Gandhi and The Myth of Non-Violence
By Simon O'Neill 26 April 2007
Mahatma Gandhi is feted as the leader of the non-violent campaign for India's independence. Many believe he showed how to change the world peacefully. But as Simon O'Neill explains, this is a myth that hides the truth about both the independence movement, and Gandhi's role in it.
The independence movement was ultimately held back by Gandhi's elitist ideas. According to George Orwell, who was a police officer in India, "Gandhi made it easier for the British to rule India, because his influence was always against taking any action that would make any difference." (The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell, Vol. 2, p136.)
Gandhi became involved in the struggle against British rule in 1915, joining Congress, the party of independence. Congress was divided into those who lobbied with petitions and those who advocated armed resistance. Initially at least, Gandhi's tactic of non-violent action took the movement forward by involving masses of Indians and uniting the various forces that wanted the British out: the millions of industrial and agricultural workers; the middle classes and professionals; and the Indian capitalists, anxious to be rid of the English tariffs and taxes.
But through action, the masses gained confidence and began to act independently. For example, in 1919 the British sought to extend wartime restrictions on civil rights, causing enormous resentment throughout India. Gandhi called a hartal, or general strike. The hugely successful action led to spontaneous mass marches and more strikes, as well as sporadic rioting.
In response the British machine-gunned 379 people to death and wounded another 1200 in the city of Amritsar. Protests and strikes broke out across India, and demonstrators clashed with police. Over 1,000 Indians and 4 British died in the disturbances.
Horrified at the violence, Gandhi called off the campaign, describing the hartal as "a blunder of Himalayan dimensions which had enabled ill-disposed persons, not true passive resisters at all, to perpetrate disorder." (R.P. Dutt, India Today, 1940, p304.) He turned his attention to reforms passed by the British parliament, and instructed the movement to "settle down quietly to work so as to make them a success." (Subas Chandra Bose, The Indian Struggle 1920-1934, p68.)
But the movement wouldn't retreat so easily. In 1920, workers launched a strike wave, and Gandhi began a campaign of "non-violent non-cooperation", with voters boycotting elections and students boycotting colleges. In 1921, mass struggles erupted across the country. By the end of that year, all Congress leaders except Gandhi were in prison.
Then at the height of the struggle, a crowd of villagers responded to police violence by burning a police station, killing 22 police officers. Once again, a horrified Gandhi promptly cancelled all civil disobedience across India.
As Congress leader Subhas Bose wrote, "to sound the order to retreat just when public enthusiasm was reaching the boiling point was nothing short of a national calamity". (Subas Chandra Bose, The Indian Struggle 1920-1934, p90.) Other Congress leaders sent letters of protest to Gandhi from prison. But Gandhi replied that the men in prison were "civilly dead" and had no say over policy.
Gandhi's backdown demoralised the movement for several years. Congress had failed to provide a secular, united voice for the oppressed masses, and the movement began to polarise on religious lines.
In early 1930 came Gandhi's most famous campaign - the Salt March. Gandhi led 78 disciples to the sea, where they defied the British salt monopoly by making salt. When Gandhi was arrested, striking workers attacked police stations and law courts. Peasants launched a No Rent campaign and physically resisted police attempts to seize their property.
Throughout 1930, the struggle raged. The British dropped 500 tons of bombs and arrested 60,000. Strikes flared across India and one town, Sholapur, was seized by its workers, who held it for a week. Red flags began to outnumber Congress flags in demonstrations in Bombay, the centre of the industrial working class.
Gandhi was released as a "goodwill gesture" and tried to rein in the movement that was increasingly abandoning his leadership, signing an agreement with the British that did not even break the salt monopoly. Angry workers demonstrated against him, and political organisations across India condemned the deal.
Subhas Bose was scathing about Gandhi's retreat, saying "Today our condition is analogous to that of an army that has suddenly surrendered to the enemy in the midst of a protracted and strenuous campaign. And the surrender has taken place, not because the nation demanded it, not because the national army rose in revolt against its leaders and refused to fight, but either because the commander-in-chief was exhausted as a result of repeated fasting or because his mind and judgement were clouded ..." (Subhas Chandra Bose, "The Fickle Leader", in 100 Greatest Pre-Independence Speeches.)
During the Quit India campaign of 1942 the entire Congress leadership, including Gandhi, was arrested. Wholesale rioting broke out: 550 post offices were attacked, and 85 courthouses and other official buildings besieged. Crowds were machine-gunned from the air, public hanging was reintroduced, and the uprising was crushed.
In 1946 the struggle resumed. Acting together, Hindu and Muslim sailors mutinied and seized their ships. But instead of welcoming this unity, Gandhi denounced them, saying "a combination between the Hindus and the Muslims and others for the purpose of violent actions is unholy ...". (E.M.S. Namboodiripad, The Mahatma and the ISM, People's Publishing House, New Delhi 1959, p109.)
The combination of Hindus and Muslims may have horrified Gandhi, but it starkly contrasts with the religious violence that was to come.
The rising violence meant the costs for Britain of maintaining its colony were outweighing the shrinking benefits. Independence became inevitable. The only question was what form it would take.
A movement united along class lines could have constructed a united India. But Gandhi had derailed the popular upsurges of 1919-1934, and angry peasants and workers now turned to opportunist religious leaders, who demanded independence on the basis of Partition - the division of Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan. In the chaos, millions were murdered in religious violence. India and Pakistan today remain close to war, and both countries suffer massive inequality and oppression.
As an inspiration or guide in the struggle against oppression, Gandhi is a false god. His commitment to non-violence meant he turned away from victory at key moments, and failed to unite India's poor and oppressed in a fight for true liberation.
Gandhi failed to see that the violence of the oppressed can in no way be measured against the violence of the oppressor; the slave who strikes back at his or her owner to be free does so justly. Those fighting for liberation must make victory their commitment, and see violence as a tactical question.
This is the leadership that will win a world where ordinary people are truly free.
In his own words ...
Gandhi and Elitism
There was ultimately no place for ordinary people in Gandhi's strategy. As he said in 1934, "The masses have not yet received the message of satyagraha (non-violence), ... [it] needs to be confined to one qualified person at a time. In the present circumstances only one, and that myself, should for the time being bear the responsibility for civil disobedience." - Quoted in R.P. Dutt, India Today, 1940.
Selective on Non-Violence
Gandhi's non-violence was selective. In 1930, two platoons of Hindu troops refused to fire on Muslim rioters, instead breaking ranks and fraternising with them. Rather than supporting this non-violence, Gandhi said "A soldier who disobeys an order to fire breaks that oath which he has taken and renders himself guilty of criminal disobedience. I cannot ask officials and soldiers to disobey; for when I am in power I shall in all likelihood make use of the same officials and those same soldiers. If I taught them to disobey I should be afraid that they might do the same when I am in power." - Reply to French journalist Charles Petrasch on the question of the Gahrwali Soldiers, Le Monde, 20 February 1932.
On the Nazis and the Holocaust
Prescribing non-violence as the antidote to the Nazi war machine, Gandhi said: "The calculated violence of Hitler may even result in a general massacre of the Jews by way of his first answer to the declaration of such hostilities. But if the Jewish mind could be prepared for voluntary suffering, even the massacre ... could be turned into a day of thanksgiving and joy that Jehovah had wrought deliverance of the race even at the hands of the tyrant. For to the God-fearing, death has no terror. It is a joyful sleep to be followed by a waking that would be all the more refreshing for the long sleep." - M.K. Gandhi, Zionism and Anti-Semitism, from Non-Violence in Peace and War (Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1942), Vol 1.
On the Nazis and war
He went on, regarding Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia: "the Czechs may be annihilated for disobedience to orders. That would be a glorious victory for the Czechs." - M.K. Gandhi, For Pacifists (Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1949). Gandhi sought moral victory - the deaths of ordinary people meant nothing to this religious fanatic!
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment