BAPU: A SELF-STYLE STATESMAN

Ghulam server shaheen

                   

Ghulam server shaheen

The history of mankind shows how great men have always struggled and fought against prevailing social evils and human sufferings. Out of those men in human history, the 20th century produced one outstanding personality – Mahatma Gandhiji. Gandhiji responded to the challenges of the given historical situations, realized the historical necessities of their time  and  tried  to  actualize  the needs  and aspirations  of  the  people  of his  times  in  his own  ways.  Gandhiji  tried  to evolve a revolutionary approach to political and social change. His originality lay in the formulation of a new technique of non-violent,  non-cooperation  and Satyagraha  for  social  action.  Traditionally,  we  understand  that  there are  two  types  of forces,  physical  and  spiritual  forces.  Gandhiji  said  that  in  general,  people  are  familiar  with  the  physical  force.Physical force is based on violence. Violence cannot be solved any issue, it created more violence. Physical force promoted only one  side  victory  and it defeated the other side. The real  issue  of conflict does not resolve this approach. Gandhi was opposed to this physical force”. Joan V Bondurant, an international peace researcher; said that force can be  used  in  either  violent or  nonviolent ways.  With  violence,  force  is used  to  intentionally  harm the  opponent.  But  with nonviolence, force is used to make changes in the opponent. Michael J. Nojeim has written extensively  on  the  nature  of  violence  and nonviolence. This  concept  of  nonviolence  is  defined  as  using  force  to  provoke  opponents  into  changing  their  actions,  without intentionally  harming  them,  but  instead  of  exercising  the  transforming  of  power  by  intentional  self-suffering.  In  turn violence is using force to deliberately harm, if not destroy, an opponent’s physical and psychological well-being in order to compel  a  change  in  their behaviour.  Gandhiji had  given  his  theories  on  resolving  the  conflicts  to  this  changing  world. Gandhiji’s method of conflict resolution was based on Satyagraha and non-violence.                  

  

                         Mahatma Gandhi

The technique or method Gandhiji used  was evolved  out  of a  philosophy of  non-violence.  Gandhiji  mentioned the use of pressure of hunger strikes, threats of self immolation, picketing & similar other coercive measures. But is seldom an appeal to  the  conscience of  their  opponents.  Later on  Gandhiji’s  Satyagraha  has  been completely  perverted in what is known as gherao  method of coercing the decision maker. The gherao is potently immoral  in as much as it amount besieging seldom peacefully,  unarmed,  reasonable and helpless men or body of men & not lifting the  siege until demands have been fully conceded. Gandhiji  always  claimed that Satyagraha can rid  society  of  all  evils,  political, economical and moral. Satyagrah being a resistance to evil, in the context of social conflict, included as its most visible form opposition to unjust laws. For Gandhiji, the rules of morality, which ought to guide the life of an individual, should  likewise  guide  the interactions between nations. In the  Gandhian model the  individual comes to  conflict  situation  as  one  who  is not innately aggressive and he has the freedom of will to resolve conflicts in a  non violent way. Conflict is  a natural fact of life  either we focus on  interactions between  individuals,  groups, organizations  or  nations.  Conflicts  are everywhere  of  the range  of emotions  that  may arise  conflict  in  forms of  conflict  settlement,  conflict  transformation,  conflict  coercion  and  conflict prevention as a way to reach the state of cooperation. Gandhiji called his struggle satyagrah was a moral equivalent of war and  a  deeply  spiritual  action.  Gandhiji  believed  that  individual’s forms  society,  as  we are  so  our  environment  becomes.He  claimed  a small  body of  determined spirits  fixed  by  faith  in  their  mission  can  alter  the  course  of  history.  He  saw relationship between individual and society as one of the parts determining whole. For  Marxists, it is the  social existence, which  determines  individual’s  consciousness. He  believed  that  men  are  the  outcome  of  circumstances.

                           Mahatma Gandhi

Basic Principles of Satyagraha in Gandhian Perspective  Satyagrahi  need  not  wait  forever.  When  the  limit  is  reached  he  takes  risks  and  conceives  plans  of  active Satyagraha. A satyagrahi never  misses,  can  never miss a chance  of  compromise on honorable  terms, because I can  never  be sure I  am  right. Gandhi  asserted: Human  life  is  a  series  of compromises  and  it is  not  always easy  to  achieve  in  practice what one had  found  to be  true  in  theory. Conflict resolution  through  Satyagraha is  based on the beliefs  and  assumptions that:.Some elements of common needs to the disputants always exist. Disputants could be amenable to an 'appeal to the heart and mind'.  Satyagrahis are capable of carrying Satyagraha to the end. Concepts of Satayagraha in Gandhian Perspective  Gandhiji  said that  truth is  God.  God  is  absolute  truth. But  at  the  same  time,  he said  that I  have  not  realized absolute truth, so long I must hold to the relative truth as I have conceived it. 

Gandhian  conflict  resolution philosophy  is an  outcome of  his own  life experiences, but  his  model  of  conflict resolution  does not  meet  with the  parameters of  a  universal and  holistic  model  of conflict  resolution.  His  techniques  for  conflict  resolution,  though  simplistic,  but  can  be  misleading,  as  it  is self-contradictory from many aspects

                         Mahatma Gandhi

Gandhiji’s philosophy of conflict resolution following concepts: 

     

  Patience 

One can be patience if there are no confusion and contradiction in belief  and assumptions. Satyagraha campaigns are methods  of  fighting  where  conflict has  reached the  grievance  stage. Fighting  is related  to being  violent,  so contrary. Gandhiji ethics stems from the injunction that what you do to others, you also do to yourself. Gandhiji  preached  and  practiced,  if  single  individual is  morally  strong, it  can bring  about  transformation  in an environment in which he lives. Faith in God The  basis  of Satyagraha  is  that the  opponent is  open  to  reason and  has  a conscience  and  that human  nature  is bound,  or  at  least  likely,  to  respond  to  any  noble  and  friendly  action.  Belief  in  the  goodness  of  human  nature  and  the operation of reason is the optimist's act of faith.

 

No violence –

non violence is means, truth is end. If we take care of the means we will surely reach end sooner or later is one of the main belief of Gandhiji. Nonviolence is never a method of coercion; it is one of the conversions. Fearlessness For Gandhi, possession  of arms  was  a  sign of  fear  and  cowardice. Cowards  could never  be  moral.  Nonviolence and cowardice are contradictory terms. The courage in Satyagraha "is a matter of heart" and not physical strength. Self-suffering Self-suffering "is used in  a course that is unjust,  only  the  person using it suffers. He does not  make  others suffer for his mistakes." And it keeps the resistance nonviolent.

Evaluation of Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict Resolution Mahatma Gandhi's thoughts  seem  to  be  attracting  more and more attention at  first  glance,  but  the  practicality of the Gandhian philosophy of conflict resolution requires complete verification, on the basis of some universal parameters.  By  going  through  the  literature  survey,  we  would  say  Gandhi’s  simplicity,  as  confirmed  in  his  apparently inadequate philosophical stand on conflict resolution, can be misleading. It has been found that Gandhi is not a  philosopher  in  any  specialized  sense,  and  he  has  little  have  to  do  for  highly  abstract  and  technical  philosophical formulations.  Most  important,  his  thoughts  on  conflict  resolution  serve  as  a  challenge  and  as  a  catalyst  for  having re-thought  dominant  positions  and  have  more  value  for  significant  philosophical  thought  than  most  mainstream ‘‘academic’’ philosophy. With respect  to  conflict,  violence, nonviolence  and  peace,  Gandhiji’s  philosophy  does  not  give  all  the answers. One has to be selective not only in terms of Gandhiji’s  writing,  but  also  in  comparing  Gandhiji  with  other  philosophical  thoughts  and  evaluating  their  respective contributions. This also because much of this challenge comes from the sheer volume of writings by and about mahatma  

                          Mahatma Gandhi

                         Although,  he never  wrote a  lengthy book,  The  Collected  Works  of  Mahatma  Gandhi comes  to one  hundred volumes of very assorted and highly fragmented articles, correspondence, speeches, and other writings. After  noting the importance of Gandhiji’s  analysis of  self, self-other relations, and  Swaraj  or  ‘‘self-rule,’’  we  conclude  by  suggesting  that  Gandhiji’s  approach  to  conflict  resolution  faces  many significant challenges and difficulties. Nevertheless, his approach has much of value in challenging dominant philosophical approaches and offering creative alternatives. In  many  writings  it  has  been  mentioned  that  whatever  Gandhiji  said,  Gandhiji  believes  that.                 But  our  proposal is  all  the  conflicts  all around  us  is because  of us  starts believing  whatever  we  get  from outside,  from parents,  teachers,  society,  friends,  media,  advertisement,  etc.,  which  are  the  sources  of beliefs  &  assumptions,  but  the resolution is if  we  start  knowing  the realities  through  self exploration.  Our beliefs and assumptions  play a very important part in the  way we behave  with  other  human  beings  and  we  work  with the  rest  of nature  (comprising of air,  soil,  water, plants, animals etc.). There is a direct relationship between what we believe & assume with our behavior and work. As we get older,  we start living with these  beliefs  & assumptions by expressing these through  our behavior and work. We found sometimes  these  beliefs  &  assumptions  are  true  and  sometimes  false.  Because  these  beliefs  &  assumptions  are  not evaluated on some basis with which we can verify, that’s why we are not sure of either our beliefs & assumptions are right or wrong. So this is the need of hour to evaluate the beliefs & assumptions. Gandhiji has given the philosophy of conflict,  by  dividing  the  conflict  situations from interpersonal to groups to national to international levels. But we have tried to see the conflict by putting the individual in the center.  If  we  look  at  our  lives,  it  becomes  clear  that  an  individual’s  living  can  be  seen  as encompassing  at  the  four  levels as  an Individual,  Family,  Society  and  Nature/Existence.  Whenever  an  individual  lives,              he lives at the above mentioned four levels. Each one of us lives at all these levels, whether we are aware of it or not. If an Individual is not able to understand itself, so he is in conflict  with all the four levels.  We can easily see the conflicts of an individual at different  four  levels  all around us like  conflicts  with own self, conflicts  in  families, conflicts in  society  and conflicts in  nature/existence. So conflicts start  from conflicts in the individual and its  expression is  the conflict  at all four levels. Gandhiji mentioned that the path of satyagrahi demands self suffering. But we can ask  ourselves  that  either  we  want  self  suffering or  not  by  using  the  universal process  for self  exploration.  No  body wants  suffering,  everyone  wants  happiness  and  prosperity.  So  the  path  of  Satyagraha  is  not  the  universally  accepted technique for conflict resolution.

Gandhiji  said  whatever  I say are  my  experiences or  beliefs  and  I realized  the  relative truth  not  the  absolute truth.  Empowerment  It  should  be  able  to  infuse  some  hope  and  confidence  in  an  individual  and  prevent  them  from  lapsing  into misanthropy or worse. Gandhiji’s methods of conflict resolution do not provide any hope to implement on modern types of conflicts. Feasible A good  philosophy must  be socially  feasible: and  must be  demonstrably so,  without any  repressive or  coercive methods being used. But the Gandhian model of conflict resolution is based on the coercive method of conflict resolution. a  good  philosophy  must  be  open  source,  so  that  once  an  individual  is  able  to understand  the  fundamentals, can  participate  in  the  process  of  developing, documenting,  and  application  of  philosophy. Gandhian philosophy of  conflict  resolution is  not a  self  exploratory model  so  there  is no  possibility of  proliferation  of  the model. So the Gandhian philosophy of conflict resolution, is not according to the universal parameter. The  wrong  identification  of  needs  and  desires  are  rising  in  human  beings  due  to  unevaluated  beliefs  and assumptions. This is the main reason for various kinds of conflicts all around us. The desires and needs of  human beings are  linked  to  the  physical  facilities.  Most  of  the conflicts  at  different  levels  of  human  beings  are  related to  the  needs  of physical facilities. Lack of understanding and fulfillment of relationship with others is also the other reason that gives birth to  various  conflicting  situations.  Everybody  wants  a  good  relationship  with  all.  When  we  have  problem  in  these relationships, it troubles us;  we remain in contradictions, which form conflicts.

As far as the role Gandhian philosophy in national struggle is concerned.no doubt,the circumstances in which Gandhi twisted his philosophy was quite pragmatic and successful.

Before Gandhi arrival in india many movements were launched and failed after one another except congress.reason was only that their strategy were not able to lead movement too longer.in other words movements were politically very immature.but when Gandhi led movement with the idea of non violent and satyagarha it was quite successful in champaran,kheda and ahmedabad and at a subsequent stages.although his philosophy was difficult to follow for common men even for politician to some extent but it was successive at many time during the freedom struggle.according to dr.oslo "Gandhian poverty is very costly"its true to some extent.because boycott of foreign products and spinning khadi,used indian crafts and replace them by domestic products was very costlier for poor men.same way his idea about modern education,economy,polity and developing industrialisation was very complicated to follow. thats why free india replaced it by the path of modernisation.

Another reason for successful of his philosophy in india because the formation of labour party in england during 1920-30  It’s also the case that one powerful segment of British opinion, represented by the Labour party, was always for Indian independence. From about 1905–6, well before Gandhi returned to India, Keir Hardie committed the Labour party to independence. Then, as the Labour party grew in influence within Great Britain through the 1920s and 1930s, there was an influential constituency of politicians and intellectuals supporting the Indian freedom movement. There were writers like George Orwell, Kingsley Martin of the New Statesman, Fenner Brockway and Vera Brittain (the remarkable pacifist who was a friend of Gandhi’s) writing in the British press about the legitimacy of the Indian demand for independence. It’s not clear whether Ho Chi Minh had similar people lobbying for him in France. So it is true that non-violence had a better chance against the British as compared to the Dutch in Indonesia or the French in Vietnam.

as Ho Chi Minh coming to India in the 1950s and telling a gathering in New Delhi that if Mahatma Gandhi had been fighting the French, he would have given up non-violence within a week.

At the same time Gandhi was violating to his own idea at several  occasion.at the outbreak of Boer war,he raised an all indian ambulance corps 11000 volunteers to support the british.he was  arguing that "if indians expected to have full right of citizenship in british empire,they also needed to shoulder their responsibilities"similarly  during second world war Gandhi was willing to abandon his doctrinal commitment to non-violence and to tell the British ‘Hitler is evil, he must be defeated, we will help you defeat him.’ ‘We’ here means the Congress party, India’s main political vehicle, led by Gandhi and Nehru. They said to the British, ‘We will work with you, but you must assure us that you will grant us independence once the war is over.

To sum up Gandhian philosophy and give an ultimate statement about his philosophy is very hard.but,yes it can be concluded with these remarks in light of above analysis that he was his own style statesmanship and on the other hand it is tough for others to follow the same idea in the era of multidimensional world.

in the word of sigmund  freud "may the coming generations of india refused to accept that person like Gandhi was born in india"

writer hailing from surnkote poonch J&K and pursuing bachelor degree from AMU(CAS department of history AMU)