Page:Gregg - Gandhiism versus socialism.pdf/18

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

the violent attackers. Gandhi believes that real popular political power does not consist of control over the legislatures but lies in the ability of the masses to say no and to stick to it resolutely with disciplined nonviolent mass resistance. Leaders initiate measures; the people can say only yes or no. The substance of popular political power is the ability to use disciplined, continuous mass Satyagraha. Satyagraha will enable the people to control not only political governments but also industrialists and financiers. It is more powerful and creative than the strike. It compels industrialists and financiers to realize that domineering methods and control by money symbols will no longer work. It will bring about a fundamental change of inner attitude by psychological influences which are too complex to be discussed here.[1]

Some conservatives may say that Satyagraha is sedition. But modern Great Britain grew from the sedition of Oliver Cromwell. The United States grew from the sedition of George Washington. Probably every modern State is the result of sedition. When sedition is successful, it is considered heroism. Sedition is wicked only if unsuccessful. Nonviolent sedition has none of the moral stigma applicable to violent sedition. Sedition and violence are different. Therefore the use of the word sedition as a term of general moral reproach is simply evidence of lack of discrimination and of prejudice and anger.

Some may say that Satyagraha means anarchy. Anarchy means lack of any government or control. But Satyagraha requires, and in practice secures, very great self-control, steadiness, discipline, order and cooperation from its users. These qualities do not spell anarchy. They may spell new and different principles, new and different

  1. They have been discussed in my Gandhiji’s Satyagraha, published by Ganesan, Madras, 1930.