Introduction

• Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869–1948), known as Mahatma Gandhi, remains a subject of global interest decades after his death.

• Richard Attenborough’s film Gandhi popularized him worldwide, but Gandhi’s own writings remain crucial for understanding his ideology.

• Gandhi’s writings are clear, simple, and meaningful, especially in the context of leading the largest nationalist struggle of the 20th century.

• He wrote extensively in Young India and Harijan, addressing contemporary issues relevant to ordinary Indians during early and mid-20th century.

• Gandhi used metaphors and homilies to teach Indians about their abilities and strong traditions, involving them in non-violent struggles against British imperialism, untouchability, and communal discord.

• The language simplicity of Gandhi’s ideas allows diverse interpretations, especially his critique of modernity and modernization in Hind Swaraj.

• Gandhi is often misunderstood as advocating a simple agrarian society only, but this interpretation misses the nuanced context of colonial India’s capitalist development.

• His insistence on rural economy and uncomplicated life served as idealized alternatives to dominant colonial principles and aimed to protect Indian autonomy.

• Gandhi’s opposition was rooted in a colonial context where indigenous ideas were often suppressed by politically dominant Western ideas.

• His genius lay in linking traditional Indian society with the modern political independence movement.

• Gandhi’s charisma had a cultural referent; his leadership depended more on his reputation and the ideal he embodied than oratory or theatrics.

• He represented “saintly politics” — pursuing virtue, self-control, truth, and non-violence — resonating with indigenous cultural traditions and appealing to the masses.

• Despite his unassuming physical appearance (white dhoti, spinning wheel, barefoot), Gandhi commanded great respect and popularity among Indians.

• Gandhi established a profound rapport with Indians through symbolism that often eluded the British rulers.

• He was seen as a renouncer or sanyasi, contrasting sharply with the Anglicized politicians leading earlier anti-British efforts.

• His lifestyle endeared him to the masses, though many elite Congress leaders, influenced by European culture, neither understood nor liked him.

• Gandhi’s leadership from 1920 radically changed the Congress’s social composition, incorporating politically peripheral groups and a non-metropolitan middle class.

• This new middle class was closer to rural India and helped draw peasants into the nationalist struggle.

• Judith Brown argued Gandhi’s rise marked the replacement of Western-educated metropolitan leaders by regional elites from backward areas.

• These local leaders (“sub-contractors”) expanded Gandhi’s nationalist constituency.

• However, this view underestimates Gandhi’s direct mass appeal to the peasantry beyond elite ranks.

• Gandhi became part of the masses through his simple attire, use of colloquial Hindi, and references to popular allegories like Ramrajya.

• The masses often interpreted Gandhi with supernatural powers, viewing him as a healer and symbol of power for the weak and underprivileged.

• On several occasions, the masses deviated from Gandhi’s ideals of non-violence but still believed they were following him towards a utopian Gandhi raj.

• Gandhi’s entry into Indian politics radically restructured it by enlarging the nationalist base beyond the presidency towns.

• He introduced new political articulation styles and incorporated previously peripheral actors into the anti-British struggle.

• Gandhi symbolized radical change both in nationalist politics and its expanded constituencies, moving beyond the Western-educated metropolitan elites.

• He was a man of both thought and action, a rare combination.

• As a man of thought, he was highly critical of modernity and proposed an alternative vision blending the best of pre-modern and modern worldviews, avoiding the naïve individualism and moral vacuum of post-modernism.

• He developed satyagraha, a moral method of political change and a non-violent alternative to violence by ruling authorities.

• Indian nationalism had previously tried loyal constitutionalism and terrorist violence, both found wanting; Gandhi’s answer was satyagraha (truth force) through non-violent direct action outside constitutional frameworks.

• He identified structural violence and violence of the status quo, seeing poverty as violence caused by exploitation of humans by humans.

• Doing nothing to alleviate suffering, when one can, is itself a violent act.

• As a man of action, he led a massive nationalist struggle based on moral acceptability and demonstrated building a strong political platform on the moral strength of satyagrahees without compromising integrity.

• Gandhi differed from other nationalists by launching satyagraha in rural areas like Champaran, Kheda, and Ahmedabad instead of presidency towns, expanding the Congress’s influence into villages.

• J.B. Kripalani admitted that educated nationalists were isolated in cities, disconnected from the masses, who they only interacted with as servants.

• At Champaran, peasants protested the tinkathia system forcing indigo cultivation on a portion of their land.

• Pre-Gandhian efforts led by middle-class and rich peasants failed to involve actual cultivators; Gandhi’s intervention was effective in engaging the cultivators.

• The 1917 Champaran satyagraha was the first of its kind, led according to Gandhi’s plan and ideology.

• Gandhi’s presence gave hope to the raiyats (peasants) and his civil disobedience and readiness for imprisonment convinced them he was their saviour.

• His extreme simplicity connected him to peasants more than previous leaders.

• Rajendra Prasad found it mysterious how peasants trusted Gandhi as their deliverer.

• The British sub-divisional officer was surprised by Gandhi’s influence and described him as an idealist, fanatic, or revolutionary, but to peasants, a liberator with extraordinary powers.

• Gandhi symbolized a resurrection of hope to the masses.

• His non-violent resistance was a viable alternative in colonial struggle where force was illegitimate and ineffective.

• The Champaran satyagraha led to the 1918 Champaran Agricultural Act, providing relief to peasants forced into indigo cultivation.

• The movement laid a foundation for non-violent political mobilization though Congress limited protests against indigenous landlords.

• The Champaran movement was not purely a subaltern protest, but included multiple levels of consciousness and created a multi-class political platform uniting antagonistic classes against colonial rule.

• Gandhi managed to contain class conflicts and aligned the struggle against exploiters with the fight against colonialism.

• Gandhian non-violence in Champaran showed an effective method of resistance in a political dispensation where Congress gained influence.

• The Kheda satyagraha (1918) was a no-revenue campaign led by peasants suffering from economic hardship: crop destruction, rising wages, inflation, and bubonic plague.

• It began under local leaders Mohanlal Pandya and Shankarlal Parikh, supported by the Gujarat Sabha under Congress aegis.

• Gandhi arrived in March 1918 to lead the campaign against land revenue collection and property confiscation.

• The campaign lasted four months; government relented in June by waiving confiscation orders for defaulters.

• Gandhi’s presence was symbolic, with local leaders being the main drivers.

• Gandhi supported the local leaders’ agenda, showing his importance was in backing their demands.

• Gandhi urged villagers to join the British army during WWI, but they refused, highlighting local autonomy.

• Gandhi also participated in the Ahmedabad textile mill strike (Feb-Mar 1918) involving workers.

• The strike was triggered by withdrawal of the plague-bonus, a significant wage component paid to prevent workers fleeing during the plague.

• Mill-owners stopped the bonus after the epidemic ended, worsening workers’ economic conditions amid wartime inflation.

• Gandhi believed there was no major contradiction between capital and labour, seeking to resolve the crisis through dialogue with mill-owners.

• Mill-owners were adamant and called Gandhi’s intervention ‘unwarranted’.

• On 22 February 1918, mill-owners locked out the weavers despite Gandhi’s repeated requests.

• Gandhi decided to champion the workers’ demand, asking them to reduce their wage increase demand from 50% to 35%.

• Workers agreed to Gandhi’s suggestion, but mill-owners did not relent; workers began to lose morale.

• Gandhi started the first of his seventeen ‘fasts unto death’ on 15 March 1918, a three-day fast.

• The fast pressured mill-owners, who respected Gandhi, to come to an agreement with the striking workers.

• The arbitration board suggested a 27.5% wage hike, which was less than the workers’ revised demand of 35%.

• The settlement was seen as a face-saving formula and a tactical defeat for Gandhi, but he secured the principle of arbitration including worker representation.

• The Ahmedabad strike was unique in Gandhi’s political life and marked a new chapter in the Indian nationalist movement.

• The Bombay Chronicle appreciated arbitration as a turning point in labour–employer relations and a unique system for resolving industrial disputes.

• The Times criticized Gandhi for ‘blackmailing’ mill-owners with his fast but praised his role in promoting arbitration as an effective device.

• These movements showcased Gandhi as an emerging leader with different mobilizing tactics.

• Common features were that movements were organized around local issues and the importance of local leaders in mobilizing people.

• Gandhi was usually a secondary organizer, invited to lead when local support was already mobilized.

• His intervention gave movements greater heights, and his message broke barriers of fear in confronting powerful enemies.

• In Champaran and Kheda, Gandhi brought the peasantry into nationalist politics but controlled the political objectives, meaning peasants were mobilized but did not participate in planning.

• In the Ahmedabad strike, Gandhi accommodated mill-owners’ interests, partially conceding worker demands based on his belief that capital and labour were not contradictory.

• Gandhi articulated a political mobilization form where workers had a decisive role in nationalism.

• Like the earlier peasant movements, the Ahmedabad strike gave workers legitimate space in nationalist politics.

• These three movements were a milestone in Gandhi’s articulation of nationalist politics.

• Gandhi forged a new language of protest, combining older resistance forms with nonviolent action accepted despite colonial censure of violence.

• Two processes worked: local issues mobilized the masses, and Gandhi’s presence sustained movements losing momentum.

• Gandhi was the missing link galvanizing masses and ensuring successful conclusions involving different nationalist constituencies: peasants and labour.

• These movements set the tone for future movements with large-scale participation responding to Gandhi’s calls.

• Though a secondary organizer, Gandhi had a ‘magic wand’ that activated peripheral groups and sustained momentum despite difficulties.

• He emerged as a mass leader who understood the pulse of the people better than others.

• Gandhi transformed the freedom struggle into a wider nationalist campaign involving people who were earlier detached.

• Jawaharlal Nehru noted Gandhi attracted people despite disagreements with his philosophy because his action was tangible and effective.

• Gandhi’s leadership provided brave, ethical, and effective action after a long tradition of inaction in Indian politics.

• Nehru acknowledged Gandhi’s ability to command devotion and believed he corresponded to the masses’ needs and aspirations.

• Gandhi led three major pan-Indian movements:

  • The Non-Cooperation Movement (1919–21), merged with the Khilafat agitation.

  • The Civil Disobedience Movement, mainly the Salt Satyagraha, manifested differently regionally.

  • The Quit India Movement (1942), the last major campaign, was non-uniform but drew heavily on Gandhi’s ideas.

• These movements had two recurring features: Gandhi as the undisputed charismatic leader, and local participants organizing independently around local grievances.

• In some regions, like rural Bengal during Quit India, Gandhi’s message was interpreted differently; some justified violence in his name.

• Gandhi succeeded in creating mass participation contrasting earlier restricted nationalist movements.