HaCKeRz Kr0nlcKLeZ 1/HaCKeRz Kr0nlcKLeZ.iso/drugs/gandhi.summary

Text File | 1996-05-06 | 29.1 KB | 592 lines

Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
From: Dave Hall <[e-mail]>
Subject: Finally--Gandhi Paper! (Long but Good)
To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 95 14:31:56 PST

Hi, all--

It's been about two weeks since I committed my collegue Mary
Sibley to writing a white paper about Gandhi's techniques for
resistance and civil disobedience.  It turned into a much larger
document (about 12 pages) than what I would normally be comfortable
posting here.  But it is really EXCELLENT, and provides some
valuable insights into what we're doing locally and nationally
and what directions we may want to consider.  And please, no
flames--I said it was long in the subject line!  ;)


==========================================================
        Dave Hall, Olympia, WA:  LEGALIZE IT, TAX IT, THEN
        LEAVE ME THE HELL ALONE!!

        "Be of good cheer; the military-industrial complex
        will soon collapse." --The Late Great Edward Abbey

        "W.H.E.N. educated people know."


                * * *



A Summary of M.K. Gandhi's Technique for Political Action

By Mary Sibley

February 1995

PREFACE

I have prepared this description of the political action technique of
M.K.  Gandhi at the request of Dave Hall for distribution to the Drug
Reform Coordination Network (DRCNet) and other drug policy reform
advocates who may have an interest in Gandhi's technique.  I have read
much about Gandhi's technique and know that I still do not fully
comprehend its application and implications.  My knowledge is
especially scanty in the area of organizational structures through
which Gandhian campaigns were conducted, although I surmise that
Gandhi's campaign organizations were highly structured.  I am
currently seeking texts describing and analyzing Gandhi's
organizational structures.  If anyone has such a text, I would
appreciate access to it.  If anyone has studied Gandhi's life and work
and reads something within this that seems to be wrong, misleading, or
a misinterpretation, I would welcome suggestions.  In addition, I
would be glad to participate in further discussion.

CREDITS

For assistance in organizing my thoughts, I give credit to Joan V.
Bondurant, whose book "Conquest of Violence:  The Gandhian Philosophy
of Conflict" (second edition, 1965, Princeton University Press) I
consulted occasionally while writing this.  In the text that follows,
annotations are sparse.  If anyone is interested in reading more about
a particular topic, let me know and I will provide references.

INTRODUCTION

How this Discussion Is Organized

This discussion is organized into three sections.  The first section
discusses the cultural context and other conditions under which Gandhi
conceived and conducted political campaigns.  The second section
discusses the fundamental principles of a Gandhian campaign.  The last
section discusses the steps in a Gandhian campaign and includes my
opinions about the similarities between these steps and steps that
have been taken by drug policy reform advocates.

A Short Definition of Gandhi's Political Technique

Gandhi's political technique is a process of creatively engaging with
others to transform an unjust cultural, economic, social, or
governmental system into one that is more just.

Scope of Gandhi's Technique

Gandhi is most famous for his political activism with respect to
ending British rule in India.  He used the technique not just to work
toward reform and ultimately removal of British rule in India, but
also in many conflict situations between Indians only.  For example,
he organized and led programs designed to change how the upper class
Hindus treated the lower class Hindus.  Gandhi himself considered his
most important work the constructive programs designed to remove the
underlying causes of poverty and to rebuild strong local economies in
impoverished areas.  Without this work, poor Indians would not have
had the sustenance needed to participate in the many campaigns that
led to home rule.

Martin Luther King applied techniques similar to Gandhi's in the
United States when working to end civil rights injustices based on
race.  Many of King's programs, speeches, and writings strongly
resemble Gandhi's, with terminology and other specifics tailored to
the issues and systems at hand.  Another 20th century leader who has
successfully used similar techniques when engaging a cruel and
conscience-less government is Vaclav Havel.  The injustices that these
leaders were working to overcome occurred in widely varying cultures,
social systems, and governments.

Because I assume that most readers are specifically interested in
political strategies with regard to changing unjust laws in the U.S.,
the following discussion focuses on the application of Gandhi's
techniques in conflicts with governments.

SECTION 1.  CONTEXT AND CONDITIONS

The Cultural Context in which Gandhi Developed His Techniques

India is multi-cultural with most cultures based on religions.  The
Hindus are the largest group, followed by the Muslims, who constitute
a large minority.  Then come a much smaller number of Sikhs.  Many
other religious groups exist, but they are very small in numbers.

People of these religions had lived side-by-side in relative peace for
thousands of years when the British arrived.  As the British became
established economically, they started an insidious campaign to divide
the Indian people along religious lines, especially by planting in
Muslims fear of discrimination from Hindus should the British not keep
the Hindu influence in check.  The British were quite successful in
promoting disunity between the Hindus and Muslims, a legacy that to
this day engenders hatred and bloodshed.

The Sikhs were selected to be the native component of the
British-controlled police force.  The Sikhs were a large enough
minority to provide enough police for British purposes, and yet a
small enough group that Sikh police were patrolling and incarcerating
primarily Hindus and Muslims.  After a couple of hundred years of
British encroachment on the cultures, inter-cultural fear and
suspicion that had not existed before the British became the norm.

Gandhi's Starting Place in Society

Gandhi was born a Hindu.  The Hindu society is stratified (some say
"calcified") into classes referred to as castes.  The caste into which
one is born determines the jobs one may have, the education one may
pursue, the privileges one is allowed, the places one may gather
water, the people with whom one may eat, etc.  The highest caste is
the Brahmans; the lowest, the untouchables.  Outside of these are the
outcastes.  The outcastes are those who violated the rules of their
caste to the extent that the authorities within the caste cast them
out.  Thereafter, they are to be shunned by others in the caste--no
one may help them, they are not allowed to work within the caste, etc.

Gandhi was a member of the Bania caste, which participated in business
and government in his home state.  Gandhi was publicly ordered an
outcaste when he was in his late teens because he went to Britain to
study law; his caste's leaders said it was against the religion to
leave the country.  The leaders actually went so far as to inform the
caste members that if they saw him off when he left for England, they
would be fined!  Gandhi wrote in his autobiography, "The order had no
effect on me, and I took my leave .  .  ."  ( M.K.  Gandhi, "An
Autobiography:  The Story of My Experiments with the Truth," Part I,
Chapter XII, [1927] translation by Mahadev Desai, published in the
U.S.  in 1957 by Beacon Press, Boston).

SECTION 2.  FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES

Gandhi adhered to four fundamental principles familiar to the
Westerner.  Three are truth, non-violence, and self-suffering.  The
fourth is concerned with means and ends.  All campaigns conducted
under his guidance were consistent with these principles (occasional
errors arose due to the experimental nature of the technique and
limitations in campaigners' previous experience).  These fundamental
principles are summarized below.

Truth

Gandhi did not fully define the "truth" but instead said that he was
seeking after it.  He was seeking after it through socio-political
action, just as others might seek after it through a mystical or
spiritual path, the study of mathematics, or the creation of art.  I
gather from my readings that the goals of most his contemporaries were
much more immediate and concrete (like a cost-of-living increase for
workers in a textile mill, the right for untouchables to walk past a
temple used by Brahmans, the replacement of British rule with home
rule, etc.).

The replacement of British rule was a mighty goal.  Those who held it
accepted the need for a large number of intermediate goals that they
collectively agreed (often after long and arduous debate) would
contribute directly or indirectly to achievement of the mighty goal.
Some of the intermediate goals included things that even the most
uneducated, illiterate, and impoverished could grasp immediately,
like:  (1) Having all Indians weave their own cloth rather than buy
British cloth (most Indians made their own clothing) and (2) Repealing
a salt taxation and regulation scheme that drove the cost of salt so
high that the poor could not afford it.  Salt is an essential dietary
element in India's climate and can be collected from India's ocean
beaches or retrieved from inland deposits by anyone after a bit of
instruction.  The salt laws brought the British significant revenues.
Enforcement of the salt laws included fines and incarceration for
those who were caught making or collecting salt for personal use and
most especially if the person was producing and distributing
marketable amounts outside of the government's regulatory structure.

Non-Violence

Gandhi maintained that no human or group of humans could know the
complete truth.  No matter how close one thinks one might be to the
truth, one could be in error either wholly or in some lesser way that
is not immediately apparent.  Because of this, he maintained that no
one could use violence toward others to press his or her view of the
truth forward.

This principle excluded all acts of violence, and Gandhi's definition
of violence was broad.  As one might expect, physical violence could
not be used against an opponent.  He also maintained that there should
be no violence in one's expression and words.  The non-violence
principle required that an opponent be treated with utmost respect.
Smear campaigns aimed at defamation of character were not in his
political action toolbox, just as murder of lawmakers, judges,
bureaucrats, and police were not in his toolbox.

Gandhi's non-violence is a full antonym for violence.  Not only does
non-violence refrain from destructive acts, it is aggressively and
provocatively constructive.  Thus, Gandhi's campaigns did not seek to
defeat an opponent, but instead to convert the opponent to a more just
position and to challenge the opponent to act upon the new position.
In addition, Gandhi held that there must be an opportunity for an
opponent to save face, so long as no fundamental principle or aim of
the action was thereby compromised.

Self-Suffering

Self-suffering is an integral element of Gandhi's technique and a
necessary corollary to provocative non-violent action.  Self-suffering
can take the form of material and social sacrifice.  For example, loss
of employment, property, or income as a result of holding to one's
view of the truth is a form of self-suffering.  Self-suffering reaches
its personal extremes in incarceration, physical injury, and the
sacrifice of one's life.  Gandhi wrote:  "Suffering injury in one's
own person is .  .  .  of the essence of non-violence and is the
chosen substitute for violence to others."  (M.K.  Gandhi,
"Non-violence in Peace and War," 2nd edition, Ahmedabad:  Navajivan,
1944, p.  49).  He also wrote, "Non-violence in its dynamic condition
means conscious suffering.  It does not mean meek submission to the
will of the evil-doer, but it means the pitting of one's whole soul
against the will of the tyrant."  (M.K.  Gandhi, in "Young India,"
August 11, 1920 ).  Self-suffering is preferred over submitting to
humiliation and pr ovides a way to preserve one's personal dignity in
the face of those who would treat one unjustly.

Throughout his writings and campaigns, Gandhi emphasized that inviting
self-suffering is something that must not be done lightly.  One who
invites self-suffering must be prepared for the fullest possible
sacrifice that may result from one's actions.

Means and Ends

Gandhi believed that means do not serve ends, rather means create
ends.  Thus, to attain an end that is positive and truthful, one must
use means that are positive and truthful.  This philosophy can be
summarized by his statement, "the means are the ends in the making."

Means that create ends have two interesting implications.  First, one
cannot define a just, non-violent end and then use unjust and violent
means to attain it--for the end will be in character with the means
used.  This view precludes taking actions under the philosophy
summarized in the statement "the ends justify the means"--a philosophy
that seems to permeate current U.S.  policy-making.  Indeed, the
"ends" being created by current government policy with regard to some
drugs are very different than the officially stated goals.

A second implication is that, while one must always be moving toward a
goal of pure truth and justice, the end cannot be defined precisely in
advance.  Each action one takes creates the next action and that one,
the next, each action always in keeping with the last and moving
progressively closer to truth and justice.  Through actively engaging
with fellow activists and the opponent, one grows in understanding of
what must be done, a step at a time, to create the most just and
truthful end.

The technique becomes dynamic when it succeeds in provoking internal
change in the opponent.  Thus the knowledge and understanding of both
the activist and the opponent grow simultaneously toward truth and
justice.  However, the technique is not self-propelling; it is usually
used in a context of a stagnant, inert, or deliberately destructive
force and requires tremendous energy.  The activist must constantly
reassess the opponent's comprehension and adjust the program so that
it is more than reactive to the opponent's change--every change must
be viewed as an opportunity to press the campaign further forward.

What Gandhi's Contemporaries Thought About the Fundamental Principles

A few of Gandhi's contemporaries adhered to the fundamental principles
as inviolable guides by which to conduct one's personal life as well
as one's social or political actions.  However, the majority of his
contemporaries accepted the fundamental principles as policies.  They
recognized the success of the principles in empowering the
disempowered and realized that, even if viewed as policies, the
principles were the key to winning "home rule" with an unarmed and
impoverished army of the disenfranchised.

This acceptance as policy rather than principle caused Gandhi some
dismay.  When the activists with whom he was working rejected these
even as policy, he would leave the political sphere and return to his
constructive work toward remedying the devastating economic problems
in the villages of India.  Eventually, his contemporaries always asked
him to return to the political sphere.

SECTION 3.  STEPS OF A GANDHIAN CAMPAIGN

The Progress of a Campaign

Upon discovering an opportunity for reform or change, a campaign is
conducted through several steps.  Each step is a necessary
prerequisite to the next, for each must fully develop the context in
which the next occurs.  The early steps develop the public stage upon
which later steps, if they become necessary, can be played out.  Some
of the steps initiated early in the campaign, especially education,
continue throughout the campaign.

The progression is designed to maximize early in the campaign all
opportunities for the opponent to make positive changes and save face
without campaigners moving to more provocative measures.  The careful
progression provides fullest opportunity for the campaigners to adjust
their position if they discover that they have inadvertently violated
a fundamental principle.  It gives campaign leaders the opportunity,
through engaging with the opponent early in relatively low-risk
situations, to realistically assess their own strengths and weaknesses
and those of the campaigners and to determine what more provocative
steps can and cannot be taken successfully.

A Summary of the Steps of a Gandhian Campaign

The steps of a campaign are:

--  Investigation of the facts, situation, and conditions
--  Education of the campaigners, the public, and the opponent
--  Negotiation and arbitration
--  Preparation of the campaigners for more provocative measures
--  Agitation
--  Issuing of an ultimatum
--  Economic boycott and forms of strike
--  Non-cooperation
--  Civil disobedience
--  Creation of alternate structures

In India, these steps eventually led to the establishment of a
parallel government in some places, which provided Indians with some
of the experience needed to assume self-government when British rule
was removed.

The steps of a campaign are described in the paragraphs below.  In
brackets I have mentioned my current opinion of where drug policy
reform advocates have made the most progress.

Investigation of the Facts, Situation, and Conditions

A Gandhian campaign is founded on an objective assessment of the
facts.  All facts are considered; none are rejected or downplayed if
they do not fit the expectations of the campaigners--to do so would be
to move away from the complete truth.  The situation of campaigners
and those experiencing the injustice are examined.  As full an
understanding of the situation as possible is developed among all
involved.  The conditions at the time--public awareness and opinion,
the situation of the opponent, and other relevant factors are all
considered and weighed.

[Drug policy reform advocates seem to me to be strongest here.  The
only difficulty I've seen is the occasional attempt to reject or
downplay a pertinent fact that doesn't quite "fit," but this is
usually remedied through discussion among reform advocates.]

Education of the Campaigners, the Public, and the Opponent

With the facts in hand and the situation and conditions fully
examined, education begins.  All who join the campaign must be
educated; they become representatives through their association and
must be fully informed.  The public is often unaware of or misinformed
about injustices; they must be educated to understand why change is
needed.  Many opponents are similar to the public--they are unaware or
misinformed.  Gandhi felt that there were only a few opponents who
would actually want injustices to be perpetuated or continue.  Gandhi
was an optimist and believed even those few could be converted.

[Drug policy reform advocates are weak here, but getting stronger.  At
the International Conference for Drug Policy Reform last November,
attendees recognized the need to raise public awareness about
injustices of the drug war.  I understand that organizations like
NORML are following up with activities geared toward education of the
general public.  The Washington Hemp Education Network (W.H.E.N.)  was
started by a group of marijuana policy reform activists in Washington
State who recognized the need for education.  My personal experience
has been that many of the people who join W.H.E.N.  recognize the
injustices and are looking for the facts.  Others join because they
have much knowledge and want opportunities to educate and persuade
others.  Some relish entering the opponents' sphere and educating!
Also, Cliff Schaffer's persuasive strategies provide an excellent
example of guidelines that have been tailored to move the opponent
toward the truth given an opponent's entry position in a discussion.
Such gu idelines must be assessed and modified periodically to ensure
that they keep pace with the inevitable progress the opponents will
make when so persuaded.]

Negotiation and Arbitration

Remedy for the injustice is sought first through established channels
within the existing system.  Petitioning for change of unjust laws,
challenging unjust laws in the courts, and other legislative or legal
methods fall under this step.

[Drug policy reform advocates working on reform of marijuana laws have
done plenty of negotiation and arbitration at the federal level and in
many states.  I am not aware of as high of a level of negotiation
effort for substances like heroin, cocaine, etc.]

Preparation of the Campaigners for More Provocative Measures

Immediately upon recognizing the existence of a conflict situation
that might lead to more provocative measures, Gandhi's technique calls
for intense preparation.  The motives of campaigners are examined,
weaknesses of the group are identified, and exercises in
self-discipline undertaken.  The goal of this step is to assess and
develop the campaigners' ability to adhere to fundamental principles
and to continue action in the face of significant risks.  There is
much discussion of the issues at hand, the current situation and
conditions, and of the potential results of various courses of action.

[I have not heard of drug policy reform advocates undertaking such
self-examination and participating in mutually agreed upon exercises
in self-discipline.  I have heard discussions and analyses about
potential actions that fall under subsequent steps.]

Agitation

Agitation includes legal high-profile activities such as rallies and
picketing.  Such events are opportunities for the leaders to assess
the group's readiness to proceed with higher profile and more
difficult steps without deteriorating into violence.  Mass gatherings
also provide an opportunity to begin instructing campaigners who have
not been trained previously in the fundamental principles, to
communicate developments in the campaign, and to explain the next
step.

[I haven't heard much about this kind of agitation.  Agitation I have
heard about has involved small numbers of people and, as far as I
know, it has not been part of a sequence of steps such as described
here.  I do not believe that Hemp Fests, even if no one smoked, would
meet the criteria by which Gandhi defined agitation because they are
not part of a highly focused political campaign and do not have a
strong educational focus.]

Issuing of an Ultimatum

A strong appeal is made to the opponent.  The appeal is quite
explicit.  It states the problem, identifies a constructive solution
and the responsibilities of each party in the solution, and explains
what the campaigners will do if the opponent does not participate in
the solution.  The ultimatum should include provision for the opponent
to save face within the scope of the fundamental principles.  The
opponent is fully informed about the next step.  In fact, from this
step forward, every single step taken is preceded by a full advance
disclosure to the opponent of what will be done, when, and where.
Before each step commences, the opponent is offered the opportunity to
change.

[If drug policy reform advocates started a Gandhian campaign today, I
believe that they would be years from being able to issue ultimatums
that actually carried any weight.]

Economic Boycott and Forms of Strike

In India, Indians boycotted foreign cloth with such success that they
had a significant impact on the mills in Britain.  Strikes have been
used extensively in the U.S.  for in all kinds of reform campaigns A
scene in the movie "Gandhi" shows the power of a nationwide strike.

[To conduct an economic boycott requires economic alternatives for the
boycotters.  To conduct an effective strike, a campaign needs great
numbers of campaigners and who have economic alternatives.  As far as
I can tell, drug policy reform advocates are generally dependent on
the dominant economic structures and so are weak on this point.]

Non-Cooperation

Non-cooperation involves refusal to support the portions of the system
that require reform or accept benefits from the system.  For example,
during the campaign to remove British rule, Indians resigned from
government posts, removed their children from government schools,
returned awards and medals that they had received from the government,
and so on.  Economic boycott and strikes described in the previous
step can be regarded as forms of non-cooperation.

[The judges who refuse to try drug cases are engaged in
non-cooperation.  People who refuse to provide urine samples as a
condition of employment are engaged in non-cooperation.]

Civil Disobedience

Civil disobedience extends non-cooperation to the active and open
breaking of selected laws.  Gandhi set complete and voluntary
obedience to laws as a prerequisite for civil disobedience.  Laws to
be broken were selected very carefully for their position at the heart
of the problem or for their symbolic value.  Civil disobedience
involves a deliberate courting of arrest and, upon arrest, no defense
is offered in the courts.  In fact, full admission of guilt is
required.  The prosecutors, juries, and judges are challenged to see
the injustice of the law that they are defending against the civil
disobedient and to cease their cooperation with the injustice.

In mass campaigns involving civil disobedience in India, prisons
filled up very quickly.  Very often, the leaders were arrested in an
attempt to dishearten the campaigners and end the campaign.  Sometimes
they were arrested upon delivery to the authorities of their notice of
intent to disobey!  Other times, the government ignored them
completely which, of course, encouraged more people to join the
campaign.  If the government ignores the first civil disobedients, the
provocative nature of increasing numbers of civil disobedients
eventually compels the government to act.  And compelling the opponent
to act is the point of civil disobedience.

Two important organizational points must be mentioned here.  Every
campaign in which the leaders may be arrested must provide succession
of leadership.  A succession procedure must be planned in advance so
that civil disobedience continues apace no matter how many leaders
have been arrested.  The second point involves support for the
families of the civil disobedients.  There must always be people who
are willing to forego civil disobedience and remain free to take care
of the children, the aged, and the ill.  Support people should be
identified in advance and should, under no circumstances, court
arrest.

[Medicinal marijuana suppliers and users come to mind as a possible
example of civil disobedients, although an analysis would reveal that
very few of these civil disobedients actually meet all of the criteria
set forth by Gandhi.]

Creation of Alternate Structures

If, after all of these steps, the existing system fails to become more
just, an alternate means of ensuring justice must be developed.  This
is especially important when the existing system is so corrupt that
people are disobeying it not just as part of a campaign, but simply
because they find themselves unable to conduct their lives peacefully
without disobeying it.  Such a system is approaching inevitable
collapse by virtue of its inherent flaws.  Alternate structures must
be built in advance not only to provide for immediate needs, but also
to prevent (or at least mitigate) the potential release of
destructive, anger-driven energy that often follows an oppressive
system's collapse.

[Medicinal marijuana buyers' clubs provide an example of an alternate
structure.]

Demands of Gandhi's Technique on Campaigners

Gandhi's technique exacts a great deal from a campaign's leadership
and those who follow them.  They must tirelessly plan and monitor the
progress of the campaign, reassess their position and the position of
the opponent, and respond creatively and provocatively to events as
they unfold.  Leaders must be flexible enough to respond to change.
At the same time, they must have the insight to know which potential
responses might lead to stagnation of the campaign or will compromise
a fundamental principle--for either will lead to setbacks.

Leaders must be consummate communicators:  with the opponent, the
public, potential supporters, and those who have joined the
campaign--else misunderstandings and misinterpretations can arise as
the campaign is adjusted to changing conditions and events.  Leaders
must have an ability to organize, inspire, and use fully the talents
of an extremely diverse group of people who volunteer their services
to a campaign.  People with widely varying perspectives and beliefs
must be transformed from a disorganized scattering of supporters in
conflict not just with the government, but often with each other, to a
coherent, responsive unit that can target its actions and responses
with great force.  Finally, all in the campaign must have an ability
to manage or dispel the tension and anger that can arise when their
efforts appear to be frustrated, when there are disagreements among
campaigners, and when they directly confront an often-hostile
opponent.

CONCLUSION

Many drug policy reform advocates have been using political action
techniques similar (though not identical) to the steps described
above.  But drug policy reform advocates have not catalyzed into a
dynamic, coherent group that can act synchronously to achieve a
clearly defined goal.  I believe that, if reform advocates' efforts
were synthesized in a Gandhian sequence with an underpinning of the
fundamental principles, success would be inevitable.

--Mary