Sunday Reading
New Delhi, 30 January 2009
Relevance of
Non-Violence
GANDHI, KING
& THEIR LEGACY
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
Terrorism and violence has pervaded every nook and corner of
our society. There are reports of widespread violence in different countries of
the Third World, including India.
Indeed, it is distressing that violent trends in human society should grow at
such a fast pace when developmental activities have also been taking rapid
strides. All efforts of international and national institutions as also
respective governments have not been successful in curbing the violent trends
in human society and rooting out the causes for such occurrences.
While materialism and the resultant greed, generated by such
values have contributed to the increased violence in society, there is need to
think seriously of ways and means to curb such trends. In India, there
has long been the legacy of non-violence propagated by Mahatma Gandhi. It was
used by Gandhiji successfully in mobilizing the masses to fight the British,
which ultimately was forced to leave. But what is significant is that in
addition to the removal of foreign rule, he wanted to establish a democratic
order, free from political, economic and social exploitation. The success of
this strategy became the subject of much discussion and analysis and volumes
have been written on the Gandhian technique of ahimsa or non-violence.
As is well known, truth and non-violence were the basic
tenets of Gandhian philosophy. Moralization of politics had been the dream of
many political thinkers, to make it a reality had been Gandhiji’s endeavour. As
he aptly remarked: “Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of
mankind.” Referring to the problems of humanity created through exploitation of
man by man and group by group, he thought these could be solved through satyagraha, the organized use of truth,
non-violence and the purity of means. Gandhiji’s satyagraha attempted to guide the individual towards the goal of
higher life and also solve political and social problems.
Gandhiji’s belief that injustice can be removed through
truth, non-violence and purity of means has been considered too idealistic to
be put into practice. Those who make this criticism forget that by these means alone
Gandhiji achieved a great measure of success in the movements he led both in South Africa and India. He did not believe that the
practice of non-violence in the political field was beyond the capacity of man,
as he said: “The first condition of non-violence is justice all round in every
department of life…. The votary of non-violence has to cultivate the capacity
for sacrifice of the highest type in order to be free from fear. He who has not
overcome all fear cannot practice ahimsa to perfection”.
The philosophy of satyagraha
and non-violence had been adopted by Gandhiji from his religious beliefs. Some
Western thinkers believe that he got the idea from the New Testament, specially
from the Sermon on the Mount. It is true that Gandhiji was greatly influenced
by the Sermon. But he found that it only confirmed his own Vaishnavite faith.
As is generally known the Vaishnavites, the Jains and the Buddhists believe
that ahimsa or non-violence is the highest virtue. And Gandhiji used this
philosophy to the solution of political, economic and social problems.
Though non-violence may not seem to have any authority in
Hindu religion, Gandhiji had his own way of interpreting the Gita. He did not
consider it a book on politics or political or military strategy but a
religious scripture. It showed the way to self-realization through right action
undertaken as one’s dharma (duty) without consideration of its fruit,
favourable or unfavourable. Whether Hindu scriptures sanction violence in asserting
one’s legitimate rights or not, may be a question under dispute but Gandhiji
believed that they lay emphasis on ahimsa or non-violence as a great virtue.
It needs to be pointed out that in the North West Frontier
Province Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, inspired by Gandhiji, used non-violence to
give strength to his movement. The masses went ahead on the path on civil
disobedience by remaining non-violent for the sake of justice and freedom.
Similarly, in America Mahatma Gandhi’s philosophy influenced
Dr. Martin Luther King who combined this with Christian faith to inspire the
historic Civil Rights Movement of the Negroes. Before Dr. King, Phillip
Randolph and others were also deeply moved by his philosophy and attempted to
model their struggle against injustices along the lines propounded by Gandhiji.
The influence of the Mahatma in black Americas cannot be denied as most of
King’s supporters appreciated the moral force of non-violence.
Echoing Gandhiji’s ideal of non-violence, Dr. King said
after receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo: “…. violence never brings
permanent peace. It solves no social problem. Violence is impractical because
it is a descending spiral ending in distraction for all. It is immoral because
it seems to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding, it seeks
to annihilate rather than convert. It destroys community and makes brotherhood
impossible”.
Though there has been considerable debate whether the Civil
Rights Movement was based on satyagraha, Dr. Homer A Jack notes that the movement has
been working out new ways of using love and not hate to correct social
injustices. The after effects of his movement gained respectability and rights
for the Negroes and today the US has an African American President.
It may be pertinent to mention here that Gandhiji believed
and showed that civil resistance is the inherent right of every citizen and is
a sovereign remedy in the hands of the people. His political theory and action
can only be appreciated if this note of defiance of evil and resistance to any
irresponsible authority, irrespective of political forms, which tramples on the
individual’s liberty and freedom, is duly recognized.
The legacy of Gandhiji, Dr. King and many others stands to
be seriously challenged at this juncture of human history. Both of them as also
several political thinkers have viewed violence and democracy as incompatible.
But Gandhiji’s interpretation gains relevance and appreciation from communist
thinkers as he considered any sort of exploitation of man by man
indistinguishable from violence.
Dr. G. N. Dhawan interpreted Gandhiji’s quest for a
predominantly non-violent society and the realizable goal in the following
terms: “The ideal non-violent society of Gandhiji, unattainable due to human
imperfection, indicates the direction rather than the destination, the process
rather than the consummation. The structure of the state that will emerge as a
result of a non-violent revolution will be a compromise, a via media, between
the ideal non-violent society and the facts of human nature. It will be the
attainable middle way of Gandhiji, the first step after the revolution, towards
the ideal”.
It is not possible to indefinitely bear injustice and
tyranny. The unchecked violence of tyrants degrades human beings. Pioneers in
every field have always worked for freedom of belief, expression, movement etc.
If nations do not adopt Gandhiji’s philosophy of non-violence to remove
injustices and resolve national and international disputes, there is no escape
from hate, violence and war. There is also no escape from weapons of war
becoming sharper and ever more destructive. Today, we have reached a stage when
their use will not only destroy civilization but may also destroy the human
race itself.
The obvious question which arises is: whether a non-violent
society is foreseeable in the distant future. While attitudes have to change,
so does the character of the state and its relations and behaviour with the
people. One cannot deny that not until humanity dies will Gandhiji’s philosophy
have relevance for us…it was a voice against injustice and oppression – the
eternal voice of humanism. ---INFA
(Copyright, India News and Feature
Alliance)
|