Previous
Chapter 15
Themes
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in Hind Swaraj, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
Passive Resistance and Indian Independence
Modern Civilization and Colonialism
The Personal and the Political
Indian Nationhood and Identity
Summary
Analysis
The editor argues that force is an ineffective strategy to prevent evildoing because people do evil again as soon as the threat of force disappears. But the reader replies that the English have obviously been successful with brute force, so Indians should use it, too. He gives three examples of when force seems appropriate: a homeowner can kick a thief out of their house, people can use force in politics when the government ignores their petitions, and a parent should forcibly prevent their child from stepping into a fire. Before responding to these examples, the editor argues that there’s always a connection between means and ends, so force cannot lead to liberation. Moreover, we can’t take human rights by force because true human rights come from performing our duties to others.
Although he has already made specific arguments against launching a violent revolution, now, Gandhi makes the same argument on the level of universal principle: he thinks force and revenge are never justifiable ways for activists to get what they want. Because the ends follow the means, if they want freedom, justice, and equality, activists have to achieve them with free, just, and equal means. Again, this returns to the connection between the two forms of Swaraj: (individual) self-rule and (national) home-rule. Gandhi argues that people and countries can only truly rule themselves if they actively fulfill their moral duties, which has to be a free choice. Therefore, no country can be forced into self-rule—people and nations have to freely choose self-rule. The reader’s examples all point to situations in which people feel justified in using force after someone else has violated their moral duties. However, Gandhi thinks that this use of force will never right the wrong that was committed, precisely because he thinks nobody can force anyone else to act morally.
Themes
The editor now responds to the reader’s three examples. First, it is not always justified for someone to kick a thief out of their home by force. For instance, force is inappropriate if the thief is one’s father, or a heavily armed stranger. By retaliating against the robber with force, the victim invites further violence, which would ruin their own peace and happiness. Instead, the victim should consider the robber’s motives, take pity on them, and try to reason with them. This could even mean leaving one’s things out in the open to advertise their generosity to the robber and help him quit his antisocial habits. This illustrates the principle that the means determine the results. The editor concludes that pity and love are stronger than brute physical force.
The case of a homeowner responding to a thief is a clear metaphor for Indians responding to British colonialism. By pointing out that the homeowner’s course of action should depend on his relationship to the robber, Gandhi reminds the reader that people’s moral duties to one another as humans are far more important than any duties we may have to our property. In fact, by empathizing with the robber and trying to change their ways—rather than taking things personally and lashing out—the homeowner is fulfilling his own moral duty towards the robber. In other words, the homeowner sees humanity in the robber and views the robbery as an opportunity to do good, not an excuse for doing evil.
Themes
The editor next looks at the reader’s second example: petitioning for social change. Petitions can serve to educate others or announce a group’s understanding of their situation. But the reader is right that, to create change, some kind of force must back a petition. But brute force is a much weaker option than passive resistance—which means refusing to follow the government’s orders or recognize it as legitimate.
Gandhi finally introduces the concept of passive resistance, or satyagraha, which he sees as the only effective and ethical way to confront injustice. If the example of the robber and the homeowner stood in for the extremist activists’ plan for a revolution, this example stands in for the moderate activists’ plan to ask the English government to change. Because the government is clearly not ruling morally, it will not respond to citizens’ moral pleas. But since the citizens want to build a new, moral society, they cannot use the same tools as the existing government. Rather, the only solution is for them to start living morally and give other Indians the opportunity to join them.
Themes
Finally, the editor considers the reader’s third example, of a child who steps into a fire. If the child is too physically strong for the parent to stop them, then the child will inevitably die in the fire. But if the parent can forcibly stop the child, then this does not count as true physical force, because it is done solely for the child’s own benefit—the parent is resisting evil, not using force to advance their own interests. In contrast, if Indians use force against the English, they would do so because of their own national interest, not because of love or pity for the English.
Even if his views are often portrayed otherwise, Gandhi emphatically agrees that it’s legitimate to use force to stop greater violence—which includes necessary self-defense. In this situation, the parent is decreasing the overall amount of violence by saving their child from the fire, even if this requires using a small amount of force. So passive resistance in no way means non-interference: on the contrary, it means actively interfering with the workings of evil forces, people, and institutions.
Themes
Get the entire Hind Swaraj LitChart as a printable PDF.
