Senior Assistant Professor

Department of History

Jammu University

Jammu  Jammu & Kashmir, India 

Gandhi becomes relevant not by solving contemporary  and future problems but his ideas, and practices offer hints towards making life more bearable by showing the way out. Politicians of both sides in India and other countries continue to invoke Gandhi’s various dimensions.The practice of nonviolence has been picked up by the world leaders who had made it a compelling power.

However, a lip service was paid to Gandhian ideals and desires after independence.Gandhi demanded that Congress be disbanded and Lok Sevak Sangh be established in its place after the formation of national government. Gandhi had declared that once the state belonged to India the role of constructive programme, like elimination of caste discrimination, communalism, and poverty in general and work for the vast majority of landless peasants would be addressed first.  Gandhi suggested that independent India needs the spirit of service more than spirit of party politics

In post-colonial India it was acceptable for the leading politicians to invoke Gandhi in symbolic ways with padyatrasetc., but not for poor people. Further,Gandhian principles were ignored on economic spheres. Focus on industries in the second five-year plan and less on agricultural sector led to shortage of food. Remedy was seen in green revolution style agriculture, relied heavily on imported seed, chemical fertilizer, pesticides herbicides and water from foreign funded irrigation project.  Though all these made the country self-sufficient in food but ran counter to the ethos of locally self-sufficient agriculture propagated by Gandhi.

Since independence Indian state has supported Gandhian style constructive work more in a token form rather than as a central strategy of mass welfare. Western style developmental model creating modern capitalist infrastructure is being emphasized.

However, Vinoba Bhave used Gandhian means to mitigate the grievances of the poor of the rural areas. Bhoodan and Gramdan were Gandhianinspired active constructive work. In 1950 landlords donated hundred acres of land for distribution among the poor. These works formed a part of overall Sarvodaye movement. Further, some dedicated works for public welfare were carried out by the cadres of lokSevak Sangh who were trained in Gandhian institutions, and self-help programme. Bhoodan movement provided better climate for the government land reform legislations. Another, notable example of Gandhian style activism in post independent Indian was Jay Prakash Narayan’s 1973 campaign against corruption. Students were mobilized through Gandhian techniques - strikes demonstrations and marches for total revolution. Ecological movement like Chipko became well known throughout  the world as an example of Gandhi an environmental action, with the image of women embracing trees became an icon of environmental movement as a whole .Chipko gave rise to series of protest since that time in which activists have embraced trees or established tree houses  to prevent commercial felling operations .One of the most important campaign of civil disobedience since 1980 has been against the  construction of huge dam on the Narmada river which dislocated the population of four hundred and fifty  villages. An environmental organization was formed to fight this project. The movement created an alternative political culture based on Gandhian principles. The Narmadabacho andolanis best seen as a campaign for economic and civil rights that employed Gandhian style satyagraha.

Gandhian constructive movement retained much vitality in 1980s, but his models of struggle have been confined only to the rural areas. In Ahmadabad there has been a highly successful struggle of self-employed women by founding the self-employed women’s associations in 1972. It exemplifies the best of Gandhian constructive values.

He always represented the ideal he stood for but the alternative perspectives by his critiques remained crucial illustration. He engaged with every one especially with his own enemies due to the possibility of conversion as no one is bereft of that. It is difficult to have modern history without Gandhi. Gandhi continued to present in our polity as his ideas are increasingly relevant in our times. Though his reputation has gone through several knocks in these years. He keeps coming back.

Limited by their own mental horizons, critiques unable to understand what Gandhi is all about. Churchill called Gandhi a thoroughly evil force, a traitor, hostile to British in every fibre. Lord Wavell, Viceroy from 1943 – 47, described him as malignant old man, tough politician and not a saint. Edward Thompson in1931 concluded that he now understood why the ancient Athenians had demanded Socrates’ death.

 Many argued that Gandhi’s spinning and anti -untouchability work was irrelevant to wider struggle. Africans accused him of racism. Race which has become a big issue globally included him in this new intellectual polemical context. Some have found fault with his policies with Dalit’s specially his relationship with Dr. Ambedker. Caste politics is a new context in which Gandhi’s ideas were to be discussed. New feminist ideologies which evolved in 1980s discussed him as sexist.

The critiques easily read his statements as being just transparent illustration of Gandhi true thoughts.

Those who called Gandhi a racist only by mapping his statements as being just transparent illustration of his true thoughts. Gandhi’s works words and action can’t tell him racist. Words of a lawyer can’t be taken as transparent illustration of the inner most thoughts. His statements were made in their own context as lawyers for Indians in South Africa who employed him to work for them as their privileges   were attacked and reduced.  It was illustrated in racially defined forms of discrimination. Gandhi as lawyer who had to argue his case for Indian s and Indian capitalist class in South Africa that Indians are in fact not racially inferior. He had to maintain and protect their privileges in court of law which itself depend upon racial reasoning. So his argument was also racial. The moment he stopped being a lawyer for arguing case for Indians in legal terms he stopped using racial languages. The context in which these statements were made has not struck the Gandhi’s critiques.

He certainly merits criticism on many ideologically driven accounts as anti-Dalit. His relationship with Ambedker of course polemical and hostile and had good reasons for them as both argued their case in the court of public opinion which could not be dismissed. It’s a complex relationship. Gandhi and Ambedker engaged in the kind of a conversation with each other and shared some terms in common.

Gandhi’s clinging on the basic philosophy of caste never seriously challenged untouchability in Hinduism. Ambedker total rejection of chaturvarna and its justification on hierarchy in which caste based graded division of labour based on birth which has killed the public spirit constructed an alternative ideology. Gandhi’s valorisation of Indian village as illustrative of unique unit of social economic political equilibrium, unpolluted by Colonialism reflecting the essence of Indian civilization was also critiqued by Ambedker. Alternatively, for Ambedker village settlements reflected the basic tenets of Hinduism which never recognized Dalit as integral part and untouchables always remained outside its fold.

Gandhi, certainly paternalistic towards Dalit does not seem to understand the nature of indignity and degradation on many occasions none the less he is the first Indian Politician who places the untouchability and caste discrimination at the very heart his constructive programme. He is the first Indian politician who says we cannot have swaraj if we do not address this extraordinary form of degradation. That cannot be taken away from him.

 Gandhi wrote in his defence in the column of Harijan,andreiterated his faith in Hinduism defending Varna system as mere arrangement of universally applicable division of occupation.Ambedker rejected the reformist solution as a deliberate attempt of obfuscating the real issue of empowering the Dalit. In famous Poona pact Ambedker in fact negotiated with Gandhi and the policy of reservations came out of those discussions for Dalit. Eventually he repudiates them because he thought that had Gandhi not forced him to withdraw from the communal award for Dalit offered by the British as Muslims, Dalitwould be better off with that.  Nevertheless, he continued to use the arch Gandhian terms satyagraha towards the end of his life even after Gandhi’s death. He continued to do Satyagraha so he has learned something from Gandhi by taking up the Gandhian term

Those who focused on Gandhian caste tend to take the caste issue, distinct from communal issue. In fact, they are completely connected. Separate electorate given as communal award to Muslims earlier in 1909 extended to Dalit Hindus. These two things are connected hence Gandhi argued against separate electorate to define the entirety of Indian politics.  However, Muslim had already had separate electorate before his coming to Indian politics. Poona pact recognized that untouchability was social and not a political problem and triggered a debate on the relevance of caste in Indian society.

Further, the left set an alternative discourse by juxtaposing Gandhian views.   Gandhian conceptualized model gained currency both as nationalist strategy for political mobilization and blue print for India’s future. What was unique in it that he attempted to guide the nation towards a goal on the basis of his experiences based on understanding of the nature of the Colonial state which could only be resisted by unitary nonviolent national movement.  M.N. Roy was critical of his social political ideas and yet he found in Gandhi the most effective political leadership. 

           Gandhian   ideas of class collaboration and nonviolence Satyagraha was perceived as being politically restrictive to serve the interest of those who have built castles of social privileges and economic exploitation and non-cooperation a best strategy to contain revolutionary fervour of the masses. Socialists’ and communists’ belief in the necessity of class struggle was not accepted by Gandhi. He saw in this as inculcating hatred and counterproductive; contrasted class struggle with class cooperation and called for united political platform.

Roy endorsed the method of revolutionary mass action through the Communist Party which would overthrow the foreign imperialism and also reminded Gandhi that his insistence on charkha is economically not viable, based on hollow economic logic. Gandhian efforts for the revival of cottage industry was rejected as backward. Roy’s analysis of Gandhian thought from Marxist point of view though creative but failed to understand the cultural power of Gandhi – the strength of Gandhian politics.

Moreover, on the question of private property Gandhian ideas were fundamentally different from that of the Communists. Gandhi understood how to handle the question of private property through satyagraha. In South Africa he   defended the rights of Indian immigrants to acquire and own private property. Though Gandhi did not believe in its absoluteness but it should   not exclude society from the fruits of one’s labour.

Gandhi cleared both socialist and Marxist position of the abolition of private property by violent means and proposed his well-known theory of trusteeship. He counselled the   landlords and capitalist’s entrepreneurs to deploy the concept of trusteeship in a self-serving way to be used for the benefit of others. The institution of private property would operate non-violently when supported by the principle of trusteeship. It was critiqued by Marxists R.P. Dutt who saw it as a familiar bourgeoisie essence showing through idealistic cover. However, the idea of trusteeship failed to bring about any genuine widespread change of heart among the majority.

Further, Subaltern studies collective scholars critiqued Gandhi ‘s stress on nonviolence, based their argument that he sought to channel the discontent of poor and suppressed in to the movements that posed no real challenge to Indian elite. They have argued that Gandhi had contempt and fear for the masses, labelling them a violence prone mob. In 1921 mahatma called mobocracy, which he claimed was undermining the non-cooperation movement.  However, this optimism began to fade as it became apparent that the Naxalite movement had been crushed and driven in to pockets of Adivasi areas.  Peasants’ wars in places such as China and Vietnam had not liberated the masses in many ways.

 However, Gandhi used the term mob in the context of the experience of the venom that came to the force in violent street fighting, could see nothing constructive and made it his lifelong mission to provide an alternative. Nonviolence also encourages dialogue and negotiations and does not alienate potential allies. it is thus a far more effective force for building a future democracy. He tried to incorporate subaltern politics into his alternative by purging it of its violent aspects, so as to give it a strong moral superiority as against the coercive and violent politics of both the colonial state and the indigenous elite. He believed that they could always be won over through a sympathetic and compassionate process of dialogue.

Furthermore, accusations were also levelled by both British observers making common cause with and Muslim League against the Congress in 1937 when it accepted the office under the government of India Act of 1935, being fascist in both principle and practice and described Gandhi as Fuehrer exercising extraordinary influence upon the congress. Muslim league unsubstantiated propaganda regarding congress atrocities of minorities in the provinces they ruled goes to compare the political rivals with fascists.

 Rather than responding to allegations Gandhi’s analysis was chiefly concerned with such allegations that might pose challenge to his practice of nonviolent resistance. Like all the challenges he encountered during his career, Gandhi saw in fascism a test as much as an opportunity for matchless weapon of nonviolence. He recommended dealing with fascism in the most quotidian ways by refusing to suspend the moral norms of civilian life.  However, vindication of fascist potential victory could not give Gandhi theory of nonviolence its defeat. 

Between 1921-1925 Tagore   scrutinized Gandhi’s ideas on non- cooperation movement, he was of the opinion that the passivity of non-cooperation would prevent meeting of east and west. Gandhi replied through the piece of writing titled Poet’s Anxiety by drawing on Upanishad’s doctrine of netiand argued that the idea of rejection is similar to acceptance. It is necessary to reject untruth for acceptance of truth. Non-cooperation would revive what colonial India has lost its ability to say no.

Further, Tagore’s two articles published in Modern Review questioned the applicability of charkha in the context of Colonial India as how the archaic tool could contain poverty effectively or bring swaraj. Placing charkha in the scheme of national reconstruction is like preaching blind obedience and abdication of reason for Tagore. It will only reinforce traditional orthodoxy and slave mentality of the past.

Gandhi replied with a short piece titled Great Sentinel and reminded Tagore that spinning wheel has provided the best means through which poor could earn a supplementary income or save money by producing their own clothes. Gandhi founded all India spinners association in 1925and seeks to link swaraj with charkha for   mapping socio economic blueprint for the future of India.

Though Gandhi not opposed to machine per se but what he apprehended was the consequences of machine civilization making human labour redundant.  He firmly believed that machine must not be allowed to displace the necessary human labour. However, it had a Ruskinion tone of blanket before the lace, till the time we are deprived of bare necessities like blanket we cannot go for laces. He was not happy with the capitalism as it operated in 19^th and early 20^th century.  Life without Principle by Henry David Thoreau endorsed his ideas which were an attack on capitalist culture. Its incessant money making, deprived of morality or virtue – cited as symptomatic of modern economic life of American restless materialism.  Gandhi’s interest in Thoreau’s book was due to its timely warning for Indians that the marginalization of soul would lead to a lack of solid foundation of inward life. Gandhi’s mission was for restoring the balance between material interest and spiritual aspirations. And those tempted lives without principles had salutary warnings.

 Gandhi visualized two parallel economic systems operating side by side. One motivated by pursuit of legitimate profit, other by benevolence and the principle of cooperation. Medical legal profession is good example of this pursuit. 

He connected charkha with collective practice for recognizing dignity of labour, invited everyone to spin individually and collectively. Spinning wheel represent work wages awareness even to illiterate. Moreover, Tagore was convinced that the swadeshi programme would alienate the masses since mill products were cheaper hence more affordable but Gandhi defended the agenda on the basis of paralyzing the British commercial interests.

Though critiques seek to belittle him since the days of his own career but he was a man who himself said one’s ego should be reduced to dust. His modern day detractors even required his presence for their own arguments. More they seek to belittle him the more the make him loom large in history. Gandhi’s stand is indispensable today in modern Indian politics as unrivalled national icon of India.

Over seventy years have passed since he has been assassinated; Gandhi has presence in our polity and his ideas are increasingly relevant in our times He has been invoked by people in all kinds of ways shows us that he continues to be a living figure.

In current dispensation his ideas have been connected to cleanliness campaign and an attempt has been made to link his profound understanding of power of symbols as means of communication on national idealism. The scope of the constructive programme designed to build up nation from the very bottom upward advocated the spirit of service more than spirit of party politics. His counselling of the importance of nonviolence as an individual and a social form was able to give rise to new institutional democratic policies

He has been denounced for talking of small things and was compared with Nehru’s scientific temper. However, his correspondences with scientists likeC.V. Raman, J.C. Bose and P.C. Ray. Shows him by no means a nativist figure for whom scientific temper is problematic. Though he had been critical of modern technology controlling nature and the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki seemed to have shocked Gandhi profoundly and left him silent for some time. He himself wanted investigation and inventions and fascinated by science as subject for the sake of knowledge rather than profit. He sought to understand problems through detail field work by collecting testimonies and statistics. He applied this in Champaran in 1917 to investigate complaints of peasant’s atrocities by white indigo planters. The same method was applied in kheda in 1918to investigate the grievances of peasant

However, Gandhi was dismissed as an idealist but actually he was more realist. The argument that Gandhian ideas are outdated and need new paradigms to address the current issues is actually nottrue. They are more relevant than ever before.

References

1.David Hardiman  Gandhi in his time and ours,permanent Black, 2018, New Delhi, p

2. David Hardiman, The Nonviolent struggle for Indian Freedom, 1905-19. Penguin, 2018, Gurgaon

3.Rajmohan Gandhi Why Gandhi still matters an appraisal of mahatma’s legacy; aleph book company, 2017, new Delhi

4.Anthony. J. Parel, Pax Gandhiana, the political philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi, Oxford university press, 2016, New Delhi.

5. Nishikant Kolge, Gandhi against Caste, oxford, 2017, New Delhi.

6. Ramachandra Guha, Gandhi before India, Alfred. A Knopf, New York 2014.

7. Parry Anderson,The Indian Ideology three essays collective, reprint 2016.

8.Mahatma Gandhi the Story of My Experiments with Truth, Rajpal and Sons, 2019.

9. Bidyut Chakerverti, social and political Thought of Mahatma Gandhi, Routledge, 2006