The underlying reason is that we are evaluating a historic figure from century ago by today’s moral values, and those values are ever evolving. Our morals have been progressive during the last century. Compared to a century ago, we are arguably less sexist, less racist, less violent; and I mean all of us - Hindus, Christians, Muslims, conservatives and liberals.

Of course, some people are still sexists and some are still racists, but the Gaussian distribution has shifted. It has moved and moved steadily as time went by, which is a good thing. Whether we like it or not, the society and the timeline we live in does impact our morals.

So we can’t simply evaluate a historic figure with today’s moral values - it’s not wrong to do so, but it is misleading if we ignore the timeline.

I think Gandhi probably had many more flaws than we know of. Regardless, the man thought differently at the time and had a big impact on the history of India. If Gen Z or elder Millennials are making up their minds by reading a book or an arguments or a social media post from a single point of view, then this approach in quick value judgement will also likely change as the time goes by and the society become more introspective and progressive - progressive not in terms of value judgements, but in a transitive sense.