We have suffered the scarcity of the socialist years, and surfeited on the excesses of the consumerist age. Perhaps it is time to draw a balance, and arrive at the ethical and intelligent approach of thrift. More>>
Gandhi can be considered the most modern political thinker India
has ever had. He imbibed the best from the East and the West and evolved
a political philosophy that worked miracles. Today, in a polity steeped
in corruption, perhaps there is a need to rediscover Gandhi
Mahatma Gandhi has been an integral
part of Indian politics. His political philosophy encompasses an assortment
of elements stemming from his basic humanistic outlook. Though for him
there was no antithesis between spiritual and worldly matters, he embodied
certain fundamental beliefs
from which he seldom deviated.
As he opined in his journal, Harijan: "There are eternal principles
which admit of no compromise, and one must be prepared to lay down one's
life in the practice of them."
He adhered to these principles in all walks of his life and even extended
them in his attempt to create a resurgence of the nationalistic spirit
among Indians.
As West Bengal's Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharya points out in
his research work titled Evolution of the Political Philosophy of
Gandhi: "Mahatma Gandhi can be credited for belonging to the most
modern type of mass leader."
In 1919, when Gandhi took up the reins of the Indian National Congress,
he imparted a new technique and orientation in spirit to the struggle
for liberation. He introduced the concepts of nonviolence and non-cooperation,
which not only suited the superior resources of the British Empire but
also became the ideal weapons of protest against the Government of India
Act (1919) and the Rowlatt Act (1919).
Mahatma Gandhi's Non-Cooperation Movement, however, took a definite
form after the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh, which compelled him to
comment: "Cooperation in any shape or form with this satanic government
is sinful."
The spirit of non-cooperation and nonviolence that Gandhi infused in
Indian politics is equally relevant in modern times. The violent upheavals,
antipathy in addressing major issues and lack of a rational dialogue
among parties that characterise the Indian political scene, emphasizes
that a dedicated faith in the Gandhian political doctrines have become
the need of the hour.
As
Bhattacharya points out: "In ancient political thought there was no philosophy
of anarchism. Instead rajadharma (duty of the king) came to supercede
all other dharmas, for if the king failed to protect his subjects and
ensure peace, all else was considered a futile exercise."
Political analyst U.N. Ghosal says: "The state was regarded in Hinduism
as an essential instrument for securing not merely the whole life, but...
that the state was within certain limits virtually an end in itself."
Gandhi, whose political ideology was a harmonious amalgamation of western
and eastern thoughts, did not accept this near totalitarian concept of
the state. Inspired by western thinkers such as Thoreau, Tolstoy and so
on, he declared that power or political authority was not an end in itself.
Several critics have expressed that Gandhi regarded power to be "one of
the means of enabling people to better their conditions in every department
of life".
This recognition speaks of his awareness of the reality that is firmly
imprinted on his political thought. His political actions were directed
towards attaining power which, according to him, should not be concentrated
in the hands of a few but disseminated among the masses.
This political ideal becomes increasingly significant in the present socio-political
scenario, when there is an increasing tendency of power concentration
in the hands of the privileged few.
Another aspect that is conspicuous in the Hindu political thought and
has a significant impact on the psyche of the people is that revolt is
one of the recognized rights of individuals and groups.
This concept is deeply imprinted in the mass psyche and played a significant
role in the isolated uprisings that were a vital part of the Indian freedom
struggle.
The duty and responsibility of the king is also clearly indicated. A king
who did not abide by the dictates of ethics and justice was threatened
with dire consequences in hell as well as revolt.
In Mahabharata, Bhishma goes to the extent of saying that the king
who fails to protect his people should be slain by his subjects like a
mad dog. Gandhi's clarion call for nonviolent revolt against the British
is therefore a continuation of the Indian tradition.
Interestingly, though Gandhi accepted the traditional injunction to revolt
against a corrupt political authority, he also developed the tradition
further by introducing satyagraha-a unique means of contradicting
authority by avoiding violent manifestation of armed warfare.
The Civil
Disobedience Movement started by Gandhi in 1930 is another political
landmark in Indian history. The massive exploitation of India's economic
and human resources had compelled Gandhi to demand Purna Swaraj
(absolute independence) to which the British government had paid no
heed.
The ultimatum, therefore, was presented in the form of a 'Eleven Point'
programme to the Viceroy apprising him of the prevalent situation and
suggesting its easing, failing which the Civil Disobedience movement
would take place.
The movement was not merely a violation of the laws imposed by a foreign
rule but a mass uprising. The dramatic repercussions of a single act
undertaken with the bold recognition of the intolerable grief of the
repressed masses is a fundamental proof of Gandhi's potential as a mass
leader.
Bhattacharya comments: "The nationalist movement in India, prior to
Gandhi's advent, flowed in two streams-the constitutionalist agitation
or 'the politics of mendicancy' on one side and the underground revolutionary
movement, popularly known as terrorism, on the other."
While these movements had their own roles in national regeneration and
political freedom, these could not encompass the bulk of the population
in the country. There was no 'serious politics' as Lenin had used the
term.
The Russian revolutionary wrote: "Politics begins where the masses are;
not where there are thousands, but millions, that is where serious politics
begins."
Thus Gandhi can be rightly attributed the credit for introducing 'serious
politics' in this country. He also transformed its nature, hitherto
confined to the educated classes, to an authentic broad-based mass movement.
The historic task that confronted Gandhi's India was to strive for the
complete liquidation of foreign imperialist domination and colonial
economic exploitation.
In fact, both national liberation and democratic transformation of the
society were demands that had to be fulfilled for a better arraignment
of the society. But since society itself was divided owing to its different
inclinations, Gandhi had to formulate a philosophy that could cater
to the mindset of all.
Since the major section of the Indian bourgeoisie was dependent on the
British for their gains, they kept themselves aloof from the national
struggle. Gandhi's politics, however, was primarily concerned with raising
the consciousness
of the masses and investing them with political authority to determine
their own destiny. Here he struck a new note in Indian politics.
