716 NON-CO-OPERATION
writer, His letter is typical of the attitude I saw re- flected in Delhi. I have already given the assurance that Pundit Malaviyaji had nothing to do with the Bardoli decision. Nor have any * far-fetched notions of non-violence ' anything to do with it, The correspond- ent's letter is the best justification for it To me the Bardoii decision is the logical outcome of the national pledge of limited non-violence. I entirely endorse the opinion that Swaraj is the nation's goal, not non-violence. It is true that my goal is as much Swaraj as non- violence, because I hold Swaraj for the masses to be unattainable save through non-violence. But have I not repeatedly said in these columns that I would have India become free even by violence rather than that she should remain in bondage ? In slavery she is a helpless partner in the violence of the slave-holder. It is however true that I could not take pan in a violent attempt at deliverance if only because I do not believe in the possibility of success by violence. I cannot pull the trigger against my worst enemy. If I succeed in convincing the world of the supremacy of the law of nou-violence and the futility of violence for the progress of mankind, the correspondent will find that India will have automatically gained her end. But I freely confess my utter inability to do so without first convincing India that she can be free only by non-violent and truthful means and no other.
I must further confess that what Mr. Montagu or Lord Reading would think of the decision did not concern me and therefore their threats do not perturb or affect me. Nor should they affect any non-co-operator. He burnt his boasts when he embarked upon his mission. But this I know that if
�� �
