I

The noted Norwegian peace researcher, Johan Galtung, on the occasion of commencement of the celebrations of International Day of Non-violence, on October 2, 2007, at the Headquarters of the United Nations in New York, delivered an address on the theme “Gandhi and the struggle against imperialism.” He placed five points at the UN Round Table Meeting. Other panelists in this meeting were also noted scholars and activists like Ahmed Kathrada, Amartya Sen, Ela Gandhi, Gene Sharp, Jesse Jackson Sr., John Nash and Lia Diskin. According to Johan Galtung there are five approaches in Gandhi’s constructive handling of conflict: They are the following: 1) Never fear dialogue, 2) Never fear conflict: more opportunity than danger 3) Know History or you are doomed to repeat it (Burke) 4) Image the future or you will never get there 5) While fighting occupation, clean up your own house![1] All these points are equally important and give food for thought when we are discussing Gandhian ideas.

In the present discussion, we will consider the fourth point which is very significant because we are discussing about the reimagining of India. Galtung was right when he said, Gandhi had imaged the future and trained the people to achieve that goal. According to Galtung, “Be today the future you want to see tomorrow” was Gandhi’s way of translating this point. Gandhi was very much aware of the power of imagination and he used it effectively in his life, philosophy and methods of action. That is why he wrote in one of his letters to Jawaharlal Nehru, on 5th October 1945. “My ideal village still exists only in my imagination. After all every human being lives in the world of his own imagination.”[2] Gandhi was a visionary and always imagined or dreamt about India of his vision. The India of his vision is clearly articulated in the collection of his writings titled “India of my dreams.” It is true that if we don’t imagine the picture of the future, we will never be able to reach that goal. Gandhi not only imagined the future but also trained the people and tirelessly worked toward the goal.

To begin with, we will look into the India which Gandhi imagined by examining some of his important writings on this subject. Gandhi outlined India of his dreams in the columns of Young India way back in 1931. He wrote:

I shall strive for a constitution, which will release India from all thralldom and patronage, and give her, if need be, the right to sin, I shall work for an India, in which the poorest shall feel it is their country in whose making they have an effective voice; an India in which there shall be no high class and low class of people; an India in which all communities shall live in perfect harmony. There can be no room in such an India for the curse of untouchability or the curse of the intoxicating drinks and drugs. Women will enjoy the same rights as men. Since we shall be at peace with all the rest of the world, exploiting, nor being exploited, we should have the smallest army imaginable, all interests not in conflict with the interests of the dumb millions will be scrupulously respected, whether foreign or indigenous. Personally, I hate distinction between foreign and indigenous. This is the India of my dreams… I shall be satisfied with nothing less.[3]

Thus, it is clear that the India he imagined was a poor person’s India in which his/her voice is heard. To put it differently, he visualized an India keeping in mind the poorest of the poor and their needs and aspirations. It is a class-less and caste-less society in which all communities live in perfect harmony without any distinction. In fact his vision was not limited to India alone even though he placed his ideas taking into consideration the harsh realities prevailing the Indian scene. His approach was universal in nature and not limited to any particular country or group of countries.

He realized the unique role of villages and that is the reason why he described the villages as the very heart of India. He visualized every aspect of the village life, its administration and the role of individuals in the whole process. He placed before us the concept of oceanic circle in the place of pyramidal structure with an organic relation between individual and villages, each ready to perish for the other. Gandhi outlined the picture of an ideal system of village administration which he called as republic or panchayat having full powers and outlined salient features relating to it in the columns of Harijan in 1946. To quote him:

Independence must begin at the bottom. Thus, every village will be a Republic or Panchayat having full powers. It follows, therefore, that every village has to be self-sustained and capable of managing its affairs even to the extent of defending itself against the whole world. It will be trained and prepared to perish in its attempt to defend itself against any onslaught from without. Thus, ultimately, it is the individual who is the unit. This does not exclude dependence on and willing help from neighbours or from the world. It will be free and voluntary play of mutual forces. Such a society is necessarily highly cultured, in which every man and woman knows what he or she wants and, what is more, knows that no one should want anything that others cannot have with equal labour… In this structure composed of innumerable villages there will be ever widening, never ascending circles. Life will not be a pyramid with the apex sustained by the bottom. But it will be the individual always ready to perish for the village, the latter ready to perish for the villages, sharing the majesty of the oceanic circle of which they are integral units.

Therefore, the outermost circumference will not wield power to crush the inner circle but give strength to all within and derive its own from the centre. I may be taunted with the retort that this is all Utopian and therefore within and derive its own from the centre. I may be taunted with the retort that this is all Utopian and therefore not worth a single thought. If Euclid’s point, thought incapable of being drawn by human agency, has an imperishable value, my picture has its own for mankind to live. Let India Live for this true picture, though never realizable in its completeness. We must have a proper picture of what we want before we can have something approaching it.[4] If there ever is to be a republic of every village in India, then I claim verity for my picture in which the last is equal to the first, or in other words, none is to be the first and none the last.

In this picture every religion has its full and equal place. We are all leaves of a majestic tree whose trunk cannot be shaken off its roots which are deep down in the bowels of the earth. The mightiest of wind cannot move it.

In this there is no room for machines that would displace human labour and that would concentrate power in a few hands. Labour has its unique place in a cultural human family. Every machine that helps every individual has a place. But I must confess that I have never sat down to think out what that machine can be. I have thought of singer’s sewing machine. But even that is perfunctory. I do not need it to fill in my picture.[5]

The democratic polity Gandhi envisaged was highly decentralized and he considered village as the basic unit. He was of the view that true democracy has to be worked by the people from below or bottom. He was convinced that “True democracy cannot be worked by twenty men sitting at the centre.”[6] In such a democratic polity, the “people’s will” in consonance with truth and non-violence must be the guiding principle in the decision making process. In the true spirit of democracy, the activities of the State would be guided by public opinion and a popular State cannot act against the will of the people or public opinion. Gandhi asserted that “Government of the people, by the people and for the people cannot be conducted at the bidding of one man, however great he may be.”[7] According to Gandhi, real swaraj can be attained only by educating the masses and building up their capacity to regulate and control authority when it is abused or misused. He wrote in Young India in 1925. “Real Swaraj will come, not by the acquisition of authority by a few, but by the acquisition of the capacity by all to resist authority when it is abused.”[8] Gandhi was aware of the importance of individual liberty and freedom in a democratic polity. He wrote: “Democracy is not a state in which people act like sheep. Under democracy, individual liberty of opinion and action is jealously guarded. I, therefore, believe that the minority has a perfect right to act differently from the majority.”[9] His technique of Satyagraha was intended not only to redress the injustice perpetuated by alien rulers but also to act against our own rulers who are not following the true spirit of democracy.

Gandhi’s vision of a decentralized polity presupposes a decentralized economy in which economic power would not be concentrated in the hands of a few people. Here also the focus will be on the development of individuals in complete harmony with nature. The economy he conceived was based on twin principles of truth and non-violence and it eschews all forms of exploitation because exploitation in essence is nothing but violence according to Gandhi. The attainment of human happiness is possible only in a decentralized structure. Elaborating on this point, he wrote: “The end to be sought is human happiness combined with full mental and moral growth. I use the adjective moral as synonymous with spiritual. This end can be achieved under decentralization. Centralization as a system is inconsistent with a non-violent structure of society.”[10] Gandhian economy is aptly described as an “economy of permanence” aimed at bringing peace and prosperity to all. The goal of production is fulfillment of basic needs and not endless wants which lead to exploitation of renewable and non-renewable resources. The basic requirements of life like food, clothing, shelter, health, education etc. would be adequately taken care of in such an economy. Instead of “mass production,” there will be “production by masses.” Machinery and automation would be to assist human beings and not to replace human labour. Work is looked upon as a means of creative expression of self ultimately leading to self-realization. Poverty is not considered as a virtue in itself and it has to be eradicated completely. But the rich people should embrace poverty and lead a life of simplicity instead of extravagance. Gandhi advocated the revolutionary concept of trusteeship for the management of wealth and resources. He strongly believed that all wealth and resources belonged to God and we are just custodians of it. Therefore, it would be our duty to possess wealth and resources as its trustees and not as its owners. It should be used for societal welfare instead of personal gains. Gandhi even approved a practical trusteeship formula drew up by his colleagues with some substantial changes in the draft.[11]

As a corollary to political and economic order, he visualized an ideal social order based on justice and equality. He envisaged the sarvodaya social order in which the main focus was the uplift of the poor and downtrodden who is called daridranarayan. He wanted to change the social scenario prevailing in the villages at that time through his Constructive Programme, which aimed at the total reconstruction of the villages for the attainment of swaraj. It tried to remove the social evils prevailing in the Indian society through voluntary and constructive action. His Constructive Programme included steps like promoting communal harmony among the people of various religious communities, removal of untouchability, implementation of prohibition, emancipation of women and other marginalized sections of the society, promoting of basic and adult education, village sanitation, health, hygiene etc. In such an ideal social order, there would not be any discrimination based on caste, creed, colour, birth, religion and so on. Each individual/citizen must be trained in such a manner to fulfil the duties and responsibilities one owes to the society. An individual while discharging the responsibilities as a useful citizen, would also get equal opportunity for his or her fullest development.

Gandhi fought against the caste based discriminations and practice of untouchability prevailing in the Indian society.”[12] After his return from South Africa, he established Satyagraha Ashram in May 1915. The removal of untouchability was one of the vows he prescribed for the inmates of the Ashram. He wrote: “The so-called untouchables have equal place in the Ashram with others.”[13] He proved his commitment by admitting an untouchable family in the Ashram in spite of the opposition from different quarters including his wife. Though he believed in the division of Varna based upon occupation and the Ashram dharma, he rejected the idea of caste system altogether. It is evident from the vows of the Ashram penned by him. “In the Ashram caste distinction has no place. It is believed that caste distinction has caused harm to the Hindu dharma. The ideas of the superior and inferior status and pollution by contact implied in caste distinction serves to destroy the dharma of non-violence.”[14] His total rejection of caste and practice of untouchability achieved greater intensity with the passage of time. This is evident from Gandhi’s foreword to his collection writings on Varnavyavastha on 31 May 1945.[15] He pleaded that all Indian people irrespective of their social status must consider themselves as Shudras or even Ati-Shudras and openly supported inter-caste marriages in which one of the party must be from the untouchables. He also made it a rule that he will attend and bless any couple in his ashram only if one of parties of the marriage was an untouchable. He even refused to offer his blessing on the occasion of marriage of Narayan Desai, son of his secretary Mahadev Desai, whom Gandhi had always treated as his own son. This non-compromising approach of Gandhi on the issue of caste discrimination and untouchability helped to a great extent in taming these social evils.

Similarly, Gandhi included Sarva Dharma Samabhava (equal respect for all religions), as one of the eleven vows prescribed for every inmate of his ashrams and communal unity was the first item of his 18 fold Constructive Programme. Gandhi looked upon various religions as different roads converging at the same point. He believed that the underlying principles of all religions were one and the same and he respected every religion as his own religion. In fact Gandhi’s approach to religion goes far beyond religious pluralism and secularism. It is often described as positive multiculturalism.[16] On the basis of his relentless search for truth for about fifty years, Gandhi arrived at the conclusion that “Truth is God.”[17] Thus, he included the secular, the atheist and the humanist in his discourse of religion. Gandhi’s approach to religion was not merely toleration; rather he attempted to develop a spirit of a fellowship among different religions. Religion was the guiding force for Gandhi in all his activities from spiritual to the mundane. Even his political activities were governed by the spirit of religion. But he considered religion as a purely personal matter and the State has nothing to do with it. He was convinced that the responsibility of the State is to look after secular matters like people’s welfare, health, communications, foreign affairs and so on, but not one’s religion. He unequivocally declared: “If I were a dictator, religion and State would be separate. I swear by my religion. I will die for it. But it is my personal affair. The State has nothing to do with it.”[18] He was highly revolutionary and scientific in his approach to religion and suggested that religion should be subjected to the acid test of reason and he scrutinized every scripture, including Gita, before acceptance. He said: “I reject any religious doctrine that does not appeal to reason and is in conflict with morality. I tolerate unreasonable religious sentiment when it is not immoral.”[19] Gandhi was of the view that religions are conveyed through a human medium and there are imperfections in them and it is the duty of an individual to rectify the defects in one’s own religion in order to enrich and purify it. In that process, an individual can enrich one’s religion by drawing out the best from other religions and there is no need for converting to another religion. However, he was not against true conversion out of one’s own inner conviction and he differentiated it from proselytization.

II

It is quite unfortunate that Gandhi’s ideas were not given adequate importance in the post-independent era. The framers of the Constitution paid lip service to Gandhi by including some of his ideas in the “Directive Principles of State Policy” which cannot be enforced or guaranteed by the law. Following the British model, India adopted parliamentary system of democracy, which Gandhi vehemently opposed and criticised as early as 1909 in his seminal work Hind Swaraj.[20] The Indian experience shows that some of his criticisms were prophetic in nature. It even turned into dictatorial forms during 1970s but due to sustained efforts of the people, India could check such tendencies which plagued our form of governance. However, the government formed after emergency could not come up to the high expectations it created during anti-emergency movement. The most unfortunate thing is that it was short-lived and the Indian democracy again went back to the same plight. Whether it is the rule of the right or the left wing, people felt it as one and the same. The form of governance largely served the interest of the ruling elite and corruption and favouritism became part and parcel of the system. Sometimes a feeling is created that our nation is moving towards fascist tendencies and democracy is turning into mobocracy and hypocrisy. Thus, it is clear that there is an urgent need for reimagining the political system of the country. Gandhi’s idea of decentralized and participatory form of democracy is worth pursuing when we envision or reimagine the political structure of the country to make it more vibrant and democratic. Gandhi’s ideas have become more and more relevant in the phase of crisis which we are seeing in different forms of governance all over the globe. That is the reason why there is a systematic attempt on the part of political scientists to develop Gandhi’s political philosophy and its relevance to overcome the current impasse. What is really required is not merely theoretical appreciation, but concrete efforts to translate them into action.

In the economic field also, Gandhi’s ideas were not matters of priority in the post-independent era. India adopted a “mixed economy” combining both capitalist and socialist features. Instead of the decentralized human centered economy proposed by Gandhi, India preferred centralized industrialized economy paving the way for mechanization and automation. Though India was following the Soviet model, we can see a paradigm shift from agriculture to industry from the Second Five Year Plan onwards under the guidance of P.C. Mahalanobis. Thus, India was trying to catch up with Rostow’s theory of economic growth, which is considered as a non-Communist manifesto.”[21] The influence of Capitalist ideas grew in the course of time and it reached its peak with the opening up of our economy in the wake of globalization, privatization and liberalization drives in the 1990s. Instead of the promise of growth and revitalization of the economy, it failed to fulfil its basic objectives. On the contrary, it resulted in gross disaster in economic field resulting in growing poverty, unemployment and widening the gap between the rich and the poor. The new Oxfam report viz. ‘Reward Work, not Wealth’ released in January 2018 is really a shocking one. According to the report “73 per cent of the wealth generated last year went to the richest one per cent, while 67 crore Indians who comprise the poorest half of the population saw one per cent increase in their wealth. In the last 12 months the wealth of this elite group increased by Rs. 20,913 billion. This amount is equivalent to the total budget of the Central Government in 2017-18.”[22] This widening gap between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’ led to social tension, inequality and injustice and the marginalized sections of the society became the worst victims of the globalization process. The renewable and non-renewable resources were exploited and resulted in grave environmental crises. The traditional custodians of forest and its resources like adivasis were uprooted from their areas which were their home and hearth for generations. It resulted in the rise of violent movements like Naxalism in every nook and corner of the country. Thus, it is proved beyond doubt that this pattern of development and economic policies on Gandhian lines with emphasis on swadeshi and self-reliance. It demands a decentralized and human economy where economic activities are guided by ethical concerns and not by profit and cut-throat competition. It is argued that Gandhi’s concept of trusteeship can be used as an alternative to overcome the issues associated with management of wealth and resources.

In the social front also India is facing a number of problems. In spite of the social engineering by different governments which ruled this country, India could not overcome the problems associated with caste, language, religion and so on. The reservation policies for the vulnerable sections of the society failed to reach its target and the creamy layer in such communities pocketed the benefits of reservation. The discrimination on the basis of caste and practice of untouchability has not disappeared even in cities. The recent research report of the Research Institute for Compassionate Economics (RICE) on the basis of a survey of social attitudes and behaviours revealed the explicit prejudice prevailing in the Indian society against women and Dalits in Delhi, Mumbai, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan.[23] The Indian society is divided in the name of religion and caste and political parties are taking undue advantage of it by conducting the whole electioneering process on the basis of these factors. The religious divide has become more and more evident and it may affect the multicultural fabric of India and the very idea of nationhood. The religious minorities are facing a sense of fear and insecurity that is against the cultural ethos and tradition of “unity in diversity” of this country. The problems which we face in the social and religious front take us to the doorsteps of Gandhi who tirelessly worked to remove social inequalities and the discrimination based on caste and the evil practice of untouchability. Gandhi’s outlook towards religion and his concept of Sarvadharma Samabhava is worth emulating to solve problems associated with religious divide prevailing in this country.

From the above analysis, it is clear that Gandhi had a clear vision of the future society India should have. In his hectic life, shouldering many responsibilities, he found time to reflect, analyse and come out with practical solutions for the problems which India was facing at that time. With the passage of time, new issues and problems have come up which were not severe at that time. However, the broad guidelines and principles which Gandhi placed before India and humanity could serve as beacon lights in our efforts to build a non-violent, just, equitable and peaceful society. Gandhian ideas cannot be termed as Utopian and impractical because they were never given a serious trial in our country. People all over the world are taking clues from his principles to solve the riddles humanity is facing. It was from India, Gandhi placed his ideas before humanity and India has a special role to play in showing the efficacy of his revolutionary and scientific approach by literally putting them into practice. Let us imagine and envision the future of the country on Gandhian lines in order to realise the India of Gandhi’s dreams.

Notes and References

1. Gandhi and the struggle against imperialism
2. The emphasis is added by the authors.
3. M.K. Gandhi, Young India, 10-9-1931.
4. The emphasis is added by the authors.
5. M.K. Gandhi, Harijan, 28-7-1946.
6. M.K. Gandhi, Harijan, 18-1-1948.
7. M.K. Gandhi, Harijan, 14-9-1947.
8. M.K. Gandhi, Young India, 29-1-1925.
9. M.K. Gandhi, Young India, 2-3-1922.
10. M.K. Gandhi, Harijan, 18-1-1942.
11. On the release of Gandhi and his associates from detention in the Aga Khan Palace in 1944, the question of Trusteeship was taken up. K.G. Mashruwala, N.D. Parikh drew up a single practical trusteeship formula which was fine tuned by M.L. Dantwala. It was placed before Gandhi and he made a few changes in it. The final draft with Gandhi’s corrections reads as follows:

• Trusteeship provides a means of transforming the present capitalist order of society into an egalitarian one. It gives no quarter to capitalism, but gives the present owning class a chance of reforming itself. It is based on the faith that human nature is never beyond redemption.
• It does not recognize any right of private ownership of property except so far as it may be permitted by society for its own welfare.
• It does not exclude legislative regulation of the ownership and use of wealth.
• Thus under State-regulated trusteeship, an individual will not be free to hold or use his wealth for selfish satisfaction or in disregard of the interests of society.
• Just as it is proposed to fix a decent minimum living wage, even so a limit should be fixed for the maximum income that could be allowed to any person in society. The difference between such minimum and maximum incomes should be reasonable and equitable and variable from time to time so much so that the tendency would be towards obliteration of the difference.
• Under the Gandhian economic order the character of production will be determined by social necessity, and not by personal whim or greed.
• (g)For a discussion on the changes made by Gandhi in the draft Trusteeship formula, See Siby K. Joseph “Gandhi’s Trusteeship: An Alternative to Capitalist and Socialist Systems” in Siby K. Joseph et al. (eds.) Trusteeship A Path less Travelled (Wardha: Institute of Gandhian Studies, 2016) pp. 123-138.

1. For a detailed discussion on Gandhi’s approach to Caste refer Siby K. Joseph, Caste-based Discrimination in the Indian Church: Lessons from Gandhi’s fight for human dignity, (Carcassonne: Gandhi International, 2017)
2. Ashram observances
3. Ibid
4. On 31 May 1945 Gandhi in his foreword to his collection of writings on Varnavyavastha wrote: “…. It would not be correct to say that my views on Varnashram are the same as they were in the past. I have said that the varnas and the ashramas are the gifts of Hinduism to the world, and I still adhere to that view. But today neither the varnas nor the ashramas of my conception are in existence anywhere. They should form a part of our religion. But it can be said that these days the ashramas have disappeared altogether and varnas are found in the form of privileges. The claim of being a Brahmin, a Kshatriya, a Vaishya connotes pride. How can there be pride where there is religion? And the Shudras are not taken into consideration at all! Shudras are low and the Ati-Shudras are the lowest of the low. This is not religion but a negation of it. …Where are the four varnas of the Gita today? Varna is entirely different from caste. There are numerous castes. I know of no authority for caste in the Gita or any other scripture. The Gita has prescribed four varnas and they are based on one’s aptitudes and Karma. I am saying four just to give you an example. There can be more or less varnas than that. But there prevails only one varna today, that is, of Shudars,’ or, you may call it, Ati-Shudras,’ or Harijans’ or untouchables”… In the eyes of religion all men are equal. An educated, intelligent and affluent man is no better than an ignorant, stupid and poor man. If he is cultured, that is to say, if he has been purified by dharma, he will strive to give them, that is to say, the whole world, what he has got. If that is true of religion, then in our present condition, devoid of religion our dharma lies in becoming Ati-Shudras voluntarily.”
5. See Siby K. Joseph, Gandhi, Religion and Multiculturalism: An Appraisal,” Gandhi Marg, Vol. 33, Number 4, January-March 2012.
6. Gandhi while replying to a question as to why he considers ‘God is Truth’ at a meeting in Switzerland, on his way back from the Round Table Conference in London said: “If it is possible for the human tongue to give the fullest description of God, I have come to the conclusion that for myself, God is Truth. But two years ago I went a step further and said that Truth is God. And I came to that conclusion after a continuous and relentless search after Truth which began nearly fifty years ago. I then found that the nearest approach to Truth was through love. But I also found that love has many meanings in the English language at least and that human love in the sense of passion could become a degrading thing also. I found too that love in the sense of Ahimsa had only a limited number of votaries in the world. But I never found a double meaning in connection with truth and even atheists had not demurred to the necessity or power of truth. But in their passion for discovering truth, the atheists have not hesitated to deny the very existence of God-from their own point of view rightly.”
7. M.K. Gandhi, Harijan 22-9-1946.
8. M.K. Gandhi, Young India, 21-7-1920.
9. Gandhi wrote: “The Mother of Parliament is like a sterile woman and a prostitute. Both these are harsh terms, but exactly fit the case. The parliament has not yet, of its own accord, done a single good thing. Hence, I have compared it to a sterile woman. The natural condition of the Parliament is such that, without outside pressure, it can do nothing. It is like a prostitute because it is under the control of ministers who change from time to time.” He further stated: “Parliament is without a real master. Under the Prime Minister, its movement is not steady but is buffeted about like a prostitute. The Prime Minister is more concerned about his power that about the welfare of Parliament. His energy is concentrated upon securing the success of his party.” M.K. Gandhi, Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule (Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 2004), pp. 27-29. However, in late thirties, he conceded that he would not have used these harsh words like prostitute and sterile women out of his respect for the women fold, if he was writing Hind Swaraj afresh.
10. Rostow’s model postulates that economic growth takes place in five basic stages viz. (i) Traditional society; (ii) Preconditions for take-off; (iii) Take-off; (iv) Drive to maturity; and (v) Age of high mass consumption (W.W. Rostow, The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960).
11. www.oxfamindia.org pressrelease/2093. The report is available on the website of Oxfam.
12. Daniel Coffey, Payal Hathi, Nidhi Khurana and Amit Throat “Explicit Prejudice: Evidence from a New Survey,” Research Institute for Compassionate Economics (RICE), 2018.

(Siby K. Joseph is Dean of Studies and Research, Institute of Gandhian Studies, Wardha-442001, Maharashtra. Surendra Kumar is General Secretary, Association of Voluntary Agencies for Rural Development (AVARD) 5 (FF), Institutional Area, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Marg, Kamala Devi Bhavan, New Delhi-110002.)