Table of contents Introduction...2 Gandhi and non violence..4 The concept of satyagraha8 Gandhian struggles........10-19 South Africa...

10 Champaran and kheda.11 Non-cooperation movement.13 Salt Satyagraha..15 Quit-India movement....17 Non-violent struggles elsewhere.19 Indian non-violent struggles inspired by Gandhiji..21 Criticism of non-violence ...22 Conclusion....23 Bibliography27

Introduction
Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth-Albert Einstein on Gandhiji This was how Gandhiji was remembered by one of the greatest persons of the millennia. What made Gandhiji so great that the world sat up and took notice? What did he give to the world that it had more or less forgotten? Surely it was his non-violence. In a world torn with conflict, violence and bloodshed non-violence is a rare if not extinct thing. It is a thing not many dare think or talk about. This brings us to the question of what nonviolence really is. The phrase non-violence has been in popular usage for many years. Many have used the word in their own peculiar ways. In fact non- violence is a term which existed before Gandhiji its most famous proponent, took birth. He himself admits it when he says I claim to have invented no such thing as Gandhism , truth and non-violence are as old as the hills.1. Gandhi himself today remains shrouded in mystery. Of course it is not the case that we are not familiar with gandhi, which we are courtesy the postage stamps, currency notes,national holidays et al, only that we do not know Gandhi. Knowledge is not the same thing as familiarity. We are familiar with what gandhiji looked like ,we can sketch the bald head and the spectacles within no time, but our knowledge of what gandhiji really did and what he stood for is too little to be measured 2. Besides the man has been shrouded by the metaphor .A brave non-violent enemy of oppression anywhere is called a Gandhi and the oppressor is called Gandhis new assailant. So much so that Gandhi has become a clich. The name has been used so often that people have forgotten its meaning nowdays.3 This project is an attempt to understand the man and the message beyond the cliches and the metaphors. An attempt to study non-violent resistance movements started and
1 2

M k Gandhi, the law of love, bharathiya vidya bhavan, Bombay 1965, pg 10 Rajmohan Gandhi ,Mohandas the true story of a man his people and an empire, penguin, new delhi,2006,preface 3 Rajmohan Gandhi ,Mohandas the true story of a man his people and an empire, penguin, new delhi,2006,preface 1

inspired by Gandhiji and to analyse the merits and demerits of non-violent movements and their effectiveness. In this attempt,I shall look into what non-violence really is and what it is from Gandhijis perspective. I shall look into the struggles led by Gandhiji himself in south africa, kheda, and in champaran and I shall also look at non- cooperation ,salt satyagraha and quit india movements . an attempt will be made to understand why a particular struggle succeeded whereas another failed. How the non-violent aspect of these struggles worked and how they were supposed to work in theory. Comparisons will be drawn between struggles that have taken place in other parts of the world based on the same principle of non-violence like the American civil rights movement , nelson mandelas crusade against discrimination and the women suffragette movement. Contemporary non-violent struggles, their successes and failures, will also be briefly looked into, comparisons with the dalai lama, aung sang suu kyi, Benigno Aquino , Ibrahim rugova and our very own Medha Patkar. The work in this area carried out by students of Gandhiji like Jayprakash Narayan, Vinoba bhave,Amtus Salaam will also be looked into. Criticism of the principle of non-violence will also be understood briefly. In making this project my research has been completely doctrinal. A wide range of books and a host of internet websites have provided a complete understanding of the subject. It is my sincerest hope that this be an attempt I would not fail in. my own perception about non-violence has changed drastically since I have started working on this project and I am forever indebted to my lecturers for providing me with such a topic. I hope to bring in through this project a much more clear understanding of gandhiji and non-violent satyagrahas than what was available earlier.

Gandhi and non-violence.

To completely understand Gandhijis non-violent movements and their impact. It is imperative that one understands what non-violence stood for in Gandhijis perspective and where this belief in non-violence that gandhiji had came from. In todays world there are a lot of misconceptions about Gandhiji and his non violence. Gandhiji was raised by a mother who though a Hindu was more close to Jainism than Hinduism. Perhaps being brought up according to jain customs had an impact on Gandhiji but Gandhiji does not completely agree with the jain method of non-violence as the jains practice non-violence in deed and not in thought. The non-violence of the jains is rooted in religion or superstition. Gandhijis non-violence was based in altruism and compassion for fellow human beings. He stated in 1915 that non-violence included daya, akrodh and aman 4. Apart from this Gandhiji was also influenced by teachings of Sermon on the Mount, certain aspects of Christianity and Buddhism also affected him.5 Gandhijis argument for non-violence is based on many a belief. An important one among them is the faith in superiority of mankind. Gandhiji believed that the human race is better than animals .And that what gave the human race this superiority is that it could, and in his opinion, naturally must remain non-violent. He believed that non-violence was the law of human species and that this is what differentiated the human race from other animals ,he believed that being human meant that violence went against ones grain. He believed that non-violence was an inbuilt characteristic of man. This is very clear from his quote Non violence is the law of the human race and is infinitely greater than and superior to brute force 6 . And here- nonviolence is the law of our species as violence is the law of the brute. The spirit lies dormant in the brute and he knows no law but that of physical might. The dignity of man requires obedience to a higher law and to the strength of the spirit7

Gandhi to maganlal Gandhi,after 14th march 1915,collected works of mahatma Gandhi vol 14, newdelhi 1999 pg 383 5 Hardiman, Gandhi in his time and ours,permanent black, newdelhi, 2003. Pg 58-59 6 M k Gandhi,Harijan,5/9/1936, pg 236 7 M k Gandhi, Young india ,11/8/1920, pg 3 3

Another belief that Gandhiji put forward as an argument for non-violence was god. That human beings must have a necessary belief in god to believe in non-violence. Gandhiji believed that to have the courage to die without anger or hatred, without cowardice or retaliation necessitated a belief in god. He said that such a courage came from the belief that god resided in everyone and that there should not be fear in the presence of god. He said that belief and respect for god implied a certain kind of respect for the lives of all beings, even the enemys8. He says very convincingly fact is non-violence does not work in the same way as violence. It works in the opposite way. An armed man naturally relies on his arms. A man who is intentionally unarmed relies upon the unseen force called god by the poets.9 A further argument put forth by Gandhiji in support for non-violence is that the strength of the human mind and of the human will is far greater than the strength of the human body. This proceeded from the other belief that courage was a quality of the mind and not of the body. We have seen Helen Keller with the body of a woman and yet the courage of a warrior, we have also seen able bodied cowards run away from the battle field. Gandhiji believed that this superior force of non-violence was what the human race was destined for and that this non-violence was the natural way. Because if violence was the natural way should not our bodies have been stronger than our minds? 10.he illustrates this very clearly in his quote A nation of three hundred million people should be ashamed to have to resort to force to bring to book a hundred thousand Englishmen. To convert them, or, if you will, even to drive them out, we need not the force of arms but the force of will. If we have not the latter we shall never have the former. If we develop the force of will, we shall find we do not need the force of arms11 . Another argument put forward by Gandhiji was that of the cycle of violence. In his famous quote an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind12. Gandhiji understood that violence begets violence and that darkness and evil cannot be fought with more

8 9

M k Gandhi,Harijan,18/6/1938, pg 64 M k Gandhi ,Harijan 28/6/1942,pg 201 10 M.k Gandhi, the Hindu Muslim unity, bharathiya vidya bhavan,Bombay, 1965, pg 30-pg 34. 11 M k Gandhi, Young india,29/5/1924 12 www.mkgandhi-sarvodaya.org 4

darkness and more evil. Believed that to fight darkness you should bring in light and to fight evil you should bring in goodness. Hence to fight violence one needs non-violence. An arm striking the air will become disjointed13. Gandhiji believed that only by ending this cycle of violence would humanity ever attain salvation. Gandhijis non-violence did not mean mere physical non-violence. It meant forgiveness and love for the enemy. For Gandhiji it meant complete removal of hate from the mind and heart. Brewing hatred in the heart while not beating up the enemy was, for him, still himsa or violence. For him hatred sprung from fear and insecurity and fear was a sin in the presence of god14 . Gandhiji seems to have borrowed from Christ when he says love the sinner hate the sin. It is demonstrated clearly when he says I am not anti -English; I am not anti british;I am not anti any government; but I am anti-truth, anti-humbug and anti-injustice15 hence it is little wonder that even after the toughest battles with the britishers, India does not hate Britain. He was at pains to show that non-violence was the weapon of the brave. He cited Sanskrit shlokas like kshama veerasya bhushanam to prove his point. His non-violence required more bravery than violence. His non-violence was conscious suffering of harm because of a higher belief. It was not an aggressive hammering of ones beliefs, nor was it running away from the battle field. It was simply put standing ones ground. Neither attack nor retaliation. This he believed was the most effective way of putting ones point across to the enemy. His non violence he stressed again and again was not for the weak and the cowardly. It was for the brave. A rabbit letting a lion eat it was not to him non-violent as the poor animal would be scared out of its wits. Nonviolence can only be exercised by the strong. In fact so much did he hate cowardice that he preferred violence to it. He admitted that brave men could be violent that it takes courage to kill and to be ready to be killed in the process. But he thought it braver to let the enemy strike and still hold on to your

13 14

M k Gandhi, Hind swaraj, bharathiya vidya bhavan (1968) pg 62 M.k.Gandhi, Young India 28/05/1924 15 Mahadev desai day to day with Gandhi vol 2, sarva seva sangh, june 1968, pg 195 5

beliefs without giving a quarter. To willingly die for ones cause required for him a greater courage than to willingly kill16.non-violence for Gandhi was not a cover for cowardice. To Gandhiji non-violence was a creed. Not a policy. Policies may be changed. Creeds cannot. He recognized that non-violence was a means. But to him the means were just as important as the ends and if the means were not worthy enough, the ends would not , for him, be worth it.17 Thus we see that Gandhijis definition and application of non-violence is more complex than what it is usually understood to mean. The creed of turning the other cheek is well known but what is seldom known is the idea and the thought behind turning the other cheek. The reason for turning the other cheek . This is what Gandhiji through his various writings tried to make clear to us all. To Gandhiji if non-violence ever failed it was because there was not enough thought that was put in the act of non-violence. It was because the participants never really understood non-violence.not because there was a flaw in the principle itself.

16 17

M k Gandhi, The doctrine of the sword, young India 11/08/1920. Pg3 M k Gandhi, harijan, 27/10/1946/pg 64

The concept of Satyagraha

The concept of Satyagraha is intricately connected to the concept of non-violence. Satyagraha is derived from the Sanskrit words Satya and Agraha. Satya means truth. To Gandhiji the words truth ,love,soul,god were synonyms. The truth was for him the ultimate god. Agraha means in Sanskrit to be firm, and firmness in the face of adversity becomes a force. Thus Satyagraha can be better called firmness in truth or firmness in love than passive resistance which is often mistaken for Satyagraha. Satyagraha asks for one to love and attempt to convert ones enemy non-violently which passive resistance does not insist upon. Satyagraha is a harder option among the two 18. Gandhijis understanding of Satyagraha itself evolved in his own lifetime .In South Africa Gandhiji himself defined Satyagraha as passive resistance. Later the concept seems to have grown in his mind when he began to stress on the moral aspect of Satyagraha and the non-violent aspect of revolution. A satyagrahi, ideally, loves his enemy as the enemy too is a creation of god. He believes in a certain inherent goodness in man and seeks to bring that inherent goodness out. He seeks not victory but understanding and resolution of the conflict. He is not willing under any circumstances to harm his enemy by acting violently. He does not surrender to wrongs. But he does no wrong while retaliating. In fact he is even expected to nonviolently defend his enemy when the enemy is in trouble. Neither in thought or in deed does he do anything that would harm or hurt his enemy, he bears in his mind, no ill will19. The concept of law of love,i.e,non-violence is clearly reflected in these conditions that gandhiji set forth to his satyagrahis. Apart from these things a satyagrahi was also expected to observe certain restrictions in his own life like wearing only khadi, controlling ones plate, abstaining from alcohol and other intoxicants, disbelief in untouchability, respect for all religions, bread labor and nopossession or poverty. The reason for this is twofold. First being that these things helped in spreading gandhijis larger aims for the country and secondly, Gandhiji believed that
18
19

Gandhi, M.K. The Law of Suffering Young India 16 June 1920 Gandhi, M.K. Pre-requisites for Satyagraha Young India 1 August 1925

these things helped one in controlling ones senses which would give one the necessary strength for satyagraha and non-violence20. Gandhiji recognized that participants in satyagraha must be trained thoroughly in nonviolence ,love and poverty for these things are hard to come naturally and require a good amount of courage ,hence he set up the Sabarmati ashram where he trained his satyagrahis in non-violence the book ashram observances in action gives us a detailed picture of the life of discipline that satyagrahis there led 21. This Satyagraha later went on to be used by many people all over the world. Including but not limited to martin Luther king of America against the oppression of colored people. In the next few chapters we shall see how these concepts of Satyagraha and non-violence worked on the ground, in reality. And whether they were practically sound principles.

20 21

Gandhi,m.k, some rules for satyagraha, young India, 23/2/1930 http://www.kamat.com/mmgandhi/satyagraha.htm

Gandhian struggles South Africa

We have understood now what Gandhiji meant when he said non-violence and Satyagraha. The theory and the thought has been sufficiently understood. Now we shall try to understand how Gandhi ji applied this theory in practice and how it worked on the ground. For no study of non-violent resistance can be complete with only a theoretical knowledge of what non-violent struggles were supposed to be. The first of Gandhijis non-violent struggles was fought along with Indian indentured laborers in South Africa in the late 1890s. His struggles and battles here changed him dramatically. When Gandhiji went to South Africa in 1893 he faced racial discriminations many times. He was thrown of trains, asked to remove his turban and abused in a stage coach. These things had an influence on him and he formed the natal Indian congress in 1984 with an intention to constitutionally oppose racial laws. In 1908 the Transvaal government promogulated the Asiatic registration act which compelled the registration of the colonys Indian population. At a gathering held on 11 September 1908 Gandhiji first employed his method of Satyagraha. He called upon Indians to defy the law and suffer punishments. And to retaliate only through non-violent means. This was adopted and a seven year struggle followed in which Indians were jailed, flogged, or even shot, for refusing to register, burning their certificate, or engaging in non-violent Satyagraha. 22 The government repressed the protests. But as news travelled to England and India of the struggle , and due to the hard bargaining and negotiations of G k Gokhale and Charles Andrews .south African general Jan Christian smuts had to negotiate a compromise with Gandhiji repealing the race laws and restoring rights to Indians in south Africa. In South Africa the numbers of Indians involved in the struggle was relatively small compared to the later quit India movements. Hence non-violence was well observed.

22

Rajmohan Gandhi, Mohandas a true story of a man his people and an empire, penguin, new Delhi, 2006,pg125-182 9

Champaran and Kheda Satyagraha

After coming to India in 1915 Gandhiji was approached by farmers from Kheda in Gujarat and Champaran in Bihar. In Kheda the farmers were forced to grow indigo and other cash crops for British cloth. The landowners (mostly British) accepted part of the crop as tax. However after the industrial revolution when the prices of indigo fell the landowners refused crop as tax and demanded cash as tax. They did not even make exemptions for the farmers when there was a famine. Farmer rebellions were crushed with the help of British militia. In Bihar it was much the same thing except it dealt with food crops and huge taxes. The local British governments also made unreasonable hikes in taxes. Gandhiji laid the ground work for Satyagraha by setting up an ashram there and carrying out detailed surveys and maintaining accounts of the atrocities committed by the British. His ashram also trained villagers in Satyagraha and non-violence. Apart from this he built confidence with villagers by teaching them about hygiene and educating them. Indeed his ashram served as a school for many children. Gandhiji was arrested for causing unrest and ordered to leave. Massive protests were held outside courts and police stations demanding his release which the court reluctantly granted. Out on bail Gandhiji led massive protests and strikes against the landlords. Gandhiji had good relations with the then viceroy lord Chelmsford and had already supported the British war effort. Keeping this in mind , but obviously more worried about the protests, the British government directed the landlords to reach a settlement with Gandhiji and on 6th of June 1918 Gandhiji and sardar Patel ( who had met him through the movement) announced victory and got their terms agreed to by the landlords. However later when Gandhiji and sardar Patel went to the same villages to recruit soldiers for the British Indian army, the villagers ran away and hid in their homes. There by proving to Gandhiji that the villagers still held hatred against the British and that their

10

non-violence had not been complete23. But there could have also been other reasons why the villagers did not join the army. However his method of Satyagraha had succeeded wonderfully and indeed Gandhiji gained lifelong truly non-violent followers like mahadev desai and sardar Patel. It was also demonstrated through this struggle that if trained properly struggles no matter how long they last can be non-violent.and they could elicit from the government the response that was needed. The number of people involved in the struggle this time, though larger than that during the South African struggles is still smaller than what we will see in future movements. The people protesting at Kheda and champaran were still controllable. Apart from this Gandhiji also lead a small struggle by Ahmadabad textile mill workers against mill owners including a certain Ambalal Sarabhai , one of Gandhijis chief financiers . In that struggle too Gandhiji worked an amiable settlement between the two sides in a most cordial manner .non violence was strictly observed here too . And in this case the mill workers clearly bore no ill will toward the mill owners and the mill owners too bore no malice toward the workers for protesting24

23

Rajmohan Gandhi , Mohandas a true story of a man his people and an empire, penguin, newdelhi, 2006,pg 202-215, read also mahadev desai day to day with Gandhi volume 1, sarvaseva sangh, rajghat, june1968 24 Mahadev desai , day to day with Gandhi vol 1,sarva seva sangh, rajghat june 1968. 11

Non cooperation movement 1920

The British government in 1919 executed the jallianwallah bagh massacre where thousands of non-violent civilians were killed. This tragedy shook up the entire nation . In 1919 gandhiji was elected as the president of the Indian national congress and the all India home rule league. In March 1919 The British government passed though the barbaric rowlatt bills which gave emergency powers to the government and tried to stop revolutionary activities25. Till now Gandhiji had pondered a future Satyagraha to obtain what the montaguechelmsford scheme lacked. But the deadly rowlatt acts , he felt demanded an immediate response. Gandhiji knew that neither the congress not the Gujarat sabha was ready to organize a mass movement so he started a new body the satyagraha sabha with himself as the president and sardar Patel as the secretary to organize the protest. He travelled throughout the country to gather support . And drafted an appeal for non-violent Satyagraha starting from 30th march, for wider participation the date was later changed to 6th April. But protestors in Delhi felt they should stick to the earlier date. In Delhi on 30th march and elsewhere a week later Hindus and Muslims joined hands and observed a black Sunday against the black acts. It was the first nationwide protest in Indias long history.26 Gandhiji called for nationwide boycott of British goods27 councils 28and British schools
29

. Protestors would refuse to buy British goods, adopt the use of local handicrafts, picket

liquor shops, and try to uphold the values of Indian honor and integrity. Lawyers emptied
25

Rajmohan Gandhi ,Mohandas the true story of a man his people and an empire, penguin, new delhi,2006 pg 219 26 Rajmohan Gandhi ,Mohandas the true story of a man his people and an empire, penguin, new delhi,2006 pg 220-221 27 Mahadev desai, day to day with Gandhi vol 2, sarva seva sangh, rajghat june 1968, pg 146,213,224 28 Mahadev desai , day to day with Gandhi vol 2,sarva seva sangh, rajghat june 1968, pg 213214,224,227,228 29 Mahadev desai , day to day with Gandhi vol 2,sarva seva sangh, rajghat june 1968, pg 212,226,242,243,245,248 12

the court rooms, students left their schools, government servants gave up their jobs, and titles given by the British government were given back. The country came to a stop. The British government was taken unawares and it was a state of anarchy for a while. And then on February 4th 1922, the chauri chaura incident happened. Protestors in chauri chaura in Lucknow set a police station on fire and killed twenty three English policemen. Gandhiji was shaken by the violence. He feared that the violence would spread. That the Indian masses had not understood his non-violence was evident. He went on a fast to end the movement and the protests stopped. However he was later arrested by the same government he had saved and put in prison for two years.30 This struggle raised serious struggles about Gandhijis non-violent Satyagraha, even his followers like Nehru and Patel were bound to question whether non-violence was the way. Should nationwide movements be stopped because of one tiny incident? And what they were to do when the enemy posed as a protestor and brought in violence. At the time Gandhiji did not answer these questions. However as we shall see later in his salt satyagraha and quit India campaigns he made it clear that non-violent movements could continue in the midst of violence and that an incident in some corner of the country would not bring the revolution to a halt. The rowlatt bills continued to be on the rolls but were never used. As an aside it is amusing to note that the britishers got into so much of trouble for bringing in bills that they would enforce not even once.

30

. Rajmohan Gandhi ,Mohandas the true story of a man his people and an empire, penguin, new delhi,2006, pg 240-267

13

Salt Satyagraha 1930-1934

At midnight December 31st 1929, the Indian national congress headed by Gandhiji and Nehru issued a declaration of independence or purna swaraj on 26th march 1930. Gandhiji was chosen to oversee the protests. He chose ,most interestingly, salt as his weapon. The 1882 salt act gave the British government monopoly over salt. No one could manufacture it except the British government. It was not a great contributor to her majestys treasury but was one of the symbols of British rule in India. Everyone in India, no matter how poor, used salt. Gandhiji chose this so that he could involve even the poorest man in his struggle. It was a masterstroke. Gandhiji also laid before the viceroy a list of seven demands. Which , The viceroy chose not to respond to. Gandhiji announced that he would march from his ashram in Sabarmati to dandi in Gujarat and make salt. Non-violent protests were organized from 12th march onwards. Mass civil disobedience spread over India with people making and selling salts illegally.31 In reaction the British government jailed over 60,000 people before the month end32. Soon the movement went beyond just salt and British clothes were boycotted, forest laws disobeyed, land revenues not paid, the British responded with more laws and censorship but the movement would not slow down. Gandhiji began his march from Sabarmati on march 12th and reached dandi and made salt on April 6th , a symbolic date as precisely two years before innocents had been slaughtered at jallianwallah bagh. Throughout Gandhiji issued statements to the press and kept the whole world involved. For the first time many women took part in a mass disobedience movement in India. 33

31 32

Dalton, selected political writings, Hackett publishing company, 1996, p. 72. Homer jack,the Gandhi reader; a sourcebook of his life and writings,grove press,1994, p 238239 33 Rajmohan Gandhi , Mohandas a true story of a man his people and an empire, penguin, newdelhi, 2006, pg 325-347 14

But his non-violence was not yet learned. There were outbreaks of violence in Calcutta. Unlike in 1920 this time gandhiji was unmoved. He asked for the violence to end , but congratulated the parents of the boys killed in Chittagong as he thought their sons had behaved as warriors, with bravery.34 This civil disobedience continued until 1931 when gandhiji was released from prison and called to England to hold talks with lord Irwin on an equal footing. These talks would later lead to round table conferences held in England.35 A difference can be seen between the Gandhi of 1920 and the Gandhi of 1930. In 1920 the movement was stopped solely because a few policemen were killed in chaurichaura, in 1931 despite the Chittagong incident, the movement continued. Besides this time around the country too had understood at least, the importance Gandhiji attached to nonviolence. Hence there were relatively few violent uprisings. Non violence was observed remarkably well. 36

34

Stanley wolpert,gandhis passion:the life and legacy of mahatma Gandhi, oxford university press,2001, pg 149 35 Dalton, selected political writings, Hackett publishing company,pg 73

15

Quit India movement 1942

In 1942 Indians were still divided over whether or not to support the British war effort in the second world war. The British governor-general of India lord linlithgow (later lord Halifax) had brought India into the war without consulting Indian leaders. Some people wanted to support the war and hope for independence. Others were angry because they felt the British had disregarded Indian intelligence .The congress, in 1939, passed a resolution which supported war on the condition of independence. Gandhiji had not supported this as he was against war and for non-violent resistance. However he later changed his stance as he did not want to free India by putting the British at an unfair disadvantage. In march 1942 the Cripps mission headed over to India to talk with Indian leaders and work out a possible compromise for full fledged support in war in exchange for selfgovernment. But the mission failed as demands for time frame toward self government and definition of powers was not met.37 On July 14th 1942 the congress passed resolutions demanding independence at the cost of massive civil disobedience. But not all were happy within the party, many felt that the movement was too premature, others wanted to bargain with the British like the Hindu mahasabha or the Muslim league. On august 8th the quit India resolution was passed at the Bombay session of the congress. This time the British acted more swiftly and imprisoned gandhiji at the aga khan palace the next day. All prominent congress men were arrested and put in ahmednagar fort jail. The movement lost direction as all the leaders were in jail. The congress party was itself banned.

37

Barkawi, Tarak. Culture and Combat in the Colonies. The Indian Army in the Second World War. J contempt History. Pg 325-355 16

Violence broke out in a big way bombs were exploded, buildings set on fire, telegraph lines cut. Over one lakh arrests were made nationwide. Protestors were publicly flogged. Hundreds were killed in police firing.38 Gandhiji went on a 21 day fast against the violence. His health petered out and he was about to die in 1944 when the scared British government released him. However the movement was soon suppressed by the British government. A feeling of hopelessness spread among the nationalist leaders. By the end of 1944 the movement had died out.39 Again it was a serious question whether non-violent resistance could succeed in a dictatorship. Whether it was necessary for the oppressor to have a sense of right or wrong for a non-violent movement became a question often asked. It was felt popularly, even now it is felt, that a non-violent resistance cannot succeed under a regime similar to that in Nazi Germany.

38

D, Fisher D; Read A (1998). The Proudest Day: India's Long Road to Independence. WW Norton. pg. 330. 39 . Rajmohan Gandhi ,Mohandas the true story of a man his people and an empire, penguin, new delhi,2006, pg 450-519 17

Non violent struggles elsewhere

The world has seen many non-violent struggles throughout history. Gandhiji was right when he called it an ancient principle of which he could not claim authorship. In the United States of America martin Luther king jr led a non-violent resistance against racism40. in the 1960s Caesar Chavez fought non-violently for the rights of the farm workers of California41.in Czechoslovakia the velvet revolution helped get rid of a communist government42.more recently leymah gbowee of Africa organized a peace movement that brought to end a 14 year old civil war in Africa by motivating women. in 1968 in Czechoslovakia the Prague spring was another successful non-violent movement. in fact there have been many non-violent movements in Czechoslovakia in 1989. From 1980 to 1989 the solidarity movement in April marshaled popular resistance to communist regime. From 1987 to 1989 the singing revolution happened where there was a cycle of singing mass demonstrations followed by a living chain across the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. In 1989 a bloodless revolution in Bulgaria resulted in downfall of a communist regime. The carnation revolution of 1974 Portugal and the people power revolution of 1986 Philippines is also worth mentioning. In 2000 the bulldozer revolution led to the fall of Milosevic Slobodan. The rose revolution in Georgia in 2003 led to the overthrow of Eduard Shevardnadze and the victory of Mikhail saakashvili. the orange revolution in Ukraine led to the annulment of election results. the cedar revolution in Lebanon led to the fall of a pro-Syrian government. Benign Aquino of Philippines also is an example of non-violence. The work of nelson Mandela in south Africa is only too well known.womens suffrage movements across the globe have been largely non-violent. a little lady called aung sang suu kyi from Burma has become the latest proponent of non-violence. The dalai lama of Tibet has been an illustration of non-

40

Clayborne Carson; Peter Holloran; Ralph Luker; Penny A. Russell The papers of Martin Luther King, Jr.. University of California Press. ,1992,pg 76
41

Ferriss, Susan, and Ricardo Sandoval, eds. The Fight in the Fields: Cesar Chavez and the Farmworkers Movement ,1998
42

Robin shepherd,chekoslavakia, the velvet revolution and beyond,st martins press, newyork, 2000 18

violence for years now. Thus non-violent resistance is a popular method of protest against oppressive regimes everywhere.

19

Indian non-violent struggles inspired by Gandhiji

Closer home in India many struggles have been inspired by Gandhiji and his nonviolence. Medha patkars narmada bachavo andolan is a controversial struggle for the preservation of the environment. It is a movement which has been made fun of but not ignored. Vinoba Bhave carried out the famous bhoodan movement in the most non-violent way and is a shining example of what gandhijis students should be like. Jayprakash narayan is another student of gandhis who carried out non -violent struggles in his name. Khan abdul gaffar khan is another of gandhijis students who continued to work for peace even in Pakistan. Maganlal Gandhi proved a true son to his father by his heroic struggle and hard work. Baba Amtes work in helping leprosy patients help themselves is but another example of how many lives Gandhiji touched. Apart from this there are innumerable groups which resort to non-violent satyagraha in order to get the government to listen to them. One of Gandhijis most important contributions to our country is that he taught us how to strike. Fasting like Gandhiji is not unheard of in India. Recently telugu politician k chandrashekhar rao fasted demanding a separate state for telangana. Fasting for a cause we believe in is not an unknown thing in India. But it was definitely popularized by Gandhiji. The chipko and appiko movements to protect the environment shine as examples of nonviolence. Gandhiji has certainly inspired many an activist in India today.

20

Criticism of non-violence
Although non-violence has been fiercely promoted by many people. It is not a philosophy which has no detractors. Many prominent people including leon Trotsky, Frantz fanon, Reinhold Niebuhr, subhash Chandra Bose, George Orwell, ward Churchill, and Malcolm x were fervent opponents of non-violence. Their argument is that non-violence is an attempt to impose the morals of the elite on the poor and the oppressed. They believe it to be a wrong for anyone to suffer a crime without retaliation. some believe that violence speaks louder than an appeal to reason. Others say that non-violent resistances are easily crushed by authoritarian regimes . even nelson Mandela said that non-violence only succeeds when the oppressor has a reason and a morality. Others believe that non-violent movements take longer than required time to achieve their ends and that such time maybe of critical importance. Gandhiji answered a few of these charges well. Morals he said were common to all men, not just the elite. In fact gandhiji ever found more morality among the poor. He said that it is always wrong to accept a wrong. But non-violence he argues counters the wrong at a higher level. It is not really non-retaliation ,merely retaliation in a different manner. Gandhiji did believe that reason and morality spoke louder than any harm that can be done to the body. He believed in changing the minds of the oppressor, not killing them for having weaknesses everyone does. To the charge that non-violence will not work against a heartless enemy, gandhiji simply replied that he believed everyone, including even Hitler, possessed a soul and a heart somewhere. To the charge that non-violence takes too long gandhiji said that he considered the means as important as the end and if the means was mired in dirt and blood then he could not accept the ends to be true and holy. Thus for him a violent struggle that led to freedom would be actually leading to a flawed freedom which meant little. India he said would have ill-earned her freedom if she got it through murder. To the charge that non-violent movements could be easily suppressed, Even though his own movements failed sometimes gandhiji always felt that it was because the non-violence practiced was impure, not because there is a flaw in the principle. All in all it can definitely be said that non-violence like everything else is highly debated
21

Conclusions
One of the themes that came up in this project is the superiority of non-violence over violence. I have since doing this project been converted. It is undoubtedly clear that nonviolence is a higher law, that it is something that is more precious and courageous than violence. However whether every person claiming to be non-violent is truly so , it cannot be said. It takes a lot of courage to be non-violent, to let go of anger, to be kind and to love. It is the kind of courage not many have. I definitely do not have it. Yet. Gandhiji has convinced me about the merits of being non-violent, but I am afraid I cannot be nonviolent as I do not posses that kind of courage. Even in Gandhijis own time few others were really non-violent with their hearts and minds. The way India burst into flames of anger during the partition riots and has been getting into violence ever since is proof of that. Although Gandhiji was from India, he may even represent what India should be, but he does not represent what India really is. India is really a violent country, in north, south, east and west, in every corner of the country there is strife, there is anger and there is killing. The principle of non-violence has been forgotten and Gandhiji has been confined to being a photo on the currency, nothing else. Yes there are non-violent struggles going on. There is a medha patkar once in a while there is a sunderlal bahuguna who comes along once a decade. But the country as a whole has not yet understood non-violence. Even after the greatest proponent of nonviolence was born and killed in our country, we are yet to learn. These are hard lessons. The fact that any non-violent resistance requires planning and must be meticulously monitored also becomes clear. Gandhijis non-violent resistances in south Africa, kheda, champaran, were successful because they were planned, the message of non-violence was grilled into the masses, they were monitored closely to check any outbreak of violence. This was I think the failing of quit India movement and the non-co operation movement. The 1930 salt satyagraha movement was in comparison a success, of course violence broke out, but thats because it is impossible to monitor such huge numbers of people, and if we had to wait to educate and convert all Indians to non-violence before starting a movement, I am afraid we would still be under colonial rule. non-violence is according to me a work thats not been finished with Gandhi, it has just been started with him, to make
22

India a truly non-violent country, will perhaps take eons, but it must be done, nonviolence means more strength than violence. India will shine in the world and give the world a way out of chaos and dirt if it manages to understand and implement nonviolence. Non-violence might sound idealistic. It is idealistic. But what is a life without ideals?. I say with Gandhiji it is human behavior that must be changed for ideals, not the other way around. The world would have progressed very little if there were no idealists in it. It is true that non-violent movements take a long time to bear fruits. But do violent movements take less time?. I dont think so. They may look like they are bearing fruits, but in the end, they dont, in the end one oppressor is replaced by another, it is what Orwell said in his animal farm. To fight evil with evil makes no sense. there have been many small non-violent movements which have borne fruits faster than what would have happened had they been violent, take for example the south African movement led by gandhiji himself, in a matter of twenty years the set goals were achieved. In many struggles in smaller countries it has been shown practically that non-violent resistances have been more successful than violent ones. The criticism that non-violent movements favor the bourgeoisie is to me, ridiculous, take the example of Indian independence movements. There had been violent movements before Gandhi, 1857 sepoy mutiny is just an example, Bengal was always the hot place with a lot of bloodshed. But despite all the bombs, we did not gain independence until Gandhi came along. Violent movements are easily crushed. You have one person throwing a bomb, jail him, execute him, brand him a menace to the society and its done. the movement has been crushed. You have one person who will let you do every bodily harm to him, but will not give up on his ideals, who will stand up every time you strike him down, you cannot jail him, you cannot kill him, you cannot call him a menace. With violence you can do little to him. Besides, how are an unarmed people to fight an armed government? that itself shows that it is violent movements that are bourgeoisie because the poorest man cannot take part in an armed struggle, gandhiji showed with salt that even the poorest man can take part in freeing his country.bhagath Singh, chandrashekhar azad and others were brave ,great men I agree. They have not received their due, I agree.
23

But that they could have helped the country more by putting their bravery to a more sane use is to me apparent. Imagine how much more useful it would have been if bhagath Singh had taken up non-violent resistance and not got himself killed in an act of nonviolence. What a shining example of courage and morals that would have been, what an inspiration indeed. It is apparent that non-violent resistances cause less damage to public property and life than violent resistances ever will. Many are killed in our country everyday because of the violent naxalite movement, were these people to protest non-violently they would be preserving the nations wealth, their nations wealth. Non-violent protests are more practical than violent ones. The world has been torn apart for millennia by violence, the pages of history have been soiled by blood, we have had so much war and death and destruction. And what have we achieved through this violence? Nothing. Maybe its time to try something different. Maybe its time we stop wasting our world, maybe its time for peace, non-violence and truth. It will be hard to do this, I agree, violence has been ingrained in us since childhood, but we must try, or else we may not have much to give our future generations. it is time to stop the madness. I will confess that I am ashamed that till I did this project I was only familiar with Gandhi, not knowledgeable about him. It is something everyone should know about, regardless of their political beliefs or stances on non-violence. There must be something in a man could threaten an empire with a pinch of salt. Who could move men from all corners of the world. It is worth a read. I must end by saying that Albert Einstein was right as always, it is hard to believe that a man like gandhiji existed, that a person could be so brave, so humble, it is hard to believe in this world where we are taught how to lie by our parents that one man truly believed in the truth. It is hard to believe that in this world where we are taught to be practical that one man dared to be a practical idealist. it is hard to believe that one man could ever take his religion and morals so seriously. It is hard to believe, and it is heartening. It

24

shows, I guess, that god need not give up on mankind yet. That there is some hope for the rest of us.

25

Bibliography
Mahadev desai, day to day with Gandhi volume 1, sarvaseva sangh, rajghat,june 1968 Mahadev desai, day to day with Gandhi, volume 2, sarva seva sangh, rajghat, june 1968 Collected works of mahatma Gandhi, ministry of broadcasting,newdelhi, 1999 Rajmohan Gandhi, Mohandas a true story of a man his people and an

empire,penguin,newdelhi,2006 M k Gandhi,The hindu-muslim unity,bharathiya vidya bhavan , Bombay, 1965 M k Gandhi, the law of love, bharathiya vidya bhavan, Bombay, 1968 M k Gandhi, hind swaraj, bharathiya vidyabhavan, Bombay,1968 M k Gandhi,the story of my experiments with the truth,navjivan publishing house , ahmedabad,august, 2009 Dalton, selected political writings, Hackett publishing house, 1996 Hardiman, Gandhi in his time and ours,permanent black, newdelhi, 2003 Homer jack,the Gandhi reader; a sourcebook of his life and writings,grove press,1994 Stanley wolpert,gandhis passion:the life and legacy of mahatma Gandhi, oxford university press,2001 Barkawi, Tarak. Culture and Combat in the Colonies. The Indian Army in the Second World War. J contempt History. D, Fisher D; Read A (1998). The Proudest Day: India's Long Road to Independence. WWNorton Clayborne Carson; Peter Holloran; Ralph Luker; Penny A. Russell The papers of Martin Luther King, Jr.. University of California Press. ,1992 Ferriss, Susan, and Ricardo Sandoval, eds. The Fight in the Fields: Cesar Chavez and the Farmworkers Movement ,1998 Robin shepherd,chekoslavakia, the velvet revolution and beyond,st martins press, newyork, 2000

26