The Kodaikanal Gandhi Prize 2022
First Prize
(shared)
MEHULI GOSWAMI
Revisiting the Mahatma in the Age of Polarisation
Every page of the newspaper that I turn, fills my head with doubts and disappointments. Each page carries bold headlines etched like scars on paper, reporting instances of raging political extremism, intolerance, terrorism and callous hate speeches. Every morning my passive eyes scan through the pages and I purse my lips while my mind buzzes with thoughts of the grim reality and an over-darkened future. It makes me wonder if ‘leaders’ are becoming blind to the chaos ensuing in the world or if we are waiting for trouble to hit the roof till it’s time for action. These media reports showcase a clear reflection of our present society based on divisive affiliations devoid of humanity.
Somewhere amidst the hollow cries for rights, revolution and war, the essence of freedom and its subsequent responsibility lies forgotten. Activists, politicians, and citizens all raise a cry for individual liberty without first understanding that freedom is followed by immense responsibility. Everyone wants to claim his or her right to free speech, action and association without first determining their duties which are due to other fellow beings. This animalistic greed and absolutism are especially widespread in this era, attributes to easy access to the masses through the internet, revolutionised print media and numerous news channels. This stems from a place of collective insecurity where the only path of survival is by trampling upon your brethren. In India, it is evident by way of increased communal disharmony, militancy, hate speech, religious fundamentalism, fake news and majoritarian party politics.
The present social and political situation in our country reminds me of a great mind who claimed that individual rights and civil liberties must go hand in hand with societal harmony. With two World Wars fought in his lifetime, his revolutionary ideas of non-violence and satyagraha, seemed like an anachronism to an age drunk on retaliatory violence, mass destruction and brutal suppression. The ‘naked fakir’ as he was called in the West, held civil rights and individual liberty to the highest esteem, pioneering a nationalist movement based on the search for truth and non-violence. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi or the ‘Mahatma’ a name given by Rabindranath Tagore has left behind a crucial legacy affirming individual rights and liberties, which can be interpreted as a distinct message in today’s day and age.
Gandhiji said, ‘Freedom of speech and civil liberty, are the very roots of Swaraj. Without these the foundations of Swaraj will remain weak’. His unequivocal stance on these issues guided his non-violent struggle against colonial rule in twentieth-century India. As maintained by Gandhiji, the ideas of freedom, rights, duties and responsibility on the individual level were tributaries to the intangible river of Swaraj. For Gandhiji, the notion of Swaraj was interlinked to Satyagraha or the truth force, since it was the only means through which the masses could reclaim their rights and perform their duties. According to Mahatma Gandhi, ‘Swaraj’ or self-rule was a dual doctrine where the individual is granted autonomy and liberty to search for truth and take responsibility for various civil duties while the nation, as a whole, salvages its independence from foreign imperialism and establishes self-governance. Therefore, ‘Swaraj’, as described by Gandhiji, was not only comprised of self-governance but was based on the principles of a constantly evolving individual having an immense capacity for dispassionate self-assessment, self-reliance and self-mastery. Gandhiji proclaimed, ‘In the democracy that I have envisaged ... there will be equal freedom for all. Everybody will be his own master.’ For the Mahatma, freedom for each individual irrespective of his or her gender, social background, economic status, religious affiliation or ethnicity, was extremely vital. He observed, ‘Real Swaraj (freedom) will come, not by the acquisition of authority by a few, but by the acquisition of the capacity by all to resist authority when abused’. This magnanimous statement rings especially true when contrasted with the contemporary social and political scenario in India, where the rule of the majority seems to be drowning out the persistent whispers of the minority.
The Indian democratic framework, although based on the guiding principles of equality, freedom and secularism, is progressively shifting towards a more majoritarian approach. Instances of violence and virulence on communal lines have been increasing, ranging from the mass exodus of Kashmiri Pandits, the 2002 Gujarat Riots, to the recent incident where government officials tore down the homes of Muslim rioters when a clash broke out between Hindu and Muslim groups in Madhya Pradesh, the alleged use of spy software against politicians, the peremptory exercise of the colonial sedition statute and cursory hate speeches aimed at hurting religious sentiments. It has been quoted in the book named The Mahatma, Vol VI, ‘The rule of majority does not mean that it should suppress the opinion of even an individual if it is sound. The opinion of an individual should have greater weight than the opinion of many, if that opinion is sound on merits. That is my view of real democracy.’
Although, Gandhiji emphasised a stateless democratic society, for him tyranny of the majority was never a solution. The emphasis on the individual was so great in his philosophy that the opinion of the masses ranked lower than that of a person. Gandhian principles, therefore focus on the individual as the central driving force for all change achieved through persistent Satyagraha. Gandhiji mentioned in Young India, ‘The rule of majority has a narrow application, i.e., one should yield to the majority in matters of detail. But it is slavery to be amenable to the majority, no matter what its decisions are. Democracy is not a state in which people act like a sheep. Under democracy, individual liberty of opinion and action is jealously guarded. I therefore, believe that the minority has a perfect right to act differently from the majority.’
Gandhiji believed that freedom of speech, action, and association were the life force of a pluralistic and democratic society such as India. However, the exercise of these rights to suppress the voices of another was diametrically opposite to his philosophy. If the right to free speech or expression of one individual curtails the rights of another individual, it is not freedom at all but archaic and subtle domination. In this context, according to Gandhian philosophy, freedom is akin to a flimsy eye-wash attempting to cover up its absence and inadequacy.
Gandhiji led by example and propagated that banning certain destructive elements did not justify the elimination of rights or the vehement slaughter of human beings. He believed that prohibition must take place through constructive persuasion and gradual change in mentality rather than through coercive measures. M.K. Gandhi observed in Young India, ‘We must patiently try to bring round the minority to our view by gentle persuasion and argument.’
On the other hand, Mahatma Gandhi was against the formation of an autocratic minority who would ignore the needs and aspirations of the people to further their fanatic objectives. The solution to the limitations of a democratic society was not the emergence of a despotic minority community in retaliation to aggressive majoritarianism. The minority in this context must act like an interjector to the pre-eminence of the majority without the abuse of violence, virulent speech or schismatic policies. The superiority of the majority over the minority is as undemocratic as the security of privileges of minority communities over the rights of the general public.
The Constitution of India grants to the citizens of India, the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a). It implies that all citizens of the country have the right to express their views, opinions, beliefs etc. freely by mouth, writing, printing or through any other means. Article 19(1)(b) and 19 (1)(g) guarantee to its citizen, the right to free assembly without arms, to form unions, and to practice any profession or reside in any part of the country respectively. Nevertheless, the Constitution provides the above-mentioned rights within the context of reasonable restrictions to ensure that individual rights do not interfere with national security and the well-being of other citizens. However, the prevailing scenario highlights the fact that the significance of these restrictions is lost to political leaders as well as ordinary citizens. These rights were granted to amicably discuss and put forward multitudinous prospects to embody the spirit of pluralistic Indian society. The prime objective of the makers of the Constitution was to ensure that the State does not override the needs and aspirations of its citizens and instead acts as a guardian ensuring all-around development and well-being. The ideas of free speech, action and opinion are taken for granted and often abused to further selfish and indifferent goals without any consideration for the harm they might cause to the sensibilities of other people. The use of free speech is essentially null and void if it is exerted to snatch away the freedom of another individual or manipulated to cause distress to a community. The manhandling of freedom of speech and expression has disastrous consequences for society witnessed in recent times through the commotion caused by careless remarks of leaders against religious figures. Therefore, as Gandhiji emphasised, simply claiming the right of free action, opinion or expression for oneself is devoid of any value if the same is not guaranteed to others. Raghavan Iyer, aptly observes the following lines in his book, The Moral and Political Thought of Mahatma Gandhi, ‘Gandhi equated freedom with self-rule because he wished to build into the concept of freedom the notion of obligation to others as well as to oneself while retaining the element of voluntariness that is the very basis of freedom. The notion of self-rule implies the voluntary internalisation of our obligation to others which will be obstructed by our placing ourselves at the mercy of our selfish desires.’
Thus, in my modest opinion, although Gandhian ideals in present-day India seem utopian in comparison to our sombre reality, it is the perfect time to revisit his teachings and implement them in a renewed fashion. The exemplar Gandhian propositions of Satyagraha and Swaraj have been reduced to mere hypotheses without any practical application. Yet in these turbulent times with shifting geo-political strategies, internal turmoil, vote bank politics, and fake news, the ideas of Mahatma Gandhi are gaining importance. The use of rationalisation instead of force and individual Swaraj are the two ways to handle the rapid polarisation of Indian politics.
The lessons from the legacy of the Mahatma need to be re-learned and executed to temper the various evils prevailing in our society from sectarian politics, religious fundamentalism, abuse of Fundamental Rights of free speech and expression and rising intolerance. In conclusion, the essence and vitality of freedom of speech and action can be condensed in the following excerpt from Mahatma Gandhi’s speech at the Congress session in Ahmedabad in 1921, ‘This resolution is ... a humble and an irrevocable challenge to authority which in order to save itself wants to crush freedom of opinion and freedom of association – the two lungs that are absolutely necessary for a man to breathe the oxygen of liberty; and if there is any authority in this country that wants to curb the freedom of speech and freedom of association, I want to be able to say in your name, from this platform, that that authority will perish, unless it repents, before an India that is steeled with high courage, noble purpose and determination, even if every one of the men and women who choose to call themselves Indians is blotted out of the earth.’
MEHULI GOSWAMI
DPS, NAVI MUMBAI
No comments:
Post a Comment