The Kodaikanal Gandhi Prize 2021
Second Prize
(shared)
Noor Sabharwal
Neev Academy, Bangalore
The Moderate Radical
Dinyar Patel’s recent biography of Dadabhai Naoroji suggests that Gandhi ji considered Naoroji the father of the nation. The biography also interestingly describes Naoroji as too moderate for the radicals and too radical for the moderates, something that could be used to describe Gandhi ji as well. His ability to balance practicality and idealism was his genius, his enduring legacy, and my inspiration.
In 1909, Mahatma Gandhi, fondly referred to as Bapu, used the time and space on a long sea journey from London to South Africa to write Hind Swaraj. This book represented his idealistic vision for nonviolent political change – non-cooperation. It was highly impactful because it laid out the tools and strategy that Gandhi ji used from 1915 (when he arrived in India) till 1947 (when the British left India). It synthesized his genius in finding the right balance between thinking big and new thoughts while persisting with getting small things done till big things happened.
An important anecdote about the creation of Hind Swaraj that conveys the intensity of his vision, is the fact that he wrote with such fury that when one hand started aching, he wrote with the other while still writing in two languages (Gujarati and English). This book outlines four major themes. Firstly, he makes the case for the notion that ‘Home Rule is Self Rule’. He expresses concern over India remaining anglicized after independence. As he puts it, some "want English rule without the Englishman ... that is to say, (they) would make India English. And when it becomes English, it will be called not Hindustan but Englishman. This is not the Swaraj I want.”1 Second, he highlights that independence is only possible through passive resistance, stating that violence is not only abhorrent but counter-productive. He believes, “The force of love and pity is infinitely greater than the force of arms.” To exert this, he brings in the concept of Swadeshi (self-reliance). He suggests that all Indians refuse trade and dealings with the British. Addressing the colonizers he says, “If you do not concede our demand, we shall no longer be your petitioners." He makes the valid actionable point that if trade is the value of India to the British, remove trade from the equation. Finally, Gandhi ji argues that without rejecting western civilization, India will never be free. He remains very critical of western civilization stating that “India is being ground down, not under the English heel, but under that of modern civilization." He speaks about civilization not just in relation to India but argues that “Western civilization is such that one has only to be patient and it will be self-destructed." In this, he posits that western civilization by its own virtue is unhealthy. The brilliance of this book and the man is that while he speaks of dreams, values, and philosophy, his pragmatism shines through because this text is a battle plan.
Gandhi ji’s biggest and most universal legacy is the concept of Ahimsa. This word has its origins in Sanskrit with the word ‘san’ meaning to kill. In this form, it means desirous to kill, but this is negated by the prefix-a. So the literal translation of ahimsa is lacking any desire to kill. Bapu learned this concept from his wife as she deliberately resisted conforming to his will through by quietly suffering his stupidity. He extended the definition of ahimsa beyond just non-violence, to what he stated was an “infinitely higher” meaning. To not offend anybody, internally or explicitly. Being the first human to extend this principle to the social and political sphere, his innovation faced resistance and ridicule. He was critiqued for being overly imaginative, but he affirmed that it was a tool for the common people. In the struggle for India's independence, he insisted on the adoption of civilized methods of non-violence and suffering. His stand for the freedom of India was not based on hatred for the British. He famously said, “I am patriotic because I am human and humane” proving that his intentions did not focus on destroying the oppressors, but rather empowering the oppressed. While nonviolence in a battle for independence from a colonial power seemed far-fetched, Gandhi ji grounded his ambition with action, determination, and faith.
In 1921, Gandhi ji and his followers planned a non-cooperation movement to force the British government of India to grant self-governance to India. It was one of his first organized acts of large-scale civil disobedience and became an opportunity for Bapu to gain attention and trust. Additionally, the movement built on the anger that lingered from the widespread horror in India over the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh: in Amritsar in April 1919, the British-led troops killed several hundred Indians. Anger compounded as the government failed to address those responsible for this failure of humanity, notably General Reginald Dyer; he had commanded the massacre and was welcomed back to his home as a hero. Gandhi strengthened the movement further by providing support to the Muslim campaign against the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire after World War I. The movement was to be non-violent and consisted of Indians resigning their titles, boycotting government institutions, and eventually, refusing to pay taxes. However, a revolt in Kerala by the Muslim Moplahs (August 1921) and a number of other violent outbreaks alarmed the originally moderate opinion. After an enraged mob murdered police officers in Chauri Chaura village (now in the state of Uttar Pradesh) in February of 1922, Bapu called off the movement despite significant opposition to his decision from fellow leaders 2. In keeping with the idealistic context of non-cooperation, he made the difficult decision to not use the rage of the public due to the potential violent and long-term damage this could cause to his strategy. This did not mean he was underinvested or weak, but exactly the opposite. He allowed logic to overpower his emotions in this decision showing restraint, thinking of the long term, and creating curious awe among supporters and opposition.
Through the Purna Swaraj declaration, Gandhi ji exemplified the importance of threatening. On the banks of the Ravi river in Lahore under the leadership of young Jawaharlal Nehru, Congress adopted the resolution Purna Swaraj or complete independence in 1930. The resolution read: “The British Government in India has not only deprived the Indian people of their freedom but has based itself on the principle of exploitation of the masses, and has ruined India economically, politically, culturally and spiritually. We believe, therefore, that India must sever the British connection and attain Purna Swaraj or Complete Independence.” 3 The resolution further laid down the methods to achieve the goal, stating that “the most effective way of gaining our freedom is not through violence.” His mental toughness manifested itself in the Declaration of the Independence of India as he used morality and conviction to see his beliefs through. The Purna Swaraj resolution was too radical for the moderates who wanted more dialogue with the British and too moderate for the radicals who wanted independence through violence. Hearing them, he found compromise; he managed to represent a diverse oppressed majority.
His ability to reconcile opposites was captured again in the 24-day salt march over 250 km that began in Sabarmati Ashram and ended at Dandi on 6th April 1930. The British passed the India Salt Act of 1882 that created a government monopoly on the manufacture and sale of salt. When Bapu spoke of resistance to this, his fellow congress members and spectators laughed at him. The Statesman, a prominent newspaper, wrote about the choice: "It is difficult not to laugh, and we imagine that will be the mood of most thinking Indians”.2 Lord Irwin, the Viceroy wrote to London saying, “At present, the prospect of a salt campaign does not keep me awake at night”. Bapu placed faith in his march, understanding that an item of daily use would resonate more with the masses. The salt tax provided 8.2% of the British Raj tax revenue and hurt the poorest Indians most significantly. Explaining his choice, he said, "Next to air and water, salt is perhaps the greatest necessity of life." He felt that this protest would greatly dramatize Purna Swaraj in a meaningful way by touching Indians of all castes, religions, and backgrounds. The leaders quickly realized the power of salt as a symbol when the protests gathered steam and became a direct action campaign of tax resistance and nonviolent protest against the British salt monopoly. Bapu started this march with 78 of his trusted volunteers but ended with over 60,000 people. While this movement did not have great significance in the legal or formal affairs of the Indian’s oppression, it served a much deeper purpose. Bapu’s ability to synthesize showed that he knew the value of symbols or what today would be called marketing and soft power as a tool in his battle for “right against might”. In promoting such a symbolic event, he changed hearts and convinced minds.
Gandhi ji had a significant bearing on the choice of the first Prime Minister of India. From Rajendra Prasad to Maulana Azad to Sardar Patel, he considered many capable leaders. Maulana Shaukat Ali called Patel the “volcano in the ice”, he was also the greatest organizer of the party. However, he was 14 years older than Nehru, and both Gandhi ji and Patel saw themselves as men to free the country and leave the management to the younger generation.4 When asked by a British journalist if he would be the next prime minister, Bapu quickly said,“It will be reserved for younger minds and stouter hearts”.2 Considering their intentions, the ill health of Patel, and the “Nehru personality” as one of the darling faces of the youth of India, Gandhi favoured Jawaharlal Nehru India to be India’s first Prime Minister. This must have been a hard choice but again, reflected his willingness to take the long view.
Another issue important to Bapu was gender equality. In Young India (1921) he states that the female sex is “the nobler of the two as it is the embodiment of sacrifice, silent suffering, humility, faith, and knowledge”. As a privileged, renowned, and educated man in the 20th century, it was very easy for him to fall into the mould awaiting him. Instead, he made a choice. One based on the ideal of equality for all. He became one of the first Indian political figures to support women having their own “sphere of activity” realizing that the sexism women faced was counterproductive in his fight for India’s long-term progress. His belief in equality transformed somewhat into equity in this regard. Learning from the oppression of the British Raj he stated, “the contrary custom” to the current oppression of women “should be to prefer women, merit being equal, to men even if the preference should result in men being entirely displaced by women”.5 His dependable kindness became recognized and all the more powerful with his action-oriented thinking. At the Round Table Conference’s Federal Structure Committee meeting in 1931, he highlighted that while the Congress did not wish to implement any scheme of nominating members to legislative bodies to give adequate representation to minorities, the organization was obligated to judge candidates fairly. Around the same time, he beckoned women to take part in the Satyagraha movement. The fact that 17,000 of around 30,000 persons who courted arrest during the Salt Satyagraha were women volunteers is a conspicuous example of their equal role under the leadership of the Mahatma.6 The message he gave to the women of India was of such a nature that they responded to it in a manner that they had never done before. Sarojini Naidu, Kamala Nehru, Sushila Nayyar, Kamaladevi Chattopadhyay, Anasuya Sarabhai, and Miraben are a few of the illustrious women associated with the Gandhian movement. His ideas about women and their role in political life were a departure from the 20th-century norms restricting women. He saw them as Indians, and hence, made conscious attempts to articulate the implicit connection between public and private life. He also extended his goals into the future by looking ahead and redefining independence as “the day a woman can walk freely on the roads at night” or the day in which Indians are free from all systems of oppression.
In The Years That Changed the World2, Ramchandra Guha eloquently highlights the true meaning of swaraj. He states that for Gandhi ji, political and legal independence meant nothing unless “it was accompanied by religious harmony, caste and gender equality, and the development of self-respect in every Indian”. While other leaders used the word swaraj to mean national independence, he made Indians aware of its “true or original meaning, swa-raj, or self-rule”. His dedication more than to the country and politics was to every Indian. As a leader, he exemplified the purpose of not building followers but more leaders. It is almost impossible to imagine India getting independence without the team of rivals (a wonderful book by another historian that describes another great world leader) that Bapu nourished. His ideal was his vision for India and his practical approach was to open hearts and minds.
Gandhi ji considered his biggest failure to be Partition. In his stout opposition, he proposed to the Viceroy that Jinnah be appointed prime minister in the hopes that this would satisfy his ambition and wean him away from his insistence on Pakistan.7 Lord Mountbatten agreed that this would please Jinnah’s vanity, however, Congress leaders worried that opting out of the constitutional arena would be the wrong choice. Further, appeasing Jinnah would not stop the partition as leaders in the Muslim League would overpower him. Nehru described Jinnah stating that they were up against “something which is neither political, nor economic, nor reasonable, nor logical.” Patel was also clear that there would be no more appeasement of the Muslim League. Accordingly, Bapu withdrew his offer stating that the decision had been arrived at after taking into account the pulse of the people of all communities. “The demand has been granted because you asked for it. The Congress never asked for it. But the Congress can feel the pulse of the people. It realized that the Khalsa as also the Hindus asked for it.”7 In this instance, his practicality took the reins as his emotional investment turned to desperation. Selflessly, he allowed his party to make the decision, despite his obvious preference to oppose partition.
Bapu spent the last year of his life fighting for the ideal of unity, but when he realized this was no longer practical he stepped back. Even on his last day, he used a meeting with Sardar Patel to express his practical idealism. His practicality was captured by his delaying of a prayer meeting by 10 minutes to take a promise from Sardar Patel, stating that he would not resign from his post despite his disagreements with Nehru. He counseled him of the importance of working together for the future of India’s unity and prosperity. His idealism came through in the same conversation when he reportedly reiterated his decision from a few days earlier: “I want to go to Lahore. I do not want to go with any police or military escort. I want to go with faith and trust in the Muslims there. Let them kill me if they want. Let the Government stop me if they will. But how can the Government stop me? They will have to kill me if they want to stop me”.8 His practicality grounded him but he never let go of his ideals. His life was his message because he taught us that in a gentle way you can shake the world.
References
1. Gandhi, Mohandas. Hind Swaraj. S. Ganesan & Co., Publishers, Triplicane, 1921.
2. Guha, Ramachandra. Gandhi: The Years That Changed the World. Vintage Canada, 2019.
3. “Constitution of India.” CAD,
4. "NEHRU : AUTHORITY, INTIMACY AND VOCATION IN THE LIFE OF A REVOLUTIONARY on JSTOR." Jstor.org. n.d. Web. 28 Aug. 2021. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/41854623>
5. "Harijan - Harijan, Ahmedabad, Sunday, April 7, 1946 - South Asia Archive." Southasiaarchive.com. n.d. Web. 28 Aug. 2021. <http://www.southasiaarchive.com/Content/sarf.120270/224227>
6. "Gandhi on Women on JSTOR." Jstor.org. n.d. Web. 28 Aug. 2021. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/4374897>
7. Collins, Larry, and Sohravardi Saīd. Freedom at Midnight. Nigārishāt, 2002.
8. Gandhi. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi. The Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Govt. of India, 1973.
Edited by the Out of Print team
No comments:
Post a Comment