals as if they need to be glorified. I need to have posters that glorify ideas/ideals, not people.
He was quite ahead of his time. It's not like he invented racism, and he did manage to unlearn his views evidenced from him taking up the cause of untouchability (leaps ahead of his time). He's definitely a better role model than other powerful men* of his time -- most of them tyrants. But you're right; we're not in that time anymore so let's bring out the new posters. I recommend Peter Singer.
Ninja Edit: typo in my excuse
+Atul Sharma
You're completely ignoring his point because you're mad.
Read my comment to this "Knowing Better" fellow pinned above. The whole Racism charge against Gandhi for using the word "Kaffir" has been cooked up by the blacks. The truth about what the blacks and whites did to Indians over the last 300+ years will start coming out soon. This constant negative propaganda against Indians needs to end.
If you have any of Churchill you might want to take them down too, guy instituted a man made famine. Kind of lumps him in that rare famine club along with such illustrious individuals as Mao Zedong and Stalin.
Jan Sprat "the blacks" wow you're pretty dumb. Gandhi said it himself,. He's Arian. lol
I saw a school art project once that had Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. shaking hands... it’s really awkward walking past that now. 😬
Because tie-wearers are noose-wearers? I have a dream, that mankind will see how stupid that tie tradition is.
BARBATVS 89 tie? What does that have to do with what I said?
@@AmethystEyes Methinks MLKJr wore a tie. It represents a noose.
BARBATVS 89
Wat?
They’re both pretty flawed characters. Ones a racist ones a sexist.
Bro I am an Indian and u made a Great Video on the sides of Gandhi kept away from us in History textbooks .... U deserve 1.3 Billion likes
You can condemn me for this poor excuse of a joke
Will that give him enough karma to become a Brahmin caste?
He was racist first, cause he was educated from western University. Then he changed after the train incident. It opened his eyes
This kind of comment is rare to find outside Eastern Europe
This was an eye-opener. As an Indian, I always felt there was something really off about him. Now I know why.
You shoulda said, Now I know better ! :P
Well as a Canadian, I like him even more now.
@@AownAli-xi8jq Because he helped India fuxk up the brits and motivated them (he wasn't the main reason I know but he was a big motivation) and brits colonized Canada and I don't think anybody likes being colonized.
@@BatCostumeGuy lmao come to india and ask for yourself what a lot of people think about the dude
@@g.w.f.212 Your point?
Can you cover mother Theresa in a similar manner? I've read...unsavory things regarding her patient care.
@@SaraH-jn5db Your sources?
@@SaraH-jn5db She wasn't vile per say; she just cared only for the Church and it's "mission".
@@SaraH-jn5db Not really, you gotta think of historical figures in the context that they lived in. Getting people to convert to Christianity was more important than healing them, because treating their spiritual ills was more important than treating their physical ills.
If your view is that the soul last for eternity but the flesh lasts temporarily, and you have limited resources - then you yourself would try and tie these together; let me treat your spiritual woes and I'll treat your physical woes.
She wasn't vile, she was just operating under a different moral preset than modern people.
@@sambeck2510 *some modern people
@@petertomov5728 most modern people
There's no moral grey area about that hair.
More of a case of orange and blue morality.
The parting is what bothers me but I have no suggestion as to how to improve it.
He lost a bet.
Got em
Well you'll be surprised to see how many Indians, themselves, hate Gandhi.
I'm Indian but born in England, and Gandhi was portrayed to me as this god-figure, the perfect human being.
I went to India during my secondary education, and i always thought the last thing you should do here is speak negatively about the Father of the Nation, Gandhi. But surprisingly, when i questioned my friends about him, they all said they hated him! This was schocking to me.
But it's true, Gandhi was not only creepy in his personal life (being racist against blacks, sleeping with teenagers), but he also halted India's independence, and his, and Nehru's role in the partition was terrible.
Indians hating Indians is not surprising. Especially hating frauds like Gandhi.
By the way, teenagers have reached puberty in most cases, which according to science makes them adults. Think for yourself. Your society's opinions are libtarded. That same society says Gandhi was noble.
@@barbatvs8959 According to science, humans are considered as adults when their brain has fully developed which is 25 years old.
Puberty is only the first step to adulthood.
@@dropmelon Brains always evolve. And many children are wiser than some adults. Compare Bush to you as an old child. Are you dumber than Bush? Make me laugh.
@@dropmelon PS The brain is a SLAVE to physics so it is not the mind that is FREE to think. That's an atheist materialistic lie.
Spirit thinks. The brain is equivalent to a video game controller, not the real player.
BARBATVS 89 I was only correcting what you said.
In science, puberty is not considered as adult yet.
25 years old is just the average age for people to fully grown their brain.
1.3 bn dislikes? Seriously? You think Indians dont know their own history?
Well you think right :/
I think he deserves all the dislikes one can get, but looking at the comment section it seems like he has been teaching to the choir. This video was trash and a literal abuse to Mahatma Gandhi's legacy.
@@ishanbajpai6940 how so
@@ishanbajpai6940 Ghandhi was a racist and didnt even acheive his goals
@@CEO_Of_Racism-fk3qv It is Gandhi, not ghandhi.
Plus, he achieved 100x times whatever anyone on this comment section did or would ever achieve.
If you don't actually study history then please shut the fuck up.
@@ishanbajpai6940 actually u should learn history more than those learned from school. Wht u learned from school r pure shit... Do some research and then bark. Against others...just congress made him look better
I commend you on your research and objective narrative
We are all fed up with the glorification of Gandhi and Nehru in Indian histrory
IKR
Even I as a Pakistani didn't know he did this crap.our leader jinnah is portrayed as some new age borderline prophet but the dude drank alcohol owned dogs ,wore western clothes and couldn't even speak Urdu.admittedly he wasn't completely bag suit crazy like Gandhi.
@@arhamshahid5015 Gandhi was a conservative politician. Nothing more.
He was most likely a freemasonic agent for the British. Just look at what’s happened to India (yes it probably wasn’t entirely him, but he was a key part). Of course the greatest manipulators don’t need violence. They’re more sinister and cunning than that.
@@arhamshahid5015
what's wrong with owning dogs? Also, what's wrong about not being able to speak Urdu?
I learnt about Gandhi in school, now I realise that i didn’t actually learn anything!
thats why history books should neber be taken seriously thary are always written by those who were powerful at that time
Dat hair though
Suibhne great videos.
milo yiannopoulos hair
Suibhne love your vids
I paused at "People love..." and can only imagine that he's going to say "Blue hair" when I un-pause.
Is it bluish grey or greyish blue..🤔
The "K-word" comes from Islamic Arabic; it means "infidel." It later became a loan word in Afrikaans as a racial slur.
Thought I'd heard that word used by Islamists too.
First sensible person found
@@alexwright4930 Islamists? it's a normal word mostly used for nonbelievers.
I have a friend who is an Arab Muslim and he used the word "Ab'd" which he didn't know I know what it means. Look it up
PS he still doesn't XP
PlainsPup yea I know that word very well as I was called that all the time by my fellow friendly Muslims
Normies: No nut November
Gandhi: hold my fluids
@@googleaccount93 oh yeah yeah yeah yeah
*SUPER fluids
@@hide-zh4mz ...
🤣🤣🤣
@@hide-zh4mz
Your boy Max was demolished by Moist.
Gandhi was a very complex individual. If it wasn't for his help in freeing india, he would have been just a very strange mentally disturbed guru.
Ghandi didn't free India lol go do some research. Ww2 get a clue?
Thomas Ridley
That's just something Indians spread, he had nothing to do with India's independence.
@@SunnySide388 Really? You do know that he was active in the free India movement during the interwar period. Also, he had been championing Indian rights in the empire since before the late 1800s in South Africa and India, his work even reached the eye of the folks in the UK themselves.
Also, if it hadn't been popular support for Indian independence that he helped formed, India will not gain independence in 1947. Yes, it is a shared effort, but if he had no influence, why is he well-regarded by the nation not only after independence, but during WW2 and before? And why is he the face of Indian independence from that same time period?
@@alexanderchristopher6237 oh God. India owes its independence largely to Subash Chandra Bose. And he never got credit for it because he disagreed with Gandhi's views on politics. I believe India would have gained independence a long long time ago if it had not been for Gandhi and his willingness to cooperate with the British. He definitely had influence, but is absolutely overrated.
@@HSingh-rw1eg Bose didn't do shit
Totally laid down naked next to the subscribe button, but I couldn't resist touching it...RIP vital fluids
BokehDon haha this joke was masterful
OMG what a genius with words you are NOT HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
His joke was better then your comeback man. What's your problem anyway?
Edit: Fixed after @kiwii was kind enough to point out mistakes
Perhaps he was touched by Ghandi as a child.
@@IamJenJen101 His* joke, your* comeback 🤦🏻
@kiwii oops, gotcha. Anything else lead editor?
asking for independence during a war is a great idea, when the super power is occupied, they cant stop you.
Exactly
Say that to an Indian liberal lol
@@prashuram8135 No wonder the liberals hate Subhas Chandra Bose.
Asking for independence not demanding it is a bad idea
No, the Indians held very little power in comparison to the the powers which were fighting the war for the cause, so if they didn't fight for the British other powers might had invaded them.
I live in South Africa and we've covered Gandhi in history class many times, yet this video was wayy more informative :)
Fax my guy
In school they only teach you what they want you to know.. not the important facts
@@TAYLORGANG116 Except AB apparently.
I love that you pointed out Ghandi’s nuclear inclination in Civ 😂
I honestly believe that it's actually impossible to talk about Gandhi and not at least mention his CIV self
what does civ mean??
Aryan in Sanskrit means "intellectual society" (close but not accurate) not white brotherhood.
@Stellvia Hoenheim Excuse me but can you tell me I am racist towards which race ?😂😂😂
Aryan literally means those who belong to Arya-varta, which was what India (before any partitions, of course) was called back in the ancient days.
@@akashekhar arya just means people with high morals, great scientific knowledge, and who are in the path of truth aka dharma. Bharatvarsh called aryavarta because of that. Arya isn't any race as told by false western historians.
Ya but I think this video is saying that he implied Aryan in the way that European thought of it since he was writing to one
He says the Aryans he's talking about are also known as the Indo-Europeans. We now know these people as the Yamaya.
These people spoke the common ancestor language of English, Hindi, Latin, Greek, Persian, Russian, Gaelic etc. (known as Proto-Indo-European). Around 1900, people thought that this also meant people from Ireland to (northern) India were largely descended from these people. With modern genetics, we now know that the Yamnaya account for about 10% of our DNA.
Every historical character should be evaluated in their original historical context. This aplies to Gandhi and Columbus. This point was kind of made in the video, but wanted to make it clear.
But you’re assuming everyone was like that. In the future more advanced people will probably look back and think overall that most of us were whiny, violent, twisted and backwards too. In reality, that’s just too many people that gain a lot of publicity and support as this is a cold world. Often the better you are, the more of a minority you are.
He said Ghandi spoke modern English so there isn't much room for interpretation. I do understand what you mean about historical context for a frame of reference.
Why did the Indians not burn the hedge down that separated them from the salt?
That is okay in study. But when worshipping somebody as a hero today then you also have to judge him by today standards.
@@Elite7555 Very true, if you are gonna make someone a hero or a role model, then you have to test him against modern morals. Which is not the same as demonising them, obviously.
“history is written by the victors” - Winston Churchill
Kevin LaRocque Winston Churchill was a racist, drunk, and a fraud.
Napoleon Bonaparte I'd expect to hear that from Napoleon.
Napoleon Bonaparte Ad hominem
Napoleon Bonaparte thats a lie and he even made a video
It's not a lie. Churchill killed thousands of Indians. That's a fact.
In late May 2020, this information is incredibly relevant to the people who claim that Gandhi’s protests were non-violent and he was successful. It puts him and his movement into a new perspective. Thank you for making this video.
Regarding Gandhi's racism vs. Columbus' racism:
Our modern concept of race wasn't nearly as 'developed' in Europe during the Renaissance. I believe it was well into the colonial period, when countries relied more heavily on black African slave labor, that people saw race as more "important". I'd argue that western society was more racist in the year 1900 than it was in the year 1500.
Pretty sure ancient Romans, Greeks and others examples were very racist (although Romans not as much as anyone would think), but still well said.
@@Jake007123 Kinda? It was weird. At the very least, slavery was a very different concept during the Classical Period. There wasn't nearly as muhc of a racial connotation when it came to slavery or forced servitude as there was back then.
One of the conquistadors was Juan Garrido from the Congo, showing how nice Spaniards were to other races. Also, demographics prove that the Spanish did not commit genocide like the macro-evolutionist British tended to do. Most Spanish speakers are one hundred percent Native American as you can tell just by looking at them. The Black Legend, propaganda of Britain, has deceived millions into hating and belittling the great Spanish Empire the first to go around the world, and the first on which the sun never set. You enjoy chocolate because of my people, and there would be no British Empire nor US and thereby no youtube, without the Spanish expeditions and the conquest of América and beyond.
@lelennyfox34 Atheists preach that we come from these contrived subhuman proto-blacks like Lucy (a reference to LSD and both to Lucifer the author of the racist myth that a race can become superiour by isolation and evolution), yet try to say Christianity is evil even though it says man comes from Adam regardless of race meaning all races are intellectually equal.... and Christianity also says that some people have cursed their bloodline which is not the fault of the race but of the individual ancestor that God hated enough to curse that much. I'm not a Catholic. They are heretics who worship Mary as the "Queen of Heaven."
I did a video called and delivering: "Proof Macro-evolution is IMPOSSIBLE."
@lelennyfox34 PS Do you believe races have equal intelligence? Do you belive in IQ? I did a video proving that that is racist pseudo-science. :-)
I'm Indian and I have been binge-watching your content over the last couple of days. I like your channel.
About Gandhi: Your fear of a billion dislikes is unfounded. There is size-able and growing rabid anti-Gandhi sentiment in India (Especially the younger generation and the current establishment). But not for reasons you might think. He is perceived as having acquiesced to Muslim demands for a separate homeland without putting forth strong resistance. And I can't say that that perception is baseless. (In fact, that was the reason for his assassination at the hands of a fellow-Hindu)
Yes I think this is the true reason.
Yes, I totally agree. An additional point would be his notorious Poona pact in which he forced Dr B R Ambedkar to not take the communal awards for dalits
Sai J, very true. The younger generation of india understands and can sort out its own priorities. Gandhism forces us to act like cripples although we r not and undergo 'sanyas' although we don't want to. Thats why there is opposition otherwise who don't want peace ?
Bloody gandhians like nehru hv supressed the expanse of our national honour by limiting india into an anti martial and all tolerant state. How countries like pak and bdesh and china dare to try offend india now ?
Its bcoz of us sticking to the gandhian ideology and not trying to deviate from it.
Extreme violence or extreme tolerance is not an option for india and it never was.
Sai J All agreed! But somewhere, we fail to realise that inspite of all his flaws and mistakes, the people of India got something that kept them united. Even if it was a tainted person like Gandhi, he was the binding force of the millions of oppressed people of India which lead to our independence.
We can speak and debate as much as we want regarding his misdoings and perverted views, but all we will be doing is giving one less reason for our people to unite as a whole.
Gandhi didn't unite India for shit. The real credit for consolidation goes to The Iron Man of India
The younger generation in India increasingly identifies with nationalists like Subhas Chandra Bose and great economists and social reformers like Dr. B R Ambedkar, who was once a student at Columbia University.
Oh, the hypocrisy here
@@barathivaasan5876 what's the hypocrisy?
WRONG!! They identify with mass murderer and human rights abuser narinder modi, who is hindu extremist and nazi sympathizer
Please stop spreading lies.
Hey,aren't you a writer on Quora?
Subhas Chandra Bose was also flawed, he actually allied with Nazi troops against the British rule. Moral is to not idolize anybody and be your own person.
No lie, I was watching this video as I walked into my apartment building, and the guy in front of me recognized your voice and said "hey, I know that guy. Knowing better?" And I replied with "yeah, I just found his channel today!" And we exchanged a high five. :)
...And then everyone clapped
@@rey4059This isn't that crazy of a story
Who was it who said "There are no great men who are also good men?"
@@nikhilmannava22 i dont think that's the intended quote but still, the one you provided is a good one :)
Honestly, Tolkien fulfills both!
While one might find his statements on Muslims racist-ish, I was surprised by your surprise at the fact that he wrote those things in a “pre 9/11” world “before the first suicide bombing,” that’s an agonisingly America centric view of an Indian figure.
Muslims have lived here much before even Colombus’s voyage to America. There is no doubt that compared to the Indian religions, Islam is more aggressive and warlike. I’d like to clarify I’m talking about the values and doctrines, not individual Muslims.
In that context, and the fact that the Muslim elite of that time had started to view themselves as closer to the Arabs, Persians or Turks because of the so-called ‘common Islamic connection’ being stronger than centuries of being part of Indian civilisation, his comments are not racist but criticism of a religion and the views held by the religious elite-as is acceptable in any modern society…I hope.
The man was literally assassinated for being too pro-Muslim. He held prayer meetings where gods of all religions were prayed to, but that can only work so well when one religion recognises many gods and the other believes their god is The Only True God. So that went as well for Hindu-Muslim unity as you’d think.
Agreed, as an Arab
Your comment about how ‘starting an independence movement during wartime is ridiculous’ makes sense out of context but it’s important to note that the British declared martial law in the Raj on the 29th of September 1939 and stripped all power away from the elected provincial governments to give power back to the British government in India. This was justified as a necessary measure to ensure the colony contributed the maximum amount to the war effort, however this did not sit well with the people. The British government’s detached way of running the nation led to famines in the past, and many other problems, and their mismanagement of food supplies would be a major factor in how devastating the Japanese invasion of Burma was to the Bengal region.
Also, you said the British promised independence during the war and that was just a lie. They did send the Cripps mission in which a representative (Stafford Cripps) gave vague promises of future dominion status, but that was all, and this was really only to appease the Americans who were anti imperialism. To Indian officials in the 1940’s, fighting a war against fascists to uphold the dominance of the imperialists simply wasn’t justifiable. That was the reason for Quit India, and I will add that Quit India was not led by Gandhi or the Congress. It was so massive in scale that it was pretty much just led by whoever was around at a particular protest. It grew out of the control of Gandhi’s political group.
The final decision to leave India was also only taken because the British literally couldn’t afford to pay the people they needed to run the country after being bankrupt by the war.
Also, most of what you said about the All-India Muslim League wasn’t really that accurate and could definitely mislead some people.
True man . Also , some points didn't make sense to me. Historically, form what I know, aren't untouchables basically a part of shudras ?The ones who cleaned and stuff. That's why they were "untouchables" because they were too "dirty" to touch or socialise
He can't be as bad as your hair style lol
Frankie Coto he's blue ....dabba dee dabba do..... lol
Danial Howe it’s actually (Im blue, if i was green I would die)
Looks kinda hot to me, though I cant be sure if ist blue or grey?
@@TheTemper-King nope
Harsh
"Gandhi thought that Muslims were too intolerant of criticism and that they should welcome criticism of the Qur'an"
That's not Islamophobia, that's having a reasonable and accurate stance on the issue.
I had the same thought. Presumably Knowing Better is already aware of the Danish cartoon riots, the Charlie Hebdo massacre, etc. If he's _really_ plugged in then he might be aware of strong-arm tactics used by on-campus orgs such as the MSA against pro-Israel activists.
U cant generalize all Muslims in the same area. Not all of us are the same
@@sajidteg4682 I understand that perfectly, but that's not really an argument against Gandhi's statement.
@@sajidteg4682 Of course not. When i say "catholic priests should molest children less" i'm not saying ALL catholic priest molest children, but a worrying number of them. Seemingly more catholic priests molest children than priests of other religions. Calling them out isn't saying that all catholics condone it, but it saying that catholics should own up to the fact that there is an issue within their community. Change needs to come from within.
Criticism of Christianity is accepted and widely spread throughout Christian nations. We have criticised christianity so much that people don't even realise it when i happens, it's normal life for western countries. South Park have had Jesus Christ in the show many many times. They have made fun of basically all religions. But once they made fun of Islam and Muhammad they suddenly got death threats in the thousands and the episodes had to be pulled and you can no longer get a hold of them. This is unlike any other religion.
i agree with you. to take some understandable meaning from 2 or more group society. we need some argument base on fundamental book. but the majority people in my group just bunch of stupid. they cant satify your question and anybody who has some sharp question and need much detail information.
I have only one problem with the video , when you say Gandhi was racist against Muslims ( I ain't supporting Gandhi here in any way , whatever he said was terrible) but Muslims aren't a race , they are a religious community like Christians , Hindus , etc.
Srikant Iyengar well he was racest against Arabs
@@toonsvoons9478 Muslims in India aren't Arabs all right they are south asian in origin and not all Arabs are Muslims , there are small minorities of Christian and Jewish Arabs ( I know that because I live in India).
Srikant Iyengar your right but i think he said that back in the day people who didn't like Muslims were called racist but Now we call it islamphopya
@@toonsvoons9478 No one who didn't like Muslims were called racist , it's like saying people who hated Christians were called racist makes no sense.
Srikant Iyengar he said it not me
Great video!
One thing I found especially interesting is the fact that 'Kaffir' was apparently an Indian slur for black people. In Afrikaans (That Dutch daughter language in South Africa) the most common racial slur for black people is (or was) "Kaffer", which also found its way to The Netherlands, where some have used the word "Kaffer" as the closest thing to "the N-word" in Dutch. Never knew that word had its origins in the Indian communities of South Africa.
Edit: forgot to add, the word is also used as a non-racial insult in some regions. I didn't originally explain this because I didn't think of it as relevant.
So the word went from Arabic to Hindi to Afrikaans to Dutch... Damn.
Kafir in india is a term used by muslims to insult others you idiot
Ghipoli, This kind of media propaganda is nothing short of a criminal behavior and needs to be addressed. These videos are being made to pull in Indians to these videos and increase the number of hits. We have taken this up with Google to see how they are allowing such videos to monetize on such blatantly wrong propaganda. I have written a rebuttal to this moron to his pinned comment above. Its time to expose the reality of how Indians were treated by both Blacks and Whites. Read my comment above addressed to "Knowing Better" who ironically doesn't know any better.
Ghipoli Of course the dude talking about the Netherlands has a windmill profile picture.
Im Dutch and we definitely dont use that word.
"All of his pent up... power." 🤣 I just started watching your videos and I can't get enough. So informative, comical and fundamentally memorable. Thank you so much for everything you post for us, your viewers!
A Hindu Indian hating on Muslim Indians isn't racism because they're the exact same race. It's religion-based bigotry (I hate the term "Islamophobe" because it's far too ill-defined to be used in intellectual discourse).
doesn't really change the point of the video though
Shuaib Ahmed Syed Gilani
I'm not sure you understand what a 'race' is. Then again, the term 'race' is extremely ill-defined, so I'm not sure I understand it either. But I know enough to know that Indians are all the same race. There are many ethnicities and even a variety of skin tones, but they're all the same race. In fact, I'm pretty sure Indians and Europeans are the same race. Africa is the same way--the Koi-San people of South Africa, for example, are much lighter-skinned than the Bantus of east Africa, but they're also considered to be the same race.
As far as I know, there are three races in the world: African, Asian, and White. As I said, that's a bad definition for race, since it doesn't account for, what, 2 or 3 billion people? If you're using a different definition from the one most people think of that's fine, but maybe you should lead with that.
That said, I still don't see what any of that has to do with the main point of my original comment. Hating someone because of their religion is not racist. Even if the two people are different races. Although in that case, racism could be a part of it.
There's also the issue of Islamic terrorism and genocide. The prophet Mohammad was a pedophile as well.
Calling for Independence during a World War is exactly what Ireland did and managed to succeed.
Ireland became independent in 1922. WW1 ended in 1918
Not to mention, they were supported by Germany, while Irish Soldiers died in trenches on the continent as well. What a glorious effort...
The Easter Rising by Irish nationalist insurgents was in 1916 during WWI, and it was crushed.
Wendover: planes
Polymater: China
Knowing Better: Columbus
knowing better: genocides
@@mindlesswav hotel: trivago
I was watching a video on the origin of Civilization's nuke-happy version of Gandhi.
There was a comment war on whether Gandhi was a racist pervert or a saintly man. There was a lot of rage. I think someone called someone else a heretic over this.
WHO WENT AGAINST THE WORD OF THE EMPEROR
it's youtube comments, what do you expect? In fact, if "heretic" is the worst thing someone said to someone else then that comment section is one of the nicest political debate comment sections on this website.
Thank you for this video. I used to idolize Gandhi. My first introduction to him was through Richard Attenborough's 1982 film "Gandhi" which completed sanitized Gandhi and made him appear to be a saint. It made it seem as if he stood for civil rights for all and was always kind and considerate. In recent years I found out that was not true. He truly was racist and was also manipulative and arrogant. I can still admire him for pushing for non-violent solutions but I no longer consider him a role model.
This is eye opening. And people love this man. What a world we live in.
They don't love him in India also anymore. His political party is finished.
yes he was a bloody racist and rapist
Dude you do not get enough views. Tremendous editing, calm voice, relaxing background music that isnt too high, and insane attention to detail. You also explain everything so well. I wish I had you as a history teacher in school
Sadly majority of indians still worship him and calls him the father of the nation
Yes
Why should India care if the protest was in the middle of the war? It would make more sense to protest at that time anyways.
I have long ago came to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a Good Guy and a Bad Guy...just people that are generally better or worse than others. All the heroes have an alterior motive, and all the villains have honest motivations. So we can't ever catagorize anyone as being one or the other, but we can judge for ourselves whether we are willing to love them for their qualities or hate them for their flaws.
Except Anna Pavlova; She's a plain good girl.
How is criticizing Islam and people who follow Islamic beliefs racist?
Bad Dragonite he’s a SJW
Alot of Muslims and non Muslims nowadays act like it's a race
6:51 I see why ghandi would start at 0 aggression and then halfway into the game he would go nuclear by declaring war on everyone.
It's Gandhi not Ghandi. Are you that visually challenged?
@@mydearfriend007 Its, who cares. He's a pervy racist.
@@mydearfriend007A minor typo is somehow a bad thing?
The worst bit about the "Aryan Brotherhood" thing is that it's actually half-right, since English and Hindi are both Indo-European languages. However this doesn't work on a more general racial level (because race as an idea is a crock of shit), and doesn't work for all Indians (because southern Indians such as Tamils and Malayalees are Dravidian-speakers, and there are loads of non-Indo-European speakers in the north-east).
And not all white people speak indo-european languages, like Hungarian, Finnish, or Basque people
As an Indian thank you. We are all complex even “saints” like Ghandi aren’t perfect.
Normal people aren't perfect, he's not even close to be a normal good human being, he's a sick racist homophobic
@@TheGuideCenter lol, racist? Have you even read his autobiography?
@@subaruyagami2327 did you see the video?
@@subaruyagami2327 Are you blind? Yess he's racist af
@@psi9899 this guy made the same video as "you don't see in 4k" his channel is based on talking trash while sounding really smart. He does research equivalent to a 4th grader searching for how to overclock a GPU. His content is trash.
As an Indian i already know some of this..he was never my idol (not for a lot of Indians actually)
I was rather surprised that he is famous outside of India. We all know he did almost nothing for freedom from Britain...he was just a bit smarter and educated than most people back then and played his game well
He was Britains B team
Well, Gandhi did a lot but he was a politician more than anything. The stabilisation of India also depended on him and other intellectuals. Independence could have been delayed even longer, the country could have been fractured and India could have become much more nationalistic.
I agree with this video but it does have one flaw . And that’s you can’t be racist against Muslims because Muslim isn’t a race idk how you can put that against him, he was just being critical of Islam
Yeah Islam deserves a lot of criticism but there's a difference between criticism and bigotry.
@@karlazeen any criticism of Islam is seen as bigotry
@werid person Yeah that's good
@werid person criticism of a groups practices is good
I am an Indian and I don't think gandhi as "Father of the nation"
Out of interest, who (if anyone) do you consider it to be? I'd put Nehru at the top of the list, but of course there were other important players such as Jinnah and even Cripps, though neither were Indians at their time of death.
Chandra gupta
Nehru was also a horrible person who was just trying to gain wealth and fame.
Bose
The Pirate Persian India was always a hindhu nation, why else do everyone convert to Christianity and Islam in India to gain minority benefits. Cuz it's a hindhu majority country. And past Congress members weren't all bad it's just a few that ruined it's reputation. Lal bahadhur sastry was a Congress party member and we ain't bashing on him. It's just a few that screwed up big time just like other members of other parties. Why do you have to involve religion into this, us hindhus don't care about other religions as long as they stop converting our people. We are cool with sharing our space with everyone.
As a citizen of India, I fully endorse what was said in this video, Gandhi was a shrewd man who only brought disaster whereever he went. We can all see the current state of Africa, that was only because people failed to criticize his viewpoints there but India is recovering for the nationalist didn't buy into his false ideals of non-violence which led to the death of millions of Dharmic people and resorted to just violence or else our current state would have been despicable.
Thank you for being Honest and objective and not letting nationalism cloud your judgment sir ✅
Your content is such high quality, it's a wonder that you don't have more viewers. Great video!
The big reason seems to be people jump in thinking its another anti-SJW party when really it's just all common sense and then they hit a gun control video...
At least we still have Fred Rogers in the "genuinely good person" category...for now.
Neverhoodian Mr. rogers will always be amazing
Well, Gandhi is still a very good person...just more complicated than we may have originally realized. :-)
There is no for now. To be mentally stable:
1. Take your paranoia and drop it.
2. Crush it underfoot.
3. Scatter it to the winds.
4. ???
5. Profit.
There's also a super complex perception of Gandhi in India. There's a faction of centrist-ish liberals who view him pretty highly and might defend/disregard valid criticism. Then, there's the right wing that hates him - not because of the valid criticism, but because of his affiliation with the Nehru family and his centrist-liberal political stance. And finally, there's the faction I agree with, which strongly dislikes him for all the critique, especially his stance on the caste system and the role of liberal caste-privileged Hindus in the continuation of the caste system in direct and indirect ways.
Personally, I'd much rather see a pan-national lauding of figures like Dr. B R Ambedkar, rather than just Gandhi and other caste Hindus actively interested in perpetuating caste.
I'd say now he's like hated by atleast 30% of the population
40% don't care at all
The remaining 30% defend him
Great video. Minor quibble, Islam is a religion not a race.
As an indian , I really hope we remove his photo from Indian currency.
2:00 Yeah that word is like the N word in South Africa, but far worse because it was never given a new connotation and exists purely as a slur.
The whole thing about Muslim not taking criticism well has now become true for a good number of Hindu’s in India too now.
This video is excellent :)
Up and Atom eyy
Except it has almost all the points half cooked, check my comment in the main thread if you want details
He is lying, He is Biased, He is Clueless
@@rohittantia4020
All he said was very true. But we should never forget that he had a lot of positive sides too. Instead of either idolizing Mahatma Gandhi or throwing him in a ditch, keep him just as other freedom fighters...
Cows, a wife and running around naked sounds like the life
Trueeeeeee
Sounds like the life he was hating on
You Gandhi be kidding me
😂
As an Indian, a few points on the video:
Good:
1. Thanks for covering the "dark" bits of Gandhi. In our history books, he is portrayed as a saint who could do no wrong. His racist sentiments towards Africans is totally glossed over in India. 3. His weird fetishes are also never mentioned in our books
2. Gandhi was a transparent man. His writings are exhaustive and available freely online.
3. His role in our freedom movement is exaggerated due to whitewashing of our history books by the Congress Party (his old party)
4. His ideals for a modern India were antiquated and called for a return to the old Vedic ages.
Bad:
1. He was soft towards Muslims. He was even killed by a Hindu extremist because of the same perceptions. His "criticism" of Islam was that it takes itself too seriously, which is not Islamophobia. In a modern society, nothing is above criticism,.
2. Muslim league was a minor player in Indian politics of the time. The two state theory was advocated by both Hindu and Muslim extremists and was seen as the best way to avoid a massive civil war. Even so, the partition of India was a brutal time, involving displacement of millions of people.
3. He never directly advocated violence. In 1921, he called off the Non-Cooperation movement precisely because people burned policemen for firing at them. His snake-oil of Satyagraha led to several thousand Hindus being killed by Moplas (muslims) in Kerala.
4. What is not mentioned in the video is that he was an incredibly populist figure throughout the India of 1930-1940s. This was why the Brits were cautious in dealing with him. His words could sway people regardless of religion.
PS: If you want a billion dislikes, do a video critical on Narendra Modi, our current PM :P He is being propped up into a demi-god just like Gandhi was.
0:27 Most of the Indians hate Gandhi
Dude, I agree with most of what you say but the part about Gandhi talking about criticism of Islam thing is spot on and shouldn't be considered racist.
I mean, how many Islamic countries you know allow criticism of the religion?? NONE. They all severely punish those who criticized Islam or anything related.
Islam fucking sucks and Indians know that better than anyone. Literally hundreds of years of invasion and millions of deaths
True, Islamism as a national ideology is fucking cancer. Islam as a religion, I couldn't care less, but when they make Sharia law the country's law, now that's when shit goes to storm.
Yeah muslims are the most intolerant , yet when they come over to Canada or us because they are sick of living in fear they want to bring all their bullshit they left over hear , and we get called racist for telling them to not try and change our traditions
Exactly, how is it racist to have debate and discourses on backward religious practices, be it Christian Hindu or Muslim
It shows how even this channel can go against anybody to criticise them but not those that can behead him if they fell like it
This channel is amazing! I always thought I was at the very least semi-educated but here I am learning a metric fuck ton of new information in just a day of learning of this channels existence.
Wow. This was an eye-opener indeed! Thanks for this well-researched video.
Good work. Thank you for going places others shy from.
Literally everyone is in the grey, no one person is all good or all bad
Precisely! Like Walt Disney, or Jim Jones, or Bill Cosby, or Christopher Columbus...
I don't know, Hitler falls pretty comfortably into the "bad" category. I mean, he was big on animal rights, but that's about it.
@@gabrielfraser2109 that single thing keeps him in the grey area as well. In his mind he never wanted bad things for his people but all these don't justify or rationalize his actions.
@@boredguy5463 He lied about being curly. It's a big no no.
@@boredguy5463 yes, let's not forget about that, even the devil needs compassion.
Tyler “Ninja” Blevins 30 years after leaving twitch
He died of Ligma though
You opened my mind to Gandhi, I'm just now realizing how bad my high school education was. Thanks
I just did an a-level project on Gandhi, so it was important that you got that right, and you did pretty well. The thing that people don't get about Gandhi was that he was a religious man first, and a good man second. Everything he did was religious. However, two things.
With regard to the Muslim thing... there is context. Hindu-Muslim relations were on par with Protestant-Catholic relations in the middle ages. Arson and murder were incredibly common, and that's why many wanted a two state solution. Really, the only argument against was that the populations were mixed in some places. You really made this sound awful when it wasn't.
Secondly, you needlessly hate on Gandhi's non-violence. Gandhi knew he couldn't always stop violence, but when his first independence movement turned violent, he immediately called it off and relented. Also, the Quit India movement, while ill-advised, was non-violent. Also, you completely ignored the salt March.
Gandhi is human as we all are, he was born into a super rich minister family but he became something else and he had his ups and downs both as a person and as a politician or leader.. All our leaders across the world are presented towards us as polished good deed generators but thats not true. Just good examples.. And i have to admit this video has some truth to it but be wise not to completely ignore the greatness of Gandhi.
Nobody is born great not even the gods
Sleeping with underage girls, bathing with them .... Yeah that's human isn't it? Forbidding his ailing wife to use penicillin as treatment, causing her death, and then using penicillin himself when he was sick, yeah of course that's so human. Leaving his father's funeral to have fornicate with his wife, yeah, of course that's normal and human.
Gandhi was a sick man, who disguised himself as a simple beautiful person. Period.
He’s not great he basically backdoored his own people as well as had hate in his heart
Will you do one on Hitler, Stalin, or Che Guevara?
Alexander Chippel Che Guevara murdered tyrants. I am okay with it
Shubham Bhushan Che was a tyrant. This bizarre worship of Che Guevara in certain circles on the left is something that warrants an anti Che video in its own right.
Che Guevara was an overrated one hit wonder. Helped overthrow Batista in Cuba, and it was downhill from there. Tried to help overthrow several other governments and failed. He was a smart and photogenic pretty boy who took a great pic that made the girls wet their panties. I believed his so called buddy Fidel sold him out in Bolivia, after Che mouthed off about the Russians.
Shubham Bhushan In addition to suppressing free speech and executing hundreds of people without trial during the Cuban Revolution, and that's not to mention the hard-on he got for nuclear weapons. Che Guevara was trash.
Not to mention he went all-out racist when his campaign in the Congo failed miserably.
Australians when they realize that they also wiped out the locals like South Africans
The religious Indian "Caliphate Movement" DID NOT want a separation, they were for unification. But, they collapsed and gave way to the All India Muslim League, which was secular and for separation (ironically) and for the creation of Pakistan.
Splendid!!
Fancy doing a similar piece on Mother Theresa?
14:45 The George Washington and the cherry tree business is not a complete lie. As we see in the final episode of Ben 10 Omniverse, the cherry tree was an analogy for Vilgax's spaceship, so it has basis in truth.
Fun fact! Kaffir is the Arab slur for barbarian, as often referring to sub-Saharan, as it is to European.
wrong, this word means non-believer
@@miine3862 ...
@@harold3345?? barbarian ≠ non- believer
@@miine3862 can confirm
Mii Ne as an Arab I can confirm
Many Indians do not uphold Gandhi
You're confusing the Aryan Brotherhood with Aryanism - not the same thing.
Yeah lol. Every “Aryan Brotherhood” member I’ve met has a tear drop tattoo and an unlicensed firearm 😂
I haven't even watched it yet, but thank you! I'm tired of being the only jackass in the room willing to say that Ghandi was a creepy dude. Now I have somewhere to send people who argue with me.
My first game of Civ. 6, I was going for a religous victory (as Saladin), India spammed apostles, I did the next best thing and went crusading, needless to say, I didn't have friends afterwards.
It is in the habit of people to glorify those who liberated their country. In a sense this is what Gandhi did but without starting a war. I actually recall hearing this story in a book about the Gandhi movie where one of his followers wanted them to include the darker aspects of his nature simply to keep it from glorifying him because he preferred it that way. In a sense it is better to include these things because we need to remind people that you don't need to be a saint to do a great good or to help people. Incidentally I think the Indian/African racism went both ways. In Uganda at one point Idi Amin deported everyone of Indian descent from his country and seized their property - an act of genocide - which I believe had great support at the time in Uganda. It didn't help matters in the country but these things are not uncommon as we might believe.
Ghandhi was not against giving voting rights to dalits he was against giving them a seperate electoral system where in all dalits would have had to vote seperately from all other indians he believed that this would slow down the merging of dalits into society as it would have. That is what he protested against and not segregating them entirely
10:43 Gandhi was right tho ngl
Hey mister we all make mistakes, and Gandhi was no different in his young. He descended from a family where untouchability was practiced, considering that, the efforts he made to change his world view and that of others was commendable.
I just cannot fathom why are you attacking the idea of untouchables being called as Dalits (Dalit is not a derogatory term). After India got its independence, because of this characterization through caste certificates given out by the government of India, Dalits had special privilege, which continue in modern India to this day. They got special reservation in public jobs, universities where they were not even required to pay their tuition fees after admission. Any Indian staying in India would know, the work that the government has done and continues to do so in order to protect the rights of the Dalit community and other minorities and uplift their social status. You should do your part of the research before hurling accusation about the caste categorization system in India and its motive (not for discrimination, but to provide disadvantaged communities more benefit)
You said that 2 million people were killed in Bengal, under the order of Winston Churchill was necessary, as Bengal was in the front line and Japanese occupation would have killed people anyway. This is the worst ever excuse I have heard from a Churchill fanatic? Do you know the number of zeros there are in 2 million. Even the Japanese didn't kill so much citizens during their seize of Manchuria and Nanking combined.
The British didn't try to uplift the lower castes in Hindu society or the poor in the Indian subcontinent, they ossified caste and religious divisions further and induced more and more inequality. They used to charge exorbitant tax revenues from the Zamindars(land-owners) that led poverty to go rampant in the country. Before British Raj India was one of the best performing countries in the world in trade and export of finished products and even had one of the highest GDP. The torture that the British did on Indians for 200 years is no less than what the Hitler did in Europe. This mentality of brtish towards Indians could be understood by one of the quotes that their high-ranking officers made on amritsar in 1919, “We hold India by the sword and rule her by fear” with respect to the incident of Jallianwala Bagh massacre.
Gandhi was glorified by the Indian National Congress for political purposes. Period.
Considering how many were killed in India by muslims and the world as a whole for religious reasons Ghandhi put it quite softly when he said that they don't take critisism
wut? what about the muslims killed in india and the rest of the world for religious reasons (like the forced conversion of arabs and moor muslims in spain)? have you missed the message of the video that there is no pure "good" and "evil"? his comment was stupid and not justified at all,in the times of the caliphate,people from different religions would debate about them and science related topics all the time,christians contributed in the islamic golden age in arabia and the jews had their golden age under islamic rule,not to mention that in the lifetime of the prophet (pbuh),arab pagans would write poems to defame him and insult him all the time and he did nothing to them...
Prior to the reconquest of Granada, the Moors tried to conquer all of Iberia and convert the people to Islam. The Arabs never even belonged in Spain. They were essentially colonizers. Much of North Africa and the Levant used to be mostly Christian before the Muslim armies conquered it. It's why there are still Coptic Christians living as a minority in Egypt and are being discriminated against.
The moors and arabs didn't try to convert anyone,that time period is famous for the piece between the three abrahamic religions,and was a time of prosperity,conquered and probably enslaved people upon conquering? sure,but that's what people did back then,also,the christians and muslims are living together fine in egypt and there's muslim coptics and arab christians there too,they all celebrate together and help each other and live in harmony (besides the strictly political problems),before christianity,much of north africa and the levant were pagans,so? peoples beliefs change and for the most part there were no forced conversions in islam (besides the seljuks I believe),do you know what happened in lebanon a few weeks ago? a guys fb got suspended for a month (and was about to be put in jail) for making a joke about a christian saint,that same judge that did that to him,shares super islamophobic stuff on her page all the time,christians are fine in the middle east and north africa.
Sila That period of tolerance and advancement was short-lived. It only lasted until the Umayyad Caliphate fell apart. Many of the states and rulers that replaced it were far less tolerant and more fundamentalist and desperate as the Christian north started making gains, especially the Almoravids and Almohads.
"he's sleeping naked with the girls and the girls are naked too"
He also oppressed and shamed a girl who was raped. Not only that but he wrote two letters to Hitler addressing him as “Friend” and Hitler wrote back!!!
Why do you think world war is a bad time to fight for independence? Maybe it is the only time to fight for independence.
because if an independence movement rises up during a war, they get accused of being aided by the enemy... which at lot of times is true such as hiw the Soviet Union rose up during WWI due to german support
@@DragonCity2videoaula which leads to the people you're revolting against clamping down even harder on you than before
To be honest, fighting for independence is also fighting for economic freedom, safety, freedom from racism, ability to choose who makes your laws, freedom from arbitrary arrests and a lot of things (The colonialism had sucked away much of the industry and arts native to India, not to mention the famines). The second world war was more like a phase in history for England, but under British Occupation, India was at war for 200 years. If someone thinks that we should wait till it's a better time for the English and take an appointment to discuss our country our people's future, they're coming from a very privileged position. Being under occupation is not easy.
When your enemies are the Third Reich and the Japanese Empire, not so much.
I agree with you that WW2 was the only time India could fight for freedom as it was when Britain was at it's absolute lowest point. The British were in desperate need of resources, the Indians took advantage of the situation by lending them soldiers, clothes and food at the cost that they let India go.
(Edit: my horrible grammer)
I'm of the Christian race myself, sub-race Protestant of the family Calvinist. I find most youtubers and commenters to be extremely racist against my people.
As an Indian, Gandhi with all his racist xenophobic ideas and inconsiderate ill-will to maintain his influence in politics by disregarding other really sincere freedom fighters, remains as a subject of great shame and disgrace for Indians.
After watching Penn and Tellers BS, I never trust it when people are called "saints".
what are u talking about with Penn and teller
@@bloodeagle2234 they made an episode about mother Teresa and Gandhi and that they are kinda bad people
"Anti-imperialist movement lead by the United States." Let me ask you this, have talked to any Latin American? The only major power with a commitment to anti-imperialism was the Soviet Union.
I think he meant in this specific instance that the USA was anti-imperialist, not overall.
To be fair that's basically only because the soviet geography made colonialism impossible
“ with a commitment to anti- imperialism is the soviet union” 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Which is why they invaded every nation in Eastern Europe, The caucuses, and invaded Afghanistan in the 80’s to right ?
There are some discrepancies in this video regarding the views of Gandhi towards the Muslim League, the awarding of the title of Mahatma and his preaching of non-violence. This is kinda a one-sided video (though I must admit we all have seen the ‘Gandhi is a saint’ trope too many times) and I think a slightly more detailed analysis of arguably the most famous person on the planet would have been better.
That Civ meme gets me every time