Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU

Summer 2006, comm 102

SATYAGRAHA

‘‘Truth implies love, and firmness engenders and therefore serves as a synonym

for force. I thus began to call the Indian movement satyagraha, that is to say, the force

which is born of Truth an Love or non-violence’’ (Phelps, 2000, pp 1).

Mahatma Gandhi is known around the world that great philosopher, politician and

teacher. He will always be remembered with as the man who found non-violent movements,

approaches, and how it is work. Satyagraha, Gandhi’s philosophy, is very essential and

significant for societies that every unmoral and unjust thing can be eliminated by this

philosophy but in real world usage of satyagraha is criticized. In my research paper I will

argue this issue. Some of the author discusses that satyagraha can not be used in some

situation because of satyagraha’s function. But some of them advocate the usage of

satyagraha that it will be very beneficial for societies. In my paper Martin, Terchek, Shepard

thinks that satyagraha can not use in contemporary countries but like Champeon and Reddy,

some of them say it can be use in these countries.

In his book ‘‘Gandhi’ Terchek admits that satyagraha is nonviolent action. Also he

mentions that ‘Gandhi’s satyagrahi believes that what happens to any one person is important

to everyone because we are all interested’’ (Terchek, 1998, pp180). From this perspective, all

people have to live with like whole and entire. Also this philosophy’s utilization can be seen

by very developed and wealthy societies like Iran, Czechoslovakia, East German, and Soviet

Union. Some of them became successful, some of them not, so the main point is that in which

situation or condition satyagraha is useful for societies. Some of the author discusses that

satyagraha can not be used in some situation because of satyagraha’s function.They give

reason for this like satyagaraha works too slow, it works only against easy enemies, it is not

any relationship between cooperation and everything changes like Gandhi’s life period and

1
Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU
Summer 2006, comm 102

nowadays. But some of them advocate the usage of satyagraha, that it will be very beneficial

for societies and they give examples of lifestyle or believes like buddhism. Firstly, we need to

understand who Gandhi is and what satyagraha really means.

I want to give some brief information about Gandhi’s life before I focus on the use of

his philosophy in contemporary societies because the relationship between England and

Gandhi started very early if we look at his life. Gandhi is an Indian ‘nationalistic leader’.

Mahatma Gandhi ‘‘was born in Poe Bandar in Gujarat’’ (Chada, 1988). When Gandhi about

thirteen he married a girl who was ‘chosen’ for him (Chada, 1988). In 1869 Gandhi

educated law at university in London. Then Gandhi was accepted by British Baro. British

acceptation is very interesting and important because he did a lot of things against British

government. After acceptation, Gandhi returned to his country and started to practice of law

in Bombay. Then he started to work an Indian firm as legal adviser in its office in Durban. So

he figured out the civil and political rights of Indian immigrant are risked in South Africa.

Because of this, he starts to struggle for people’s natural rights. One of the most respected

spiritual and political leaders of the twentieth century; Mohandas Gandhi spread his message

of non-violent civil disobedience throughout India and several other British colonies.

I have to define some terms like satyagraha that is Gandhi’s philosophy, to make my

topic more apprehensible. Satyagraha is Gandhi’s famous and one of the most important

philosophies in his life period. Injustices in such society mean violation of somebody's rights.

The above duty of civility includes the duty to defend the rights guaranteed by constitution.

Civil disobedience gives an opportunity to resist injustice in adherence to the law. Passive

resistance or in other words satyagraha is people’s respond against unjust or unmoral laws

without using violence. Richards maintains that ‘‘it is the way in which ahimsa is

implemented or put in action; it is the technique of non-violence’’ (Richard, 1991, pp 48).

2
Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU
Summer 2006, comm 102

This philosophy is completely eliminated and excluded violence in its movement. Because

this philosophy is very honored value that ‘the sword of satyagraha only love’ not violence

(Harijan, 1946, pp 143). Gandhi said that the method of satyagraha requires that the

satyagrahi should never lose hope, so long as there is the slightest ground left for it. All

satyagrahis -who share some idea about Gandhi’s philosophy-, have to trust and believe each

other strongly. Also cooperation is very necessary. The most important thing is absolute truth.

‘Truth’ and ‘reality’ will determine everything according to this philosophy (Richard, 1991).

So the main purpose of this philosophy is getting and achieving the ‘absolute truth’. There for

people can think satyagaraha ‘truth force’ because of ‘truth is soul or spirit’. People can say

satyagaraha is ‘soul force’. The main purpose of the passive resistance is breaching the

unmoral law without using unmoral law. It doesn’t mean like do anything against the unjust

things like law; all people have to do something. Citizens should do something with get rid of

violence either like refuse to pay taxes like Thoreau did or imprisonment like Gandhi did.

Some authors think that satyagraha is relevant in a new world that people can easily

use it to show their desires or responds. ‘Are Gandhi’s Ideas Relevant in a New South

Africa?’ Reddy discusses Gandhi’s ideas about resistance which is passive, in other words

‘satyagraha’ and he tries to understand if it is useful for other contemporary societies like

Iran, Czechoslovakia, East German, Soviet Union. ‘‘They have been developed and enriched

– not only by him in the freedom movement in India- but by others in the struggles in many

lands, particularly in the United States in the civil rights movement and the resistance to the

Vietnam War, and, of course in South Africa since the 1940s’’ (Reedy). The author maintains

that Gandhi’s action and movement for freedom in India is very crucial for other countries

freedom movements. For instance in United States in the civil rights movement and the

resistance to the Vietnam War. ‘‘The regime of shah of Iran’ was ended by an essentially non

3
Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU
Summer 2006, comm 102

violent movement, also ‘the regime of General Marcos in the Philippines’ was concluded

again by non-violent movement like Gandhi’s philosophy says. Because of peoples’, interest

about ‘environment, liberation’ and political worries Gandhi’s idea relevant nearly all around

the world. The main point in Gandhi’s Philosophy; satyagraha, is non-violent movement, he

eliminate the violent in his all action, Gandhi thinks that if one unjust or immoral thing are

occurs in society , all citizens have to do something and show their own response to governed

people without violence. He always defenses and maintains the requirement of laws in

society; also he always can show his respect for these laws. But if something wrong in these

rules, –especially if some of them revised laws for just someone’s own purpose- he did

something against the government. Unfortunately in some situation violent action shows

itself very strongly. For example in South Africa there was an extraordinary situation

hundreds of people were killed by the political and security forces or in Algeria again a lot of

people murdered for just political worries. Like this condition, regrettably, satyagraha may

not work. I think, we have to believe and try to understand the real meaning of this

philosophy a people adapt satyagraha whatever evil thing arise. In deed, in Gandhi’s life

period everything suits for satyagraha, but although Gandhi concern about people’s

complains and annoyances, he also did this movement for his and his citizen’s honor and ‘‘the

spirits of nationalism’’ (Reedy, pp1). He thinks that everyone has to understand the real

meaning of Gandhi’s philosophy and show their respond according to satyagraha. They have

to develop their ideas with Gandhi under serious circumstances.

In addition there are also some beliefs or religions that non violent regime works with

only nonviolent actions because they believe that source of religion is nonviolence and

humanity. In Buddhism we can see this belief. Nonviolence is the core of the Buddhism. In

article, ‘‘The Case for Forbearance: Buddhism and Nonviolence’’, Champeon maintains that

4
Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU
Summer 2006, comm 102

‘‘should not deprive a living being of life, even if it is only a black ant or a termite. Violence

cannot be used in self-defense either’’ (Champeon, 2003, pp1). A lots of people who believe

Buddha or who believes Buddhism’s rule, against violence in all action. ‘‘Even if bandits

were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handed saw, he among you who let

his heart get angered at that would not be doing my bidding’’ (Champeon, 2003, pp1).

Also they live in our life condition. It is proofed that nonviolence lifestyle possible in present

life.

The time always goes and along with, everything is going to be change include some

philosophies roots like nonviolence which is Gandhi’s philosophy’s root. ‘‘The philosophy of

non-violence that has been developed through much of the twentieth century has made an

indispensable contribution to all theories of legitimate revolutionary social change’’ (Martin,

2005). Martin maintains in his article that the philosophy of non-violence changeable and it

always modifies and converts with time. All philosophers who interests non-violent

movement include Mahatma Gandhi, can’t see this term because in some situation people

have to use violence. If this philosopher can understand the alteration in non-violence, they

must figure out this philosophy can not work today. Indeed non-violent actions are very

humane and it is the best way to show people’s response against unjust or immoral laws. In

theory, if all people use the process of non-violence in all areas, there is no harshness or

vehemence. Also if all governments perform non-violence, like satyagraha, their way to

govern will be perfect. In my own idea, unfortunately in practical terms, it is impossible,

there are lots of evil in nowadays. They can do what they want with using violence. So

satyagraha or in other words passive resistance is not so logical to use. That would be utopian

and may not even be desirable. Martin says ‘‘I have been repeated over and over again that he

5
Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU
Summer 2006, comm 102

who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honor by nonviolently facing

death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with oppressor’’ (Martin,2005).

Opposite of Champeon and Reedy Shepard thinks that the usage of nonviolent action

that satyagraha is impossible in present days. According to some authors there are some

myths about Gandhi. In article ‘‘Mahatma Gandhi and His Myths’’, Mark Shepard claims that

Gandhi is not like everybody knows him that he is so different what people knows. So there

are lots of myths is Gandhi’s life period. For instance even his ideology is different. Shepard

argues that ‘‘there is nothing passive about Gandhian non-violent action’’ (Shepard. pp 2).

The main points of satyagraha is being passive but according to Shepard it is not. Gandhi’s

movements are always seemed to be defensive but in fact it is always offensive. Also there is

no relation ship between being passive and being offense. They are totally different. What

kind of nonviolence movements needs to be died for the reason. ‘‘Gandhi said that the non-

violenet activist, like any soldier, had to be ready to die for the cause’’

( Shepard, pp 3)

Unfortunately, just the way of using satyagraha is defective and disqualified. Because

oen of the most important way of satyagraha is imprisonment.Also Shepard analyses that

Gandhi practiced satyagraha with imprisonment. First you break an immoral law and you

arrested. Then other satyagrahi – Gandhi’s follower- do same thing that Gandhi did. All jails

are filled by satyagrahi that government can’t control his prisons. They start to lose their

authority under criminals. So government must remove the law and satgyagraha achieve. In

this situation the most important thing is core of his movement. Satyagraha’s purpose is not

to fill the jails. The real purpose of his ideology is caring some matter deeply. He care and

pay attention this issue very much that he risks his life without fear. Shepard maintains that

he want to ‘‘take legal penalties, to sit in this prison cell, to sacrifice his freedom, in order to

6
Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU
Summer 2006, comm 102

show you how deeply he care’’ (Shepard, pp 6). It seems very pretty and beneficial to use in

our world. But unfortunately it is impossible. In his life period it worked but now the entire

situation was changed. Just breaking a law politely and arrested is not efficient way to solve

all problems. Love is not enough to eliminate the real evil power.

Cooperation is very crucial and essential in civil disobedience. If you want to show

your response to authority, you have to supply majority. Disobedience can’t occur without

majority. Majority power has more beneficial and advantageous than individual power.

Shepard declares that satyagraha is ‘‘noncooperation’’ (Shepard, pp 7). The satyagraha was

developed by obeying someone’s order. When Gandhi arrested, all admires understand that

they have to be in jail too. It is Gandhi’s order to do some thing same what he did. He tried to

provide majority with just his order. But in deed it is not best way to form a majority. Shepard

locates ‘‘what happens if those people begin to say that they are not afraid of prison even

willing to die but not willing to obey you any longer’’ (Shepard, pp 7). Then everything will

be finished, satyagraha won’t be works. So regrettably the usage of satyagraha is impossible

in nowadays.

Non-violent resistance only materializes against ‘easy enemies like British. Shepard

focuses on if you want to make ‘‘civil disobedience against Soviets, Central American

dictators or Nazis’ you won’t be successful. For instance, French killed 800.000 Algerians

during Algeria’s war of independence’’ (Shepard, pp 9) and ‘‘some 75000 people has been

killed so far in El Salvador more in Guatemala’’ (Reedy, pp1). Think about if Jews showed

their responds with passive resistance to Nazis, what they conclude and achieve. Although the

only wrong thing that Jews did are being just Jews. So how can this people show their rights

to Hitler? Hitler only one who wanted to get rid of those Jews what kind of way he found. In

this position satyagraha will be ineffective.

7
Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU
Summer 2006, comm 102

In an other perspective¸ nonviolent action works just too slowly. People can not wait

in very bad condition, ‘‘suffering injustice, slavery starvation, murder (Shepard, pp 8)’’. How

can people expect to citizen be patient in this circumstances. It doesn’t mean violence is the

one way that we have to use only action but in fact there are a lots of evil in our worlds, we

cant struggle with only love it is realistic and also impossible. Briefly, according to Shepard

non-violent resistance works only in an Utopia not at the present time.

Many people think that Gandhi was not as modern as he should be. For example,

Glen T. Martin maintains that Gandhi’s idea isn’t suitable for our world because of time. But

as opposed to this idea Terchek analyses that Gandhi is very modern and ‘‘he offers a wide-

ranging indictment of modern rationality, science and technology’’ (Terchek, 1998). Terchek

provides that Gandhi’s ideas very modern so it is suitable for our life periods. We can use it

without any examination.

As Terchek mentions, ‘‘as much as most of us want to avoid violence, it some times

seems necessary. This seems especially to be the case when the strong employ violence to

dominate the weak or attack the vulnerable’’ (Gandhi, 1998 pp180). If people think that there

are immoral and unjust laws in society, citizens have to do something. They shouldn’t wait

just their destiny. We all human beings and all human have to have rights. People can think

and decide what they want so people can understand what is wrong and what is true. People

shouldn’t let this people to take these rights away from us.

Regrettably there are lots of evil today like Usama Bin Ladin, Saddam or other

millions of his followers. We don’t live in utopia or in dream that everything goes on

brilliantly. Unfortunately, this people are able to do what they want to conclude their purpose.

People can understand that non-violent is so humane thing which all people have to

understand that it is the one of the best way to show people’s respond to authorities. There is

8
Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU
Summer 2006, comm 102

no defense mechanism like satyagaraha in the world. Also we have to understand that the

usage of nonviolence action is possible like Buddhism. But against greatest evil non-violent

action isn’t enough to solve all problem. How can you solve the Usama Bin Ladin’s plans

without using violence? Also against these people, everything becomes important. For

example time or enemies character becomes more crucial. Because non-violence movement

works slowly and only works against easy enemy, people shouldn’t use it. How can you

expect people’s patient in very bad situation? However satyagraha is one of the most humane

and best way to perform in society, it is impossible.

9
Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU
Summer 2006, comm 102

Reference

Chadha, Yogesh (1997). Rediscovering Gandhi. This edition published by Century

Books,Limited. (pp.1- 10). 1997 Century, London First edition hardback, 546pp with

photographic illustration in this comprehensive biography. Mint in black cloth, no DJ.

ISBN: 0 7126 7731 3

Champeon, Kenneth (05.18.2003). The Case of Forbearance: Buddhism and nonviolence.

Published in Britain cooperation.

Harijan (1946,17 March). Satyagraha in Face of Hooliganism, Collected Works, Volume 85

Martin, Glen T. (2005, February). The Philosophy of Nonviolence and World Revolution

Through World Law. Published in Martin

Phelps, Dr. Katreine. (2000). Modern Satyagraha. Published in Boston uni.

Reedy, E.S (1991). Are Gandhiji’s Idea Relevant in a New South Africa. Published in Los

Angels.

Richard , Glyn (1991). The Philosophy of Gandhi. Humanities press international inc.

Atlantic Highlands. (pp 31-46)

Shepard, Mark. (2000) Mahatma Gandhi and His Myhths, Civil disobedience, nonviolence

and satyagraha in the real world. Reproduced in full from the book published by

Shepard Publications, Los Angeles

Terchek, Ronald J. (1998). Gandhi: Struggling for Autonomy. Rowman & Littlefield

publication. (pp95-96 & pp 105)

10
Şükrü Şener DEDEOĞLU
Summer 2006, comm 102

11