Gandhi and Satyagraha— A Quest for Global Transformation: A Review Essay on the International Seminar

Introduction

Globally, M. K. Gandhi has been celebrated for the possibilities that his thought and political actions present for a non-violent and truthful transformation of self and others towards claiming freedom. Gandhi’s emphasis on reclaiming truth through one’s moral and sacrificial action remains a powerful political action against the brutalities of regimes, atrocities perpetrated by powerful opponents and oppressive systems. In today’s contentious global scenario, Gandhi’s satyagraha has much to offer; it offers a path to reflect on ways to address inequality, injustice, the takeover of ‘truth’ by ‘post-truth’, rise of populism and the sliding of liberal democracies into majoritarian systems. While liberal democracies have the potential to change their ruling parties and thus ensure some course correction because of the presence of political options and individual freedoms, some inner contradictions within these democracies, like capitalism-induced inequity and majoritarian tendencies in the form of nationalist populism, along with homogenisation, remain as aberrations. It is the presence of these aberrations and their ephemerality that forces the most ardent supporter of liberal democracies to consider various alternatives. These alternatives present the possibilities of overcoming crises and contradictions while questioning class, caste, gender and the racial foundation of contemporary times.

One such alternative is the satyagraha discourse which not only presents a unique approach but also a philosophical profundity. The ideational premise of democracy accommodates satyagraha which in turn facilitates the arrival of swaraj, an inclusive engagement that ushers in mutual development of all.

The ‘satyagraha discourse’ despite its longstanding significance is little theorised. Furthermore, it does not figure much in social science literature on state and society. One of the largest deliberations on satyagraha, a three-day international seminar, ‘Satyagraha in the 21st Century—Social, Ethical and Spiritual Dimensions of the Global Pursuits of Truth’ on the occasion of Gandhi’s 150th birth anniversary organised by the Council for Social Development, New Delhi, in collaboration with 12 other institutions ¹ was held on 22–24 October 2019. It not only showcased the strong historical legacy of Gandhi but also re-lived his philosophical relevance in contemporary empirical sites in which massive inequality and majoritarianism persist defended by asatya (untruth). Besides inaugural and valedictory sessions, the seminar, representing a global endeavour towards transformation, was organised around 3 plenary sessions and 17 technical sessions.

The thematic intertwining of the inaugural session, plenary sessions, technical sessions and valedictory session was influenced by Gandhi’s philosophical enumerations refelected in Hind Swaraj, An Autobiography or The Story of My Experiments with Truth, Satyagraha in South Africa and in his satyagraha campaigns in South Africa in order to analyse philosophical discourse, social movements and the global challenge of the twenty-first century. Numerous movements in India and elsewhere which are aiming to achieve an ‘equitable and sustainable world’ in sync with justice, equality, self-determination, democratic decentralisation and symbiotic relation with nature formed parts of the deliberations. The fight against untrue conditions, evolution of satyagraha and satyagraha against sources of exploitation and discrimination were concurrent concerns that emerged in all discussions. A vivid engagement (amongst singers, writers, artists, social scientists, activists and academics) and encompassing methodology (deliberations, singing and poetry) unravelled the multi-dimensionality of the alternative discourse of satyagraha.

Truth as a Vantage Point

Since truth is the core foundation of Gandhi, it needs to be immediately outlined and engaged to avoid the construction of a false reality. Therefore, Manoranjan Mohanty, the key architect of the international seminar, ² considered satyagraha as the pursuit of truth. Gandhi challenged the untruth of prevailing conditions. In his introductory presenation, Mohanty pointed out that any truth discourse must be based on reason not on power. The powerful has no monopoly over truth which is a continuous process. Taking the debate further, Mark Juergensmeyer posited two concerns regarding ‘global religion’: the negative concern is regarding xenophobia, an aspect related to domination by religion. The positive aspect is the emergence of a global civil society which goes beyond the xenophobic domination of religion.

Muchkund Dubey highlighted the need to challenge the status quo which is unjust and unfair. The term ‘passive resistance’, he said, did not capture the meaning of satyagraha. For him, civil disobedience is a more apt term. Martin Luther King Jr. and Nelson Mandela followed satyagraha as a non-violent movement. According to Dubey, in Nepal, unknown heroes of one of the great janandolans (mass movements) who did not seek posts or positions replaced the monarchy with democracy. In Bangladesh, General Hussain Muhammad Ershad was removed democratically. In the Philippines, Ferdinand Marcos was also removed by non-violent democratic movements. The Orange Revolution in Eastern Europe and the Arab Spring in West Asia signified the need of change through non-violent protests. In India, the Narmada Bachao Andolan led by Medha Patkar, the Chipko movement, farmer movements, movement for wages by Aruna Roy are all examples of satyagraha. For Gandhi, non-violence and non-hatred were two defining aspects of satyagraha.

N.N. Vohra underlined the significance of satyagraha being beneficial to all in the global, regional and national context of violence. Gandhi, the inventor of the tool of resistance against the backdrop of inequality, poverty and ignorance, offered ‘meaningful resistance’. This became a new tool of protest and mass politics. For Beatriz Bissio, solidarity among religions and a renewal of commitment towards the legacy of Mahatma Gandhi are important signposts in today’s world. Satyabrata Chakrabarti looked at Gandhi and Gandhism in a pragmatic manner and suggested his three levels of experiments (non-violence, non-cooperation and satyagraha; theory of truth; and truth as God, transcendence and organised strategist) were important interventions. M.M. Verma explored the possibility of satyagraha in the twenty-first century dominated by materialism, consumerism, pseudo-culturalism, commercialisation, moral decays and terrorism. Bulbul Sharma and Vibha Singh Chauhan emphasised the significance of Gandhi in education. Sharma explicated the relationship between Gandhi and Jamia Millia Islamia which was established in 1920. Chauhan also, with reference to Abhimanyu Anat’s novel, Gandhiji Bole The (Thus Spoke Gandhi), underlined Gandhi’s three-pronged advice to indentured labours: educate, consolidate and participate. Ashok Pankaj acknowledged the tremendous response this landmark satyagraha seminar received from all quarters.

Life as Satyagraha

Medha Patkar in the plenary session spoke on Satyagraha in Contemporary India: Some Reflections, encapsulating the churning between satyagraha and displacement, people versus state and decentralisation versus centralisation. According to her, corporate might and the state are continously battling people in the name of development. Dalits, adivasis, women and other disadvantaged are fighting this battle against the corporate–state nexus, and Gandhi’s vision has given them the strength to challenge the entire paradigm and not just a few individuals in power. The corporate class grabs natural resources and converts it into capital accumulation. In doing so, atrocities are committed on people, taking a heavy toll on them. An alliance of people’s movements is needed, she said. She highlighted the idea of trusteeship that stresses the primacy of ownership of local resources that must reside within the community. Vinoba Bhave ³ not only experimented but also promoted equity and justice by stating that sharing resources added value. Gandhi’s alternative politics is possible as it facilitates the crucial unity of caste, communalism and development. The only options are swaraj, swadeshi and self-reliance. Agrah for satya, said Patkar, is a comprehensive concept. A slew of movements (like Lok Shakti ) have followed Gandhi’s notion of satyagraha where the insistence on truth is the core. Related to this, she raised three pertinent questions: What is the nation state? Is the nation associated with the state? What is the relation between people and power? Gandhi’s vision of religion is dharma satta and dharma nirpekshata. There is no place for commercialisation in religion for Gandhi and he advocated manav dharma.

Gandhi, Satyagraha and Contemporary Experiences

Understanding Gandhi is crucial for many reasons: first, to rekindle the inseperability of his philosophy from political action which function in tandem with each other; second, to address and understand contemporary political turmoil; and third, to counter the hegemony of post-truth politics as Gandhi’s satyagraha establishes moral-ethical parameters of truth. Regarding the first, although there is a deep recognition of satyagraha amongst scholars, differences exist regarding the idea of truth, history versus philosophy and normative premises versus technique associated with satyagraha. Such a contested understanding about Gandhi’s satyagraha has both delimiting and limiting dimensions. Delimiting dimensions makes satyagraha a porous pursuit which may generate multiple possibilities. The absence of concrete political action is a substantive casualty, a limiting dimension. Sessions/speakers specifically related to the satyagraha experience brought in dimensions around these concerns.

Satyagraha, Gandhi’s 11 vows ⁴ and a constructive programme, ⁵ according to Varsha Das, are crucial for achieving justice, equality, empowerment and harmony. Meera Chakarvarty insisted that reclaiming satyagraha is important to preserve our co-existence, an idea of belonging and harmonious thinking. Satyagraha can create a space for an alternative way of dealing with situations. It has always been the truth, important for Gandhi in his decision-making, and is accessible to all. Sanjeev Kumar pointed out that satyagraha is not only simply a method or technique but also an ethical system. It is an ideal and must be perceived in relation to truth, non-violence and the end-means debate. The reason behind it has to be moral, it is dignity in existence and not merely a teleological pursuit. Rajesh Kumar stated that Gandhi’s truth signifies experiences from various religions. He added, morality is an important aspect in Gandhi, but truth is morality in all things. Truth is a sovereign principle and also takes place through action. In satyagraha (satya and agraha), individuals seek their version of truth on the basis of choice-making consciousness and obeys the law which one gives to oneself. In a similar vein, Sreejith Sugunan pointed out that the notion of absolute truth in Gandhi is beyond the relative or subjective truth that the self is in a position to comprehend. The relative truth of Gandhi is located in the self. This truth makes a moral demand for self, and from here emerges the pursuit of non-violent truth. The relative truth admits the possibility of fallibility on the part of individuals.

Such theoretical postulations are informed by history and location of the contemporary. The Vaikom Satyagraha in Travancore in 1924–1925 and the Chipko Movement in Uttarakhand encompassed a resurrection of Gandhian techniques of satyagraha. Savita Singh remarked that Gandhi came at a time when there was a transition from power politics to mass politics. Gandhi’s relevance emanates from the view that he showed an oppressed society the path to freedom through satyagraha. The Champaran Satyagraha of 1917 was the first satyagraha movement. While the Swadeshi Movement of Rabindranath Tagore in 1905 remained confined to only the intelligentsia, Gandhi’s satyagraha movement reached the masses and Charkha Chala Chalake Swaraj Lenge was a song sung in every household.

Raj Shekhar Basu critically analysed Gandhi’s involvement in the Vaikom Satyagraha which sought to eradicate the age-old practice of untouchability. It tried to secure free access to all sections of society, devoid of the distinctions of ‘pure’ and ‘impure’, to all public roads leading to the Shri Mahadev Temple at Vaikom. He made two distinct observations. First, Gandhi’s involvement in Vaikom Satyagraha, despite criticism, brought him closer to a social movement which was trying to defy the age-old practices of untouchability. Always against untouchability, Gandhi still did not favour pursuing radical assertions that had the potential of ripping the social fabric of the princely state of Travancore. Second, Gandhi could have taken the Vaikom Satyagraha to greater heights had he not kept himself confined within the debates of the philosophical tenets of Hinduism and had been more concerned with the involvement of the Syrian Christian leadership.

The historical limits of Gandhi’s satyagraha have also been transcended by several Gandhian movements. Barnali Sarma explored the relationship between Sarvodya and the Mouman Ashram in Assam, the first Gandhian ashram in Assam which identified local needs and resources and trained local people in multiple skills, including the weaving of high-quality silk, oil pressing, carpentry and herbal medicines while bringing economic development and social upliftment in the remote village of Boko, inhabited by the Bodo and Rabha communities.

Another reference point is the Chipko movement in which satyagraha and non-violence were used to save forests. For Milan Acharya, even after 70 years of his death, the fundamental reason why Gandhi still matters today is his insistence on non-violent resistance, that is, satyagraha. He explicated how Gandhian techniques were utilised by Chipko activists. In the 1970s, the villagers of the Himalayan region of Uttarakhand initiated a protest movement by embracing trees against their large-scale felling for commercial purposes. The villagers used the traditional conflict resolution strategy of satyagraha and non-violent resistance, and in due course, it spread throughout the world and became a new strategy for people facing environmental threats. If we see the Chipko movement from the perspective of Gandhian satyagraha, we notice that the principles of truth, non-violence and self-suffering were inbuilt in activism. Apart from clinging to trees, the Chipko activists also adopted other non-violent techniques like dharnas (rallies), fasting and padyatras (marches). Another technique adopted by the Chipko movement was to spread the message through folk songs. Priya Sharma also took the cognisance of the Chipko Movement of the 1970s, the Jal Satyagraha of 2015 and Jan Andolan of 2018 against the backdrop of visible binaries of human and nature, mind and body, and modern and traditional values in society.

Satyagraha against the accumulation of natural resources is a crucial contemporary concern. K.B. Saxena drew attention to how land is crucial for peasants and how it has been systematically taken away from them. He divided this trend into four areas: in the land reform movements and in the onset of the Green Revolution which stayed till 1967; the unfinished task of the land reform movement and the land grab movement pursued by Left parties; the change from redistributive movements to market-led reforms; and the introduction of the Forest Rights Revised Land Acquisition Act and MGNREGA (Mahatama Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act). He suggested the need to reinvent Gandhian principle of trusteeship in natural resources with the government not owning natural resources. Mani Mala narrated the influence of the JP movement and women-led satyagraha for land ownership in Bodh Gaya, Bihar.

Bezwada Wilson highlighted the contribution of Gandhi to eradicate manual scavenging. Prafulla Samantara emphasised the deprivation and livelihood issues being faced by the disadvantaged currently. The capture by corporate interests was not just limited to natural resources but also to governance. The politics of development was controlled by corporations, spearheaded by global financial capital. The state had become a police–corporate state willing to take away people’s rights. Gandhi wrote about economic inequality in 1948, stressing that the corporates preferred a communal agenda to dominate politics. Roma Malik read Gandhi beyond Gandhism. For Dhananjay Rai, philosophically and empirically, Gandhi and satyagraha needed to be seen in a framework of antagonism characterising every situation of injustice. Satyagraha represented a unique way of comprehending and handling antagonism. Rai felt that since most analyses on Gandhi’s contributions were focussed on epistemic realms, his contribution to law and justice needed to be explored. In this regard, Rai highlighted the idea of ‘principle of antagonism’ in Gandhi’s philosophy in contrast to his ‘principle of reconciliation’. Gandhi’s politics was not without political action. In an unjust society, justice could not be delivered without questioning laws, and ‘consent’ then becomes a tool of confirmation.

Satyagraha, Civilisational Engagement and Swaraj

Various sessions and speakers examined the relationship between satyagraha and civilisations (inside and outside India) while deciphering the meaning of swaraj. Arun Bandhopadhyaya underlined the idea that satyagraha in the Gandhian philosophical context is most intelligible when viewed from the short- and long-term perspective of civilisational politics. Gandhi was the first person to talk about the idea of civilisation in understanding India or the significance of it in the Indian nationalist discourse, even before Tagore and Swami Vivekananda. Throughout his life, Gandhi followed the main principles of Hind Swaraj in his writings, activities and political programmes. Indeed, it may be argued that Gandhi’s civilisational politics stand as a unique feature of his political philosophy.

Does gender suggest a rupture in civilisational politics? Bijayalaxmi Nanda and Nupur Ray critically looked at Gandhi from a gender perspective. The common theme between women movements and satyagraha is that both challenge the unjust and unequal premises of social relationship, institutions and hierarchy. Gandhi definitely feminised the national movement by involving women from all walks of life. Womens’ movement in a way also taught Gandhi satyagraha and non-violence.

In his deliberation, John Clammer emphasised the ambiguous attitude of Gandhi’s towards art. He suggested that approaching Gandhi’s work and his writings from the perspective of the aesthetics can provide the basis for a fresh reading of his corpus. He also suggested that revitalised ways of re-thinking with creative ways of addressing contemporary social issues have changed since Gandhi’s day. Taking the debate further, Gianluigi Segarleba analysed the relationship between three gunas (satva, rajas and tamas) of satyagraha and Plato’s writings on three parts of human nature, that is, pleasures, desires and ruling principles to the three parts of the soul and the challenges of evil.

Against the backdrop of USA and Latin America, Mark Juergensmeyer, Beatriz Bissio and Vinay Lal engaged with Gandhi for the conceptualisation and advancement of satyagraha. For Juergensmeyer, Gandhi continues to be a global personality with multi-dimensional perspectives, but his fulcrum of thought remains satyagraha. A large part of this satyagraha is his spirituality rooted in individuality as well as in collective action. Satyagraha is a manifestation of Gandhi’s ability to mobilise the masses for conflict resolution through non-violent struggle. Juergensmeyer presented a critique of America’s post-9/11, anti-terrorism strategy as it failed to include empathy for the other side and ignored the requirements of conflict resolutions where changes in self are as important as expecting changes in the other.

Beatriz Bissio elaborated on Gandhi’s ideas and their reception in Latin America and Africa. The impact of Gandhi’s ideals, she said, can be divided into three historical moments: first, the two decades of the twentieth century (symbolising a debate between modernity and identity), second, the 1960s and 1970s (cycles of dictatorship) and third, the first two decades of the twenty-first century (marked by difficult relationships between modernity and tradition). In the first phase, Gandhi’s satyagraha provides an effective rationale to express identity under colonialism; second, it became an ideal tool to counter dictatorship, and finally, it was an apt strategy to counter the effects of neoliberalism.

Vinay Lal focussed on Gandhi’s global popularity inseparably linked with the African American Movement. The popular accounts of the African American Movements highlighted only Martin Luther King Jr. as the public face of the ‘Civil Rights Movement’. In 1920, W.E.B. Du Bois (an African-American intellectual), the editor of The Crisis, brought in ‘Negro Gandhi’ as a popular icon whom Black Americans could emulate. Lal analysed the world view of the African-American press and its outlook towards the national movement in India. Prevailing conceptions of the Global South, focussing on anti-colonial movements in Asia and Africa, generally overlook the history of Black America in the twentieth century. African-American newspapers have played a critical role in shaping notions of solidarity of coloured people and provide an unusual perspective on the possibilities of satyagraha in democratic societies.

Satyagraha and swaraj are also visible in myriad forms. Maya Joshi has explored such possibility while reading Baisvin Sadi, a novel by Rahul Sankrityayan, which highlights the idea of socialism, diminution of crime and the blurred division of public and private property. Debajani Ray has highlighted the significance of folk healers and various schemes of the Government of India to promote them. Anup Dhar has interpreted Gandhi’s politics as a reconstructive programme in which transformation is important and not the opposition. Gandhi’s politics is post-capitalist and not just anti-capitalist. For Ananta Kumar Giri, satyagraha’s link with the three gunas—sattva (truth), rajas (power) and tamas (darkness)—and mediation of these plays a very important role. Satyagraha is a field of ethics, aesthetics and responsibility, and they are fields of going beyond the dualism of self and other and realise Advaita (non-duality) at the levels of self, other, culture and the world—both local and planetary Advaita, ultimately leading to the realisation of Lokasangraha—gathering of people for the welfare of all.

Some deliberations also probed the iconisation of Gandhi which has led to his alienation and also a reduction to tokenism. Priya Bhalla pointed out that Gandhian economics talks about practising minimalism or austerity. Persis Latika Dass drew attention to consumerist India in the context of Gandhian values and principles. She emphasised Gandhi’s three vows––aparigraha (non-possession or limitation of wants), sarva dharma saman (equality of all religions) and ahimsa (non-violence) and concluded that globalisation has had a poor impact on all the three truths that Gandhi professed. Ambarish Mukherji spoke on Gandhi’s concern for the environment, quoting him: ‘The Earth has enough resources for our need but not for our greed’.

Education and Satyagraha

Gandhi and education have an inseparable relationship, particularly in the context of satyagraha and swaraj. R. Govinda dwelled on Gandhi’s evolving idea of education and its interpretation and misinterpretation, especially as Gandhi’s largest amount of writings have been on education. For Gandhi, education was an experiment in his life, and the Wardha experience shaped his ideas on education. Gandhi evolved the term shram, a collective experience which helps integrate the community with schools. V. Palanithurai brought in his activist’s experience and work in Gandhigram, sharing his experiences working with community leaders and training them in Gandhian values, resulting in the transformation of their communities. His work has derived strength from the alternative ideas of governance, democracy, development and politics as espoused by Gandhi.

Discussing Gandhi’s experimentation and evolving ideas of education, as explicated by Avinash Singh, is vital as his political ideas and strategies are based on his educational ideas and experiences. Singh found the link between education and satyagraha and conceptualised the basic scheme of education which was based on one’s mother tongue and handicraft. Gandhi has been criticised for the insistence of handicraft or manual work in the age of technology. Countering this, Singh drew a parallel between Paulo Freire’s idea of conscientisation and Gandhi’s idea of satyagraha. Sushama Sharma highlighted what it takes to be a satyagrahi, particularly in the context of school. To be a satyagrahi, one needs the ready to learn the truth. According to her, Nai Talim (new education) was the best gift given by Gandhi to the nation: it was the pedagogy of transformation. Nai Talim was seen as a process of silent revolution, continuous learning and character building.

Nidhi Gaur focussed on how Gandhi saw education as a means to satyagraha which was a means to swaraj. She sought to examine the potential of Nai Talim to facilitate the practice of satyagraha and explain the relationship between the practice of crafts and swaraj. A popular perception of the term crafts associates it with tradition. Gaur used the term ‘crafts’ to denote an activity that essentially leads to create something new (alluding to the recent work of Richard Sennett). Gandhi’s lifestyle, S.B. Chakrabarti argued, was a complete curriculum. It encompassed individual and collective education that cannot be a part of a formalised and institutionalised syllabus, but can only be embedded in regular practice of cultivating values—modern, ethical, social, cultural, political and religious.

Truth in Global Philosophical Traditions

Truth resonates in different philosophical traditions. Gandhi’s relation or inspiration could be fathomed in this regard. Uma Chattopadhyaya asserted that Gandhi’s ideas are subject to several interpretations. In him, truth and God were identical and the former had an epistemological and metaphysical basis. The epistemological basis was influenced by Pramana theories (knowing about the truth) and metaphysical theories were based on nature (which also delimits metaphysical theories). Gandhi was an intuitionalist regarding truth. Truth was common for both idealists and realists for final emancipation. Truth leads to truthfulness and morality in a person which in turn lead to peace.

Saroj Giri explored the relationship between Western (alluding to Plato, Foucault and Christianity) and Indian philosophy (referring to Adi Shankara, Buddhism and Ram Chandra Shukla’s interpretation of Kabir) while locating Gandhi’s idea about the truth. Arttatrana Nayak brought in the truth discourse in Chinese philosophy where social ethics are an important component. According to him, for both Gandhi and Confucius, knowledge, humanity and truth were important components in their social philosophies. Specifically, in the Chinese philosophy, investigation was important for the persistence of truth. In Western philosophy, a priory knowledge (Kant) was important, whereas in Chinese philosophy if knowledge was not for humanity, it was not knowledge.

According to Manindra Nath Thakur, Gandhi connected with the collective consciousness. There were three important components of his consciousness: being, thinking and knowing. There were many layers to this process, one being the political layer. Being was the totalised self and had many layers including body, community and self. That the being was connected with other beings was best reflected in Hazari Prasad Dwivedi’s novel Anam Das Ka Potha. Gandhi’s ideas of communication took place through being in the process of becoming which helped in addressing the binary of otherness. Akhlaque Ahmed spoke on the truth discourse in the Persian tradition and its contemporary relevance. There was a validity of truth in both the notion of a priory knowledge and certification of truth and all knowledge was a necessity.

Manoranjan Mohanty brought in the global traditions of the truth discourse by highlighting some methodological issues. For him, the pursuit of truth and its interconnections with philosophy were important. He raised three questions: If the pursuit of truth was located in practices, what were those practices? Was truth utilitarian? What was the idea of the Supreme Being/God (for Gandhi, truth was God as he rejected Romain Rolland)? Which part of truth was important? For Mohanty, there were two constraints regarding truth: first, was it solving the utilitarian conundrum (for instance, was technology helpful or a hindrance)? Second, a particular truth could be popular which challenged dominance, but later that could become dominant itself.

Satyagraha, Religion and Politics

Gandhi had a profound capacity to engage with religion and politics by reprioritising and deconstruction meaning in an anti-binary manner. Amitha Santiago referred to Gandhi, Frantz Fanon and B.R. Ambedkar on violence to explore the construction of truth within power. Gandhi used the strategic non-violence method for political resistance, and satyagraha was used for strategic purposes to fight for the imaginary collective of India. Santiago concluded stating that power produced truth as well as resistance.

According to Rinku Lamba, though for Gandhi religion was a personal matter that had no link to politics, politics can be approached in a religious manner and politics without morality should be avoided. James Ponniah highlighted two discursive acts (‘comparison’ and ‘theology’). For him, comparative theology was a journey of truth and a process of back and forth learning which made a detailed study of religion over a period of time, and such journey of truth was meditative, reflective, contemplative and repetitive. Thus, comparative theology was a process of travel and translation. There were four phases of travel, namely ‘elaborative’ phase, ‘questioning’ phase, ‘discourse’ phase and ‘returning’ phase. There was a convergence between comparative theory and satyagraha, as both travel for truth, treading on uncharted path; both acknowledge the role of co-pilgrims in the making of truth.

Suwa Lal Jangu discussed the role of church and civil society in social change and democracy and reflected on Gandhian practices in Mizoram. There were four features of Gandhian civil society (non-violent, moral and ethical in public life; full consciousness of one’s duty; self-control and discipline; and tolerance and forbearance). Civil society, which had limited space in India before Independence, derived its strength from the Gandhian tradition of voluntarism. Civil society of Mizoram played a major role in bringing about social change and modernisation of Mizo tribes. They also played a major role in governance and administration and also participated in policymaking.

Satyagraha, the Information Age and Mass Communication

More than relevance per se, Gandhi and satyagraha also needed an analysis to comprehend the complexity of the information age and distortion in mass communication. Zoya Hasan alluded to Gandhi’s relevance vis-à-vis nationalism, capitalism, solidarity and mass mobilisation through satyagraha. For Gandhi, nationalism was civic, non-sectarian, and inclusive; and capitalism was incompatible with freedom. The concept of solidarity was crucial to Gandhi’s idea of freedom and was reminiscent of Marx’s endeavour to overcome alienation. Huang Yinghong located Gandhi’s relevance in the information age in which information was used to increase wealth while causing inequality and low income for labours. Avinash Gupta argued that satyagraha is as strikingly relevant today amidst inequality and crisis of parliamentary democracy as it was in the 1930s and 1940s. He explained how the concept of satyagraha was relevant for the development of the political, societal and economic transformation of Nepal.

The nature of contemporary communication and need of alternative communication have been a perennial concern in the satyagraha discourse. In this context, N. Tamilselvi discussed the role of media in the Sabrimala temple issue which saw the lifting of the ban by the Supreme Court which had prevented women entering the temple. Protests against the judgement ensued, leading to lopsided coverage of the issue by leading newspapers. She concluded that newspaper reports should be balanced, giving equal importance to all parties involved in this dispute.

‘Mobile satyagraha’ for Subhranshu Chaudhary was a way for adivasis to pressing their demand effectively. ‘Voice Media’ on cell phones enabled adivasis to record their problems which are further sent to the relevant government department. Papia Sen Gupta remembered Gandhi in times of fake news. People’s faith in the media in the West may be decreasing, but in India’s majority still had faith in the media. Gandhi argued against sensational writings which he called ‘poisonous journalism’. Satyagraha as an idea was conceptualised and applied to the field of journalism by Gandhi when he started the Indian Opinion (1903) in the Natal in South Africa.

Satyagraha for Life

Along with life as satyagraha, satyagraha for life was an immediate concern because the Earth was being ravaged by vested corporate interests. Vandana Shiva in her valedictory address, ‘Satyagraha and Life Sustenance on Earth’ encapsulated this concern graphically. Biodiversity was four billion years old; yet, biodiversity that enriched our planet was dying. Every fourth Indian remained hungry and every second child was malnourished, she said. The ‘science of extraction’ currently prevailed was causing the extinction of two hundred species daily, ‘making agriculture an extended market now.’ Satyagraha was crucial to reverse this calamity. Shiva said that the after effects of ‘violent farming’ caused by the Green Revolution led to 33,000 people dying in Punjab. The only alternative was ‘non-violent farming’. Otherwise civilisation, as we know it, would become extinct and thus there was a critical need for the regeneration of civilisation.

Apotheosis of Satyagraha

Across the globe, the crises of liberal democracies have casued a breakdown of constitutionalism, depleted rights and justice, casued rising inequality and discrimination, the emergence of majoritarianism emasculated institutions. The self-assured normative high ground of liberty and justice in liberal democracies has been violently threatened by ideological and empirical assertion of nationalist populism and majoritarianism. Along with these, the nature of capitalism within the liberal framework has undergone a change where lopsided growth across classes has been camouflaged by the construct of religious–social majoritarian identity over majority in economic class. Against this backdrop, the rekindling of satyagraha for perhaps a global transformation presents a possible intervention.