India's history has often been associated with the life and thought of Mohandas Gandhi. Gandhi insisted that all his followers remain nonviolent. For him, ahimsa (nonviolence) was essential. What accounted for the success of ahimsa? Can you think of any American parallels to this technique?
Violence begets violence. When a person or a group uses nonviolence to achieve their goals, the public is generally in sympathy with them.
Dr. King and the Civil Rights movement in the U.S. was patterned after Gandhi's methods.
The success of ahimsa, or nonviolence, can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, Gandhi believed that ahimsa is not just the absence of physical violence, but also the absence of any harm caused by thoughts, words, or actions. This understanding of nonviolence allowed for a comprehensive approach to conflict resolution.
Secondly, ahimsa appealed to the moral conscience of people. Gandhi's emphasis on peaceful resistance and his willingness to undergo personal suffering for the cause of freedom garnered sympathy and support from both Indians and the international community. Nonviolence resonated with people's innate sense of justice and compassion.
Additionally, ahimsa was a strategic tool in the fight against colonialism. Gandhi recognized that the British Empire's strength was in military might, and violence would only beget more violence. By choosing nonviolence, he aimed to expose the inhumanity and injustice of colonial rule, gaining popular support and pressuring the colonial authorities to negotiate.
In terms of American parallels, the Civil Rights Movement led by Martin Luther King Jr. employed similar nonviolent resistance tactics. Drawing inspiration from Gandhi, King and his followers organized nonviolent protests, boycotts, and acts of civil disobedience to challenge racial segregation and discrimination. Like Gandhi, King's commitment to nonviolence appealed to people's sense of justice and morality, leading to significant social and legislative reforms in the United States.
It is important to note, however, that the success of nonviolence is not absolute and depends on various contextual factors, including the nature of the oppressor, societal dynamics, and the extent of public support.