"Man of his time" is not an excuse for overlooking a hero's bad
values, his racism or religious hate but a reason for firmly condemning him
Human nature likes to pretend there is something new under the sun. In fact
there is nothing. We want to pride ourselves on how socially and morally
progressive we are. But people who we would violently disagree with do that too.
Liberals are always at each others throats and often enjoy one another's
downfall. People of many centuries ago thought it was progressive to leave sick
babies on a hillside to die of exposure.
The perception of yourself as progressive goes with historical ignorance and a
total lack of humility. Then you join a group of cranks who think like you do
and you feel affirmed and almost divine.
The reality is that the person in the past was as much of a person as you and
shouldn't need to be shown how wrong it was to treat any person as below human.
The stupidity of thinking somebody should be your slave or beneath you is clear
to you. When the prejudice is put into action you get a new clarification - how
ugly and harmful and potentially harmful it is.
When society has always said to put yourself in the place of the other to treat
them as you would like to be treated there is no excuse. We cannot use the
limitations of our time and age as an excuse. True humanitarians do not make
excuses for people like Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Joseph Smith, Lenin or even
Lincoln. And especially when these figures proclaimed liberty and claimed to
value it so much! It is possible they did know they were evil and still
advocated evil to fit in their society and be popular and relevant.
Paradoxically, you are claiming to be superior to them when you think you know
better and excuse them as products of their dark age. This is not about you for
real people bled for and over the attitudes and actions of those people.
The other problem is that in many places today communities still hiddenly or
openly let bigotry and hate and racism thrive. We cannot pretend that racism was
everywhere in the past but not today for today it is still significant and still
dangerous. There is no clear cut difference between the past and today and its
more fluid and deceptive than you would think.
It is not our place to forgive and say it does not matter for that is saying
those who were hurt by them do not matter. They cannot stop mattering just
because they are dead. Feeling pain and anger over the hurting of another is
decency. We cannot say that we need to forgive so we can feel good. That is just
selfish and we must live in the real world where it is not all about us.
In 2019, many students campaigned against Gandhi's statue being placed in front
of Manchester Cathedral as he was a racist. They said as he was complicit in
what the British Empire did to the people of Africa and did so out of a racist
hate for black people. The statue went up and then a Gandhi must fall campaign
broke out on social media.
One thing that stands out to me is how he referred to Africans as "half heathen
natives." That is clearly a religious slur.
Responses to the demands include the statement that he was indeed bigoted and
racist but say they were products of the time he lived in. So unpack that. If
you are racist or bigoted and promote hate in a society that does it with you,
you are not responsible as an individual. The right way to look at it is that it
is COLLECTION of individuals who are under the banner of hate and racism. It
does not matter if it is one person or many. Bad people feel it is easier and
safer to be bad if they have a bad society around them. They can murder and feel
less responsible than they would otherwise. When responsibility is diffused like
that and spread you find it harder to feel pangs of conscience for the terrible
things you do for you think it is not just you but many others. For that reason
Gandhi's society does not absolve him in the slightest or ask for mercy. It asks
for unrelenting judgement. If he had murdered somebody with his bare hands he
would be cancelled from the annals of the heroes so he should be judged for his
hate and racism. A doctor who saves a million children and sexually molests one
will be damned in the eyes of society and so should Gandhi.
Another complaint is that how he became a much better and more inclusive man
later on is being ignored. But a bigot getting into a high position and then
mellowing sends the message, "Bigotry can bring you to power." He was a hero for
bigotry and then he softened. That is nothing to praise.
The reality is that the statue sends a mixed message. It makes people ask how he
thought and why he thought it. It may lead them to racism. The erection of the
statue says his racism and hate were not enough to justify the statue of some
consistent peace maker going up. Reasons and excuses to be racist are successful
enough without this. It is true that racists don't need Gandhi's logic or his
example to become racist or more racist but it does not help.
Sara Khan liberation and access officer at Manchester University Student's Union
put it well by saying, "This statue would not promote peace but instead promote
Gandhi's racist and anti-back ideology and promote continued violence in
Kashmir."
One thing for sure bad things such as racism and slave owning act like diseases.
They spread. They are like the flu when it sweeps through society. You do not
see it until the symptoms show its presence. People may act and look cured of
hate and racism but are still hankered for underneath. That is why anything that
can be reasonably seen to promote or advertise racism and sectarian hate is
dangerous.
Religion and spirituality on occasion have endorsed racism and fostered it.
Consider new age writings that demonise certain races such as Isis Unveiled. And
there is the Book of Mormon where the Indian's dark skin is down to a curse from
God. Consider how Jesus said the Jewish people of his time preached hate of
enemy. He would not help a Lebanese woman's little child who had a demon. The
text says it was an impure spirit so it was probably tempting the girl or
possessing her or both. He refused basic spiritual aid to a child for her race
though it only took less time than it took for him to tell the woman she was a
dog and that he had to give the bread to the Jews not to the likes of her. He
helped in the end which was just racist virtue-signalling. He was not even in
ministry at the time for the text says he was having a break and the woman found
him by chance so he was trying to argue that he had to focus on giving the Jews
freedom from demons. It was a shameless excuse. The story appears in Mark's
gospel where Jesus gives no real new teaching and in fact very little teaching
but he was able to step out of character to deliver a malicious teaching to a
suffering woman.
Strong opposition to respect and celebration of bigots and racists and war
mongers is a must. No debate. The man of his time thing is a justification
for not pulling down the current consequences of such a person's actions.
It is a justification for the culture being oppressive. Take Jesus as a
good example and Muhammad. They are called men of their time and nobody
realises their religions need dismantling and it is honouring their errors and
evils by neglecting to do so.