by Greg Satell
It was there he would develop his own brand of civil disobedience, which he called Satyagraha or “truth force.” The aim, as he put it, was “the vindication of truth not by affliction of suffering on the opponent, but on one’s self.” In his view, the opponent must be “weaned from error by patience and sympathy.”9 He took pains to distinguish it from passive resistance, which he felt was a “weapon of the weak.” His vision was something more forceful, to expose the faults of a repressive regime.
One of the first principles of Satyagraha was ahimsa, or nonviolence, which was rooted in the quest for truth. If no one could claim to have absolute knowledge of the truth, then it followed that using violence (or any other means of coercion for that matter) to compel people to accede to one’s will would be to undermine, rather than support, truth. For much the same reason, means were given equal significance as ends, because any victory brought about by unjust means would be a pyrrhic one. After all, how could you build a just society on an unjust foundation? And if a just society wasn’t the objective, then what was the point?10 “But all my life through,” Gandhi would write in his autobiography, “the very insistence on truth has taught me the beauty of compromise.”11
To the modern ear, Gandhi’s views seem idealistic at best, if not completely naive, yet there was much more to his philosophy than met the eye. In fact, he thought about things in very strategic terms. His aim was to undermine his opponents’ legitimacy, and in doing so, their freedom of action. He sought to back them into a corner in which both action and inaction would yield essentially the same result—an upending of the existing order. As Gandhi himself put it, “Men say that I am a saint losing myself in politics. The fact is I am a politician trying my hardest to be a saint.”12
It was during his South African years that Gandhi ceased to be an ambitious young lawyer and took on the legendary persona we know today. He eschewed Western dress, memorized the Bhagavad Gita, took a vow of celibacy, and began fasting and living a life of austerity. He also worked to control his violent temper. In sum, he sought to sublimate his ego to his cause, so that he could uplift his fellow Indians in South Africa.13
The plight of Indians in South Africa was profoundly unjust. They were originally brought to the country to work on British plantations, as indentured laborers, for a term of five years. Many, finding conditions somewhat better than they had in India, stayed on as free men. Some of these prospered as merchants who brought other Indians to work as tradesmen and professionals, much as Gandhi himself had. By the end of the nineteenth century, they greatly outnumbered Europeans.14
In order for the Europeans to maintain control, a series of increasingly repressive laws were adopted that were designed to make life unbearable for Indians. In addition to the restrictions on what train car they could ride in and where they could walk, a number of bills were passed to restrict immigration and require them to carry registration cards. A three-pound tax (a prohibitive sum) was levied on all previously indentured servants who remained in the country, and travel restrictions were put in place that greatly hampered the ability of Indians to earn a living. To add insult to injury, a court ruling decreed that only Christian marriages would be considered legitimate.
Gandhi led a series of Satyagraha campaigns that defied these laws, including mass border crossings, strikes, and burning of registration cards. The struggle went on for years, and thousands went to jail. Gandhi himself was imprisoned three separate times. Yet the position of the South African government became increasingly untenable and, in 1914, Gandhi signed an agreement with the Boer General Jan Christiaan Smuts to retract the repressive tax along with many of the discriminatory regulations. Satyagraha had its first major victory.15
When Gandhi returned to India in 1915, he was already a confirmed nationalist. His book, Hind Swaraj or “Indian Home Rule,” published in 1909, laid out his principles. First, he advocated for Satyagraha while condemning terror as an illegitimate, and ultimately ineffective, tactic. Second, he stressed the need for self-reliance. It was, in his view, the mutual reliance with the British that kept Indians enslaved. Third, he insisted that the goal was not mere independence, but to return to a more authentically Indian existence. If they replaced British rulers with Indians who would rule the same way, then what was the point of the struggle?16
The India that Gandhi found upon his return was far removed from his ideal. The most significant nationalist institution was the Indian National Congress. Established in 1885, it was, for the most part, a talking shop, which gathered delegates from all over the country every December to make speeches and pass resolutions. These would then be sent on to the British overlords to be considered.
On the other end of the spectrum, there were splintered terrorist groups who thought they could get the Raj to leave by force. In between were the majority of the Indian population, mostly poor peasants and “untouchables.” They didn’t really care if they were ruled by British elites or Indian elites. Either way, their lives would be filled with poverty, privation, and struggle. To make matters more complex, there were significant tensions between Hindus and Muslims, caste Hindus and untouchables, and regional rivalries as well as concerns among minority Sikh and Christian populations.
It should be noted that this is not at all an uncommon situation. Most change movements start out in a small, distinct group that has little in common with many potential constituents and supporters. To take just one example, the Occupy movement was largely made up of college-educated elites rather than the disaffected working class most impacted by the financial crisis.17 That’s why it’s so important to reach out and build links to weave a network.
Gandhi, however, was determined to internalize the struggles of those he wished to liberate. For a year after his return, he traveled around the country. Unlike his earlier insistence on first-class train compartments in South Africa that led to his initial activism, he now gladly traveled third class. As had become his custom, he wore little more than a loincloth made out of fabric he spun himself. Already renowned as a “Mahatma” or “saintly man” after his exploits in South Africa, he agitated for women’s rights, acceptance of “untouchable” outcastes, and for “khadi,” the home spinning of cloth that would reduce reliance on foreign imports. “We may petition the Government, we may agitate . . . for our rights, but for a real awakening of the people, the more important thing is activities directed inwards,” he wrote.18
His actions were, in no small measure, a challenge to the elite nationalist movement. “How could leaders in Bond Street suits or Bombay coats and trousers reach the peasants’ hearts: how could English-speaking orators touch their minds?” he asked in a speech surrounded by Indian politicians in European dress.19
He also put Satyagraha to work in the struggle for peasants’ rights. The first notable example was in the Champaran district in the region of Bihar, which lay in the foothills of the Himalayas, on the other side of the subcontinent from Gandhi’s native Gujarat. He was implored to go to the region by a farmer named Raj Kumar Shukla, who approached the Mahatma at the 1916 Indian National Congress and then followed him to his ashram. Impressed by Shukla’s tenacity, Gandhi agreed to go to Champaran and see what was going on for himself. He had planned to visit for a few days, but ended up spending almost a year.20
The situation in Champaran was indeed troubling. The landlords had required the peasants to use 15 percent of their land for the cultivation of indigo, which was then sold on the global market, as rent. Yet industrialists in Germany had developed a process for producing synthetic indigo, causing prices to collapse. So instead of allowing rent to be paid in indigo, the landlords now required cash. They also took advantage of an old agreement that stipulated that rents could be raised if indigo was not grown. So the peasants, already impoverished, were getting squeezed twice over.
The first thing that Gandhi did upon his arrival was to make appointments to see the secretary of the Planters Association and the commissioner of the Divisional Go
vernment. The secretary told him that he was an outsider—the designation of “outside agitator” has long been a common refrain of those who seek to resist change—and had no business meddling in the affairs of the landlords and their tenants. Gandhi told him that he did not consider himself an outsider and that he had every right to advocate for the peasants if they asked him to. The commissioner tried to bully him and advised him to leave the region.21
Soon after, as Gandhi proceeded with his investigations, he was overtaken by a messenger from the local police superintendent who asked him to return to town. When he arrived, he was given an official notice to leave the district. He signed the order to confirm he had received it, but also announced his intention to disobey. Upon doing so, he was given a summons to appear in court the next day.
When the Mahatma arrived at the courthouse, enormous crowds had gathered to support him. The officials asked him to help pacify the crowds to prevent a riot, which he did willingly. Inside the court, Gandhi explained that he understood the order, but could not obey it because he felt it violated his conscience. Unsure of what to do, the magistrate ordered a two-hour recess and announced that Gandhi would be released on bail. He refused to pay it and was released anyway.
When the court reconvened, the magistrate announced that he would wait for orders from his superiors. The Bihar government, aware of Gandhi’s exploits in South Africa and how the Afrikaners’ rough treatment of him only increased his power, was cautious about making the same mistake. It ordered him to be released and for local officials to cooperate with his investigation. “According to law,” Gandhi would later write, “I was to be on trial, but truly speaking Government was to be on trial. The Commissioner only succeeded in trapping Government in the net which he had spread for me.”22
So Gandhi continued to investigate, working with local lawyers and businessmen to take the statements of the peasants (a practice similar to that employed by Thurgood Marshall decades later in the struggle for civil rights in America).23 He also worked to improve the lives of the peasants by setting up schools, improving sanitary conditions, and bringing in medical care. Eventually, a committee to arbitrate the dispute was convened and Gandhi was invited to sit on it. The landlords agreed to rescind the rent increases and refund 25 percent of the increases already collected.24
Satyagraha had triumphed, but Gandhi had achieved even more than that. He had shown himself to be a very different kind of nationalist. Unlike the urbane Congress delegates, who were often blinded by high-minded rhetoric, he proved to be a true and effective advocate of the Indian people. It would serve him well in the years to come, but as he would soon learn, there were unforeseen challenges ahead that had less to do with the British and more to do with the movement Gandhi was building itself.
The next phase in Gandhi’s journey came in 1919, with the institution of the Rowlatt Acts. During World War I, the Defense of India Act was passed in order to control terrorism. Now, these new laws, including administrative detentions and trials by judges instead of juries for acts determined to be seditious, were to be extended. Gandhi, as well as many other Indians, was appalled. He set up a new organization, called Satyagraha Sabha, to resist them.
His plan began with two major actions. The first was the sale of banned literature. The second, which came to him as an inspiration in the early hours of the morning, was a nationwide hartal—a day of fasting and prayer in which Indians would stop work and cease to do business. It was an enormous success. In Bombay, 80 percent of shops were closed.25 Once again, Gandhi had proven himself to be not only a spiritual leader, but a master strategist.
Yet after that, things spun out of control. The hartal, while successful, sparked further protests, many of which turned violent. Riots broke out, buildings were burned, and there were a number of violent confrontations with police. In the Punjab city of Amritsar, General Reginald Dyer banned all public gatherings. When his order was ignored, he allowed the protestors to assemble in a large square with just a few exits and then drove up with his men in two armored cars. Without warning, he gave the order to fire, killing hundreds and severely injuring even more.26 As Dyer himself would say in the inquiry that followed, “It was no longer a question of merely dispersing the crowd, but one of producing sufficient moral effect not only on those who were present, but more especially throughout the Punjab. There could be no question of undue severity.”27
Afterward, India plunged further into violence, and Gandhi would fast for three days in penitence. It was, as he would later call it, a “Himalayan miscalculation.” “I had called on the people to launch upon civil disobedience before they had thus qualified themselves for it, and this mistake seemed to me of Himalayan magnitude,” he wrote in his autobiography. “I realized that before a people could be fit for offering civil disobedience, they should thoroughly understand its deeper implications. That being so, before restarting civil disobedience on a mass scale, it would be necessary to create a band of well-tried, pure-hearted volunteers who thoroughly understood the strict conditions of Satyagraha.”28
These early disappointments were surely on the Mahatma’s mind when he retreated to his ashram a decade later to contemplate a new campaign of civil disobedience in support of Purna Swaraj. He spent most of the previous 10 years preparing the Indian people for the rigors of Satyagraha. He promoted the spinning of cloth and the reduction of reliance on foreign goods, worked to bridge the divides between Hindus and Muslims, and campaigned against the discrimination of the untouchable outcastes. Yet still, he saw that there was great potential for violence in any political action, and that’s what he meant when he told his friend that he was struggling to see “any light coming out of the surrounding darkness.”
The precipitating event was the Simon Commission, which was convened in November 1927. Ostensibly, its purpose was to propose further reforms in the governance of the Indian people. Yet the Commission did not include a single Indian among its members and was widely considered a farce. Gandhi himself called it an “organized insult to a whole people.”29
The Indian National Congress responded in December 1928 by adopting the Nehru Report, named for Motilal Nehru, father of Jawaharlal, the future prime minister of India. The report proposed a draft constitution that would include autonomous dominion status for the country and self-government by a legislature elected by Indians. The British were given a year to consider the proposal. When the Congress met the next December there had been no progress. That’s when the declaration of Purna Swaraj, or complete self-rule, was issued. It now fell to Gandhi to formulate the next steps.
His previous efforts at Satyagraha had proven successful in limited settings, when the Mahatma himself was there to impose some discipline and head off the potential for violence. In the interim between the mass campaigns that ended in violence, which followed the Rowlatt Acts, and the meeting of the Simon Commission, Gandhi had done much to prepare his followers for the rigors ahead. His tireless work on behalf of India’s downtrodden, his promotion of self-reliance, and his well-earned reputation for wisdom and common sense among the country’s elite made him uniquely qualified to lead the campaign ahead. Still, he harbored no illusions, and his “Himalayan miscalculation” still weighed heavily on him.
Although few saw it at the time, the salt law was an inspired choice for a target. It was almost ridiculously repressive, outlawing the production of a natural resource by the people who inhabited the country. In fact, Ramsay MacDonald, a prominent British politician who would be named Prime Minister in June 1929, had himself previously denounced the salt law as unjust. It was also a grievance that everybody in the country shared, regardless of religion or caste, but particularly impacted the poor. Perhaps most importantly, participation was easily accessible to anyone. All that was needed was to take some water from the sea and boil it. Salt, in a sense, already had a connected network of grievance. This network only needed to be activated, and a cascade would ensue. At the same time, the revenue gained from th
e tax was not significant enough to provoke a vigorous initial response from the British Raj. As the Viceroy himself had written, it didn’t seem like anything to lose sleep over.
Gandhi had found his keystone change.
He began the march from his own ashram on March 12 with a small, tight-knit group of 80 of his most disciplined and devoted followers, well versed in the principles of Satyagraha, so there would be no possibility of violent outbursts. They would march over 200 miles in 24 days to the coastal village of Dandi, where they would defy the oppressive British law by making their own salt.
The Salt March was an enormous success from the start. Gandhi and his band walked in the morning and the afternoon, avoiding the most oppressive midday heat. At each village he would speak, exhorting the people to spin their own cloth, avoid alcohol and opium, and live clean lives. Tens of thousands came out to see him. Hundreds of village officials gave up their government jobs after the Mahatma encouraged them to do so.30 All across India, newspapers featured Gandhi and his followers on the front page, chronicling each leg of the march and his message of civil disobedience. By the end of 1930, Time magazine would proclaim Gandhi its “Man of the Year.”
On April 5, the marchers reached Dandi and spent the night praying. The next morning, the Mahatma picked up a lump of salt from the shores of the ocean, and his followers immediately began filling pots with seawater to be boiled. It was, as Jawaharlal Nehru would write, “as though a spring had been released.”31 In a single stroke, he had not only shown defiance of British rule, but also displayed the power of civil disobedience. Within weeks a cascade ensued and people all over India were brazenly manufacturing their own salt. To create further pressure, Gandhi encouraged his fellow Indians to boycott foreign cloth and liquor. Then, on April 24, he announced that he would lead a march on the Dharasana Salt Works, raising the level of provocation even further.
