"The greatest revolution of our time is, therefore, a procedural revolution, removal of injustice through a mode of action characterised by justice. The question here is not so much the contents of justice as the mode to achieve it. Constitutional and orderly processes are often not enough. They are then transgressed by the use of weapons. In order that this should not happen and that man should not ever get thrown around between ballot and bullet, this procedural revolution of civil disobedience has emerged. At the head of all revolutions of our time stands this revolution of satyagraha against weapons..."
— Dr. Rammanohar Lohia, "Marx, Gandhi and Socialism"
***
Mahatma Gandhi, who lived a rich life defined by both thought and action, has today been reduced to a mere photograph and an object of ritualistic veneration. The contemporary debate often centers on who waves his picture more vigorously and who displays greater superficial reverence towards him. (It is a separate, darker reality that there is no dearth of individuals who literally fire shots at his photographs in a bid to 'murder' him all over again).
In this milieu, it is highly pertinent to recall Dr. Rammanohar Lohia’s serious endeavour to harness Gandhi’s ideas and modes of resistance to create a new socialist doctrine—one that provides a viable alternative to both capitalist and communist systems. Both Gandhi and Lohia share a deep connection with the month of October: Gandhi’s Jayanti falls on October 2nd, while Lohia’s death anniversary is observed on October 12th.
Lohia’s critique of Gandhi remains a seminal contribution to post-Gandhian studies. As a 'Gandhian heretic', Lohia offers perhaps the most revolutionary interpretation of Gandhi’s philosophy and his unprecedented non-violent mode of protest. After critically examining both capitalism and communism, Lohia observed that the world was trapped in their grip, resulting in poverty, war, and fear. He proposed a 'third idea' of socialism as an alternative, proceeding by placing the colonised part of the world at the centre. He accepted that this idea was not fully elaborated, but insisted that it remain open. According to him, “In an open system there is still some chance of truth and progress, while a closed system does violence to facts and wishes them away in order to prove their meaninglessness."
Long before the Neo-Marxists and the New Left pondered these concepts, Lohia took fresh initiatives to construct a new socialist philosophy and politics. He found highly useful material for this venture in the ideas and modes of protest of Gandhi. According to Lohia, this new socialist doctrine would form the basis of a new global order, ultimately leading humanity into a civilisation free from violence and poverty.
While Lohia accepted Marx in his intellectual tradition, he clarified that “…this talk of being a Marxist or an anti-Marxist is futile and irrelevant. What is relevant is correct thinking and an integrated approach. Our mind must be on a quest, a quest for the essence that lies under Gandhiji's or Marx's thoughts. Quest and not entanglement with tradition can help us to do this." He firmly refuted the prevalent belief that he was merely trying to mix Gandhi and Marx, arguing: “Socialism need not proclaim itself as Gandhian or Marxist on the one hand and as anti-Gandhian or anti-Marxist on the other…”
He further suggested, “…it is not the fault of Marx that people stay put at Marxism." Lohia was equally critical of the claimants of Gandhism: “It will be countered that what prevails in the country today is not the Gandhi doctrine but a somewhat inferior brew of Gandhism and Marxism. That is substantially correct, but it confirms the weakness of Gandhism in so far as Marxism forces it to mix and also that the best in it is unable to burst forth."
Lohia applied a Gandhian filter to his theorisation of a new socialism. Therefore, he did not reject Gandhi's ideas on truth, time, history, progress, development, or even religion. For example, the echo of Gandhi’s cyclic vision of the universe and civilisation can be heard in Lohia’s cyclic view of history. In modern industrial civilisation, the linear view of the driving forces of history has come to be accepted as gospel truth. Both Gandhi and Lohia outright refused to ride the chariot of a linear 'history' that races ahead for a small section of the global population while marginalising others and destroying the environment. While Lohia gave more importance to the material driving forces of history than Gandhi did, he placed equal significance on the universal values inherent in epics, myths, and symbols that exist beyond the boundaries of historical time.
Lohia developed a Gandhian sociology by analysing the nexus between the caste system and capitalism. He understood that in India, capitalism and its positive aspects were hijacked by the upper castes, turning it into a project of caste elites. Lohia's entire political economy can be seen as an imaginative restatement of *Hind Swaraj*. He combined the radical social philosophy of lower-caste radicals with Gandhian economics. Thus, his most important contribution to *Gandhiana* is his critique of the dominant paradigms of development, utilising the experiences of people in colonised countries, as well as the marginalised populations within them. In India, he identified these groups as Dalits, tribals, backward classes, women, and poor minorities.
Lohia theorised the specifics of Gandhi's ideas, images, and actions to support his dream socialist system. For instance, he interpreted the message of the spinning wheel as a push for controllable technology, village governance, and direct democracy. Through the notion of controllable technology, he paved the way for a new form of ecological socialism; he translated village governance into a four-pillar state representing the decentralisation of economic and political power; and he elevated the value of austerity into a decent standard of living.
Lohia’s emphasis on the 'principle of immediacy' also shows a clear Gandhian influence. He suggested that “the essence and justification of each deed should be embedded in the deed itself. It should not become necessary for man to make prefatory or postscript justifications for his deed whereby misdeeds like lies, deceit and bloodshed might be explained away.” Here, Lohia sought to integrate the politics of immediacy with larger ethical conduct in politics. In doing so, he restored the oppositional content of Gandhi’s ideas and actions that mainstream Gandhians had lost.
Just as Gandhi undertook a deep study of Indian conditions before plunging into its politics, Lohia agreed with this empirical approach: "Conditions must be studied before they can be improved upon. There is often no effort in the human mind to investigate the real conditions but a frequent attempt to advise, exhort, and give moral precepts. One should never identify what is with what ought to be."
Lohia also agreed with the manner in which Gandhi proceeded from the 'local' to the 'universal'. Though grounded in India, Gandhi responded to the whole world. This is a unique feature of Lohia's thought as well: any idea or mode he suggested to revolutionise the Indian mind held equally good for the rest of the world.
When it comes to the mode of protest against injustice, Lohia viewed Gandhi's method of civil disobedience (civil nafarmani) and satyagraha—which enables an individual to resist oppression without external support—as the greatest revolution of our time against the weaponisation of state power.
This is merely an outline of Lohia’s reading and interpretation of Gandhi. Yet, the takeaway is clear: by appropriating Gandhian ideas and modes of resistance to forge a new socialism, Lohia rescued the Mahatma from static worship. Through Lohia’s eyes, we do not just see a photograph on a wall; we see a vibrant, active Gandhi, urgently relevant to our times.
---
The author is a veteran of the socialist movement, a former professor at Delhi University, and a former fellow at the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla
Comments