John Grishman, Meet Gandhi

Myth:  Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, better known as Mahatma – meaning “Great Soul” – Gandhi, is synonymous with non-violent protest and civil disobedience.  A key player during India’s oft-violent march toward freedom and independence from Great Britain, Gandhi advocated a spartan lifestyle, fasting occasionally as a way of cleansing his soul and expressing political disapproval.  Born into a relatively affluent family in 1869, Gandhi traveled to London in order to study law at University College London.  He attempted to assimilate to British culture, but was instead drawn back to his native Hindu culture.  Shortly after graduation, Gandhi excelled as a civil rights lawyer in South Africa, later deemed a national treasure after his instrumental role in the forwarding of black equality.  In later years, Gandhi focused on his native India, adhering to a strict pacifist ideology and utilizing truth as his greatest weapon.  He even went as far as to spin his own clothes and don the traditional dhoti as a means of expressing solidarity with his fellow, subjugated Indians.  In the wake of such events as the Dandi Salt March in 1930 and numerous imprisonments, Britain eventually bowed to Indian demand and bestowed independence upon the nation in 1947.  Though much of India was exuberant, Gandhi continued to fight for total egalitarianism since much of the Muslim population of India was still under great oppression.  On January 38^th, 1948, a Hindu nationalist gunned down Gandhi as he walked toward a podium to give an opening prayer.

Fact:  Gandhi was your typical caricature of a modern day lawyer: greedy, conniving and a classic megalomaniac.  It all started at University College London, where he founded the smug and arty Indian Apparel Club (later purchased after his death and renamed American Apparel).  The club was a way to cash in on his Indian ethnicity by creating cheap “Indian-style” clothing and charging exorbitant amounts of money for the goods.  The liberal campus ate it up.  A more conservative student simply looked like a dick for not supporting the “Aid India Fund” to which much of money was ostensibly going toward, though records indicate that Gandhi pocketed the majority.  He had found his niche: capitalize on his apparent downtrodden Indian identity as a means of garnering sympathy – and money.  Tensions between colonial India and the British Empire continued to escalate during the early 20^th century: it was the prime atmosphere for corruption.  First, Gandhi had to fully transform himself into the martyr he wished to convey, and that meant strict vegetarian restrictions and clothing that looked like a gigantic diaper.  Gandhi’s diary relates his dissatisfaction with such a lifestyle: “I look like a malnourished baby.  89 pounds today.  I hate this fucking supposed food.  What I wouldn’t do for some beef stroganoff.  But the time is nigh, so my thought must be elsewhere.”  The time was indeed ripe for Gandhi to enact his grandest of plans.  He did advocate the policies of civil disobedience, but he had ulterior motives for such a bold approach.  He had intensely studied aggravated assault, personal injury and the money that could be made from such cases.  Gandhi waited for India to gain independence and then, and only then, would he produce the evidence of over two decades of abuse by British authorities.  Part of the reason why he adhered to such strict dietary laws and modest clothing was to better the appearance of bruises and the bloodstained cloth of his numerous dhotis.  We all know vegetarians bruise like peaches.  In order to incite British guards and soldiers to attack, Gandhi utilized classic taunting – it was as simple as that.  One British soldiers remembers one such verbal onslaught in 1939:  “He said, ‘Hey, white boy.  Yeah you, white boy.  Got some fucked up teeth there, son.  Where’d you go to university?  Ohhhhh, that’s right, you didn’t you stupid piece of shit.  Ah, I’m just kidding.  But seriously, I did have sex with your mother.’  I couldn’t take it anymore, so I beat him ruthlessly.”  After Gandhi’s death, Indian officials found some 2,000 case files on British soldiers, complete with photographs of his subsequent bruises from their attacks.  Gandhi was never able to execute his plan fully, as he got greedy and continued taunting.  His assassinator was no Indian by the by, but a rather husky British soldier whom Gandhi had called an “albino somosa.”

All Men Are Created Equal...

Myth: John Brown, the fanatical abolitionist, first gained notoriety during the Bleeding Kansas crisis during the 1850s, in which proslavery and abolitionist factions vied for supremacy in the Kansas Territory.  Both sides knew what hung in the balance: Would Kansas enter the Union as a free state or slave state?  Most abolitionists advocated a pacifist approach when dealing with their proslavery counterparts, employing politics and diplomacy as their axes and swords.  John Brown on the other hand vehemently disagreed with this tactic.  He and a band of like-minded zealots skirmished with equally violent proslavery Border Ruffians, resulting in the death of many over a period of time.  Brown’s anger and frustration were eventually channeled into a plan to attack the US arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia.  With the consent of such political and social figures as Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman, Brown concocted a scheme to lead an armed insurrection led by slaves themselves.  After a mere 36 hours, the plan backfired on October 18^th 1859.  Seven were killed at the hands of Brown and his comrades, sending a shockwave of fear throughout Dixie.  Brown was executed by hanging a few months later in the December cold.

Fact:  John Brown was a man ahead of his time – a true progressive.  Abolitionists were a dime a dozen, and though it may seem like Brown was an ardent abolitionist, he most certainly was not.  No, no.  Brown was one of America’s first gay rights activists, petitioning more than a century before the first large-scale gay rights demonstrations even transpired.  His status as abolitionist is a combination of his colorblindness and the antislavery movement exploiting Brown’s affliction to further their agenda.  Brown did not see race, but he did see shirtless men.  Victorian dress was anything but freeing.  A Connecticut man by birth, Brown interacted with only a few homosexuals during his former years.  As homosexuality was not even spoken of during this sexually restrictive period of time, certain signs were flashed within the gay community to let one know they too were of their ilk.  A man revealing his bare ankle was the most common.  Brown became increasingly stifled during his New England rearing, and he yearned to flee to that bastion of the gay community – the Deep South.  Paradoxically, the same states that locked African-American men in shackles were also the most sexually liberal areas in the world.  Brown had most likely heard of such havens as the majestic Cotton Club of Charleston, South Carolina, wherein gay men could dance amidst large, billowing bales of cotton (a precursor to the foam parties of the 20^th century).  His naivety was later shattered as he laid eyes upon hoards of shirtless men, lashed by, what appeared to be, fully clothed homophobes.  Where was this bastion he had heard so much about?  Brown’s colorless world became even drabber, as the same people who were once so accepting of homosexuality chastised his brethren.  That bastion did exist, he just, literally, couldn’t see it.  Enraged, Brown turned violent.  Men such as Frederick Douglass utilized his rage to the abolitionist’s advantage.  “I don’t care much for Brown’s alternative lifestyle choices, but during this tumultuous time, we must fight fire with fire and rid the South of its peculiar institution.  And if man-love be vanquished as well, so be it…all the better.”  Douglass, the fervent abolitionist and closet homophobe, played puppet master and pulled the strings on Brown’s hardened heart.  Thinking he was arming the largest gay army ever assembled, Brown failed and was executed by a racist South and homophobic North, soon to be torn apart.