THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER , 16, 1932 GANDHI AND HIS CAUSE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21289, 16 September 1932, Page 10

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER , 16, 1932 GANDHI AND HIS CAUSE

Oxce more Mahatma Gandhi sets himself against the forces working for the peace and order of Indiaone man against a host. Time and again in his strange career he has taken a cause into his own hands and by his initiative rallied others, but this strangest of all his desperate ventures is not winning endorsement as of yore. Prominent orthodox Hindus are pleading with him to abandon his intention to "fast unto death" in order to impress on the British Government his disapproval of part of its constitutional plan for India. They may be unable to dissuade him from his purpose. This little, weakly man with quiet eyes set in a thin face, to all appearances a pilgrim rather than a campaigner, noted for his suavity and kindliness and at times full of convincing humility, can be adamant. His tranquil bearing, calm and poiseful. speaks relentless war more often than considerate peace. None can outstay him in intrepid resolve, once his mind is made up. He is built for resolute endurance and takes personal hardship as a delight. His scanty garb of coarse white cloth, his bare feet, his meagre diet of rice and fruit-and water,-his preference for sleeping on the ground, all argue a. spirit above luxury and ease and j a readiness to suffer for a cause.' An enigma to most of those knowing him, he wields an uncanny influence as a rule., Once, when tho Prince of Wales visited India, there were unpleasant disturbances in Bombay, but Calcutta seemed a city of the dead, for the nationalist agitators were stilled into silence by Gandhi's mere word. That mere word, however, has been known to inflame the National Congress, as when he induced it to boycott the Indian Eeforms Commission of 1927. And with it all he has been tireless. Early in his career he undertook twenty years of organised resistance on behalf of his 150,000 countrymen living under Asiatic laws in South Africa, and won relief for them by his unremitting pressure. This latest purpose shows him in a role for which all his unusual life has been a preparation. He cannot be understood without remembrance of his habitually religious point of view. In this, although a Hindu of high caste and strict tenets, he is not exclusive. To toil for humanity as well as his country ; is his declared passion. "In the language of the Gita, I want to live 'at peace with both friend and foe," he once said. "Though, therefore, a Mussulman or a Christian or a Hindu may despise me and hate me, I want to love him and serve him even as I would love my wife or son, though they hate me. So my patriotism is for me a stage in my journey to the land of eternal freedom and peace. Thus it will be seen that for me there are no politics devoid of religion. Politics bereft of religion are a death-trap, because they kill the soul." There are echoes of this creed in his letters to the British Prime Minister conveying his protest against the particular legislation he now opposes. He disdains to discuss it as a matter of politics. Thus he has approached the whole question of Swaraj, with its insistence on independence for India. He disavows anti-British prejudice. Critics of his implacable crusade against the rule of British law in India have cited his undergoing of an operation for appendicitis in a British hospital, and even his wearing of spectacles of European make, as inconsistent with his intense nationalism ; but he would admit nothing of inconsistency in such things. They do not touch his axiomatic relation of politics to religion. That is his cardinal principle. It has enabled him to inspire Moslem confidence and adherence on occasion, and to make a compact with militant Sikh leaders in the ardour of his work for an independent India. An enigma he may remain, but to understand this religious pivoting of his policy clears away some misconception. In the present instance he claims that a wrong against religion is contemplated in the proposal of separate electorates for the depressed classes. To the British mind, his objection must seem fantastic. What is intended is an aid to these unfortunate classes by giving them direct representation. Gandhi's objection is that, by the granting of this privilege to Hindu "untouchables," a blow is struck at Hindu unity. He is not disposed to look at the matter as it really is—a constitutional safeguard for these despised people, a merely political arrangement protecting them from domination by those of higher caste. He is unmoved by the reminder that the arrangement, designed to confer this special franchise on them for twenty years, still leaves them free to vote as part of an undivided Hindu community. He will not accept this as providing for a continuance of Hindu communal unity, but fastens on the additional vote in separate electorates . as an affront and menace to Hinduism. Among tho depressed classes themselves there has been a division of opinion, some being content with joint electorates and others wanting the separate franchise as well. It has been suggested that Gandhi's objection is based on the fear that the creation of separate electorates would so foster a sense of privileged status among the Hindu "untouchables" that his lifelong championship of thern would no longer be appreciated. This view may do him an injustice. Nevertheless, he seeks to obstruct a provision for their social and political good, and adopts a course that is fanatical in the extreme.