29 November, 2020
“Who truly was Mahatma Gandhi before he spearheaded the Indian independence movement?” The answer to this quintessential question unquestionably lies predominantly in the seminal text ‘Hind Swaraj’ – a political manifesto, penned by the man himself, that launched a scintillating charge against colonialism and Western civilisation (inter alia)and their culminant offspring viz. ‘cultural modernity’.
“I think it would be a good idea” was London-educated M.K. Gandhi’s initial take on Western civilisation – heavily influenced by his infatuation with the ‘Western way of life’ in his younger days.[1] The defining moment leading to a drastic transformation in Gandhi’s stance as an anti-modernist is traceable to his time in South Africa, which coincidentally occurred months before he penned ‘Hind Swaraj’ – where Gandhi who had earlier acknowledged the administrative efficiency of modern technology,[2] vocally shunned ‘scientific modernism’ upon realising the ill-effects of ‘modern technology’ as a tool for policing and identification by the State. [3] The more Gandhi saw through the multiple layers of “tinsel and glitter” of the ‘modern Western civilisation’, the more he became disillusioned with the idea of it and thus set-forth on his experiments of spiritual discovery and self-realisation through a ‘re-discovery’ of Indian culture and traditions, thereby ending his initial infatuation with the Western ‘way of life’. Interestingly, the unconventional ‘dialogic’ means of translating his political thought to text in Hind Swaraj is evidence of how he refused to play by the ‘formal’ rules of writing and citing espoused by the Western schools of thought.[4]
In the Hind Swaraj, which he himself referred to as a “severe condemnation of civilisation”,[5] Gandhi tears into the intrinsically materialistic culture espoused by ‘modern Western civilisation’ and its glorification of violence, speed and over-indulgence in worldly pleasures; rubbishes humanitarianism as the predominant Western school of political thought and critiques the modern nation-state, thereby calling for the colonisers and the colonized alike to think outside the shackles of “satanic” ‘modern Western civilisation’.[6]
At the outset, before critically analysing Gandhi’s critiques of Western modernity, it is noteworthy that Gandhi does not oppose ‘modernity’ and ‘technological advancements’ altogether, rather only a specific aspect of it that came to define the ‘modern Western civilisation’, and consequently, a predominant part of the world due to the West’s ‘hegemonic soft power’.
Gandhi devotes the entirety of the sixth chapter of Hind Swaraj to address ‘civilisation’ as construed by Western theoretical notions. The “true test of (this) civilisation”, as interpreted by Gandhi, lay in the people living in it making bodily welfare the object of life. However, Gandhi condemns the immoral and irreligious Western culture that extols ‘consumption’ and ‘self-indulgence’ – and “fails miserably even in doing so” and ergo, is destined towards self-destruction.[7]
Gandhi juxtaposes the ‘modern Western civilisation’ with the cultural ethos prevalent in Indian civilisation and concludes that while the former is “godless” and attempts to replicate immortality, the latter is an inherently faith-based system that tends to propagate the elevation of the moral being. He expresses through a simile – “it behoves every lover of India to cling to the old Indian civilization even as a child clings to its mother’s breast.”[8] Thereon, Gandhi arrives at the conclusion that ‘civilisational ethos’ is the “truest test of civilisation” through his conception of the Indian civilisation – which he regards as the highest civilisational culture that humankind ever witnessed.
Gandhi then proceeds to attack the fruits of ‘scientific modernism’ – the ‘intrinsic violence’ and ‘militarism’ prevalent in the ‘modern’ Western civilisation despite purporting to espouse the seemingly noble ideals of human dignity, equality, freedom and civility. This “violence” that he speaks of does not manifest merely from the mass production and accumulation of arms and armaments and its consequent perpetuation of systemic aggression by the State, but rather, is an attack on the cultural ramifications brought forth by the glorification of ‘speed’ and ‘machinery’. With respect to ‘speed’, Gandhi relies on binaries, as he paints the picture through allegories of how ‘slow’ is ‘good’ and conversely ‘fast’ is ‘bad’ – “Good travels at a snail’s pace… To build a house takes time. Its destruction takes none.”[9] The ‘industrial revolution’ – a fruit of years of ‘scientific modernism’ is righty credit by many historians as “the single-greatest defining moment in history”, in that it completely revolutionised the means of production and consequently the ‘way of life’ as it was known.[10] Gandhi deemed the sheer suddenness of eventuality that this alienation of labour from machinery, brought forth by the ‘industrial revolution’, to be a “great sin” – whose social and cultural effects would be unsustainable for any civilised society.[11] It is noteworthy that Gandhi’s arguments here are largely resemblant to that of Karl Marx’s theory of ‘alienation of labour’.[12] The ‘violence’, according to Gandhi, had oozed from every pore of modern society to such an extent that the populace of the civilisation was in danger of acknowledging its very presence. Gandhi intended to replace (not merely symbolically), modern machinery with the Charkha a Swadeshi or indigenous alternative.
History is written by the victor[13] and it is undisputed that it is the Western ideals that have prevailed as the hegemon for the past few centuries. Gandhi, however, finds fault with the occidental understanding of historical events. To him, ‘history’ is much more than a chronological account of wars and its consequent violence, and rather, must account for accounts of ‘the forces of truth or love’ and ‘soul-force’ that have stood testament to time despite the cruel wars of the world.[14] Atypically, Gandhi – one of the most-written figures in modern history (with the exception of only perhaps Jesus Christ) – therefore, would rather be a part of folklores, myths and legends than be a part of the violence draped history of humankind.
The Hind Swaraj finds its next prey in ‘humanitarianism’ – the modern ‘liberal’ regime of rights rooted in Marxist-socialist notions of victimhood and reparations. Gandhi’s ideas and theories of ‘non-violence’ and ‘passive resistance’ were heavily influenced by the Ancient Indian ‘Dharma Theory’ where rights were intrinsically intertwined with duties combined with a heightened ethic of self-sacrifice and moral responsibility. In a letter to the UNESCO, Gandhi whilst condemning the discourse of universal human rights extenuates that “… all rights to be deserved and preserved came from duty well done. Thus, every accrues to us only when we do the duty of citizenship of the world … Every other right can be shown to be usurpation hardly worth fighting for.”[15] Gandhi, in fact, while extenuating about what he reasoned as “true civilisation” had explicitly said that “Civilization is that mode of conduct which points out to man the path of duty. Performance of duty and observance of morality are convertible terms.”[16]
The ‘observance of morality’ was defined by him as the attainment of mastery over one’s mind and worldly pleasures – in doing which, one knew their true self. Interestingly, the colloquial term for ‘civilisation’ in Gujarati – Gandhi’s native tongue – translates to “good conduct”. “Good conduct”, in turn, was inextricably connected with self-restraint as he compares the human mind to a restless bird, the more it gets the more it wants, and yet still remains unsatisfied. Ergo, “our ancestors”, he writes, upon diagnosing unending happiness as a ‘mental condition’ set a limit to human indulgences.[17] Moreover, this is consistent with the religious principles of certain sects of the Abrahamic religions which condemn the “seven deadly sins”.[18]
In fact, Gandhi’s response to suffering and oppression was not to immediately attempt to ameliorate it to but rather to ensure that those who had been wronged behaved like moral agents and not victims, thus allowing them to enter into a political relationship with their persecutors[19] – an apt example of this in motion would be his interactions with the Harijan community in India.
Gandhi finally goes after the by-products of the modern nation-state within the ‘civilisational ethos’ viz. hyper-nationalism and political violence. Many aspersions have been cast by scholars over the years with regard to who apprises the role of the “reader” in this dialogical exchange, but regardless, it is a settled position that it refers to one of the frontrunners of the freedom movement prior to Gandhi’s arrival in India.[20] Gandhi believed that hyper-nationalism itself was an offspring of Western modernity and would do more harm than good to the Indian society.[21] This was not the ideal ‘civilisation’ he had dreamt of in an independent India – you want the English rule without the Englishman … and when in become English, it will be called not Hindustan but Englistan. This was not the ‘Swaraj’ he wanted. [22] Also, whilst critiquing ‘political violence’, he argues the justiciability of the ‘means of the end’ and holds that the non-violent character in such cases – to attain freedom and sovereignty – should be treated as the end in itself and staunchly believed that ‘political violence’ as a means to an end to achieve freedom, in itself, was nothing more than a replication of the modern Western State – “you want the tiger’s nature but not the tiger itself” he remarks.[23]
In the Hind Swaraj, notwithstanding his scathing critique of the ‘modern Western civilisation’ and its progeny, Gandhi offers as answers to these problems – counter-narratives and alternatives in the form of ‘patience’ and ‘self-restraint’.
Gandhi sees ‘patience’ as an imperative and implicit solution to tackle the depravity that is modernity – “it is necessary to exercise patience. The true inwardness of the evils of civilization you will understand with difficulty.”[24] His appeal to his readers and audience to be “patient” is prevalent throughout Hind Swaraj as he impresses upon the ‘editor’s’ message to slowly seep into the minds of the ‘readers’ – he notes that “I do not expect my views to be accepted all of a sudden. My duty is to place them before readers … Time can be trusted to do the rest.”[25] Gandhi wanted to wake upthe “readers” from the lull of Western civilisation causing the loss of control over the mind and body and ergo, strived to ensure the ascesis of patience and knowledge among the “readers”.[26]
Be the change you want to see in this world – Gandhian ideals in practice are consistent with his sayings. In contravention to the purported fetishization of ‘self-indulgence’ as a glowing virtue manifesting in Western civilisation, the Gandhian call for self-restraint, the performance of duties, and ‘a reform of the self’ – fundamental to the Indian civilisational ethos, as the first step towards redemption from the evils of modernity is received loud and clear – be it spinning the charkha, wearing khadi or espousing the practice of celibacy. It was the failure to cultivate the ethical and spiritual self, that was responsible for the “many horrors of modern Western civilisation”.[27] Therefore, what Gandhi referred to as “soul-force” was indispensable to the utopian Gandhian ‘civilisation’ that would overcome the psychological and physiological frailties that the modern Western civilisation had poisoned the world with and thus, it was this spirituality that would have transformative ramifications in curing the self and consequently the world.
Gandhi was a man ahead of his times who foresaw many of the problems which we are facing today. It was in 1927 that he expressed that “a time is coming when those who are in the mad rush today of multiplying their want will retrace their steps and say, what have we done?” Fast-forward to the year 2020 and we are on the precipice of realising the same – be it the degradation of the environment at the hands of humankind or the retardation of culture and the departure of social harmony amongst peoples of the world. While Gandhi’s ideologies are mostly restricted to the pages of books and academic discourse, the need is imminent to flesh these ideals out into the chapters of the real world.
[1] E.F. Schumacher, ‘Good Work’, Harper Perennial, (1979).
[2] K. Breckenridge, ‘Gandhi’s Progressive Disillusionment: Thumbs, Fingers, and the Rejection of Scientific Modernism in Hind Swaraj’, Public Culture, Vol. 23, Issue 2, (2011), p. 334.
[3] Ibid, at 348.
[4] Gandhi would be disappointed that I’ve followed the Western ways of writing and citing for this paper, unfortunately.
[5] M.K. Gandhi, ‘Indian Home Rule or Hind Swaraj’, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad, (1938).
[6] M.K. Gandhi, ‘No and Yes’, Young India, 17th March, 1927, p. 120.
[7] Anthony J. Parel (ed.), Gandhi: Hind Swaraj and Other Writings, Cambridge University Press, New Delhi, (2009), p. 35-38.
[8] Ibid, at p. 71.
[9] Anthony J. Parel (ed.), Gandhi: Hind Swaraj and Other Writings, Cambridge University Press, New Delhi, (2009), p. 47-48.
[10] Joel Mokyr, “The New Economic History and the Industrial Revolution: The British Industrial Revolution: An Economic Perspective”, Vol. 2, (1999) p. 27.
[11] Anthony J. Parel (ed.), Gandhi: Hind Swaraj and Other Writings, New Delhi, Cambridge University Press, (2009), p. 107.
[12] Karl Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Oxford, Oxford University Press, (1932).
[13] Attributed (often) to Winston Churchill, Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
[14] Anthony J. Parel (ed.), Gandhi: Hind Swaraj and Other Writings, New Delhi, Cambridge University Press, (2009), p. 89-90.
[15] M.K. Gandhi, Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. 95, p. 142.
[16] Anthony J. Parel (ed.), Gandhi: Hind Swaraj and Other Writings, New Delhi, Cambridge University Press, (2009), p. 67.
[17] Ibid, at p. 68.
[18] St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica I.35.4.
[19] Faisal Devji, ‘The Paradox of Nonviolence’, Public Culture, vol. 23, issue 2, 2011, p. 272.
[20] Many scholars have substantiated that Gandhi was referring to either Vinayak Savarkar or Bal Gangadhar Tiak, or rather, he might’ve been addressing the both of them collectively.
[21] Anthony J. Parel (ed.), Gandhi: Hind Swaraj and Other Writings, New Delhi, Cambridge University Press, (2009), p. 81.
[22] Ibid at p. 28.
[23] Anthony J. Parel (ed.), Gandhi: Hind Swaraj and Other Writings, New Delhi, Cambridge University Press, (2009), p. 28.
[24] Anthony J. Parel (ed.), Gandhi: Hind Swaraj and Other Writings, New Delhi, Cambridge University Press, (2009), p. 47.
[25] Ibid, at p. 72.
[26] Usha S. Mehta, ‘Patience, Inwardness, and Self-Knowledge in Gandhi’s Hind Swaraj’, Public Culture, Vol. 23, Issue 2, (2011), p. 429.
[27] B.S. Chimni, ‘The Self, Modern Civilization, and International Law: Learning from Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi’s Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule’, The European Journal of International Law, Vol. 23, No. 4, (2012), p. 1164.
Bhrigu A. Pamidighantam 
Leave a comment