• Gandhi’s social and political thoughts in Harijan are rooted philosophically in his earlier work, especially Hind Swaraj, which remained the primary reference point.

• Harijan’s ideas differ in three key ways:

  1. Hind Swaraj was based on Gandhi’s limited experience with satyagraha in South Africa, while Harijan was shaped by the vast nationalist struggle he led with the Congress.

  2. Gandhian ideas in Harijan were dialectically constituted through dialogue with contemporaries who held contrasting views, adapting political strategies to accommodate others in the nationalist movement.

  3. Gandhi’s writings in Harijan explain his actions as a series of experiments and a specific way of life, often unplanned and evolving through feedback and dialogue.

• Gandhi maintained faith in non-violence despite differences with leaders like Tagore, M.N. Roy, and Ambedkar, and did not dismiss their alternative views.

• The 1932 Poona Pact exemplifies Gandhi’s belief in a national democratic ideology bridging social and economic contradictions.

• Gandhi successfully incorporated working-class grievances within the nationalist framework, prioritizing freedom from colonialism over other socio-economic issues.

• Gandhi was not only a political activist but also a theoretician who evolved his actions based on a deep understanding of India’s unique social, economic, and political context.

• The excerpts selected from Harijan highlight distinctive features of Gandhi’s social and political thoughts, primarily post the Civil Disobedience Movement (1931–32), yet rooted ideologically in Hind Swaraj.

• Gandhi continuously interpreted and reinterpreted his ideas in response to critiques and circumstances, without compromising on non-violence.

• Harijan is filled with Gandhi’s articles defending non-violence as the most effective means for satyagraha against oppression.

• Gandhi addressed both civil disobedience against colonial rule and deep-seated social and cultural exploitation based on religion and caste.

• Although some of Gandhi’s social arguments were critiqued by figures like Tagore and Ambedkar, his concern for previously neglected issues was unique.

• Gandhian ideology in Harijan combines dialectically linked socio-political and economic issues.

• Gandhi’s emphasis on khadi and charkha symbolized not just economic regeneration but also a political ideology based on indigenous production systems.

• He critiqued the machine civilization of the West as unsuitable for eradicating poverty in India.

• By rooting his economic thought in traditional khadi and charkha, Gandhi offered a moral justification and a realistic defense of self-sufficient village republics.

• Gandhi’s constructive programmes combined economic strategies to combat poverty with efforts to strengthen social harmony by creatively redefining caste and varnashrama.

• His nayee talim (alternative education) aimed at all-round development (body, mind, spirit), distancing itself from both spiritually oriented Hindu education and colonial English education.

• The selected Harijan excerpts are thematically structured, chosen for their authentic reflection of Gandhi’s social and political thought.

• Harijan serves as Gandhi’s contextualized response to contemporary social, economic, and political issues, making it a unique literary commentary on Indian nationalism.

• Unlike European modular forms, Harijan blends social and political concerns, becoming an authentic text of Gandhi’s thought during the massive nationalist struggle of the twentieth century.

Gandhi’s Writings in Harijan

Satyagraha

What is Satyagraha?

• Satyagraha is a universal principle, with civil disobedience being just one of its many applications.

• Satyagraha continues regardless of whether the opponent is in difficulty or not, as it is meant to be a service to the opponent when offered in the proper spirit.

• It is essential not to embarrass an opponent who is in difficulty or exploit their difficulty as an opportunity.

• Civil disobedience can only be applied under certain conditions and circumstances and may not be applied against an opponent in difficulty.

• Civil disobedience is not the law of life; satyagraha is.

• Satyagraha never ceases, while civil disobedience can and should cease when there is no occasion for it.

• There are two kinds of civil disobedience: aggressive and defensive.

• Defensive civil disobedience becomes a duty when insult or humiliation is imposed by the opponent, and must be done regardless of the opponent’s difficulty.

• An opponent in difficulty cannot expect obedience to unjust or humiliating laws or orders.

• Aggressive civil disobedience embarrasses the opponent, whether intentionally or not.

• Examples like traveling without a ticket (assuming it is civil disobedience) would be taboo, as it serves only to embarrass the opponent.

• Actions that are morally necessary and beneficial and conducive to swaraj are never taboo, even if they embarrass the opponent.

• Doing what is morally necessary is a duty, distinct from actions meant merely to vex or embarrass an opponent in difficulty.

• Exploiting an opponent’s difficulty as one’s opportunity is never justifiable.

Non-violence

• Non-violence is the law of the human race and is infinitely greater and superior to brute force.

• It requires a living faith in the God of Love to be effective in the last resort.

• Non-violence fully protects self-respect and sense of honour, but does not always protect land or movable property.

• Habitual practice of non-violence is a better bulwark than armed defense for possessions.

• Non-violence cannot defend ill-gotten gains or immoral acts.

• Those practicing non-violence must be willing to sacrifice everything except honour, even nations to the last man.

• Non-violence is inconsistent with imperialism, which relies on force to maintain control over other countries.

• It is a power wielded equally by all—children, men, and women—provided they have faith in the God of Love and equal love for all mankind.

• When accepted as the law of life, non-violence must pervade the whole being, not just be applied to isolated acts.

• It is an error to think non-violence is suitable for individuals but not for the masses.

• Non-violence cannot be taught to those who fear death and lack power of resistance.

• A helpless mouse fleeing danger is not non-violent by choice but by nature; similarly, a man who flees danger like a mouse is a coward.

• A coward harbours violence and hatred and would kill if possible without harm to himself—such a person is a stranger to non-violence.

• Before understanding non-violence, one must be taught to stand ground and even suffer death to defend against an aggressor.

• Allowing a coward to misuse non-violence as a shield is wrong and confirms cowardice.

• Many wrongly believe running away from danger is a virtue compared to offering resistance, but this is an unmanly belief.

• A teacher of non-violence must guard against this false notion.

• Non-violence is the greatest force available to mankind, mightier than any weapon of destruction.

• Destruction is not human law; man lives freely by being ready to die, not kill his brother.

• Every act of murder or injury against another is a crime against humanity, regardless of cause.