Indian Freedom Movements - Essay Example

Mahatma Gandhi Introduction Despite his popularity, Gandhi is credited with not having made any claims toutinghimself as being either a philosopher or even a prophet. He warned that there was no such thing and Gandhism and that he did not wish to leave behind any sect. Indian freedom movement’s real significance according to Gandhi was that it was waged in a non-violent manner. His premise for rejecting violence was not only based on the belief that an unarmed people would have relatively very little change of success in the event of an armed rebellion, but also as a result of his opinion that violence was essentially a rather clumsy weapon that served to create more problems that it could possibly resolve (Pandikattu, 207). He was also of the opinion that violence would have the effect of leaving behind a trial of bitterness and hatred that would make attempts at achieving a genuine reconciliation almost impossible. Explaining and Defending Gandhian Philosophy of Non-Violence to a Skeptic Gandhi’s campaigns against non-violence in both India and South Africa had an enormous influence as they led to the development and diffusion of nonviolent campaign skills and insights. In most societies today nonviolent action has largely become the preferred approach. Nonviolent campaigns have the advantage of their being largely spontaneous and organized without much planning, preparation and training. Considering the large amounts of efforts and money that go into planning armed operations, it is highly likely that non violent action will continue to become more effective in future. However, there are some criticisms targeted at the premise of non-violence, some of the probably reservations and objections that a skeptic might voice and the probable approach that Gandhian might use to answer these objections include; One of the arguments a skeptic of non-violence might raise is that non-violence is largely ineffective when employed against oppressive systems that have been backed by violence. In answering this claim, a Gandhian might point out that this statement is essentially not true as history is rife with examples of just how non-violence has been used to successfully obtain victory against oppressive systems backed by violence. An example of this is that in India, Gandhi was able to successfully build up a non-violent movement against the oppressive British colonials. The non-violent movement engaged in peaceful protests that included noncooperation, exemplary hunger strikes, economic boycotts and rampant acts of disobedience that had the effect of causing the oppressive British imperialism to become unworkable. Other examples of the successes of non violence are demonstrated by Lannstrom (10) who points out that Martin Luther used non-violence in achieving civil rights for black Americans and Iranians were able to use it against the Shah. Another claim that might be made in opposition to non-violence is that non-violence is patriarchal. Patriarchy is essentially a form of social organization that works to produce what is commonly recognized as sexism. Patriarchy works to put women in a submissive position and men in a dominant position. Traditionally, characteristics and activities that are traditionally associated with power and privilege belong to men. In this regard, patriarchy assumes that instead of individuals defending themselves against violence, they can suffer violence patiently enough until enough of society is eventually able to mobilize itself and oppose it peacefully. A Gandhian can possibly counter this premise by pointing out that in the event of violent armed conflict, the armed groups are almost always dominated by men. Of note also is that it is widely acknowledged that women and children are usually the groups most affected in the event of armed conflict. Conversely, in the event of non-violent action, women are usually quite predominant. Why Gandhi Rejected Passive Violence in Favor of Satyagraha Gandhi’s first passive resistance campaign is seen to have begun as a raging protest against the 1906 Asiatic Registration Bill. The bill had been drafted as part of an attempt to try and limit the presence of individuals of Indian origin in the Transvaal by attempting to limit the trading activities of this individuals and confining them to a few segregated areas and regions. According to Bhikhu (5), the first Indians that arrived in South Africa in 1860 did so in the capacity of indentured laborers and from that time until 1911, an estimated 152,000 Indians are thought to have come to work on sugar estates across the country. After 1890, Indians began to obtain other jobs such as working in coal mines and the railways. By the turn of that century, it is thought that there were about 30,000 indentured Indians in Natal and before the start of the Anglo-Boer War, a few thousand had began moving into Transvaal. After the British won the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902), the Indians living in the Transvaal had hoped that the British administration would start to treat them in a more favorable manner, however the British chose to instead pass a string of various laws designed to limit the rights of Indians in the country. In August 1906, the Transvaal Gazette was instrumental in publishing a draft of a new law which sought to make it compulsory for all Indians above eight years of age in the province to be legally registered by have all their fingerprints taken and recorded. Gandhi perceived that this law would spell complete ruin for the Indians of South African and believed that it was indeed much better to die than submit to such a law (Bhikhu, 6). As a result of these events, Gandhi began to clarify and outline the rationale behind the concept of passive resistance that he had developed. He however disliked the notion behind passivity as it seemed to connote a cowardly refusal to oppose injustice. Gandhi called for people to try and propose an appropriate name that would refer to the newly developed mode of resistance. Gandhi’s nephew suggested the term Sadagraha which essentially means firmness in a good cause. Gandhi accepted this idea and went on to coin the term Satyagraha which he used to mean truth force (Gandhi 85). In Gandhi’s usage, truth has a wider connotation that it happens to have in English. The term Satya is derived from the Sanskrit term Sat which has a number of meaning that include being and abiding, actual, self-existence essence, right as well as anything really is, as anything ought to be. In the Indian tradition of thought, When applied in its highest sense, Sat stands for archetypal, absolute truth. In this respect, Satya is noted to embrace not only logical and factual truth, but also metaphysical truth and moral truth. Satyagraha can be described as referring to being strong not with mere brute strength, but with the relatively greater strength of God’s spark. The term according to Gandhi denoted the vindication of truth not by the wanton infliction of suffering on the perceived opponent, but instead, on one’s own self. The main intention behind the principle is for an individual to attempt and convince the opponent to not crush him, and in the process convert the opponent who must of necessity be weaned from error by the use of both sympathy and patience. Is Religion or faith Integral and necessary for the Practice of Ahmisa and Satyagraha? The term Satyagraha is made up of the two terms Satya meaning truth and graha meaning firmness of force. Gandhi regarded his Satyagraha campaigns as being a practical way of aptly demonstrating the ancient idea of ahimsa. The term ahimsa literally means non-violence or non-force and is a common doctrine in the three Indian religions of Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism. Of all Indian religions, Jainism can be noted to have taken ahimsa to the greatest extreme. The Indian Jaina religion is fundamentally ascetic and the life of a monk is considered as the one things that is truly religious. The householder is regarded as being an apprentice and by observing obedience and piety to the Jaina ethic, it will eventually be possible to bring about a rebirth in which the life of a monk is made possible. To ascribe to the more traditional concept of Ahimsa, both faith and religion are found to be necessary. The Jaina monks have taken ahimsa very seriously and at time go to the extent of sweeping the pavement before them as they walk down the street and wearing a gauze covering their mouths so as to avoid any unintended destruction of living creatures. Householders are permitted certain practical limitations of non-violence as their activities to support their families might possibly inhibit an absolutist approach to ahimsa. However those wishing to avoid violence are advised to refrain from consuming any products containing honey, meat and wine as the principle assumes that there exists a connection between one’s diet and having a violent disposition. Of note however is that writing in the Hind Swaraj, Gandhi points out that that at the very root, no man can be identified as really practicing such a religion because we all really do destroy life(Gandhi 55). Gandhi’s genius helped to transform the principle of Ahimsa from what had been an individual ethic, into a tool of political and social action. In this regard, it is still necessary for an individual to have faith so as to practice ahimsa. It is not possible for non religions persons to uphold the practice without their having to first having faith or following a certain religion as this would cause the principle to lose its fundamental meaning. According to Gandhi, one of the qualities of a non-violent activist ascribing to the practice of Satyagrahi is that they should have a living faith in god. Gandhi was aware that it was very necessary to train individuals who would be able to carry on with his Satyagraha campaigns and it is due to this that he endeavored to train his Satyagraha Ashrams and it is in training these individuals that he prescribed this requirement. In Gandhi’s mind, the concept always a religious aspect and depended upon moral force for its overall success. According to Bhikhu (93) Gandhi believed that since human beings are essentially spiritual in nature, the good society should serve to help them in developing their spiritual powers and moral and in so doing create the conditions necessary for Swaraj. Works Cited Top of Form Bhikhu Parekh. Gandhi: a very short introduction. Oxford University Press, 2001. Print. Gandhi, Mahatma. Gandhi:Hind Swarajand Other Writings. Cambridge University Press, 1997. Lannstrom, Anna. “The Stranger’s Religion: Fascination and Fear”. Why Terror. Notre dame Press. 2004. Print. Pandikattu, Kuruvilla. Gandhi: The Meaning of Mahatma for the Millennium. Washington, D.C: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, 2001. Print. Read More