You’re forgetting the importance of nuance. While there’s some truth to what you’ve said, there’s also truth to the broader narrative. How is twisting the truth to fit your argument any better than the Indian government twisting it to fit theirs?
Imagine if someone did to Jesus what you just did to Gandhi. They could say Jesus advocated for cannibalism (eating His flesh and blood), went on a violent rampage with a whip at a holy site, and had a suspicious fascination with children. Technically all true, but taken out of context, it’s a gross misrepresentation — just like your claims about Gandhi.
Gandhi’s fasting wasn’t about defending the caste system. He believed that giving political power to the Untouchables in that way would divide Hindu society even further. He was flawed, but reducing this to “defending the caste system” is misleading at best.
His connection to war and violence was situational, not some early obsession. He briefly supported it under specific conditions, but his lifelong commitment to peaceful protest wasn’t just a calculated strategy — it was a guiding principle he held for decades.
As for sleeping next to naked teenage girls, yes, it happened, and it’s troubling. But this wasn’t about exploitation. Gandhi claimed he was testing his own discipline. Was he a flawed and misguided human being? Absolutely, just like all of us. But framing it as something predatory is just dishonest.
Gandhi, like anyone in history or alive today, was complicated. His faults were real, but so was his work for justice and peace. Misrepresenting him to fit your point to "verify, don't trust" is no better than what you accuse the Indian government of doing, and, quite frankly, incredibly ironic.
