Is The Peaceful Rebel Always Flawless?

The Rebel Archetype: Non-Violent Resistor

The peaceful revolutionary 

6 to 7 min read 

There are many who fit this archetype such as Martin Luther King Jr, Thich Nhat Hanh, Nelson Mandela and Mikhail Gorbachev, to name a few! However, the two rebels I've chosen are the most recognised and quintessential non-violent resistors: Mahatma Gandhi and the Historical Jesus, but I'm only going on the Gospel of Mark, only because it's the oldest!

These men rebelled against the status quo, preaching and instilling non-violence, moral reform, and compassion. If we can recognise their human flaws alongside their strengths, it reveals much about them as individuals!

Gandhi: Beating Back the British Empire Without Bashing Anyone!

Gandhi, the little bald guy with those round glasses, cleverly rebelled against British colonialism with his philosophy of Satyagraha, which means clinging to truth. It’s all about non-violently expressing disruption while holding onto peaceful principles! His virtues attracted admiration, but Gandhi’s personal life shows the imperfect humanity behind his ideals.

While he preached simplicity and self-discipline, his treatment of his family was less than equal. His eldest son Harilal became estranged, and when his wife fell ill, he refused modern medicine, opting for natural remedies—it may well have contributed to her death.

This humble sage didn’t speak nicely of Black Africans, using terms like 'savages,' believing in the stupid ideas of racial superiority. He promoted Indian rights over Black rights in South Africa and supported segregation when it benefited Indians. Eventually, he woke up, changed his views and spoke out against all racism—goodo!

Gandhi also drilled sexual abstinence into his family and community. This pious peacemaker deliberately tested the grit of his celibacy by sleeping beside young women or teens! When females become testing devices for married men, it raises eyebrows! What did he think might have happened if his abstinance abruptly failed him? Would he fall victim and be swamped by their teen lust? 

Despite his oddities, Gandhi’s approach at resisting the British was tactically sound. His Satyagraha was methodical and fostered global sympathy. The strategy brought tangible success—liberation, not his other, uh... goals!

Mark’s Jesus (Yeshua): Moral Vision, Strategic Missteps

If we ignore the theological history and supernatural stuff, we see quite a different Jesus (who was called Yeshua). All the other Gospel writers were a tad 'Ed Sheeran' with Mark, as in 'borrowing content'. However, skipping to Luke 22:36 for a moment, we see something quite strange for the prince of peace to say: '...if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.'

Modern Christian theology fails to explain why a traitor was paid to identify Jesus for his arrest; famous controversial figures stand out, and plenty saw him table tipping in the temple. If the story is true, he must not have been as popular as his we think. 

Yeshua is described as an emotionally unstable man resorting to calling his religious adversaries names, like hypocrites and vipers. He regularly critised their legalism, but still entered into legalistic debates with them! Yet his group carried weapons—one of them allegedly cut-off a Roman's ear! 

Gospel writing and interjection has Yeshua rebuke violence, healing the ear to maintain a peaceful martyr option. The group were an armed sect who fought back and lost it's confrontation with the authorities, but defiantly, the sect continued it's own narrative and formed churches—Tomai, Kephas, many other disciples and followers were indistinguishable from Yeshua. 

People were expected to leave their families to join. Followers likely contributed financially, but above all; he expected them to die with him. He treated a non-jewish woman in a racially charged manner, comparing her to a dog! It suggests they held a nationally focused religious scope. 

Yeshua's Strategic Flaws: Alienation and Inevitability

Yeshua's rebellion against religious authority may have resulted with personal moral victory, but it all lacked any benefit to anyone else. If he had an endgame, it was secret, like his attempts at hiding his flirtations with being the messiah? Was it his fantasy? A self image that lifted him above those with whom he argued? Why so coy? Who knows? It’s all speculative! 

Openly antagonising the religious elite was like squeezing the ghoulies of Tiberius Caesar for not following a kosher cuisine! However, I must stress, Yeshua's only enemy was Orthodox Judaism, not Rome! Was this a failed resistance movement? I suspect Yeshua may well have planned to replace his countries Orthodoxy with his own system, rendering it a kingdom of god. The Christian religion has had it's sights on converting the world. 

We all Have Faults

There you go—both Gandhi and Yeshua could throw a wobbly just like the next bloke! The pious peace brokering in the history books, all those centuries of sermonised poppycock do not mean these men were better than everyone else! 

Yeshua was impulsive, emotional, sometimes irrational behaviour. Whatever his plan was, Mark alluded to it with mysterious riddle and metaphor.

Gandhi, however, was a clear sighted man with a targeted plan and his followers often supported him. Unfortunately, his unusual sexual 'tests' would stand out as a red flag nowadays! Like Jesus he alienated family members and showed beliefs of racial inferiority. 

The human animal, the person, our species is faulty. Maybe it’s time to stop putting our role models on pedestals? 

They are more interesting worts and all!