288
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] glimse@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago

Putting the text right over the comedian's face is a double whammy when the image doesn't include their name lol

Who is the comedian?

[-] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 weeks ago

Wasn't ghandi a racist pedophile?

[-] otto@sh.itjust.works 18 points 3 weeks ago

Yep. Just like people such as Mother Teresa, they were venerated for the few good things they did while every other horrible detail about them was covered up.

[-] artificialfish@programming.dev 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Definitely not like Mother Teresa. Ghandi can still be significantly linked to Indian independence. His philosophies are still highly relevant to non violent revolution and still contributed greatly to American civil rights. Basically like all people he was imperfect, but he’s definitely not an insignificant thinker like Mother Teresa.

Mother Teresa was pure evil all the time, actively harmed thousands, and contributed nothing to philosophy or politics.

And no ghandi did not fuck kids. He was racist though.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 weeks ago

Which honestly is as it should be. I personally prefer looking at the good rather than the bad, because whatever you look for, you will find.

[-] whostosay@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

So we're talking about fucking kids here and hate fueled by ignorance, I don't think that's really an out of site out mind kind of situation.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

I think it is. Public figures like these become representatives of the ideas they're known for. We care about Ghandi's nonviolence, not his racism or weird sexual nonsense. The further back in history you go, the less their personal lives matter.

If you're making a movie or writing a book about them, sure, display their failures as well. But a person doing bad things doesn't make the great things they did any less great.

[-] artificialfish@programming.dev 1 points 3 weeks ago

Imagine eliminating all philosophical figures that were eugenicists. Wed have to start over.

No ghandi didn’t fuck kids. It’s weirder than that, but he wasn’t a criminal.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

It’s weirder than that, but he wasn’t a criminal.

I never said he was.

My point is that ghandi is a symbol, and getting into his views on Africans or whatever is entirely irrelevant to that symbol of nonviolence. It's only interesting if you're studying the man's life, for example to understand why so many Indians don't like him, but if you're referring to him as an example of how to effect change without violence (along with people like MLK Jr), it's irrelevant.

And that goes for everyone. Hunter Biden being a drug addict is irrelevant to Joe Biden's presidency. Trump having sex with escorts is irrelevant to his presidency. Bill Clinton getting a BJ from his secretary is irrelevant to his presidency. And so on. The important part of each of those scandals is whether the politician lied about them and/or abused their position to hide them, because trustworthiness is directly relevant to being a president. Whether they were good people is irrelevant.

I'm not saying we should whitewash history, I'm saying we shouldn't bring up irrelevant details when discussing figures as symbols. If you want to study an important figure's life, then those details are relevant.

[-] artificialfish@programming.dev 2 points 3 weeks ago

And I was agreeing with you

[-] projjalm@lemy.lol 5 points 3 weeks ago

ghandi? or gandhi? I'm so confused

[-] Nasan@sopuli.xyz 3 points 3 weeks ago

Possbilieie

this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2025
288 points (98.3% liked)

Funny

8295 readers
1040 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS