Mahatma Gandhi remains one of the most iconic figures of the 20th century, revered globally as a symbol of non-violent resistance, moral leadership, and the anti-colonial struggle. His leadership in India’s independence movement against British colonialism turned him into a universal symbol of justice and human dignity. Yet, in recent years, Gandhi’s legacy has come under intense scrutiny, both within India and across Africa, as new generations examine his life beyond the celebrated narratives and confront his controversial views, particularly during his time in South Africa.
Reverence in India and the Critiques Within
In India, Gandhi is often revered as the “Father of the Nation.” His philosophy of satyagraha (truth-force) inspired mass mobilization without violence, shaping India’s independence in 1947. Streets, institutions, and even the country’s currency bear his image. However, despite this veneration, critiques have persisted from opposing Indian schools of thought.
Dalit leaders such as B.R. Ambedkar, for instance, openly challenged Gandhi’s stance on caste, accusing him of upholding aspects of the discriminatory system rather than dismantling it entirely. Others argue that his economic vision of rural self-sufficiency was impractical for a modernizing nation. Even within mainstream politics today, some Hindu nationalist voices portray Gandhi’s commitment to inclusivity and communal harmony as a weakness that contributed to the partition of India.
These critiques have led to a more complex, sometimes polarized, remembrance of Gandhi at home: a figure both sanctified and contested.
The African Lens: From Admiration to Disillusionment
For decades, Africans saw Gandhi as a model of anti-colonial struggle. His methods of non-violent resistance inspired liberation leaders from Nelson Mandela to Kwame Nkrumah. Monuments in Ghana, South Africa, and other African states honored his global legacy.
Yet, recent archival research and public debate have reignited questions about Gandhi’s attitudes toward Black South Africans during his 21-year stay in the country. Historians have documented writings in which Gandhi, while fighting for the rights of Indians in South Africa, often distanced himself from Africans and even used disparaging terms.
These revelations have sparked protests, particularly among African students and intellectuals. In 2015, a Gandhi statue at the University of Ghana was removed after a campaign argued that honoring him ignored his record of supporting racial hierarchies. For many young Africans, this has shifted Gandhi from a universal hero to a more ambiguous figure, one whose global image was built partly on overlooking inconvenient truths.
Diplomacy, Symbolism, and the Rewriting of History
The reevaluation of Gandhi’s legacy also reveals a deeper global tension: how societies remember their heroes, and whether moral icons can—or should—be judged solely by the standards of their time. Defenders argue that Gandhi’s transformation from a lawyer in South Africa to a leader of non-violence in India reflects growth and evolution, not hypocrisy. Critics, however, stress that acknowledging the full scope of his life—including his prejudices—is essential to prevent romanticizing incomplete histories.
In Africa, where the wounds of colonialism and racism remain raw, Gandhi’s story now resonates less as a universal symbol and more as a contested figure whose contradictions mirror the broader struggles of memory, justice, and accountability.
A Legacy Reconsidered
Today, Gandhi’s legacy sits at a crossroads. His philosophy of non-violence continues to inspire movements from civil rights in the United States to pro-democracy struggles worldwide. At the same time, his contested past—especially in the eyes of Africans confronting the long shadows of racial oppression—forces a more nuanced view.
For some, Gandhi remains a towering figure of resistance. For others, he represents the limits of early 20th-century reformers who challenged one system of oppression while upholding others. Either way, the debate underscores a critical truth: history is never static. Heroes can inspire, but they must also be examined, critiqued, and understood in their full complexity.