In chapter sixteen Gandhi begins to flesh out his argument and his process for self-rule. In this reading Gandhi establishes proofs for three basic precepts of home-rule by disproving the assertions of the Reader through the voice of the Editor. These precepts are the following: the means is relevant to the end, that brute force or submission are not answers to the Indian plight, and the end desired is self-rule not the end of british rule. It is by these proofs that Gandhi asserts the necessity of passive resistance fueled by each individual's soul force to ultimately topple the machinated and foreign blight in India.
In this reading Gandhi firsts uses the dialogue between the Editor and the Reader to establish a correlation between the means achieving the desired result and the actual outcome of these actions. The editor responds the readers assertion that "brute force" and "a continuance of force" as an implausible means to achieving self-rule as a result of simple cause and effect (78). The Editor claims that the use of brute force to achieve self-rule will result in the exact situation in which they currently exist beneath the brute force of British rule. The Editor compares analyzes the reader's reasoning "as saying that we can get a rose through planting a noxious weed" (79). The Editor's analyses of both the thief and the robbers further expose brute force not as a wrong response but rather a plainly irrational one. Gandhi expresses through these storied situations that the use of inappropriate means to achieve a certain result is impossible.
The Editor invokes the same assertion in the case of petitions as for brute force, that the inappropriate means won't achieve the desired results. The editor critiques petitions "without the backing of force" as useless, a given fact (82). In such a sense only useful for the education of others, specifically to express to the people "an idea of their condition, and warn their rulers"(82-83). The editor then specifies that if a petition is backed by force and contests the position of a equal it "testifies to his nobility"(83). The conditions of the force used to back petitions are either of brute force or the "force of love or the soul"(83). The Editor having already disproven the response of brute force maintains that the only appropriate response is the soul force. The Editor sums up the response of soul force as that of "passive resistance".
The dialogue ultimately brings the voice of the reader to its child analogy to complete Gandhi's argument for passive resistance. The Editor clarifies that the analogy in itself is inappropriate in the assumption that the British, as the child, "proceed to their actions through ignorance". The use of brute force against the ignorant neither educates nor resolves the problem, the affected party only has been forced into a new action without knowing why the preceding one was wrong. The editor instead asserts that the only appropriate response is to accept the inevitable action and through the means of the soul or love force to express to the acting party the action is unacceptable and wrong
Discussion Questions:
The importance of the analyses of brute force and petitions becomes apparent in the following chapters when the stances of the moderate and extremist parties are addressed. Do you see a correlation between how Gandhi addresses the respective stances on British rule in the later chapters in chapter 16?
It is quite apparent that Gandhi is unsupportive of all aspects of foreign invasion from the governmental to the infrastructural level. Is Gandhi's complete rejection of the British warranted, is the return to the old ways instead not just a rejection of the british rule but also a regression? What would Gandhi say to his rejection as a regression?
To answer your second discussion question, I think that Gandhi would say that the meaning of the term "regression" depends on who's defining it. The British might see rural "third-world" simplicity as worthless and wretched, but Gandhi (and the peaceful Indian country dwellers, presumably) see it in a different light. For instance, on the subject of education--something that Westerners view as absolutely necessary to one's quality of life--Gandhi calls it "merely an instrument" (98). As he elaborates, "What do you propose to do by giving [a villager] a knowledge of letters? Will you add an inch to his happiness?" (99). Clearly, he doesn't believe that Western methods are any more effective than the present ones at addressing what really matters. When it comes to attaining swaraj, such systematic details are irrelevant; thus, so is the term "regression."
ReplyDeleteEmily makes a great point. I would add that the word "regression" isn't inherently bad, but instead simply means a return to what was before. To answer whether Gandhi's complete rejection of the British is warranted depends on your viewpoint. If you believe, as Gandhi does, that British society serves as the double sin that both leads people astray from the true path of self discipline while simultaneously allowing for the British to hold control over India, then his point seems valid. I myself would argue that Gandhi's argument ignores those that died from illness and had not the option to learn from their mistakes concerning self-control as well as the fact that life before the British came was brutal both under those Indian princes who became despots and for those villages that were deathly poor. If people were truly less happy in the cities, then there is no reason for them not to pack up and leave for the countryside. As such, I remain skeptical that everything British is evil.
ReplyDeleteMorgan makes excellent points about the passive resistance is Gandhi's only way of returning India back to its natural or rather pure form. Gandhi seeks to have no British ways in India, since they are not part of India's original characteristics. India allows these ways to take control of its nation. This control over the nation creates the idea of brute force to be useful or even correct, but Gandhi claims that "[passive resistance] is the reverse of resistance by arms" (88). Here, this resistance is the opposite of what the English do to enforce their desired conditions. He continues to declare, "Passive resistance, that is, soul force, is matchless. It is superior to the force of arms" (91). In his statement, he relates that this soul force is greater than fighting and forcing other to believing their ideas, when they should really be showing compassion and love to educate them the right ways. To elaborate more on this that Morgan originally mentions, this follows Gandhi's metaphor of the thief, where there are two ways to handle it. One way involves using "brute force" by chasing after the thief with a group of armed men, but the problem only becomes worse as more stealing occur upon oneself and many others; in the other way, Gandhi states, "you keep your things in a manner most accessible to him. The robber comes again, and is confused as all this is new to him nevertheless, he takes away your things. But his mind is agitated. He inquires about you in the village, he comes to learn about your broad and loving heart, he repents, he begs your pardon, returns you your things and leaves off the stealing habit" (81-82). Within this metaphor, he relates the relationship of the good outcomes and possibilities that may occur with using the passive resistance. The only result of the brute force is a bad one, which leads to only one bad result. To answer the discussion questions, I think that Gandhi would not find this rejection of British rule to be a regression, for he finds it to move them forward towards greater things. Their nation becomes greater, once it looks back to its origin and roots to find the identity of their nation. Their identity comes from their idea of home rule and passive resistance, which was originally evident in the nature of their nation before the British. Once they achieve the separation from Britain and recognize the past contains the elements needed to promote their nation, India will move forward and achieve great development.
ReplyDelete