Non-Violent Resistance

by Mahatma K Gandhi

  Young India, 1-5-'30

  156. HOW TO DO THE PICKETING

  1. At least ten women are required for picketing a liquor or foreign cloth shop. They must choose a leader from among themselves.

  2. They should all first go in a deputation to the dealer and appeal to him to desist from carrying on the traffic and present him with leaflets setting forth facts and figures regarding drink or foreign cloth as the case may be. Needless to say the leaflets should be in the language understood by the dealer.

  3. If the dealer refuses to suspend traffic, the volunteers should guard the shop leaving the passage free and make a personal appeal to the would-be purchasers.

  4. The volunteers should carry banners or light boards bearing warnings in bold letters against buying foreign cloth or indulging in intoxicating drinks, as the case may be.

  5. Volunteers should be as far as possible in uniforms.

  6. Volunteers should at frequent intervals sing suitable bhajans bearing on the subject.

  7. Volunteers should prevent compulsion or interference by men.

  8. On no account should vulgarity, abuse, threat or unbecoming language be used.

  9. The appeal must always be to the head and the heart, never to fear of force.

  10. Men should on no account congregate near the place of picketing nor block the traffic. But they should carry on propaganda generally through the area against foreign cloth and drink. They should help and organize processions of women to parade through the area carrying the message of temperance and khadi and the necessity of boycott of drink and foreign cloth.

  11. There should be at the back of these picketing units a network of organizations for spreading the message of the takli and the charkha and thinking out new leaflets and new lines of propaganda.

  12. There should be an absolutely accurate and systematic account of all receipts and expenditure. This should be periodically audited. This again should be done by men under the supervision of women. The whole scheme pre-supposes on the part of men a genuine respect for women and sincere desire for their rise.

  Young India, 24-4-'30

  157. SOME PICKETING RULES

  In picketing foreign cloth or intoxicating drinks and drugs, let it be remembered, that the aim is to convert the addict or the buyer. Our object is moral and economic reform. The political consequence is but a by-product. If Lancashire ceased to send us its cloth and the Government ceased to use the abkari revenue for any purpose save that of weaning the drunkard or opium-eater from his vice, we should still be engaged in picketing work and allied propaganda. The following rules, therefore, must be read in that light:

  1. In picketing shops your attention must be rivet-ted on the buyer.

  2. You should never be rude to the buyer or the seller.

  3. You may not attract crowds or form cordons.

  4. Yours must be a silent effort.

  5. You must seek to win over the buyer or the seller by your gentleness, not by the awe of numbers.

  6. You may not obstruct traffic.

  7. You may not cry hai hai or use other expressions of shame.

  8. You should know every buyer and his address and occupation and penetrate his or her home and heart. This presupposes continuity of same picketers.

  9. You should try to understand the difficulties of buyers and sellers, and where you cannot remove them you should report them to your superiors.

  10. If you are picketing foreign cloth, you should have some khadi or at least a sample book with prices and should know the nearest khadi shop to which you could take the buyer. If the buyer does not wish to buy khadi and insists on mill cloth, you should direct the buyer to an indigenous mill-cloth seller.

  11. You should have relevant literature upon your person for distribution among the buyers.

  12. You should join or organize processions, lectures with or without magic lantern, bhajan parties etc.

  13. You should keep an accurate diary of your day's work.

  14. If you find your effort failing do not be disheartened but rely upon the universal law of cause and effect and be assured that no good thought, word or deed goes fruitless. To think well, to speak well is ours, reward is in the hands of God.

  Young India, 19-3-'31

  158. A STERN REPROOF

  [To certain foreign-cloth dealers who presented Gandhiji with a purse and an address in Navasari Gandhiji administered the following reproof:]

  This function appears to me to be to a great extent out of place and uncalled for. The association of merchants, dealers as they are in foreign cloth, ought not to have thought of presenting the address to me or the Sardar. The presentation, if it must be made, ought to be accompanied by a pledge that they would never in future have anything to do with foreign cloth and also the intimation that they have either burnt their present stock or sealed it. How can we, whose daily prayer is for the entire extinction of this trade, accept an address and a purse from dealers in it? I would, therefore, plead with the friends to take back their purse and their address. The address affords no information about the association and reads as though it was a citizens' address. That smacks somewhat of a bogus translation, as I said to the Sardar. Satyagraha eschews all make-believe. I have no relish for the title of the Mahatma given me by the people, if only because I am unworthy of it but I have given myself a title of which I am proud. I call myself a Satyagrahi, and so I must live up to it. I cannot but utter the bitter truth, whenever there is an occasion for it. The acceptance of the purse and the address would be a bitter dose for me, as its presentation should be for you too. But, if I cannot convince you, I must ask you to take both of them back. I have had occasions in my life when I have practised Satyagraha against my brother and my wife, and today's occasion can be no exception. I would have to return the address and the purse, as I would return a title from a government with which I non-co-operate or a gift from a liquor seller. I want you to understand that I would compromise myself to the cause if I agreed to accept your address. I would, however, spare you a sudden shock, hold the address and the purse in trust for you. You can ponder over what I have said and decide whether you will present them on my terms or take them back because you will not give up foreign-cloth trade.

  Young India, 19-3-'31

  159. PICKETING

  My critics are shocked over my recent remarks on picketing. They think that in describing as a species of violence the formation of a living wall of pickets in order to prevent the entry of persons into picketed places, I have contradicted my sayings and doings during the civil disobedience campaign. If such is really the case, my recent writing must be held as cancelling my comparatively remote sayings and doings. Though my body is deteriorating through age, no such law of deterioration, I hope, operates against wisdom which I trust is not only not deteriorating but even growing. Whether it is or not, my mind is clear on the opinion I have given on picketing. If it does not appeal to Congressmen, they may reject it, and if they do, they will violate the laws of peaceful picketing. But there is no discrepancy between my past practice and the present statement. When civil disobedience was first organized by me in South Africa, my companions discussed with me the question of picketing. The registration office had to be picketed in Johannesburg, and the suggestion made was that we should form there a living wall of pickets. I at once rejected the idea as violent. And pickets were posted in marked positions in a big public square so that no one could elude the eagle eyes of the pickets and yet every one could go to the registration office, if he liked, without touching any one. Reliance was put upon the force of public opprobrium which would be evoked by the publication of the names of the 'blacklegs'. This method was copied by me here when liquor shops were to be picketed. The work was specially entrusted to the women as better representatives of non-violence than men. Thus there was no question of the formation of a living wall. Many unauthorized things were no doubt done during those days as they are now. But I cannot recall a single instance in which I co
untenanced the kind of picketing condemned by the article that has come in for sharp criticism. And is there really any difficulty about regarding a living wall of pickets as naked violence? What is the difference between force used against a man wanting to do a particular thing, and force exercised by interposing yourself between him and the deed? When, during the non-co-operation days, the students in Banaras blocked the passage to the University gates I had to send a peremptory message and, if my recollection serves me right, I strongly condemned their action in the columns of Young India. Of course, I have no argument against those who hold different views from mine regarding violence and non-violence.

  Harijan, 27-8-'38

  160. WHEN IS PICKETING PEACEFUL?

  A correspondent writes:

  "I find that here in Bombay this weapon of 'peaceful picketing' is being misused on the ground that peaceful picketing, with whatsoever just or unjust object it may be resorted to, is no offence. The aggrieved party against whom such picketing is aimed at. fails to get any protection either from the police or law. For instance, A happens to be a shop-keeper. B an employee of A, having no legal claim against A, threatens A with picketing his shop in case A does not accede to B's demands and actually, with the help of C and D posing as 'leaders', starts picketing A's shop and misleads A's customers, with a view to dissuading them from patronizing A's shop. Would such picketing, even though there be no actual physical force used, be termed 'peaceful'?"

  I cannot speak about the legality of such picketing, but I can say that such picketing cannot be called peaceful, i.e. non-violent. All picketing without indubitably just cause is violent even though no physical force is used. Picketing without such cause becomes a nuisance and interferes with the exercise of private right. Generally no picketing should be resorted to by individuals unless it is promoted by a responsible organization. Picketing like civil disobedience has its well-defined limits without a strict observance of which it becomes illegitimate and reprehensible.

  Harijan, 2-12-'39

  161. PICKETING AND LOVE

  A writer in the public Press indignantly asks: "How can I reconcile picketing with my doctrine of love? Is not picketing a form of violence or undue pressure?" It can be that certainly. It has been that in several cases, I am sorry to say. But it has been also an act of love, I know. Several sisters and young lads have gone on picketing purely out of love. Nobody has accused me of hatred against Marwadis. Nobody can possibly accuse Sheth Jamnalalji of hatred against his own caste-men and fellow merchants. And yet both he and I are countenancing picketing of Marwadi foreign-cloth shops. When a daughter stands guard over her erring father, she does it purely out of love. The fact is, that there are certain acts that are common to all classes of men. And when they are not in themselves objectionable, the motive alone decides their quality.

  Young India, 22-9-'21

  162. STUDENTS' NOBLE SATYAGRAHA

  In referring to the universality of Satyagraha I have time and again observed in these columns that it is capable of application in the social no less than in the political field. It may equally be employed against Government, society, or one's own family, father, mother, husband or wife, as the case may be. For it is the beauty of this spiritual weapon that when it is completely free from the taint of himsa and its use is actuated purely and solely by love it may be used with absolute impunity, in any connection and in any circumstance whatever. A concrete instance of its use against a social evil was furnished by the brave and spirited students of Dharmaj (in Kheda District) a few days back. The facts as gleaned from the various communications about the incident received by me were as follows:

  A gentleman of Dharmaj, some days back, gave a caste dinner in connection with the twelfth-day ceremony of the death of his mother. It was preceded by a keen controversy about the subject among the young men of the place who shared with a number of other local inhabitants their strong dislike of this custom. They felt that on this occasion something must be done. Accordingly, most of them took all or some of the following three vows:

  1. Not to join their elders at the dinner or otherwise partake of the food served on that occasion.

  2. To fast on the day of the dinner as an emphatic protest against this practice.

  3. To bear patiently and cheerfully any harsh treatment that might be accorded to them by their elders for taking this step.

  In pursuance of this decision quite a large number of students, including some children of tender age, fasted on the day on which the dinner was given and took upon themselves the wrath of their so-called elders. Nor was the step free from the dangers of serious pecuniary consequences to the students. The 'elders' threatened to stop the allowances of their boys and even to withdraw any financial aid that they were giving to local institutions, but the boys stood firm. As many as two hundred and eighty-five students thus refused to take part in the caste dinner and most of them fasted.

  I tender my congratulations to these boys and hope that everywhere students will take a prominent part in effecting social reform. They hold in their pocket, as it were, the key to social reform and the protection of their religion just as they have in their possession the key to Swaraj—though they may not be aware of it owing to their negligence or carelessness. But I hope that the example set by the students of Dharmaj will awaken them to a sense of their power. In my opinion, the true shraddha of the deceased lady was performed by these young men fasting on that day, while those who gave the dinner wasted good money and set a bad example to the poor. The rich, moneyed class ought to use their God-given wealth for philanthropic purposes. They should understand that the poor cannot afford to give caste dinners on wedding or on funeral ceremonies. These bad practices have proved to be the ruin of many a poor man. If the money that was spent in Dharmaj on the caste dinner had been used for helping poor students, or poor widows, or for khadi, or cow-protection, or the amelioration of the 'untouchables', it would have borne fruit and brought peace to the departed soul. But as it is, the dinner has already been forgotten. It has profited nobody and it has caused pain to the students and the sensible section of the Dharmaj public.

  Let no one imagine that the Satyagraha has gone in vain because it did not succeed in preventing the dinner in question from taking place. The students themselves knew that there was little possibility of their Satyagraha producing any immediate tangible result. But we may safely take it that if they do not let their vigilance go to sleep no shethia will again dare to give a post-mortem dinner. A chronic and long-standing social evil cannot be swept away at a stroke; it always requires patience and perseverence.

  When will the 'elders' of our society learn to recognize the signs of the times? How long will they be slaves to custom instead of using it as a means for the amelioration of society and the country? How long will they keep their children divorced from a practical application of the knowledge which they are helping them to acquire? When will they rescue their sense of right and wrong from its present state of trance and wake up and be mahajans in the true sense of the word?

  Young India, 1-3-'28

  163. LIMITS OF SATYAGRAHA

  A correspondent impatient to stop the marriages of aged men with young girls writes:

  "This evil requires drastic remedies. Twenty-five young men of character should form themselves into a band of Satyagrahis, proceed to the place of the marriage eight or ten days before the event and plead with both the parties, with the heads of the caste organization, and with all concerned. They should parade the streets with suitable placards condemning such marriages and produce an atmosphere of opposition to the proposed marriage. They should persuade the people of the town or village to declare a peaceful boycott against the parties to the marriage, and court arrest or whatever other punishment that comes to them.

  "Thus the Satyagrahi band would soon become a power in the locality, and these marriages would be a thing of the past."

  The suggestion looks attractive, but I am afraid it cannot be of use on more
than one occasion. Where lust and cupidity join hands the slaughter of the innocents becomes almost impossible to avoid. As soon as lustful old candidates for brides and the greedy parents get scent of the invasion of the Satyagrahi band, they will evade the band by performing the wedding secretly, and they will find enough priests and wedding guests to help them in the ceremony. The readers of Navajivan may be aware of an incident that happened some time ago. The old man in that case feigned contrition, and successfully threw dust into the eyes of all by a hollow public apology. The reformers were delighted, but before they had finished congratulating themselves the old man managed to get secretly married. What happened in one case may happen in many cases. We should, therefore, devise other means to grapple with the evil. I have an idea that it may be easier to reach the greedy father of the bride than the slave of his lust. There is a great necessity for cultivating public opinion in the matter. The parents who readily sell away their girls, out of cupidity, should be sought out and pleaded with, and caste organizations should be persuaded to pass resolutions condemning such marriages. Evidently such reforms cannot be carried out all at once by the same band in large areas. Their field must needs be circumscribed. A Satyagrahi band in Cape Comorin will not be able to prevent a monstrous marriage in Kashmir. The reformers will have, therefore, to recognize their limitations. We may not attempt the impossible.

  Love and ahimsa are matchless in their effect. But in their play there is no fuss, show, noise or placards. They presuppose self-confidence which in its turn presupposes self-purification. Men of stainless character and self-purification will easily inspire confidence and automatically purify the atmosphere around them. I have long believed that social reform is a tougher business than political reform. The atmosphere is ready for the latter, people are interested in it, and there is an impression abroad that it is possible without self-purification. On the other hand, people have little interest in social reform, the result of agitation does not appear to be striking and there is little room for congratulations and addresses. The social reformers will have therefore to plod on for some time, hold themselves in peace, and be satisfied with apparently small results.