University of Virginia Library

gandhi's relevance

reprinted with permission from
the new york times

The memory of Mohandas Karamchand
Gandhi, whose 100th birthday anniversary is
being observed today, was recently described
as having become at one and the same time,
"Inspiring and irrelevant" in the India of
1969.

Certainly in a world increasingly torn by
conflict there is little evidence of regard for
the teachings of the twentieth century's
leading apostle of nonviolence. Gandhi's own
home state of Gujerat has been the scene in
recent weeks of bloody communal strife. In
the United States there has been a violent turn
away from the compassionate leadership of
Gandhi's disciple, the late Dr. Martin Luther
King.

But if Gandhi's universal precepts are
disregarded, it does not necessarily follow that
they are irrelevant. Gandhi's basic belief that
violence is not only immoral but also in the
long run impractical has yet to be disproved.
Much of what he preached to Indians during
the first half of this century is still pertinent
for other around the world today.

For instance, embattled Arabs and Israelis
might ponder this: "If we have no charity,
and no tolerance, we shall never settle our
differences amicably and must therefore
always submit to the arbitrament of a third
party — foreign domination."

Feuding Irish Protestants and Catholics
would do well to heed Gandhi's warning that
"the most heinous and most cruel crimes of
which history has record have been committed
under the cover of religion."

Americans who still have illusions of
imposing a Government of United States
choosing on the South Vietnamese should
remember that "(No) people exists that would
not think itself happier even under its own
bad government than it might really be under
the good governance of an alien power."

There are endless examples of Gandhi's
timeless wisdom. But even more important
than what Gandhi preached was the example
of his own life. This has been memorialized in
a tribute from the late General Smuts, the
South African leader opposed by Gandhi in
the latter's struggle for equal rights for South
Africa's Indian minority. General Smuts
wrote:

"It was my fate to be the antagonist of a
man for whom even then I had the highest
respect....He never forgot the human
background of the situation, never lost his
temper or succumbed to hate, and preserved
his gentle humor even in the most trying
situations. His manner and spirit even then, as
well as later, contrasted markedly with the
ruthless and brutal forces which is the vogue in
our day."

Such men are always rare, never irrelevant.