Gandhi and AnarchySankaran Nair, C. (Chettur), Sir
History
Gandhi and Anarchy
Sankaran Nair, C. (Chettur), Sir
Gandhi, Mahatma, 1869-1948 -- Political and social views; India -- Politics and government -- 1919-1947
Empire does not support the claim for early concession of Home Rule, for
Home Rule means Home Rule within the Empire, not outside it--the Home
Rule enjoyed by the self-governing constituents of the commonwealth. The
Empire, it will be reasonably urged, cannot afford to place great power
in the hands of a party which would subordinate the interests of the
Empire and of India to the interests of a large body outside the Empire
who actually stand in opposition to it. The introduction of this
religious element in this manner is fatal to the well-being of the
Empire, and unless some other basis can be found for the Hindu-Mahomedan
entente, it must go. The extent to which Mr. Gandhi is prepared to go in
support of the Khilafat claim is stated in this extract:--
"What will the Imperial Government do if France were to attempt to
deprive England of Dover and India were secretly to help France or
openly to show indifference or hostility to England's struggle to
retain Dover? Can Indians be expected to sit idle when the Khilafat is
vivisected?"
It is one thing to ask the Empire or India to go to war in favour of an
oppressed class--but to ask her to do it in the interests of
co-religionists of a community living outside the Empire is very
different.
What is the present position? I shall describe it in the words of one of
Mr. Gandhi's dupes, a secretary of a District Congress Committee, Mr. K.
Madhavan Nair of Calicut, who writes on January 4th as follows:--
Now the position is this:--
The Hindus and Mohamedans have been waging a common war with
non-violence as the fundamental creed. It has to be noted however, that
there is a party led by the Maulana that advocates violence for the
achievement of their object. Suppose to-morrow that party takes to
violence and the other remains non-violent, what will be the fate of
the non-violent party if Maulana's views are pushed to their logical
conclusion? Is freedom worth having if in the attainment of it you have
to loot, murder and outrage your innocent neighbour who does not agree
with you or approve of your methods and is Swaraj possible of
achievement and the Khilafat likely to be righted by such means?
Maulana's views make those who have absolutely no faith in violence to
think over these facts deeply and anxiously.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account