Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Heredia-InterpretingGandhisHind-1999
Heredia-InterpretingGandhisHind-1999
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
text within it's own horizon of meaning always be a people enslaved by one power More recently a post-modern w
and then interrogate it from within or ouranother, whether foreign or native. emphasised the aggressive and de
own contemporary. For Gandhi's text Certainly,
is Gandhi would not want to march of this 'age of reason'. H
"a proclamation of ideological indepen- exchange an external colonialism forGandhian would test his faith with h
dence" [Dalton 1993:16] he never com- internal one, a white sahib for a brown but he would not allow his reason t
promised, his "confession of the faith" one, orcompensate the loss of 'Hindustan'his faith. What makes such tech
[Nanda 1974:661 he never abandoned, "a 'Englistan' (HS, Ch 4).
with rationalism even more destructive in
rather incendiary manifesto" [Erikson British India colonialism was first Gandhi's view, is its flawed materialism.
1969:217] to enkindle his revolution. No
justified by a supposedly Christianising
That is, the negation of the spiritual, the
wonder it was banned by the colonial transcendent, or in other words, the denial
mission, but very soon this was articulated
government in 1910 lor fear of sedition. of a religious worldview.
in terms of a civilising one. In rejecting
this modern civilisation, Gandhi is For Gandhi truth, was much more than
I
subverting the legitimacy of the colonial
could be grasped by science or reason. For
Gandhi's Critique of the Modern
enterprise at its core. For there could him
be there was a reality beyond that
West
perceived by the senses. It is this trans-
no colonialism without acivilising mission
For Gandhi civilisation was by definition[Nandy 1983:11] since it could hardlycendent
be reality that gave meaning and
a moral enterprise: "Civilisation is that sustained in India by brute force. value to our present one. In this Gandhi
mode of conduct which points out to man Industrial capitalisim: Gandhi sees is very much in the mainstream of Hindu
the path of duty" (HS, Ch 13). Hence itcapitalism as the dynamic behind colonial tradition. Indeed, most religious traditions
is the very basic ethos of this modern westimperialism. Lenin too had said as much, would be similarly sensitive to such a
that Gandhi sets himself against. For heand like Marx, Gandhi's rejection transcendentof world, even when it is not
finds two unacceptable and unethicalcapitalism is based on a profound repug- perceived as wholly other-worldly. In a
principles at its very core: 'might is right' nance to a system where profit is allowed
more secular world today we may not be
and the 'survival of thle fittest'. The first to degrade labour, where the machines sympathetic
are to such a worldview. And yet
legitimated the politics of power as valued more than humans, where auto-a materialism that is deterministic leaves
expounded earlier by Machiaveli; the mation is preferred to humanism. no scope for human freedom and hope.
second idealised the economics of self- It was this that moved Gandhi to his Gandhi emphasises this reaching out to a
interest as proposed by Adam Smith.somewhat In hyperbolic claim: "Machinery
beyond, that gives this freedom and hope
the west "with rare exceptions, alternatives
is the chief symbol of modern civilisation;
its dynamism and a reach beyond its grasp.
it represents a great sin" (HS, Ch 19).
to western civilisation are always sought
II
within its own basic thought system" [Saran
However, by 1919 his views on machinery
1980:681]. do begin to change right up to 1947, as
Relevance of Gandhi's Critique
The three recurrent themes in Hind he gradually comes to concede some
Today
Swaraj which we will discuss here positiveare: aspects like time and laboursaving,Gandhi's critique of modem civilisation
colonial imperialism, industrial capitalism,
even as he warns against the negative onesdoes overlook many of its strengths: its
and rationalist materialism. of concentrating wealth and displacing scientific and critical spirit of inquiry: its
Colonial imperialism: Gandhi cate- workers [Parel 1997:164-70]. He was human control over the natural world; its
gorically insisted that "the English have acutely sensitive to how machinery can organisational capacity. Such achievement
not taken India; we have given it to them. dehumanise and technology alienate, and would imply acertain 'spiritual dimension'
They are not in India because of their he extends his critique to the professions that Gandhi seems to have missed [Parekh
strength: but because we keep them" of medicine and law (HS, Chs 11, 12). 1997:35]. However, the focus of his criti-
(HS, Ch 7). He was one of the earliest to The poor hardly benefit from these cism is modern civilisation of a specific
realise that colonialisim was something to professional services, though they are often period; his condemnation of colonialism
is that the caste divide has only deepenedagreements between Gandhi and Nehru. Glohalisation: Globalisation and the
with increasing conflict and indeed the But in the exchange of letters in 1945 alienating homogeneity that it must
[Parel 1997:149-56], it is quite clear that inevitably promote, is the very opposite
same can be said about the religious divide
and religious conflict in this country. the axis of their reconciliation was pre- of the localism and the celebration of
Yet for Gandhi the unity of humankindcisely around this quest for equality. Their diversity that Gandhi' s swadeshi was meant
was premised on the oneness of the cosmos,paths may have been different but Nehru' s to encourage. However, Gandhi' s pri nciple
which was a philosophical principle thatsocialism and Gandhi's swaraj were of swadeshi, "simply means that the most
was ontologically prior to diversity. Onceboth oriented to this quest for equity and effective organisation of social, economic
the legitimacy of religious diversity isequality across all the divides, of caste, and political functions must follow the
class, region, etc.
rooted in the fundamental Jaina principle natural contours of the neighbourhood,"
of 'anekantavada', the many sidedness of Gandhi was quite radical in urging thus affirming "the primacy of the
equality, even more so than the com- immediate community" [Roy 1985:114].
truth, then religious tolerance is a necessary
consequence - not a negative tolerance ofmunists. He would have equal wages and Gandhi's "goodness politics" as it has
distance and coexistence. but rather one bread labour for all. In his 'Constructive
been called [Saran 1980:691], could only
of communication and enrichment Programme' (CW, 75:146-66). Gandhi's really operate on such a scale. For "Gandhi
[Heredia 1997]. concept of equality is not grounded in decentralisation means the creation of
In cultural matters, Gandhi wanted all parallel politics in which the people's
impersonal and competitive individualism,
cultures to be enricled by each other as it seems to be in the west, but in co-power is institutionalised to counter the
without losing their identity. But such operative and compassionate non-violence,
centralising and alienating forces of the
modern state... Thus the Gandhian
cultural assimilation. was opposed by on 'fraternity' not just 'liberty'. In the
political revivalists and religious beginning, he saw no contradiction betweendecentralised polity has a built-in proce
nationalists. Yet for Gandhi open and such fraternal equality and the idealised of the withering away of the state" [Set
understanding dialogue must precede, not hierarchy of varna. But in his later years 1986:229].
follow, a free and adaptive assimilation. he reversed himself to urge that "classless But before this is dismissed as too naive
Thus, an enriched diversity would then society is the ideal, not merely to be ator impractical for our sophisticated an
contribute to a more invigourated pluralism aimed at but to be worked for" (Harijan, complicated world, we might pause t
and an enhanced unity. This was precisely February 17, 1946. p 9). By now he was think of the kind of politics our centralise
Gandhi's understanding of Indian culture promoting inter-caste marriages and states have in fact spawned. The very
and civilisation, and hie had, indeed, hoping "there would be only one caste hegemonic homogeneity it promotes