The political views of Mahatma Gandhi

     Gizrat is the mass emigration from the region where the opponent has a very great power - for a while, until the opponent does not agree to concessions.

     To extreme forms of Satyagraha Gandhi attributed the fasting, refusing to pay taxes, non-cooperation, civil disobedience and the parallel administration.

     Gandhi himself often resorted to fasting. Fasting refuses food, and if the opponent does not agree to implement all demands of Satyagraha, he fasting to death. Every time when Gandhi fasted, the British colonial administration was forced to fully or partially meet its requirements.

     It is curious that during the fasting in 1943, Stalin indirectly saved the life of Gandhi. At the Teheran Conference, Stalin asked Churchill reasons for his bad temper. He said that Gandhi fasting in prison for a long time, and doctors expect  him any day to die. And it will cause unpredictable consequences in India. Then Stalin suggested to Churchill to mix into the drinking of Gandhi glucose. Of course, Gandhi did not know about it, but lasted more than 10 days of fasting until the British would not have made concessions.

     Non-cooperation, according to Gandhi, is to avoid the honorary titles and medals, a government salary, boycott of government ships, when the plaintiffs and the defendants have resorted to arbitration, the boycott of public schools and higher educational institutions, legislatures, that is, refusing to vote and stand as candidates the election, refusing to work in ministries and departments, the boycott of the army and police, all British banks, insurance companies, etc.

     The difference between civil disobedience and non-cooperation is that disobedience, in contrast to the above-mentioned form, involves a demonstrative violation of the laws. The most glaring example - salt march to the sea in 1930, when Gandhi and hundreds of thousands of his followers publicly violated the law concerning state monopoly on the sale of salt.

     And finally, the last form of resistance is to create a parallel government - alternative government.

     In conclusion this chapter I want to note that three decades, Gandhi spent at home after returning from South Africa - a solid history of various forms of Satyagraha. In this struggle were “hot flashes” and “ebbs”, but the authority of Gandhi, the number of his supporters are constantly increasing. In the end, in the mid of 40-ies, the British realized that they still have to grant India independence. This meant, in effect, the collapse of not only the largest empire in human history - the British, but the world colonial system.

     In the next chapter we will discuss in more detail at this historical aspect, where the role of Mahatma Gandhi is simply impossible to overestimate where we will see how all of the above theoretical calculations of Gandhi found their immediate implementation. 
 

2. IMPACT OF GANDHI’S TEACHING ON THE CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC PROCESSES 

2.1 The universal character of Gandhi’s teaching 

     Indeed one reason, I would suggest, why Gandhi is so significant today is that he was the first great example of a typically modern phenomenon, the political saint. I use the word ’saint’ for want of a better, but by a saint or mahatma I do not mean a perfect human being, because then there would be no saints, but someone whom we spontaneously feel to be much closer to God, or the ultimate realty, than the rest of us. Before the rise of democracy such individuals generally had no political power or, therefore, responsibility, and saintliness typically took the form either of acts of individual charity or of a life of secluded prayer and contemplation. But since Gandhi - and many of them directly influenced by him - we have seen Vinoba Bhave in India, Martin Luther King in the United States, Osca Romero in San Salvador, Thich Naht Hahn in Tailand, Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu in South Africa, as well as very numerous lesser figures in many places. For each one of whom we have all heard there are probably fifty who are only known locally. Dedication to needy and suffering humanity has now become the main arena in which spiritual greatness is expressed. But returning to Gandhi, he was undoubtedly sometimes a difficult person with whom to deal. [19, p. 6]

     Thus Gandhi’s vision went much further than the immediate political aims that he shared with his colleagues in the Indian National Congress. What elements of his long-term project are relevant today? [19, p.8]

     First is the Gandhian approach to conflict resolution, based on a belief in the fundamental nature of the human person. Not however of human nature as it has generally manifested itself throughout history, but of its further potentialities, which can be evoked by goodwill, self-giving love, and a sacrificial willingness to suffer for the good of all. As Lament Hempel puts it, ’Gandhi’s crowning achievement may have been his ability to inspire homo humanus out of homo sapiens. But this was only in a number of individuals, not in society as a whole. Individuals continue to be inspired by Gandhi’s teaching and example. But neither India nor any other state has based its policies consistently on Gandhian principles. It is particularly tragic that his own country has failed to live up to his ideals. The rise of the Hindu supremacist movement - which was responsible for Gandhi’s assassination - has intensified communal tensions, culminating in the destruction of the Ayodia mosque in 1992. All this would make Gandhi weep. Unregenerate human nature has triumphed once again over what Gandhi called Truth - as it has over the teachings of enlightened religious leaders in every century.

     Nevertheless the attempt to inspire humans to rise to true humanity must never cease. It involves an unwavering commitment to fairness, truthfulness, open and honest dealing, willingness to see the other’s point of view, readiness to compromise, readiness even to suffer. In the familiar but in practice disregarded words of Jesus, it requires us to love our enemies. Such a response refuses to enter the downward

spiral of mutual recrimination, hatred, and violence. The lesson of history is not that this has been tried and failed, but that the failure has been in not trying it.

     But ahimsa as practical politics is a long-term strategy. It took time and patience and ceaseless effort and example to evoke the limited realisation that non-violent action in India, even simply as a tactic, is more effective than violent revolt. It is thus pointless to ask how Gandhi would have fared in, for example, Nazi Germany. He would no doubt have been quickly eliminated. The more useful question is what would have happened if a Greman like him had been at work there during the previous twenty years.

     Another implication of Gandhi’s thought concerns ecology and the preservation of the earth and the life on it. Here Gandhi anticipated the widespread Green movement of today. To quote James Gould, ’Gandhi has emphasised opposite values to those of the consumer society: the reduction of individual wants, the return to direct production of foodstuffs and clothing, and self-sufficiency rather than growing dependency. As the limits of growth and the inherent scarcity of resources broke upon the world in the 1960’s, the Gandhian idea of restraint suddenly made sense. E.F. Schumacher, author of the influential Small Is Beautiful, regarded Gandhi as the great pioneer in insisting that the rampant growth of capitalist industrialism is incompatible with a sustainable world ecosystem. Schumacher said, ’Gandhi had always known, and rich countries are now reluctantly beginning to realise, that their affluence was based on stripping the world. The USA with 5.6% of the world population was consuming up to 40% of the world’s resources, most of them non-renewable. Such a life-style could not spread to the whole of mankind. In fact, the truth is now dawning that the world could not really afford the USA, let alone the USA plus Europe plus Japan plus other highly industrialised countries. Enough is now known about the basic facts of spaceship Earth to realise that its first class passengers were making demands which could not be sustained very much longer without destroying the spaceship’. Gandhi saw this in terms of his native India, which was then still a developing country in which people in the hundreds of thousands of villages lived in extreme poverty. And so instead of building up modem industries with labour saving machinery in the cities, drawing the villagers into the urban slums, he urged basic employment for all. He wanted ’production by the masses rather than mass production’. Every policy should be judged by its effects on the multitude of ordinary citizens. For example, cottage industries, such as spinning, required very little capital equipment and should be encouraged and supported throughout the vast rural areas. That is what Gandhi saw as the need at that time. Had he lived a generation later he would no doubt have accepted industrialisation, but would have worked to humanise it and to undo the great gap between the rich and the poor.

     In the matter of aid to impoverished countries Gandhi was at least a generation ahead of his time. In 1929 he wrote, “The grinding poverty and starvation with which our country is afflicted is such that it drives more and more men every year into the ranks of the beggars, whose desperate struggle for bread renders them insensible to all feelings of decency and self-respect. And our philanthropists, instead of providing work for them and insisting on their working for bread, give them alms” [20]. But that aid should be given in such a way as to free the recipients to help themselves is now an accepted principle in international aid circles.

     Gandhi’s feminism’ - though that is not a term that he used - is also of interest today in shifting the focus from the transformation of women to the transformation of men. In the Indian context his concern for the position of women in society was ahead of his time. He was impressed when in England by the courage and dedication of the suffragettes, although he did not approve of their occasional resort to violence. And when women responded to his call in South Africa and India, showing themselves as willing as the men to face violent police action and jail, Gandhi saw that they had an unique contribution to make. He was quick to see that women could become the leader in the Satyagraha which does not require the learning that books give but does require the stout heart that comes from suffering and faith. Further, because for Gandhi true liberation always went much further than political

independence, to the humane transformation of society, he believed that by taking

part in the nationalist struggle, women of India could break out of their long imposed seclusion. His conception of the kind of gender revolution that is needed was novel in his time. For the wholehearted adoption of nonviolence can be seen as making for a gentler and less aggressive masculinity. Sushila Gidwani puts the point challengingly in this way: “Indian feminism aims at changing men to become qualitatively more feminine while modern feminism aims at changing women to become qualitatively more masculine”.

     And finally, another aspect of Gandhi’s thought which is relevant today. This is not novel in the East but is highly controversial within Christianity, though much less so today in many circles than in Gandhi’s time. This is his understanding of the relation between the great world faiths. “The time is now passed”, he said, “when the followers of one religion can stand and say, ours is the only true religion and all others are false” [21]. In his youth Gandhi lived within a very ecumenical community. He was particularly influenced by a Jain, Raychandbhai, who introduced him to the idea of the manysidedness of reality (anekantavada), so that many different views may all be valid. And this includes religious views. Gandhi shared the ancient Hindu assumption that Religions are different roads converging at the same point. What does it matter that we take different roads so long as we reach the same goal? He regarded it as pointless, because impossible, to grade the great world faiths in relation to each other. “No one faith is perfect. All faiths are equally dear to their respective votaries. What is wanted, therefore, is a living friendly contact among the followers of the great religions of the world and not a clash among them in the fruitless attempt on the part of each community to show the superiority of its own faith over the rest… Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Parsis, Jews are convenient labels. But when I tear them down, I do not know which is which. We are all children of the same God” [22]. However his “doctrine of the Equality of Religions”, as it has been called, did not move towards a single global religion, but enjoins us all to become better expressions of our own faith, being enriched in the process by influences from other faiths.

     These, then, are ways in which Gandhi’s thinking was ahead of his own time and alive today in our time. And underlying all this, as an available source of inspiration for each new generation, is Gandhi’s indomitable faith in the possibility of a radically better human future if only we will learn to trust the power of non-violent openness to others and to the deeper humanity, and indeed divinity, within us all. To most people this seems impossible. But Gandhiji’s great legacy is that his life has definitively shown that, given true dedication, it is possible in the world as it is. 
 

2.2 Decentralized democratic political system on Gandhi 

     Political Decentralization: Political decentralization aims to give citizens or their elected representatives more power in public decision-making. It is often associated with the pluralistic politics and representative Government, but it can also support democratization by giving citizens, or their representatives, more influence in the formulation and implementation of policies. Advocates of political decentralization assume that decisions made with greater participation will be better informed and more relevant to diverse interests in society than those made only by national political authorities. The concept implies that the selection of representatives from local electoral jurisdictions allows citizens to know better their political representatives and allows elected officials to know better the needs and desires of their constituents. Political decentralization often requires constitutional or statutory reforms, the development of pluralistic political parties, the strengthening of legislatures, creation of local political units, and the encouragement of effective public interest groups. The rationale of decentralized governance is also derived from the drawback of centralized decision making at the macro governmental levels. Being away from the basic spatial units such as hamlets and villages and with power concentrated at the top of the space in a pyramidic power base the state and the union government power structures draw representatives from well endowed sub-regions and sections of the community.

     Forms of Government: There are so many forms of government practicing around the world. Due to their socio-economic and political situation particular country uphold the certain form of government as suitable to them. The forms of governments are somehow differentiated among them. These are Anarchy, Capitalist, Communist, Dictatorship, Federal government, Monarchy, Republic, Revolutionary government, Totalitarian state, Transitional, etc. Among these forms of governments, democracy as a form of government in which the supreme power is retained by the people, but which is usually exercised indirectly through a system of representation and delegated authority periodically renewed. We can divide democracy as various types; main types are Direct Democracy, Indirect Democracy (Representative democracy) and Grassroots democracy. Grassroots democracy is a type of democracy emphasizing trust in small decentralized units at the municipal government level, possibly using urban secession to establish the formal legal authority to make decisions made at this local level binding.

     Democracy. Democracy is essentially a form of government, based upon the fundamental assumption of equality of all individuals and of their equal rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. The literal meaning of the term democracy is rule of the people or the power of the people. It is in fact very comprehensive concept. It is a political ideology to one, a form of government to the other and a way of life to the third. Democracy is a confusing concept, and a debatable doctrine. There is however no system of government more popular and prevalent, and yet the more controversial. “In its totality, democracy therefore implies that any democratic structure entrusted with the task of development and administration is expected to be not only democratically constituted according to the principle of election but should also reflect people’s free will and function according to the element of democracy both in their constitution and in their day-to-day functioning” [23, p. 17].

     Thus the idea behind democracy is that it involves a large number of people in the decision-making process. It bases political authority on the will of the individuals who by a process of co- operation make decision that are binding on the whole community. Democracy has very deep roots in Indian political history. perhaps it is India where democracy started functioning first. We can rely this fact through the existence of olden institutions of India like Samiti Sabha, and Viditha in the Vedic period. Afterward, the existence of many republics during the time of Gautama Buddha, Shakyamuni’s and Thiruvalluvar advocacy in favor of democracy, his stress upon development of democratic institutions and notable suggestions made by him in this regard strengthens India’s assert to it.

     Values of Democracy. As a form of government democracy has very deep and people welfare oriented values of whole society. These are as follows,

     Life: A person's right to life can't be violated except if your life or the lives of others is threatened.

     Liberty: This includes personal freedom, political freedom, and economic freedom. This is the freedom for people to gather in groups. They have their own beliefs, ideas and opinions. People also have the right to express their opinions in public.

-Personal Freedom - the right to think and act without government control.

-Political Freedom - the right to participate in political process.

-Economic Freedom - the right to buy, sell and trade private property and the right to employment without the government interfering.

     The Pursuit of Happiness: As long as you don't interfere with others you have the right to seek happiness in your own way.

     Common Good: Working together for the welfare of the community or the benefit of all.

     Justice: All people should be treated fairly in both the benefits and the obligations of society. No individual or group should be favored over another person or group.

     Equality: Everyone has the right to Political, Legal, Social and Economic Equality. Everyone has the right to the same treatment regardless of race, sex, religion, heritage, or economic status.

     Diversity: The differences in culture, dress, language, heritage and religion are not just tolerated, but celebrated as a  strength.

     Truth: They should expect and demand that the government not lie to them and the government should disclose information to the people. The government and its people should not lie.

     Popular Sovereignty: The power of the government comes from the people. The people are the ultimate authority over the government.

     Patriotism: The people or citizens show a love and devotion for their country and the values. They can show this by words or by actions.

     Democratic Development through Decentralization. According to Gandhi decentralization of political power is the basic requirement for the success of true democracy. For him a decentralized democracy based on non-violence must consist of groups settled in small communities or villages in which voluntary co-operation is the condition of dignified and peaceful existence. For, it is the only way to realize the value of democracy from the grassroots level as it will enable the people to participate in taking and implementing decisions without a rigid and strict control of any higher authority. Moreover, it is the only alternative to reduce the interference of the state in day-to-day affairs of the people. Gandhi never believed in half-way house democracy, or disinterest decentralization. He does not advocate decentralization only because of its economic and political advantages. To Gandhi decentralization envisions and upholds the cultural or spiritual ideal of simple living and high thinking. He does not hanker after raising merely the standard of living; he wants to raise the standard of life. Simple living and high thinking is the ideal the very foundation and essence of Gandhian approach to decentralization. Gandhi is opposed to all kinds of concentration of power; he says centralization is a menace and danger to democracy. Concentration of power in his view distorts all democratic values. So he thought that “possession of power makes men blind and deaf; they can not see things which are under their very nose, and can not hear things which invade their ears” [24, p. 8]. Thus, his linking for decentralization originates from his urge for the shrinking of the state and the deepening of the roots of democracy. He therefore asserted that “If India is to evolve along non-violent lines; it will have to decentralize many things. Centralization cannot be sustained and defended without adequate force” [25, p. 7]. In other words centralization as a system is inconsistent with non-violent structure of society. Moreover, he was convinced that moral progress was possible only in a decentralized set-up. So he wrote, “The end to be achieved is human happiness combined with full mental and moral development. I use the adjective moral as synonymous with spiritual. This end can be achieved under decentralization” [26, p. 173]. Here the perfect democracy based on the individual freedom. The individual will be the architect of his government. The law of non-violence rules him and his government. He and his village are able to defy the might of a world. In this structure composed of innumerable villages, there will be ever widening, never ascending circles.