Gandhi before Habermas: The Democratic Consequences of Ahimsa

Author(s): Dipankar Gupta

Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 44, No. 10 (Mar. 7 - 13, 2009), pp. 27-33
Published by: Economic and Political Weekly
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40278774
Accessed: 21-03-2020 14:27 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Economic and Political Weekly

This content downloaded from 117.240.50.232 on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 14:27:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
lUW'ftiUSMMBlffMBI

have done will endure, not what I have said

Gandhi before Habermas: and written" (Gandhi 1971: 271). As Nirmal
Bose records, Gandhi once turned to him
The Democratic Consequences and said: "You have drank up all that I have
written.... But it is necessary that you
of Ahimsa should observe me at work so that you can
understand me better" (Bose 1953: 77)-
Obviously when one is intent on por-
DIPANKAR GUPTA traying Gandhi without contradictions
there is an overemphasis on presenting
Without Gandhi India may well highlighting Gandhi's many
what he said as systematically as possible.
What
quirks and fads, by making himis more, as in any content analysis,
have become independent,
the way
into a kind of fakir who lost his number of times a person hits on a
perhaps even earlier, but would wordasgets
into politics, and by portraying him an greater preference over what is
we have been a liberal, unintentionally
enemy of the modern state and of indus- left behind, and which is
democratic nation state? This probably much more durable. It must also
trial machinery, I believe a grave injustice
has been done to his legacy. be admitted that in such interpretations
question should give us pause
the quaint and the unusual get greater
before we make little of Gandhi's
The Importance of Being preference than what sediments over time
Inconsistent
legacy. Uncertain and imperfect through social practice. Hence a greater
though our democracy may Sociologically,
be, it emphasis
it is more important for us on Gandhi's many oddities and
not
toitanalyse the unintended consequences on his very modern and liberal demo-
is still the world's largest, and
of Gandhi's life and works, rather cratic
than contribution to the making of our
functions for the most part. All of nation
being strict adherents of what he said, on state. It is this imbalance that my
us who value this form of paper attempts to correct.
which front, incidentally, he often contra-
dicted himself. Yet many advocatesItof
governance ought to remember is often argued that Gandhi is no
Gandhi blanch these inconsistencies in longer relevant in India. We have given up
that we owe it to Gandhi, more
order to present him as an infallible the charkha, gone in for industrialisation,
than to anyone else, for giving us
thinker and leader. But ironically it is thisand lapsed into communal frenzy on more
a start in the right direction.hagiographie
If occasions than we would like to remem-
tendency to systematise and
Gandhi is to be measured in box in Gandhi that leads his interpreters
ber. What happened to all those Gandhian
to overlook his contribution as a modernexhortations to stay close to simplicity,
terms of charkhas, frugality and
truth and non-violence? On the face of it,
liberal democrat. Gandhi, however, proudly
prayer meetings then certainly he
proclaimed his inconsistencies and madeit does appear that Gandhi was yesterday's
is of little consequence today. But
no apologies for them. To quote him: messiah whose band of worshippers is
a sociological appreciation of I must admit my many inconsistencies. Butdwindling fast. Those that remain are ag-
since I am called Mahatma I might well en-ing moral soldiers, disillusioned yet carry-
Gandhi would take us beyonddure Emerson's saying that foolish consist-ing on, in the few eponymous foundations
these emblematic acts to the ency is the bobglobin of the little minds. and samitis that bear Gandhi's name.
There is, I fancy, a method in my inconsist-
unintended consequences of what
encies (quoted in Sen ed, 1995: 43; see also But Gandhi's legacy is much more than
he did and stood for. It is only Gandhi i960: 52). the reinforcement of tradition; or of pain-
In fact, Gandhi refused Sarvepalli Radha-ful moral values which are impossible to
then we realise the gravitas of
krishnan's request to provide a systematicuphold. In fact, his influence is boldly writ-
Gandhi's living legacy. account of his own thinking. Gandhiten into our laws and in the fundaments of
believed that he was more committed toour national policies. Harold Gould is the
only scholar I know who has in recent
doing things and if a coherent account of
his thought needs to be presented it shouldtimes made this point forcefully (Gould
2000). This Gandhi is not the Gandhi of
This article based on the Rajiv Kapur Memorialbe attempted by Radhakrishnan himself.
Lecture delivered on 20 August 2008 in New mudpacks and prayer meetings, but a per-
Gandhi believed that to "give (swaraj) one
Delhi.
definite meaning is to narrow the outlook,son, who through all of this, made the sin-
Dipankar Gupta (dipankargupta@hotmail and to limit what is potentially limitless"gle greatest contribution towards giving
com) is with the Centre for Study of Social (Gandhi 1967, vol xxxn: 553). As he said inIndia a modern, liberal democratic state.
Systems, School of Social Sciences, JNU, the Harijan of 1 May 1937: "My writings So if we must respect Gandhi, let us ac-
New Delhi.
should be cremated with my body. What Iknowledge his role in this regard and not

Economic Apolitical weekly ma

This content downloaded from 117.240.50.232 on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 14:27:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
PERSPECTIVE E=£fEZ-

cast him as ato make

land, or man of wheel
high quality ploughshares has to be
the carried to people
past who
obsess
with require a fairly advanced
impractical fads. degree of tech-
Withhave no hope, noainitiative
littleleft in them..."
care
Gandhi's works and
nology and not something (ibid lxxxii: 25). In the same it
speeches
that cottagers contra- can
shown that there was indeed another
can accomplish in the sanctity of their dictory vein Gandhi said that in his Nai
mud huts. Yet, he seems to weigh in Taleem schools there "should be no place
Gandhi; a Gandhi who has always been
against high science. But true to his con- for books" (Gandhi 1967 lxxxii: 142), but
prompting us to be modern, secular and
tradictory method he also argues a little he also urged elsewhere that for true edu-
democratic even though it would appear
he was looking the other way. earlier in the same article in Young India cation "some people may feel the need for
Without Gandhi India may well have
(14 September 1919) that a study of literature, some for a study of
become independent, perhaps even earlier,Pure swadeshi is not at all opposed to ma- physical sciences and others for art"
but would we have been a liberal, demo-chinery. The swadeshi movement is meant (Gandhi 1991: 296).
cratic nation state? This question shouldonly against the use of foreign cloth. There is
Neither was Gandhi steadfast in his op-
no objection to weaving mill-made cloths
give us pause before we make little of Gan- position to socialism. He has on occasions
(Gandhi 1991: 366).
dhi's legacy. Uncertain and imperfect inveighed against socialism and this is the
though our democracy may be, it is stillOr in the Harijan of 22 June 1935 Gandhi some people refer to particularly
the world's largest, and it functions for the I would prize every invention of science in the context of the Ahmedabad textile
most part. All of us who value this form of made for the benefit of all. There is a differ- strikes. He opposed socialism for two rea-

governance ought to remember that weence between invention and invention. I sons. First, he felt that workers should
owe it to Gandhi, more than to anyoneshould not care for the asphyxiating gases understand that their labour was a kind of
capable of killing masses of men at a time.
else, for giving us a start in the right direc- capital, and capitalists should acknow-
The heavy machinery for work of public
tion. If Gandhi is to be measured in terms
utility which cannot be undertaken by ledge that capital is a form of labour
of charkhas, frugality and prayer meet-human labour has its inevitable place, but(Gandhi 1991:401; Gandhi 1967 lxxxii:
335). Gandhi had clearly put himself in a
ings, then, certainly he is of little conse- that would be owned by the State and used
quence today. But a sociological apprecia-entirely for the benefit of the people (ibid:
definitional bind. This compelled him to
402; emphasis added)
tion of Gandhi would take us beyond these seek a way out which, without temporis-
emblematic acts to the unintended conse- ing on his sentiments, would uphold the
However, when pressed on the subject
quences of what he did and stood for. It is of machinery he often professed igno- principles of amity. His second objection
only then we realise the gravitas of Gan- rance. He even admitted on occasions thatto socialism was much more reasoned. In
dhi's living legacy his view, socialism was impossible in its
he had not thought through the matter
current articulation without resorting to
and all that he knew something about was
The Practical in the Moral
the humble Singer sewing machineviolence (Gandhi 1991: 401). But it was
(Gandhi
No doubt, Gandhi was a great advocate of 1991: 348-9). Gandhi again who believed that in real so-
the spinning wheel, of khadi and was Charkha
in and khadi should therefore be cialism both truth and ahimsa can come
seen as symbols of swadeshi and non-
some senses against mills and machines. alive (ibid: 413), and that this concept is
violence (Gandhi 1967 lxxxii: 358; Gandhi
Here again, one must proceed cautiously not a new discovery but can be found in
for there are at least two Gandhis we are xxiv: 248) and as Gandhi cautioned,
1967 the Gita (ibid: 408).
one should not make a "fetish of the spin- Nehru's advocacy of socialism was thus
talking about here. Quite true to his posi-
tion of staying away from a systematic
ning wheel" (ibid: 309). Indeed, he warned
not contrary to Gandhi as he too thought
that if he should "see that it (charkha) of
philosophy but insisting more on practice, is it in non-violent terms. Many of course
Gandhi said: an impediment in the winning of swaraj,would
I argue, and quite legitimately, that
Opposition to mills or machines is notshall Nehru's socialism was not socialism at all,
the immediately set fire to it" (ibid). This
point. What suits our country most isinthe
spite of stating somewhat categorically but at least it was Gandhian to the extent
point. I am not opposed to the movement of that there was no violence attached to it.
that "all the members of the various repre-
manufacturing machines in this country, or
sentative bodies of the Congress organisa-Socialism for Gandhi, if achieved through
to making improvements in machinery. I am
non-violence, can be "as pure as crystal"
tion shall... regularly spin for half an hour
only concerned with what these machineries
every
are meant for. I may ask, in the words of day" (Gandhi 1967 xxiv: 266). (Gandhi i960: 314). In a manner reminis-
Ruskin, whether these machines will be such
Gandhi is not done yet and there are
cent of the Gospel, Gandhi said that the
as would blow off a million men in a minute,
more contradictions waiting. Though he
"rich man, to say the least, did not advance
or they will be such as would turn waste land
advocated spinning, Gandhi did not want
the moral struggle of passive resistance as
into arable land. And if legislation were in
did the poor" (Gandhi 1991: 95)
"to make every one of the boys and girls in
my hands, I would penalise the manufacture
of labour-saving machines and protectthe
thevillages of India spinners or weavers, Truly, Gandhi was a man of many con-
industry which manufacture nice plough
but.. .whole men through whatever occu- tradictions and he was the first to re-
that can be handled by everyone (Gandhi
pation they will learn" (Gandhi 1967 lxvi:
cognise this trait in him. As we mentioned
1991: 367; see also 401).
342). This led him to argue that the wheel
earlier he was never keen to systematise
was not meant for those with "remunera-his thoughts, but instead allowed practice
As will be easily noticed, Gandhi equi-
vocates. To turn waste land into arable tive employ ment.... The message of the to be his guide. And as we have just found
2<3
march 7. 2009 vol xliv no 10 CCC3

This content downloaded from 117.240.50.232 on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 14:27:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
====^==-- =-.=,

that apart from

signal contribution to the theory and prac- This is why Gandhi
his does not prioritiseins
tice of modern,
violence, liberal democracy.
which rationality,
was or reason, as Habermas
an does "e
that brooked (Habermas 1987a: 21, 25).
So if we find Gandhi's influence pervad- "no We need to
comp
1991: 190) he
ing our Constitution we was
should not be sur- recognise that at the end of the day, in
open t
prised.
practically The spirit of democracy
everything and the most vital cases of life and death, one els
It is most prized
not Articles on Fundamental cannot establish validitythen
surprising claims along t
not want to
Rights and Duties be
have found their place Habermasian
called lines (ibid: 98-100, 104). a M
1967 in our Constitution largely
xxiv: because of People can go back
232). Butand forth between lifebec
true Gandhi's
to insistence
his on non-violence as
eternala worlds, if necessary. They are even per-
prin
address him
political asan inch
precept. By not yielding mitted to take recourse to methods not
one.
on non-violence, even when there were se- given in a particular tradition,1 without
Gandhi before Habermas vere pressures to do so, he was able to forsaking it. Gandhi would be a forgotten
If contemporary sociology can still claim all nine yards of democracy. For figure if all his arguments were based on
call
Gandhi a Mahatma it is not because he Gandhi non-violence did not just mean validity claims, especially if one were to
was temperamentally an ascetic, or a reli-physical non-violence, as is often assumed, push hard the "objectively 'right'" clause
gious obdurate. These qualities may havebut equally non-violence in words and in (ibid: 104). How can we prove the right-
encouraged the sobriquet at the time whenthe way one conducted an argument. ness of celibacy, or of the spinning wheel?
he first earned it, but they do not explain Well after Gandhi, Jurgen Habermas Why should women come out of their
the man's lasting legacy in a harsh, irreli-and the theorists of the Frankfurt School homes in the defence of satyagraha?
gious world. Without Gandhi India might have also emphasised the power of debate Can capitalists and workers function like
have looked like some of the other auto-provided violence and manipulation are two wings of a bird? Though such ques-
cracies and dictatorships that characterisekept out of purview (see Habermas 1987a tions hardly admit of any consensus, yet
so many newly independent states. Theyand b). Like Gandhi, Habermas too be- Gandhi enlarged our public sphere by
too fought against colonialism and manylieved that the reason we argue is because, encouraging an open debate on each of
of their leaders made heroic contributions.in principle, we believe that consensus can these issues. That he succeeded in this
Yet the political dispensations of thesebe arrived at (Habermas 1987a: 10). For was because he never compromised on
countries either bear no trace of demo- Habermas, democracy brackets away all non-violence. That is why Gandhi was not
cracy, or, if they do, it is just a façade.considerations of power, pelf and wealth just a Mahatma but also a Myth! But more
Gandhi may not have always been self- so that debates can be dominated by rea- of that later.
conscious about his contribution to liberalson alone. Given the close concordance It must however be said that because

thought; but his practice of, and bold in-this position has with the Gandhian stand the objectivity clause does not apply to
sistence on, non-violence made all the dif-on political ahimsa (see also Parel 2007: Gandhi's form of ratiocination, there can
ference for us in India between democracy109), it is indeed surprising why Habermas be many interpretations and slippages on
and dictatorship, or worse. never quoted him. Perhaps he too saw what constitutes the politics of ahimsa.
Gandhi's non-violence has to be rescued Gandhi as an exotic, "other-worldly", These uncertainties can be done away
from spirituality and religion for a roundedpolitical ascetic. with if one were to follow the legitimacy

assessment of his legacy. When Gandhi in- In many ways Gandhi was not only be- claims as laid down by Habermas. In
sisted on disciplinary rule it should be fore, but ahead of Habermas. For Gandhi,, which case, everything is sorted out in
debates can take place between people of public by a rational meeting of minds. But
seen in the context of just laws of a consti-
tutional democratic state, and not as a different lifeworlds (Habermas 1987a: 13), the conditions that Habermas sets are al-
once violence is kept out. Though Haber- most impossible to fulfil. How can people
variant of spiritual "tapas" and self-con-
trol (Hardiman 2003:26). It is quite cor-mas does not come out very clearly on this, agree to validate something that has no
rect that Gandhi was indebted to pacifistshis method precludes the coexistence of objective criterion for affirmation? How
like Tolstoy and Thoreau, and perhaps totwo lifeworlds if communicative rationality can one even say that "non-violence" is
all pietist religions of the day. But whatis to be advanced. This is why there has to superior unless one takes the first step
needs to be recognised is that Gandhi'sbe a consensus around the untheorised and cathectively endorses liberal demo-
adherence to non-violence did not hold and the taken for granted aspects of the cracy? How can one say that the public
fast to a scriptural course as much as itlifeworld (ibid: 15, 17, 70; see also Haber- delivery of public goods is superior to un-
was directed towards a mass movement. mas 1987b: 124 and passim) as communi- regulated market capitalism unless one
As Gandhi's ahimsa was not just a divine, cative rationality presumes "a shared defi- decides that equality should precede,
spiritual predisposition, but actually put nition of the situation" (Habermas 1987b; without negating, differences when it
to use in the struggle for independence, 126, 136) between interlocutors. Gandhi comes to citizenship? How can one also
leave one's life world and embrace
the understanding of his legacy too should was more realistic and deeply practical.
be accordingly adjusted. We thus need to For him life worlds need not merge, but another? And why should it be essential
acknowledge Gandhi's non-violence not so debates can still take place provided to do so as long as non-violence remains
much as a religious expression but as a violence is picketed outside the yard. the overarching credo?

Economic & Political weekly BBO

This content downloaded from 117.240.50.232 on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 14:27:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
PERSPECTIVE ===^==^=--=-.1^====^===

The Centrality of Non-violence

you action is jealously guarded" (ibid: 157). In
angry, that is a sign that you are sub-
1946, as independence was approaching,
consciously aware of having no good rea-
Gandhi was upset when his own followers
son for thinking as you do" (Russell 1958:Gandhi said in a meeting in Ranchgani:
did not appreciate why he often suspended
136). For Gandhi, the evolution of demo-
the movement because violence had crept "What is independence? Independence must
in. As he said: cracy was not possible unless we give the
begin at the bottom. . .it is the individual who
other side a fair hearing, otherwise we
It has not yet been understood my suspen- is the unit" (Gandhi 1991: 347). The individ-
"shut
sion of satyagraha after Ahmedabad and the doors of reason when we refuse ual is at the centre of Gandhi's thought, not
to hear our opponents..., we run the risk an ethereal soul. And much like T H Mar-
Viramnagar tragedies, then after the Bombay
rowdyism, and lastly, after the Chauri
of missing the truth" (see also Terchek shall's notion of citizenship (Marshall
Chaura outrage (Gandhi 1967 xxiv: 139).
2000: 154). Habermas could have done no 1963: 9), Gandhi also argued that his life's
But if Gandhi had not acted as he did better
on than to lift this quote to substanti- mission was "to bring about an equalisa-
those occasions, instead of debate and
atede-
communicative rationality. Sadly, this tion of status" (Gandhi 1967 lxvi: 341).
mocracy, the Indian Constitution might
side of ahimsa is rarely ever brought out in Independence was not good enough for
well have valorised some other doctrine. contemporary exegeses on Gandhi. its own sake unless it was characterised by
It is so easy to stray off course as demo- In line with his liberal values Gandhi the strictest rules of discipline (Gandhi
cracy is a highly cultivated political pre-argued that "democracy dreads to spill
1967: 310). Without this quality of self-
ference. For Gandhi, freedom by itself wasblood" (Gandhi 1971: 79). As he said indiscipline
a and non-violence at all levels
not an unqualified good. According to democracy would be impossible. Perhaps
meeting at the Satyagraha Camp in Nadiad
him, "the attainment of freedom whetherin 1918: "We are not to boycott or treat
a fascist state could be contrived, perhaps,
for a man, a nation, or the world, must bewith scorn those who hold different views a state that is all pomp and splendour, but,
for all that, a soulless state (Gandhi 1973:
in exact proportion to the attainment offrom ours (Gandhi 1991: 311). Satyagraha
non-violence in each" (Gandhi i960: 32). must therefore "not be violent in thought,
255). Nirmal Bose records Gandhi telling a
Habermas might want to draw on thisword or deed towards the 'enemy' or delegation from Gorakhpur's Gita Press in
belief to facilitate his search for a suitable among ourselves" (ibid: 324). But Gandhi
November 1946 that unless "people were
"transcendental space" (Habermas 1987b:could be more specific than that. In theconscious of their political rights and
126, 154) to house communicative ration-
Harijan of 26 March 1938, Gandhi wrote: know how to act in a crisis, democracy can
ality. But there would still be a disjunct ure never be built up" (Bose 1953: 75).
We must try patiently to convert our oppo-
between the two. Habermas would like
nents. If we wish to evolve the spirit of demo-
Gandhi as Liberal Secularist
resolution and consensus, but Gandhi cracy out of slavery, we must be scrupulously
could live with disagreements provided exact in our dealings with opponents. ...We
Gandhi's partisanship with secularism also
must concede to our opponents the freedom
life went on non-violently. Gandhi recog- flows from his insistence on liberal, demo-
we claim for ourselves for which we are
nised that some of the hardiest beliefs are cratic principles as it does from his strong
fighting (quoted in Gandhi 1971: 73-4)
not based on consideration of wealth and advocacy of non-violence in all forms. If in
power at the phenomenological level. The fact that a crucial area of non- the Constitution of India we have an un-
There is something called "cant" againstviolence is debate and discussion, or, in
questioning subscription to secularism,
which the pure speech act, or validityother words, the search for truth, should
where "every religion has full and equal
claims, appear helpless. In such situations,not be overlooked in favour of only the
place" (Gandhi 1991: 348), it is Gandhi that
one can see the advantages of relying on
physical aspect of that term. No doubt heis most responsible for it. His secularism
the blanket espousal of non-violence.castigated fascism on a number of occa- was even-handed and based on liberal prin-
Instead of relying on validity claims, Gandhi ciples and not on charity and goodwill.
sions for its inbuilt violence but his critique
espoused "sweet persuasion" (quoted inwas essentially buoyed by his advocacy of
This can be seen from an incident recorded
Heredia 2007: 157) to work people out of
ahimsa style democratic debate (Gandhiby Nirmal Bose. When some Hindu work-
their deep seated prejudice. Else, he warn-i960: 68-79). Gandhi argued quite force-
ers came to meet Gandhi in the commu-
ed, satyagraha can become its opposite, nally tense days of 1946 to demand that
fully that his "opinion of democracy is that
viz, duragraha (for an extended treatment
under it the weakest should have the same
"Muslim officers should be replaced by Hin-
ofduragraha see Bondurant 1964: 76). opportunity as the strongest (shades ofdu officers", Gandhiji remarked that it was
Gandhi wrote: "Anger proves our intol-Rawls' difference principle (Rawls 1971)-
unreasonable and a communal demand:
erance. We shail lack the capacity to bear dg). That can never happen except through While putting forward such a proposal, you
one another's criticism. This is a very im-non-violence" (Gandhi i960: 114). should ask yourself if the Muslims of Bihar
portant quality of public life" (ibid: 249; It is non-violence again that inspires can reasonably make a similar demand. In
emphasis added). Note, it is public life that my opinion, the present demand is absurd
Gandhi's anti-majoritarian views of demo-
and I would personally never countenance
is being stressed here and not religious
cracy (see Terchek 2000: 132). Democracy it. You can of course substitute in its place
mysticism, or tapas. From a pronounced is for all, and not for this or that group. The impartial officers in place of biased ones,
liberal tradition Bertrand Russell also echoedfundamental tenet of democracy for that would be fair (Bose 1953: 61).
Gandhi's sentiments when he wrote: "If
Gandhi was the ultimate liberal one for Gandhi's liberal secularism was there-
an opinion contrary to your own makesunder it "individual liberty of opinion and
fore not one of grand gestures but
3 march 7, 2009 VOLXLIVN010 ODEO Economic & Political weekly

This content downloaded from 117.240.50.232 on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 14:27:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
;^IH^Ê^ÊÊEEE^^

allegiance being
to been exam
spiritually
constitutional exp
and
A secular Works,
society volcomes
for Gandhi
50: 92;alon
w
quo
where we This
couldis whymost
share "onehushed
anoth
Gandhi's l
(Gandhi 1971:
in 168).
line withwidely
Could ack
John
liberal dem
done better when he and he
asked too
us to a
p
one The
other's Mahatma
fate did
(Rawls not as
pre
1971: 10
dhi Gandhi
remarked: a
was father
a fa
Mahatm
"Independent I
ceived by nificant
me will should
way.
have all hav
Thoug
Indian
to dhi's
different (Gandhi
non-violence
religions living 197
in is
'pe
ship'" lishing
(Gandhi our
1991: Hegel
360). had
secular,
It is a
d
im
us that state,
for Gandhi of
there Right
is yet
"perfect wh
an
frie
not based where
on he allowing
in
tolerance fact
or un
succ
equid
on an active of
No the
involvement
failures. fath
in
amount ea
lives as could
full tain
show
citizens. such
that
Quite in a
the kc
this frugality
position on patriarchy
and so
secularism, fort
Gan
shook the c
The state dispute.
has Yet
nothing by
to raisin
do wit
The state enlarged
should ties.
our
look Intere
public
after secul
health, to think letter
aloud
communication, some
to a
foreign
currency, and so
subjects where
on,
of he yo
sa
but time.
the not
religion (quoted in Terchek
must 2000:
unite"
obvious disinterest w
This put On (Haberm
himself
paid several
to for
should
thos
lieve that ing
Gandhi just
media"),
saw fail to
perhap
politics i
ligious popular
terms. claims;
Theimage as he
a
separation pe
oo
and stateviction
could categorical
(which
not have has n
been
more alent),
forthright a issues.
perhaps
manner. For
also
Th
assertion ways, ofgreat
recalls when
the inter-din
Gandhi
libe
that goes immediate
back to religious
Kant, gr
credibility
Hegel a
Much is made
him of
for views on ad
Gandhi's
concealing th
a
religion would
and forgrind
to later separat
Hinduism in
in
But, in Habermas:
fact, he gious
wassee grou
Haber
extrem
Hinduism,Gandhi
though marrying
provided
this wastheo
a
prized openly
above all religion,
confront
others. In sh
dive
th
1920 issue the
of role
Young public
of women
India inte
he in
had
about Hinduism:
of shocked
capitalism in a his
dev
relations, Muslim
the (ib
import
There is on the one hand, the His
tution, oppose
and the tho
signi
duism with its untouchability,
su
of familyother comm
relationshi
worship of stocks and stones, an
fice and so on. ceeded
On (see
general the in
other
Gandhi hab
the Hinduism of the
espousal Gita,
testy
of the
brahmachUp
matte
Patanjali's Voga Sutra which of
is t
a smile incontext
contempora e
ahimsa (quoted in Terchek 2000:
also be was
seen as aa lack
way
In fact, women
he said tions,
in
at one neve
public lif
point
marriage cerns
but were
only th
way in which he saw and prac
ism and nal formulatio
desire"
non-violence(Gandhi
led man
that he made
"was a faith
women and
Christian tr
unsafe
in
(Gandhi He
1967:wasvol To argue
against
xxiv: child
139).th

This is and
not entirelybecause
unpaid labour
surprisingmaa
had once were
also the cast
order
commented aside
of fo
th
that
was "the raised
Prince the
of
debates
issue
passive of we
chi
resist
striking enhanced
(Gandhi 197t
1973: 273). As for his status as
lives. It is t
yogi, westill
have Gandhi again employed, does
words: failed? sions
On
"Non-violence the
is on m
cont
not ju
but for Gandhi
citizens" should
was
(seewell
Parelnot
ahea
20
Gandhi the forcedclude
he ultimatethe that
issue
practition o
Imagine Women
a are
tradition
can be accepted as the word of
cannot India,
be whose
tested by myria
rampant ino
reason

Economic & Political weekly QSB march 7. 2009 vol xliv no 10

This content downloaded from 117.240.50.232 on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 14:27:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PERSPECTIVE - =

not get their broughtscheduled

dues, out in the open for discussion,
castes This aspect is often overlooked by most of
continue
to face oppression,
though theyand
were neverparents
quite resolved. As routinely
us. The credit for the extraordinary depth,
force their Levi-Strauss
girls into (1966: 224-238) remarks, profundity
unhappy a marriages.
and liberalism of our Constitu-
But even so, without
myth is not misplacedGandhi, tion we
history, but a way of would
is almost entirely handed to the Draft-
have still been unaware of these warts in contemplating over imponderables that do
ing Committee. It is true that this commit-
our culture. He helped us see them by per- not easily yield solutions. Myths discuss
tee rationally debated, gave a little, took a
suading us to talk about them publicly. questions that have no easy answer, like
little and finally crafted a document that
In most of these cases Gandhi said he the beginning* of the beginning, or the
the world will always remember. While
listened to his "inner voice" (Gandhi 1991:darkness of death.2 But humankind must none of this can be denied, what escapes
nevertheless think over these matters and
213). It is hard to argue against money, but attention is the prehistory of such deliber-
this is why myths of all kinds continue in ations - a prehistory where Gandhi's influ-
even harder against someone's inner voice.
Gandhi disdained pecuniary considera-our time. By taking us to our deepest ence is inescapable.
thoughts myths help us to respond to
tions but he actively carried on a dialogue This can be best seen in the disavowal
with his inner voice. While these issues dilemmas of everyday life. It is precisely of separate electorates in the Constitution.
were raised by Gandhi's inner voice to
by doing what Habermas finds objectiona- How can we forget Gandhi's insistent com-
him, the way he amplified them allowed ble, i e, by fusing the objective and subjec- mitment to see this proposal die from the
tive worlds (Habermas 1987b: 159), that days of the Poona Pact onwards? This idea
us to enlarge our public lives. So what if
myths contribute to social life, and, as in was killed again in the Constituent
we do not accept Gandhi's view on brah-
the case of Gandhi, can also enlarge and Assembly debates. The abolition of untouch-
macharya; so what if we find it difficult to
return to the charkha; so what if we still
vivify our public sphere. ability is all Gandhi, and so are the stric-
have elements of patriarchy in family life; tures against sectarian, caste and religious
Gandhi, the Constitution and
Gandhi helped us to move from tradition discrimination. He was against untoucha-
Public
to modernity by the very act of bringing Policy bility and religious sectarianism, both in
up these issues for public debate. There were, however, some issues on which word and deed. He relentlessly pursued
Gandhi was unequivocal and these come his opponents on these questions at every
Gandhi, in this sense, was like a myth.
Through him worrisome issues were
through in the pages of the Constitution. opportunity with every weapon in his

iJj^^^JE^^
WHISTLING IN THE DARK GAY BOMBAY
Twenty-one Queer Interviews Globalization, Love and (Be)longing
Edited by R RAJ RAO in Contemporary India
and DIBYAJYOTI SARMA PARMESH SHAHANI

Whistling in the Dark is a set of interviews which
focus on issues like sexuality, sexual identity, marriage,
gay marriage, heteronormativity, gay Utopia, gay
activism, gay bashing, police atrocities and the laws
vis-à-vis these. The interviewees represent a cross
section of society ranging from university professors,
gay rights activists and students, on the one hand, to
working class men such as -office boys, auto-rickshaw
drivers and even undertrials who have served prison
sentences, on the other.
The thought-provoking narratives in this book are
the outcome of probing and incisive questions put to
the respondents by the editors. Appealing to a wide
readership, the narratives go beyond the conventional
and provide a rare insight into the private lives of
the respondents. Besides being a must read for gay
activists and organisations, it will also be a useful
resource for post-graduate students and academics
working in the fields of sexuality studies, feminism and
alternative literature.
Gay Bombay comes highly recommended for anyone
who is interested in how globalisation works, in India today,
and Shahani's pioneering study provides a muhi faceted
and illuminating introduction to brand new scene.
BusinesswoHd
books like Gay Bombay challenge the homophobe to
come out of the closet and deal with denial. It is certainly a
welcome and weighty addition to the rational voices within
the Indian gender discourse.
The New Indian Express
Well researched and written in a frank and conversational
style, the book manages to bridge the gap between being
heavily academic and serious and being frivolous and
mushy. The book also represents a coming-to-terms with
the self, for its author who is a gay.
Livemint.com
[This book is] a valuable, intelligent and well-written
chronicle of gay Indian life.
Marie Claire

2009 / 300 pages / Rs 375 (paper) 2008 / 360 pages / Rs 395 (paper)

Los Angeles ■ London ■ New Delhi ■ Singapore ■ Washington DC

32 march 7. 2009 vol xliv no io DB3 Economic & Political weekly

This content downloaded from 117.240.50.232 on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 14:27:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 -^'z:?^^- TËhrE^

non-violent armamentarium. If we have

be its major weapon in the crusade, but itthe Mahatma's democratic and liberal
unbending laws today regarding castebred in us the idea of self-reliance, andcontribution to our nation state.
atrocities and minority rights, we must re- with it a certain pride in being economi-
member it was Gandhi that compelled uscally sovereign. If today we have the notes

to do so. If untouchability is outlawed to-human and physical resources to be an i It is

give r
day in the Constitution, then it is primarilyeconomic power, it is because the spirit of some
because of Gandhi. Imagine the world'sswadeshi led us to develop the infrastruc- occas
Theor
most stratified society legally abolishingture necessary for this purpose. When betw
Gandhi campaigned for swadeshi he faced
caste based discrimination by a stroke of stand
witho
the constitutional pen. It is not just a ques-many barbs and slights. He was dubbed as 340).
tion of reservations for Scheduled Castes,a village anarchist, as a backward revan- and a
enou
but our entire public attitude regardingchist, but he held course. Today we realise accus
traditionalist bias.
inter-caste relations is now grounded in law.how indebted we ought to be to him as it
2 I am explicitly following Levi-Strauss1 understand-
No other leader before him fought castewas swadeshi that gave us the springboard ing of myths against Habermas* views on the sub-
ject (see Habermas 1987b: 159). Habermas views
and religious discrimination with as muchto participate in the global market of the
myths derogatorily and does not appear to have a
cogency and consistency. For example, 21st century. good word for them in the sphere of communica-
tive rationality. He also seems to link myths with
when it came to untouchability he will- But Gandhi's biggest gift to the nation is tribal societies. At any rate, myths are a problem as
ingly performed the lowest of tasks him-the spirit of liberal democracy which is the they "blur the categorical distinctions between the
objective, social and subjective worlds, and how
self; likewise when it came to interfaithlife and soul of our Constitution. Pages are they do not even draw a clear line between inter-
violence, he staked his personal safety anddevoted to the various tiers of elected pretations and the interpreted reality. Internal
relations among meanings are fused with external
marched straight into the line of fire. This representatives, to the powers of different relations among things" (ibid).
put Hindu activists on the defensive evenwings of the government, and to the mo-
in the fervid post-Partition days. Remem-dalities of holding free and fair elections. REFERENCES^

ber Nehru and the Congress won election We rarely acknowledge how ahimsa and Bondurant, J
raha: The Lim
after election in the first two decades aftersatyagraha are the bedrock of our demo- achandran a
independence. Gandhi did not relent evencracy, any democracy. The fact that Gandhi Relevance f
Vidya Bhava
in death. Incensed by Gandhi's assas- used thoroughly Indian terms does not Bose, N K (1
diminish their universal relevance for the
sination, Nehru compelled the Rashtriya Orient Long
Gandhi, M K
Swayamsevak Sangh to change itstheory and practice of liberal democracy. Sailesh Kum
constitution and accept that India was a So if we must remember Gandhi let us Navjivan Pu
- (1967): Coll
multi-religious society. Hindu sectariansnot devote ourselves to empty gestures Division), Mi
acquiesced because they lacked the heartlike prayer meetings or spinning the ing, Governm
- (1971): Sel
to take on Gandhi's ghost. charkha for a few mandatory minutes. To Ronald Dunc
Decentralised governance and the sig-limit Gandhi's legacy to these emblematic - (1973) The
ma Gandhi (D
nificance of panchayati raj surfaced onceacts does grave injustice to the one person
- (1991): The
again in our Constitution with the 73rdwho staked his all to fast forward our (éd.), Ragha
Press).
Amendment. Where did that all begin butbackward country towards a modern lib-
uould Harold (2000J: in bearcn or Manatma uanani
eral democracy. That is why, in the fitness
in Gandhi's strong belief that without local Today: 51 Years after His Death", New India Digest,
September-October.
self-government at the village level rural of things, Gandhi's ahimsa should be re-
Habermas, Jurgen (1987a): The Theory of Communica-
interests and aspirations would go un-membered as a high order democratic tive Action, Vol 1, Reason and Rationalisation in
heeded. The Constitution ensures that theconviction and not as a purely religious/ Society (Boston: Beacon Press).
- (1987b): The Theory of Communicative Action:
gram panchayat is directly elected so thatmoral affair. Sadly we are eroding some Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist
Reason (Boston: Beacon Press).
the village oligarch can be outnumbered.of his most outstanding contributions and
Hardiman, David (2003): Gandhi in His Time and Ours
Since the Constitution first enshrined adhering instead to purely ceremonial (New Delhi: Permanent Black).

panchayati raj this provision has under-acts of memory. But after that little rou- Heredia, Rudolf C (2007): Changing Gods: Rethinking
Conversion in India (New Delhi: Penguin Books).
gone several modifications, but none of tine is done, money is brandished in the Le vi- Strauss, Claude (1966): The Savage Mind
them dare take away the basic kernel ofLok Sabha, Members of Parliament shout (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Marshall, T H (1963): Sociology at the Crossroads and
popular elections at the lowest level ofdown their opponents, elected representa- Other Essays (London: Heinemann).
self-governance. Likewise, Gandhi's espo-tives openly espouse sectarian positions, Parel, Anthony J (2007): Gandhi's Philosophy and the
Quest for Harmony (Cambridge: Cambridge
usal of working class rights also contri-and all of this without a sense of shame of University Press).
buted to the establishment of Article 43Awhat we are doing to Gandhi's true legacy. Russell, Bertrand (1958): Unpopular Essays (London:
George Allen and Unwin).
of the Directive Principles that advocatesToday even Rajnath Singh and Narendra
Rawls, John (1971): Theory of Justice (Cambridge,
the participation of workers in factoryModi quote Gandhi selectively to suit their Massachusetts: Harvard University Press).

management. sectarian interests. Gandhi surely does Sen, N B ed. (1995): Wit and Wisdom of Mahatma
Gandhi (New Delhi: New Book Society).
Swadeshi may not have been a practical not deserve this. It is for this reason that Terchek, Ronald J (2000): Gandhi: Struggling for
we must remember, before anything else,
solution, especially if the charkha was to Autonomy (New Delhi: Vistaar).

Economic & Political weekly 023 march 7, 2009 vol xliv no 10 33

This content downloaded from 117.240.50.232 on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 14:27:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms