Mahatma Gandhi was a huge influence on me during my formative years and a major factor in my involvement in the peace movement from age 13 onwards. His philosophies, courage, convictions and leadership inspired me in my own far more humble efforts. It was only later that I realised, that Gandhi, like all of us, had his struggles with the shadow side. Peace and Blessings to All Beings- Kevin Parker- Site Publisher
Introduction: The Making of the Mahatma
When 18-year-old Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi set sail for London in the autumn of 1888, he was not the icon the world would come to know. He was a shy, nervous young man, recently excommunicated by the elders of his Modh Bania sub-caste for daring to cross the kala pani, the “dark waters,” an act they deemed a violation of his Hindu faith. He left behind a young wife and a newborn son, armed with a law degree to pursue and a solemn vow to his mother to abstain from wine, women, and meat. This departure—an act of quiet rebellion against tradition in pursuit of a modern profession—encapsulates the central dynamic of his life. Mohandas Gandhi was not born a Mahatma, a “Great Soul”; he was forged through a relentless and often painful process of self-examination and reinvention, a journey he himself would later title
The Story of My Experiments with Truth.
This report posits that Gandhi’s monumental significance in the annals of the 20th century lies not in a static, flawless ideology but in his revolutionary and sustained application of moral force to the political sphere. His life was the laboratory for these experiments, which sought to weaponize ancient ethical principles—truth (satya) and non-harm (ahimsa)—into a practical methodology for mass political action, which he called Satyagraha. This process was marked by profound personal transformation, unparalleled strategic genius, and significant, often-overlooked, contradictions. To understand his lasting and contested legacy, one must engage with the totality of his journey: the timid student who became a leader of millions, the loyal subject of the British Empire who became its most formidable opponent, and the apostle of unity who presided over a tragically divided subcontinent. By examining his life, his philosophies, his towering achievements, and the trenchant criticisms levelled against him, we can begin to grasp the complex reality of a man who reshaped the contours of political resistance and continues to challenge the conscience of the modern world.
Listen to our Deep Dive
Gandhi From Shy Youth to Imperfect Mahatma – Unpacking His Global Legacy and Contradictions
Part I: The Formative Years (1869–1914)
Chapter 1: From Porbandar to the Inner Temple
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was born on October 2, 1869, in the small coastal town of Porbandar in Kathiawar, western India. He was the youngest child of his father’s fourth wife, a product of a respectable Hindu merchant caste family. His father, Karamchand Gandhi, was the dewan (chief minister) of Porbandar and later other princely states; though lacking much formal education, he was a skilled and upright administrator known for his integrity and ability to navigate the complex politics between local Indian rulers and their British overlords. His mother, Putlibai, was a deeply devout woman of the Pranami Vaishnava sect, whose life revolved around her home, the temple, and rigorous religious observance, including frequent fasting and tireless care for the sick.
This upbringing immersed young Mohandas in a potent spiritual milieu. The family home was steeped in Vaishnavism—the worship of the Hindu god Vishnu—but it was also profoundly shaped by the pervasive influence of Jainism, an ancient Indian religion with a strong presence in Gujarat. From Jainism, he absorbed the foundational tenets that would later define his public philosophy: ahimsa (non-injury to all living beings), vegetarianism, and fasting as a means of self-purification. His mother’s example of piety and self-discipline left an indelible mark, as did the Hindu mythological stories of heroes like Prahlada and Harishchandra, who embodied unwavering truthfulness and sacrifice.
Despite this rich cultural environment, Gandhi’s youth was unremarkable. He was, by his own account and that of others, a mediocre student—shy, timid, and so fearful that he slept with the lights on well into his teens. His academic record was average, described as “good at English, fair in Arithmetic and weak in Geography”. An arranged marriage at the age of 13 to Kasturba Makanji Kapadia, a girl of the same age, further disrupted his education, causing him to lose a year of school. He experienced a brief period of adolescent rebellion, dabbling in petty theft, smoking, and even meat-eating—a serious transgression for a Vaishnava—but these were fleeting experiments that ended with a profound sense of guilt and a resolve for self-improvement.
Upon finishing his studies at Alfred High School in Rajkot, he enrolled in Samaldas College in Bhavnagar but struggled, finding the lectures difficult and the environment alienating. He dropped out and returned home, his future uncertain. It was a family friend who advised that his best path to securing a high-level administrative post, following in his father’s footsteps, was to qualify as a barrister in England. Despite his mother’s fears that he would lose his religion and his caste elders’ decree forbidding the journey, Gandhi was determined. Supported by his brother Laxmidas, he made a solemn vow to his mother to abstain from wine, women, and meat, a promise that secured her blessing.
In September 1888, he sailed for London and enrolled at the Inner Temple, one of the four Inns of Court. The transition to Western culture was a struggle for the shy young Indian. He initially tried to adopt English customs, taking lessons in dancing, French, and elocution, but soon found these pursuits hollow. His vow to his mother proved to be a defining influence. His search for vegetarian food, a rarity in Victorian London, led him to the London Vegetarian Society (LVS). This was a pivotal moment. Through the LVS, he not only found a community but also an intellectual framework for his inherited beliefs. He was elected to its executive committee and, influenced by the writings of Henry Salt, became a committed vegetarian by choice rather than just by tradition.
This community also served as a gateway to a deeper spiritual exploration. Some members of the LVS were Theosophists, devoted to the study of Eastern religions. They encouraged Gandhi to read the Bhagavad Gita, which he encountered for the first time in Sir Edwin Arnold’s English translation, The Song Celestial. The Gita‘s emphasis on selfless action and duty had a profound impact on him. He also read the Bible, particularly the Sermon on the Mount, whose teachings on turning the other cheek resonated deeply with his understanding of ahimsa. To overcome his debilitating shyness, he joined a public speaking practice group, gradually gaining the confidence necessary to practice law. When he was called to the bar in 1891 and returned to India, he was a changed man. The journey that began as a professional imperative had become a spiritual and intellectual awakening, transforming his inherited faith into a consciously constructed personal philosophy.
Chapter 2: The Crucible: Forging a Philosophy in South Africa
Gandhi’s return to India in 1891 was met with tragedy and professional failure. He learned that his beloved mother had died while he was away, and his attempts to establish a law practice in Bombay were disastrous. In his very first courtroom case, he was overcome with nervousness and fled the chamber, unable to cross-examine a witness. It was a humiliating start, and he was forced to return to Rajkot to make a modest living drafting petitions. In 1893, an opportunity arose that would alter the course of his life and, eventually, world history: a one-year contract to assist with a lawsuit for an Indian firm in the British-controlled colony of Natal, South Africa. He accepted, seeking refuge from his professional struggles.
Within days of his arrival, the full force of colonial racism confronted him. While traveling to Pretoria, he was forcibly ejected from a first-class railway carriage at Pietermaritzburg, despite holding a valid ticket. As he sat shivering in the cold of the station’s waiting room that night, he made the momentous decision to fight the “deep disease of colour prejudice” rather than flee. This incident was not merely a personal insult; it was a profound “political awakening”. He soon realized that his humiliation was not an isolated event but a reflection of the systemic discrimination faced by all Indians in South Africa, who were derogatorily referred to as “coolies” regardless of their station.
This awakening transformed the quiet lawyer into a community organizer. On the eve of his planned departure in 1894, he learned of a bill that would disenfranchise Indians in Natal. Persuaded by the local Indian community to stay and lead the fight, he founded the Natal Indian Congress (NIC). The NIC became the primary political organization for South African Indians, providing a platform to petition authorities, publicize grievances, and build a sense of collective identity. Gandhi’s activism immediately drew the ire of the white colonial population. When he returned to Durban in 1897 with his family after a brief trip to India to publicize the community’s plight, a white mob assaulted him, and he was nearly lynched.
It was in the crucible of this struggle that Gandhi forged his most potent weapon. Dissatisfied with the term “passive resistance,” which he felt implied weakness, he sought a new name for his method of nonviolent struggle. He coined the term
Satyagraha, a combination of the Sanskrit words satya (truth) and agraha (holding firmly to). It meant “Truth-force” or “Soul-force,” a method of action based on the principles of courage, non-violence, and truth. He believed that the way people behave is more important than what they achieve, and that nonviolent civil disobedience was the most appropriate means for obtaining social and political goals.
The first major test of Satyagraha came in 1906, when the Transvaal government passed the Asiatic Registration Act, requiring all Indians to be fingerprinted and carry registration certificates at all times. Gandhi organized a mass meeting where Indians, including himself, vowed to defy the law and accept the consequences. This led to his first imprisonment in 1908, one of four jail terms he would serve in South Africa. For Gandhi, going to jail for a just cause was not a punishment but an honor.
The South African years were a complete rehearsal for the larger struggle that awaited him in India. He developed his entire strategic and philosophical toolkit there. The Natal Indian Congress was a precursor to his transformation of the Indian National Congress into a mass movement. The campaigns against the registration act and a later poll tax were dress rehearsals for the Non-Cooperation and Salt March campaigns in India. His negotiations with the Boer leader and government official General Jan Smuts taught him the art of political engagement, combining unyielding pressure with a willingness to seek compromise.
Furthermore, his philosophy was not merely theoretical; it was lived. He established two communal settlements, the Phoenix Settlement near Durban in 1904 and Tolstoy Farm near Johannesburg in 1910. These were not just political headquarters but laboratories for his “experiments with truth.” Residents lived austerely, practicing self-sufficiency, manual labor, and the strict personal discipline—including brahmacharya (celibacy or self-control)—that he believed was essential for a true satyagrahi. Here, the symbiotic relationship between his personal vows and his political philosophy became clear. The inner discipline cultivated through personal austerity was the very source of the “soul-force” required for the outer political struggle.
After a protracted eight-year struggle involving mass marches, strikes, and thousands of arrests, the South African government finally relented. In 1914, General Smuts agreed to a compromise, and the Indian Relief Act was passed, abolishing the poll tax and recognizing the validity of non-Christian marriages. Having spent 21 years in the country, Gandhi decided his work there was done. As he departed, Smuts, his long-time adversary, remarked, “The saint has left our shores, I sincerely hope forever”. Gandhi left South Africa not as the timid lawyer who had arrived, but as the Mahatma, a political innovator and spiritual leader who had developed a revolutionary method for challenging injustice.
Part II: The Struggle for India’s Soul (1915–1948)
Chapter 3: The Return of the Mahatma
When Gandhi returned to India in January 1915, he was no longer an obscure lawyer but a celebrated hero, his reputation as a champion of Indian rights in South Africa having preceded him. He was greeted by large crowds at Apollo Bunder in Mumbai, already known to many as the “Mahatma”. Yet, he was a relative stranger to the complex realities of his own homeland after two decades abroad. Adhering to the counsel of his political mentor, the moderate Congress leader Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Gandhi embarked on a year-long journey across the length and breadth of India. This period of quiet observation was a deliberate effort to reconnect with the Indian people and understand their conditions before entering the political fray.
During this time, he made a powerful symbolic change that would define his public identity. He abandoned the Western-style clothing of a barrister for the simple, homespun dress of the rural poor: a loincloth (dhoti) and shawl. This was a conscious and radical act of identification with the millions of impoverished peasants who formed the vast majority of India’s population. It was a visual declaration that the time for elite, anglicized politics was over and that the struggle for India’s future would be rooted in the soil of its villages. He established an ashram in Ahmedabad, open to all castes, where he lived an austere life devoted to prayer, fasting, and meditation, further cementing his image as a spiritual leader deeply connected to India’s ascetic traditions.
After his year of travel, Gandhi began to apply the methods of Satyagraha, honed in South Africa, to local Indian grievances. These early campaigns served as crucial demonstrations of his philosophy’s efficacy on Indian soil and solidified his position as a new force in nationalist politics. His first major success came in 1917 in Champaran, a district in Bihar, where he took up the cause of indigo plantation workers who were being brutally exploited by British planters. Through a campaign of nonviolent civil disobedience and meticulous fact-finding, he compelled the authorities to investigate the farmers’ claims and ultimately secured them relief from oppressive contracts.
The following year, 1918, saw two more significant campaigns in his home state of Gujarat. In Ahmedabad, he intervened in a dispute between textile mill owners and workers, undertaking a fast—his first for a public cause in India—to strengthen the workers’ resolve and persuade the owners to agree to a settlement. Shortly after, he led the Kheda Satyagraha, organizing peasants to demand the suspension of tax collection following a famine and floods that had devastated their crops. With the help of key lieutenants like Vallabhbhai Patel, he organized a signature campaign where peasants pledged non-payment of revenue, even under threat of land confiscation. After a five-month standoff, the government capitulated, granting relief to the farmers. These victories in Champaran, Ahmedabad, and Kheda were pivotal. They not only brought tangible relief to thousands but also announced the arrival of a new kind of politics—mass-based, nonviolent, and profoundly effective.
Chapter 4: Wielding Satyagraha on a National Scale
Having proven the power of Satyagraha in localized struggles, Gandhi was poised to launch it onto the national stage. The next quarter-century would see him orchestrate three monumental campaigns that mobilized millions, shook the foundations of the British Empire, and transformed the Indian National Congress into a formidable instrument of mass nationalism.
The Non-Cooperation Movement (1920–22)
The catalyst for Gandhi’s first all-India movement was a profound disillusionment with British justice. The end of World War I, in which India had contributed immense resources and manpower to the British effort, did not bring the promised self-rule. Instead, it brought repression. The government passed the draconian Rowlatt Act in 1919, which extended wartime emergency powers, allowing for detention without trial. The nationwide protests against the Act culminated in the horrific Jallianwala Bagh Massacre in Amritsar on April 13, 1919, where British-led troops fired on a peaceful, unarmed crowd, killing nearly 400 people. For Gandhi, who had once believed in the British Empire’s capacity for justice, the massacre and the subsequent British response were a breaking point. It convinced him that cooperation was no longer possible.
Seizing the political moment, Gandhi forged a strategic, if controversial, alliance. He embraced the Khilafat Movement, a campaign by Indian Muslims to protest the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire and preserve the authority of the Turkish Caliph, whom they saw as a symbol of global Sunni solidarity. Gandhi saw this as a golden opportunity to unite Hindus and Muslims in a common cause against the British. In 1920, he took leadership of the Indian National Congress and persuaded it to adopt his program of nonviolent non-cooperation with the goal of achieving Swaraj (self-rule) within a year.
The movement was a call for a complete, voluntary withdrawal of Indian cooperation from the colonial state. Gandhi urged Indians to boycott British-run institutions: schools, colleges, law courts, and legislative councils. He called for the surrender of British titles and honors and, most visibly, the boycott of foreign-made goods, especially cloth. In their place, he promoted Swadeshi (self-reliance), exhorting all Indians, rich or poor, to spin their own yarn on the charkha (spinning wheel) and wear khadi (homespun cloth) as a symbol of national pride and economic independence.
The campaign electrified the country. The Indian National Congress was transformed from an urban, upper-middle-class debating society into a mass organization with roots in towns and villages across the subcontinent. The spell of fear that had long paralyzed the populace was broken as thousands of satyagrahis defied unjust laws and cheerfully courted arrest. However, this mass mobilization carried an inherent risk. The movement’s success depended on the strict adherence of millions to the principle of ahimsa, a level of discipline that proved impossible to maintain. In February 1922, at Chauri Chaura, a village in eastern India, an angry mob of protesters attacked a police station and burned 22 policemen to death.
Horrified by this outbreak of violence, Gandhi made a decision that stunned his followers and critics alike: he abruptly called off the entire national movement. Many of his lieutenants, including Jawaharlal Nehru, were dismayed, fearing that his moral scruples would render the nationalist struggle futile. For Gandhi, however, the purity of the means was non-negotiable; a freedom won through violence was no freedom at all. This incident revealed a central paradox of his leadership: his power came from his ability to arouse the masses, yet his greatest political crises arose when he could no longer control their actions. Shortly after, on March 10, 1922, the British authorities, no longer fearing mass unrest, arrested him for sedition. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to six years in prison.
The Salt March (Dandi Satyagraha, 1930)
Released from prison early on health grounds in 1924, Gandhi spent the mid-1920s in relative political silence, focusing on his “constructive programme” of rural development and social reform. By the end of the decade, the political climate was ripe for another mass movement. In 1929, the Indian National Congress, under the presidency of Jawaharlal Nehru, declared Purna Swaraj (complete independence) as its goal and authorized Gandhi to launch a new campaign of civil disobedience.
Gandhi’s choice of target was a stroke of strategic genius. He decided to challenge the British government’s monopoly on the production and sale of salt. The salt tax was a simple, tangible grievance that affected every single Indian, especially the poorest, making it a powerful and universally understood symbol of colonial exploitation.
On March 12, 1930, Gandhi, then 61 years old, set out from his Sabarmati Ashram with a few dozen followers on a 240-mile trek to the coastal village of Dandi. The 24-day march was a masterfully orchestrated piece of political theater. As the procession wound its way through hundreds of villages, growing in size daily, it attracted enormous crowds and intense media attention from around the world. On April 6, upon reaching the sea at Dandi, Gandhi bent down and picked up a lump of salt-encrusted mud, a simple act that constituted a technical breach of the law.
This symbolic defiance unleashed a massive wave of civil disobedience across India. Millions of people began making and selling salt illegally. The campaign quickly expanded to include the boycott of foreign cloth, the picketing of liquor shops, and the non-payment of taxes. The movement was notable for the unprecedented participation of women, who emerged from their homes to join protests and court arrest, marking a significant social transformation. The British responded with mass arrests, imprisoning over 60,000 people, including Gandhi and most of the Congress leadership. The campaign culminated in a nonviolent raid on the Dharasana Salt Works, where protesters, led by the poet Sarojini Naidu, marched forward to be systematically beaten down by police, an event graphically reported by American journalist Webb Miller that shocked the world.
The Salt Satyagraha was immensely successful. It crippled the British administration in some areas, severely damaged the moral authority of the Raj, and demonstrated the power of disciplined nonviolence to a global audience. The campaign forced the Viceroy, Lord Irwin, to negotiate. The resulting Gandhi-Irwin Pact of March 1931 secured the release of political prisoners and conceded the right of Indians to make salt for their own use. It also paved the way for Gandhi to attend the Second Round Table Conference in London as the sole representative of the Congress. The Salt March was the high-water mark of Gandhian strategy—a perfect fusion of symbolism, mass mobilization, and nonviolent discipline aimed at achieving a specific political outcome.
The Quit India Movement (1942)
Gandhi’s final great national campaign was launched against the backdrop of World War II. In 1939, the Viceroy had declared India at war with Germany without consulting any Indian leaders, an act of imperial arrogance that outraged the nationalist movement. The Congress party withdrew its support for the Raj. In 1942, with the Japanese army advancing through Southeast Asia and threatening India’s borders, the British sent the Cripps Mission with a proposal for post-war dominion status in exchange for immediate wartime cooperation. The offer was rejected by Congress as “a post-dated cheque on a bank that was failing”.
With negotiations having failed and the threat of invasion looming, Gandhi’s stance hardened. He shifted from being a strategic negotiator to a moral revolutionary. He now believed that India’s freedom could not wait and that the British must leave immediately. On August 8, 1942, at a Congress meeting in Bombay, he delivered his most defiant speech, issuing the mantra “Do or Die”. “We shall either free India or die in the attempt,” he declared, launching the Quit India Movement. This was not a negotiating tactic but a final, unequivocal ultimatum. His writings from the period reflect this radical shift: “Leave India to God. If that is too much leave her to anarchy”.
The British response was swift and overwhelming. Within hours of the speech, Gandhi and the entire Congress Working Committee were arrested and imprisoned for the duration of the war. With its leadership decapitated, the Quit India Movement became a spontaneous, decentralized, and often violent popular revolt. Lacking the guiding hand of nonviolent discipline, angry crowds attacked symbols of British authority—railway stations were burned, telegraph wires were cut, and government buildings were destroyed. The British suppressed the uprising with massive force, deploying troops, conducting mass arrests, and even using aircraft to strafe protesters.
Though crushed within months, the Quit India Movement was a strategic failure but a long-term victory. It demonstrated with stark clarity that the Indian people were united in their demand for independence and that British rule was fundamentally untenable without their consent. The sheer scale of the uprising convinced the British government that holding onto India after the war would be impossible. It was the final nail in the coffin of the British Raj, ensuring that independence was no longer a matter of if, but when.
Chapter 5: The Agony of Partition and the Final Sacrifice
The achievement of Indian independence in August 1947 was Gandhi’s greatest triumph, but it was inextricably bound to his most profound tragedy: the partition of the subcontinent. For decades, Gandhi had been the foremost champion of Hindu-Muslim unity, believing that the two communities were “sons of the same soil” who must live together in a free and united India. He was a staunch and unwavering opponent of Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s “two-nation theory,” which argued that Hindus and Muslims were separate nations deserving of separate states. He repeatedly declared that the partition of India could only happen “over my dead body,” viewing it as a “vivisection of the motherland”.
As independence neared, the country was engulfed in a firestorm of communal violence. The Muslim League’s call for “Direct Action Day” in August 1946 triggered the “Great Calcutta Killing,” a frenzy of rioting and murder that left thousands dead and spread to other parts of India, notably Noakhali in Bengal and Bihar. In a heroic and lonely effort to quell the flames of hatred, the 77-year-old Gandhi walked barefoot through the riot-torn villages of Noakhali and later Bihar, pleading for peace and sanity. His presence had a calming effect, a testament to his immense moral authority.
His final great fast, undertaken in Delhi on January 13, 1948, was a desperate plea to end the bloodshed that had accompanied Partition. The newly formed governments of India and Pakistan were in dispute over financial settlements, and violence against Muslims continued in Delhi. Gandhi’s fast was aimed at shocking the conscience of all communities and pressuring the Indian government to release funds owed to Pakistan. After five days, as his health deteriorated, leaders from all communities, including Hindu and Sikh extremists, pledged to restore peace and protect Muslims. Only then did Gandhi break his fast.
This act of reconciliation, however, sealed his fate in the eyes of a radical fringe of Hindu nationalists. They saw his advocacy for Muslims and Pakistan as a betrayal of the Hindu cause. On January 30, 1948, just twelve days after he had broken his fast, Gandhi was walking to his evening prayer meeting on the grounds of Birla House in New Delhi. Nathuram Godse, a Hindu extremist with ties to the Hindu Mahasabha and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), stepped out of the crowd, bowed in a traditional greeting, and then fired three bullets into Gandhi’s chest at point-blank range. Gandhi fell, reportedly uttering his last words, “Hey Ram” (“Oh God”). His assassination sent a wave of shock and grief across India and the world. The man who had preached non-violence his entire life had died a victim of its antithesis, martyred in the cause of the unity he cherished above all else.
Part III: The Gandhian Lexicon: A Philosophy in Action
Mahatma Gandhi was not a systematic philosopher in the academic sense; his philosophy was forged in the heat of action and articulated through speeches, articles, and letters. It is a philosophy of praxis, where core concepts were not abstract ideals but principles to be lived and applied. To understand Gandhi is to understand the lexicon he created—Ahimsa, Satya, Satyagraha, Swaraj, and Sarvodaya—which together form a coherent and radical vision for personal and political transformation.
Chapter 6: Ahimsa and Satyagraha: The Twin Pillars of Truth-Force
The bedrock of Gandhi’s entire philosophy lies in the twin principles of Satya (Truth) and Ahimsa (Non-violence). For Gandhi, these were not separate concepts but two sides of the same coin, inextricably linked. “Truth,” he famously declared, “is God”. The ultimate purpose of human existence was the pursuit and realization of this ultimate Truth. However, being human and therefore fallible, one could never claim to possess the absolute Truth. This humility led him to a crucial conclusion: if one cannot be certain of the absolute Truth, one has no right to use violence against an opponent, who may also be grasping a part of that same Truth. Therefore, ahimsa became the only legitimate means to seek satya.
Gandhi’s conception of ahimsa was revolutionary. He expanded it far beyond its traditional Jain and Buddhist meaning of simple non-harm or non-killing. For him, ahimsa was not a negative or passive state but a “positive force of love and truth”. It meant more than just refraining from physical violence; it demanded a complete commitment to non-violence in thought, word, and deed. It required actively doing good even to one’s adversary, seeking their welfare, and refusing to harbor hatred or ill-will. He saw ahimsa as the “law of our species,” the quality that elevates humans above the “brute” world of himsa (violence).
Satyagraha, or “Truth-force,” is the practical application of these principles in the realm of conflict. It is the methodology of wielding soul-force against injustice. Gandhi was adamant that Satyagraha was not “passive resistance,” which he viewed as a tactic of the weak who would use violence if they could. Satyagraha, by contrast, was the weapon of the strong, requiring immense courage and moral strength. He famously stated that if forced to choose between cowardice and violence, he would advise violence, so deep was his contempt for passivity in the face of injustice.
The practice of Satyagraha operates as a structured, escalating process designed to convert, not coerce, the opponent. It begins with persuasion through reason and negotiation. If that fails, it moves to the stage of persuasion through self-suffering (tapasya). The satyagrahi willingly endures hardship—arrest, beatings, economic loss—to dramatize the injustice and appeal to the opponent’s conscience. This self-suffering is not a sign of weakness but a demonstration of the moral conviction behind the cause. Only if these methods fail does the satyagrahi resort to non-violent coercion, which includes tools like strikes, boycotts, and mass civil disobedience. The ultimate goal is not a victory for one side and a defeat for the other, but a resolution that elevates both, creating a new and more just harmony.
Chapter 7: Swaraj and Sarvodaya: Reimagining Freedom and the State
Gandhi’s political philosophy extended far beyond the immediate goal of ending British rule. His concepts of Swaraj (Self-Rule) and Sarvodaya (Welfare of All) represent a profound and radical critique of the modern, centralized, industrial nation-state. He sought not merely to replace British masters with Indian ones but to fundamentally transform the very structure of power and society.
Swaraj, for Gandhi, was a comprehensive, integral revolution encompassing all spheres of life. It was a multi-layered concept:
- At the individual level, Swaraj meant self-rule in the most literal sense: the rule of the self over its own passions and desires. It was synonymous with self-control (brahmacharya), self-purification, and self-reliance. “It is ‘Swaraj’ when we learn to rule ourselves,” he wrote, equating this inner freedom with the ultimate spiritual goal of moksha or salvation.
- At the political level, Swaraj meant a radical decentralization of power. Gandhi was deeply skeptical of the centralized state, which he described as a “soulless machine” that concentrates power and inevitably does the “greatest harm to mankind”. His ideal was a “stateless society” or an enlightened anarchy where power resides directly with the people. This vision was embodied in the concept of Gram Swaraj (village self-rule). He imagined India not as a pyramid with a government at the apex, but as a series of “oceanic circles” of self-sufficient, self-governing village republics, where the outermost circle would derive its strength from the center (the individual) rather than crushing it.
- At the economic level, Swaraj meant economic freedom for the “toiling millions”. This was to be achieved through Swadeshi—the principle of self-reliance, which called for the boycott of foreign goods and the promotion of local, village-based industries, most famously the spinning of khadi. This was both a practical tool to undermine the British economy and a philosophical rejection of mass-production industrialism, which he believed led to alienation, exploitation, and environmental destruction.
Complementing Swaraj was the concept of Sarvodaya, a term Gandhi coined for his 1908 translation of John Ruskin’s critique of political economy, Unto This Last. It means “universal uplift” or “the progress of all” and represents his vision for a just social order.
Sarvodaya is founded on three core tenets: that the good of the individual is contained in the good of all; that all work, whether that of a lawyer or a barber, has equal value; and that a life of labor is the life worth living.
This philosophy stands in stark contrast to Western utilitarianism, which seeks the “greatest good for the greatest number.” For Gandhi, this was a flawed and potentially brutal calculus. Sarvodaya insists on the welfare of all, with a special emphasis on uplifting the most marginalized—what he called the “last man”. True development, in this view, is not measured by aggregate wealth but by the well-being of the most vulnerable member of society. Its practical application involves creating a decentralized, self-sustaining society built on principles of equality, religious tolerance, simple living, and constructive programs that empower communities from the ground up. Together, Swaraj and Sarvodaya offer a vision of freedom that is not just political but also spiritual, economic, and social—a holistic alternative to the dominant models of Western modernity.
Part IV: A Contested Legacy: Critiques and Reappraisals
Mahatma Gandhi’s legacy, while monumental, is not without its deep-seated controversies. To engage with him honestly is to move beyond hagiography and confront the difficult questions raised by his sharpest critics. Three areas in particular demand critical examination: his attitude towards race during his years in South Africa, his complex and often contradictory stance on the caste system, and his role in the tragic Partition of India. These controversies reveal the tensions and limitations within his “experiments with truth” and are essential to a nuanced understanding of the man and his impact.
Chapter 8: The South African Gandhi and the Question of Race
The accusation that Gandhi was a racist has gained significant traction in recent decades, fueled by a closer examination of his early writings from his 21-year sojourn in South Africa (1893–1914). The evidence, primarily drawn from his petitions, letters, and articles in his newspaper, Indian Opinion, is stark and cannot be easily dismissed.
During his early years in South Africa, Gandhi repeatedly used derogatory language to describe black Africans. He frequently employed the term “Kaffir,” a racial slur, and referred to Africans as “savages,” “uncivilised,” and living “almost like animals”. In his petitions to the white colonial authorities, he argued that Indians, as members of the “Aryan stock” and a “civilised race,” were “infinitely superior” to the “raw Kaffir” and should not be degraded by being classified with them. He campaigned against Indians having to share facilities like post office entrances or prison cells with Africans, whom he described as “troublesome” and “very dirty”.
These statements, viewed through a modern lens, are unequivocally racist. However, a historical analysis requires placing them in their proper context. Gandhi’s primary political strategy at the time was to secure civil rights for the Indian minority by appealing to the British sense of imperial justice and their own racial hierarchies. He argued that Indians, as loyal subjects of the Empire, deserved better treatment than the indigenous population. This was a political tactic that leveraged the racist logic of the colonial system against itself, attempting to carve out a space for Indians between the ruling whites and the subjugated blacks. Furthermore, the term “Kaffir,” while deeply offensive today, was in common parlance at the time and did not yet carry the full weight of the hateful slur it would become under apartheid.
Crucially, this is not the full story. There is compelling evidence that Gandhi’s views on race underwent a profound evolution during his time in South Africa and beyond. His use of derogatory terms ceased after 1913. As early as 1908, he was articulating a vision for a future South Africa where “all the different races commingle and produce a civilisation that perhaps the world has not yet seen”. His thinking was influenced by his engagement with global intellectual currents that were beginning to dismantle the pseudo-scientific racism of the 19th century, such as the 1911 Universal Races Congress in London, which he helped promote.
After returning to India, his transformation became even more explicit. In his book Satyagraha in South Africa, written in the 1920s, he repudiated his earlier prejudices, writing that “it is only vanity which makes us look upon the Negroes as savages. They are not the barbarians we imagine them to be”. He came to see the intrinsic link between imperialism and racism, chastising Indians for their own colorism and preference for European features as a form of mental colonization.
In conclusion, the charge of racism against the young Gandhi is substantiated by his own words. He was, in his early years, a product of the Victorian era’s racial worldview and employed racist arguments for political gain. However, to define his entire legacy by this early period is to ignore the clear and documented evidence of his intellectual and moral evolution. The man who left South Africa was not the same man who had arrived; his “experiments with truth” had led him to transcend the prejudices with which he began, ultimately making him a powerful voice for racial equality.
Chapter 9: The Reformer and the Annihilator: Gandhi, Ambedkar, and Caste
Perhaps the most enduring and complex critique of Gandhi comes from his protracted and deeply ideological conflict with Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, the brilliant Dalit leader and chief architect of India’s constitution, over the question of caste and untouchability. Their disagreement was not merely over tactics but over the fundamental nature of the problem and its solution. While Gandhi sought to reform Hinduism from within by eradicating the “sin” of untouchability, Ambedkar sought to liberate the Dalits by annihilating the caste system itself, which he saw as the very foundation of Hindu scripture and society.
| Feature | Mahatma Gandhi | B.R. Ambedkar |
| Primary Goal | Eradicate untouchability as a “sin” and a “blot on Hinduism.” | Annihilate the entire caste system as the root of inequality. |
| View on Caste System | Evolved from defending a reformed, non-hierarchical Varna system based on occupation to calling for its abolition (“Caste must go”). | Viewed the caste system and Varna as inherently evil, inseparable from untouchability, and fundamentally opposed to liberty, equality, and fraternity. |
| View on Hinduism | Worked as a Hindu reformer from within, believing untouchability was a corruption, not an essential part of the religion. | Denounced Hindu scriptures for sanctioning caste and ultimately renounced Hinduism for Buddhism. |
| Political Method | Moral persuasion, fasts, constructive programs (Harijan Sevak Sangh), and changing the hearts of “caste Hindus.” | Legal and constitutional remedies, political power, separate electorates, and reservation systems. |
| Identity of Dalits | “Harijans” (Children of God), an integral part of the Hindu fold who needed to be reintegrated. | A separate and distinct community, a political minority that needed to break away from Hinduism to achieve liberation. |
Gandhi’s position on caste was not static; like his views on race, it evolved significantly over time. In the early 1920s, he defended the ancient four-fold varna system (not to be confused with the thousands of rigid jatis or castes), arguing it was a rational and scientific system of functional differentiation based on hereditary occupation that promoted social harmony. He argued that untouchability was a later corruption, an “excrescence” that had to be purged to restore the purity of the original system. His campaign against untouchability was relentless. He coined the term “Harijans” (Children of God) for the Dalits, adopted a Dalit girl as his daughter, opened his ashrams to all castes, and undertook a nationwide tour and multiple fasts to “sting the conscience of the Hindu community”.
However, Ambedkar and other Dalit leaders viewed this approach as fundamentally flawed. They saw his defense of varna as a defense of the principle of hierarchy and hereditary status that was the root cause of their oppression. They found the term “Harijan” patronizing, a rebranding of their subjugation rather than a path to liberation. For Ambedkar, the problem was not a moral failing that could be solved by a “change of heart” among caste Hindus; it was a problem of power that required a structural solution. He argued that Dalits were not a part of Hindu society but a separate and oppressed minority who needed to secure their own political power to achieve emancipation.
This ideological clash came to a head in 1932 over the British Communal Award, which granted separate electorates to the “Depressed Classes” (Dalits). Ambedkar saw this as a vital tool for ensuring genuine Dalit representation and political autonomy. Gandhi, however, viewed it as a “vivisection” of the Hindu community that would permanently segregate the Dalits and destroy any hope of reform. He began a “fast unto death” in protest. From Ambedkar’s perspective, this was an act of profound moral and political coercion, using the threat of his own death to deny Dalits their political rights. Under immense pressure, Ambedkar was forced to relent, signing the Poona Pact which replaced separate electorates with a system of reserved seats within the general Hindu electorate.
While Gandhi’s views on caste became more radical over time—by the 1940s he was advocating for inter-caste marriage and declaring that “caste must go”—the fundamental chasm between his approach and Ambedkar’s remained. It represented a conflict between two worldviews: Gandhi, the ethical experimenter, believed in moral transformation and unity, while Ambedkar, the political system-builder, believed in securing rights and power through legal and constitutional structures. This unresolved debate continues to shape the politics of caste in India today and remains the most potent and challenging critique of Gandhi’s legacy.
Chapter 10: The Partition: Tragic Hero or Architect of Division?
No event casts a longer or darker shadow over Gandhi’s legacy than the 1947 Partition of India. He is simultaneously remembered as the great champion of Hindu-Muslim unity who died for its cause, and blamed, particularly by critics on the Hindu right, for the very division he so vehemently opposed. The historical reality is far more complex, positioning Gandhi as a tragic figure whose own political strategies may have unintentionally contributed to the outcome he most dreaded.
Gandhi’s commitment to a united, secular India was absolute. He consistently rejected Jinnah’s two-nation theory and the demand for Pakistan, viewing it as a “sin” and a “falsehood”. In the final, desperate days leading up to independence, he made the extraordinary offer to the British Viceroy, Lord Mountbatten, to make Jinnah the Prime Minister of a united India, hoping this would satisfy his ambition and avert Partition. This proposal, however, was rejected by his own senior colleagues in the Congress Party, Nehru and Patel, who feared it would leave the Hindu majority at the mercy of the Muslim League.
This moment highlights a crucial reality: by 1946-47, Gandhi was no longer in command of the Indian National Congress or the course of events. Years of escalating communal violence, particularly the Muslim League’s “Direct Action Day” in 1946 which plunged Calcutta into a bloodbath, had convinced Congress leaders that Partition, however tragic, was preferable to a full-scale and protracted civil war. They had concluded that Jinnah and the League were implacable and that forcing unity would lead only to a weak, paralyzed central government and endless conflict. Powerless to stop them, Gandhi was a “most helpless man in the whole sordid drama”. He reluctantly acquiesced to the decision of the Congress Working Committee, rationalizing it as the will of the people, who had, through their violent actions, demonstrated their inability to live together peacefully.
While he was not the direct architect of Partition, a more nuanced critique examines whether his earlier political strategies helped create the conditions that made it possible. The most significant of these was his decision in 1920 to champion the Khilafat Movement. His goal was to forge a powerful anti-British alliance by uniting Hindus and Muslims on a religious issue—the preservation of the Ottoman Caliphate. While the movement initially created unprecedented unity, many historians argue it was a pivotal error. By bringing a pan-Islamist, religious grievance to the center of the nationalist stage, Gandhi inadvertently legitimized the role of religious identity in politics. This alienated secular, constitutionalist Muslims like Jinnah, who felt sidelined by the intrusion of religious fervor into the Congress movement. When the Khilafat Movement collapsed in 1924, it left a legacy of heightened religious consciousness and communal bitterness that the Muslim League would later exploit.
Furthermore, the very nature of Gandhi’s mass politics, with its use of Hindu idioms, symbols, and prayer meetings, while successful in mobilizing the Hindu masses, made many Muslims feel excluded and apprehensive about their place in a future India dominated by a Gandhi-led Congress. This allowed Jinnah to position himself as the sole spokesman and protector of Muslim interests against a perceived Hindu-dominated Congress. The failure of the crucial Gandhi-Jinnah talks in 1944, where Gandhi could not concede the principle of two nations and Jinnah would accept nothing less, sealed the subcontinent’s fate.
In the end, Gandhi was the great tragic hero of Partition. He was the apostle of Hindu-Muslim unity who was assassinated by a Hindu extremist for being too pro-Muslim. He fought against the division of his country until the very end, only to be overruled by his own disciples and consumed by the failure of his most cherished ideal. His story is a sobering lesson in the unpredictable and often tragic consequences of political action, even when motivated by the noblest of intentions.
Part V: The Afterlife of an Idea: Gandhi’s Enduring Influence
Mahatma Gandhi’s physical life ended on January 30, 1948, but the power of his ideas has continued to resonate through subsequent decades, inspiring movements for justice, equality, and sustainability across the globe. His philosophy of nonviolent resistance provided a potent new template for oppressed peoples, while his critique of industrial modernity has found new relevance in an age of ecological crisis. The “afterlife” of his thought demonstrates its remarkable adaptability and enduring power, cementing his status as one of the most influential figures of the modern era.
Chapter 11: A Guiding Light for Global Justice
Gandhi’s most visible legacy lies in the adoption of his methods by major civil rights and freedom movements around the world. He demonstrated that an oppressed and unarmed people could challenge a mighty empire through the force of moral conviction, providing a practical and ethical alternative to both violent insurrection and passive submission.
The most direct and famous inheritor of the Gandhian mantle was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the leader of the American Civil Rights Movement. King encountered Gandhi’s philosophy during his theological studies and was immediately struck by its power. He brilliantly fused the Gandhian technique of
Satyagraha with the Christian theology of agape love, creating a framework that was both strategically sound and spiritually resonant for the African American community. King saw Gandhi’s methods not as foreign, but as a practical application of Jesus’s command to “love your enemies”. He declared that “Christ showed us the way, and Gandhi in India showed it could work”. After a pivotal trip to India in 1959, where he met with Gandhi’s family and followers, King became even more convinced that nonviolent resistance was “the only morally and practically sound method open to oppressed people in their struggle for freedom”. He applied these principles directly in campaigns like the Montgomery Bus Boycott (1955-56) and the March on Washington (1963), transforming the social and political landscape of the United States.
In South Africa, the very country where Gandhi first developed Satyagraha, his influence found a complex and powerful expression in the life of Nelson Mandela. Mandela often referred to Gandhi as his role model and was deeply inspired by his philosophy of nonviolent resistance in his early activism against apartheid. However, the South African context presented a different challenge. Faced with the unremitting and brutal violence of the apartheid state, particularly after the Sharpeville massacre of 1960, Mandela and the African National Congress (ANC) made the difficult decision to abandon exclusive nonviolence and form an armed wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe (“Spear of the Nation”). Mandela argued that the state had left them “no other choice”. Yet, Gandhi’s influence endured. After 27 years in prison, Mandela emerged not as a man seeking revenge, but as a figure of profound reconciliation. He embodied the Gandhian spirit of seeking to convert, not crush, the opponent. He guided South Africa through a peaceful transition to democracy, establishing a Truth and Reconciliation Commission instead of pursuing retributive justice, and thus avoided the bloody civil war that many had feared. His journey demonstrates a critical adaptation of Gandhian principles to one of the most violent and intransigent regimes of the 20th century.
Beyond these two towering figures, Gandhian tactics have been a wellspring of inspiration for countless other movements. The nonviolent methods of boycott and protest were central to Cesar Chavez’s struggle for the rights of migrant farmworkers in the United States. The pro-democracy movement in Myanmar, led by Aung San Suu Kyi, also drew heavily on the principles of civil disobedience. In Latin America, activists like the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Adolfo Pérez Esquivel explicitly linked Gandhian nonviolence with liberation theology to fight for human rights and oppose military dictatorships. From the anti-globalization protests to the struggles of indigenous peoples, the Gandhian model of nonviolent direct action remains a vital and globally relevant tool for social and political change.
Chapter 12: The Unlikely Environmentalist
While the term “environmentalist” did not exist in its modern sense during his lifetime, Mahatma Gandhi has been posthumously recognized as one of the foundational thinkers of the global environmental movement. His entire philosophy of life, with its emphasis on simplicity, self-reliance, and non-violence, offers a profound and coherent ecological vision. His influence stems not from specific policies, but from a radical critique of the very foundations of industrial modernity, which he saw as inherently violent and unsustainable.
Gandhi’s critique of industrialism was remarkably prescient. As early as 1928, he warned, “God forbid that India should ever take to industrialisation after the manner of the West. The economic imperialism of a single tiny island kingdom (England) is today keeping the world in chains. If an entire nation of 300 million took to similar economic exploitation, it would strip the world bare like locusts”. He saw that a system predicated on unlimited growth and endless multiplication of wants was on a collision course with the finite limits of the planet. He recognized that urbanization and industrialization were built on a “double drain from the villages,” concentrating resources and creating pollution at the expense of the rural hinterland.
His core philosophical tenets align seamlessly with the principles of modern green thought:
- Limitation of Wants: Gandhi’s most famous aphorism, “The world has enough for everyone’s need, but not enough for everyone’s greed,” has become a central tenet of environmental ethics. He advocated for a simple lifestyle, arguing that minimizing material consumption was essential for both spiritual well-being and ecological harmony.
- Ahimsa (Non-violence): For Gandhi, non-violence extended to all of creation. He was influenced by the Jain principle of respect for all life forms and believed that humanity had a duty to live in a balanced and respectful relationship with the natural world. He saw the exploitation of nature as a form of violence.
- Swadeshi (Self-Reliance): His promotion of decentralized, village-based economies that produce for local needs is a direct precursor to modern concepts of bioregionalism and sustainable local economies. By reducing dependence on long-distance trade and mass-produced goods, Swadeshi inherently lowers a society’s ecological footprint.
- Sarvodaya (Welfare of All): Gandhi’s cosmocentric worldview rejected the anthropocentric idea that humans are masters of nature. Instead, he saw humanity as part of an integrated, interdependent whole, where the welfare of all beings is interconnected.
These ideas have had a direct and powerful influence on environmental activism, particularly in India. The famous Chipko Andolan (tree-hugging movement) of the 1970s, where Himalayan villagers, especially women, physically embraced trees to prevent their felling, was explicitly Gandhian in its use of nonviolent direct action (satyagraha). Prominent Indian environmentalists like Vandana Shiva and Ramachandra Guha have acknowledged their deep intellectual debt to Gandhi. Globally, thinkers like E. F. Schumacher, author of Small Is Beautiful, and the deep ecologist Arne Naess were also profoundly influenced by Gandhian thought. In an era defined by climate change, resource depletion, and biodiversity loss, Gandhi’s call for a shift from a culture of consumerism to one of conservation and his vision of a decentralized, needs-based society appear more relevant and prophetic than ever.
Conclusion: The Relevance of an Imperfect Mahatma
To trace the life of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi is to follow a path of relentless self-invention. The timid boy from Porbandar became the determined barrister in London; the victim of racial prejudice in South Africa became the architect of a new form of political resistance; the loyal subject of the Empire became its most effective adversary. His journey was a testament to his own description of his life as a series of “experiments with truth.” He was at once a political strategist of unparalleled genius, a profound spiritual seeker, a tireless social reformer, and a radical critic of modernity.
His achievements were monumental. He transformed the Indian National Congress from an elite club into a mass movement, awakening the political consciousness of millions. He forged Satyagraha, a tool of nonviolent resistance that not only secured India’s independence but also provided a new and powerful weapon for oppressed peoples everywhere, a legacy carried on by figures like Martin Luther King Jr. and Nelson Mandela. His philosophies of Swaraj and Sarvodaya offered a searching critique of the centralized, industrial nation-state and a vision for a more just, decentralized, and sustainable society—a vision that resonates with increasing urgency in our own time of political disillusionment and ecological crisis.
Yet, to sanctify Gandhi is to diminish him. His greatness lies not in his perfection but in his complexity and his capacity for growth. The evidence of his early racist views in South Africa is undeniable, as is the profound and troubling nature of his conflict with B. R. Ambedkar over the future of the caste system. His political strategies, particularly his embrace of the Khilafat Movement, had unintended consequences that contributed to the very communal divisions he sought to heal. He was the apostle of non-violence whose campaigns sometimes erupted into violence, and the champion of unity who lived to see his country partitioned.
It is in navigating these contradictions that his true relevance emerges. Gandhi’s legacy is not a set of simple maxims or easy answers, but a powerful and enduring challenge. He challenges the modern separation of politics from ethics, demonstrating that moral force can be a potent agent of change. He challenges our acceptance of violence as a political norm, insisting on the indivisibility of just ends and pure means. He challenges our assumptions about progress, questioning a model of development built on endless consumption and the exploitation of nature.
In an age marked by deep political cynicism, violent polarization, and a looming climate catastrophe, the imperfect example of the Mahatma remains more necessary than ever. His unwavering insistence on truth, his profound courage to suffer for his convictions, and his radical imagination in seeking a more humane world serve as a vital and disruptive inheritance. His life was an experiment, and its most important finding may be that the struggle for a better world begins with the struggle to better oneself.
Bibliography
Ambedkar, B. R. What Congress and Gandhi Have Done to the Untouchables. Bombay: Thacker & Co., 1945.
Barman, Briti Roy. “Ahead of This Independence Day, Recalling Quit India Movement on Its 78th Anniversary.” One India, August 8, 2020. https://www.oneindia.com/india/ahead-of-this-independence-day-recalling-quit-india-movement-on-its-78th-anniversary-3132049.html.
Biswas, Sujay. “Gandhi’s Approach to Caste and Untouchability: A Reappraisal.” Janata Weekly, October 2, 2021. https://janataweekly.org/gandhis-approach-to-caste-and-untouchability-a-reappraisal/.
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Mahatma Gandhi.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Last modified July 18, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mahatma-Gandhi.
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Quit India Movement.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.britannica.com/event/Quit-India-Movement.
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Salt March.” Britannica Kids. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://kids.britannica.com/students/article/Salt-March/624729.
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “satyagraha.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.britannica.com/topic/satyagraha-philosophy.
Desai, Ashwin, and Goolam Vahed. The South African Gandhi: Stretcher-Bearer of Empire. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2016.
Dutta, Bimal Kumar. “Gandhi’s Green Ideas: A New Way to Think About How to Balance Human Needs with the Environment.” International Journal of History, School, and Social Science 11, no. 1 (2023): 48-52. https://www.ijhsss.com/files/07.-Bimal-Kumar-Dutta.pdf.
Gandhi, M. K. The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (Electronic Book). 98 vols. New Delhi: Publications Division, Government of India, 1999.
Gandhi, M. K. The Story of My Experiments with Truth. Translated by Mahadev Desai. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House, 1927.
Guha, Ramachandra. Gandhi Before India. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2014.
Guha, Ramachandra, and Juan Martinez-Alier. “Mahatma Gandhi and the Environmental Movement in India.” In Varieties of Environmentalism: Essays North and South, 25-45. London: Earthscan, 1997. https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/jaro2017/HEN445/um/67863089/67863283/Guha__Martinez-Alier__2000__Mahatma_Gandhi_and_the_Environmental_Movement..pdf.
Indian National Congress. “Revisiting ‘Swaraj’ of Gandhi.” Congress Sandesh. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://inc.in/congress-sandesh/tribute/revisiting-swaraj-of-gandhi.
King, Martin Luther, Jr. The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr., edited by Clayborne Carson et al. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992–.
Kolge, Nishikant. “Was Gandhi a Racist?: His Writings in South Africa.” Economic & Political Weekly 51, no. 5 (January 30, 2016): 89-96. https://www.csds.in/uploads/custom_files_new/1532340491_Was%20Gandhi%20a%20Racist.pdf.
Kumari, Baby. “Quit India Movement: A Mass Movement.” International Journal of Education for Scientific Research and Rural Development 8, no. 1 (2022): 118-120. http://ijesrr.org/publication/63/3.Baby%20Kumari%20Paper.pdf.
Lausevic, Vladan. “Gandhi as a Defender of the Caste System.” Medium, January 25, 2020. https://vladanlausevic.medium.com/gandhi-as-a-defender-of-the-caste-system-a26332b5c6b.
Nauriya, Anil. “Gandhi vs. Caste.” Indian History Collective, August 15, 2022. https://indianhistorycollective.com/a-historian-recommends-gandhi-vs-caste/.
Parekh, Bhikhu. “Gandhi’s Approach to Caste and Untouchability.” In Gandhi’s Vision of a Free South Africa. Sevagram: Gandhi Ashram, n.d. http://gandhiashramsevagram.org/pdf-books/gandhiji-vision-of-a-free-south-africa.pdf.
Raina, A. K. “Gandhi and the Re-enactment of Racism.” Economic & Political Weekly 56, no. 32 (August 7, 2021). https://www.epw.in/journal/2021/32/perspectives/gandhi-and-re-enactment-racism.html.
Seth, Manju. “Nelson Mandela’s Umbilical Bond with Mahatma Gandhi.” Diplomatist, July 23, 2020. https://diplomatist.com/2020/07/23/nelson-mandelas-umbilical-bond-with-mahatma-gandhi/.
Singh, Prem. “The Spirit of the Quit India Movement – Lohia’s Perception.” The Citizen, August 9, 2019. https://www.thecitizen.in/index.php/en/newsdetail/index/9/17441/the-spirit-of-the-quit-india-movement–lohias-perception.
Subramanian, S. “Was Gandhi a Racist?” The Hindu, December 4, 2016. Updated July 16, 2025. https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/Was-Gandhi-a-racist/article16754773.ece.
Varkey, Thomas. “The Myth and Meaning of the Gandhian Concept of Satyagraha.” Journal of Religious Culture 35 (2014): 171-182. https://www.jrc.sophia.ac.jp/pdf/research/bulletin/2014_35_17.pdf.
“Biography of Mahatma Gandhi.” M. K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.mkgandhi.org/africaneedsgandhi/biography.php.
“Bringing Down an Empire: Gandhi and Civil Disobedience.” Teach Democracy. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://teachdemocracy.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-16-3-b-bringing-down-an-empire-gandhi-and-civil-disobedience.
“Campaign Against Untouchability.” M. K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.mkgandhi.org/biography/campaign.php.
“Gandhi and Partition.” M. K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.mkgandhi.org/articles/gandhi-partition.php.
“Gandhi, Mohandas K.” The Martin Luther King, Jr., Research and Education Institute. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/gandhi-mohandas-k.
“Gandhi’s Harijan Campaign and Thoughts on Caste.” PWOnlyIAS. Last modified June 6, 2024. https://pwonlyias.com/udaan/gandhis-harijan-campaign-and-thoughts-on-caste/.
“Gandhi’s Nonviolent Resistance Movement.” Fiveable. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/ap-world/gandhis-nonviolent-resistance-movement.
“Gandhi’s Stance on Caste Discrimination and Untouchability.” Philosophy Institute. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://philosophy.institute/gandhian-philosophy/gandhis-stance-caste-discrimination-untouchability/.
“Gandhi’s Thoughts on Environment.” Global Gandhi. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://globalgandhi.com/gandhis-thoughts-on-environment/.
“Gandhi Is Assassinated.” EBSCO Research Starters. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/gandhi-assassinated.
“Gandhi Leads a Noncooperation Movement.” EBSCO Research Starters. Last modified 2023. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/gandhi-leads-noncooperation-movement.
“Gandhi Leads the Salt March.” EBSCO Research Starters. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/gandhi-leads-salt-march.
“Government of the Raj 1858-1914.” UK Parliament. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/legislativescrutiny/parliament-and-empire/parliament-and-the-american-colonies-before-1765/government-of-the-raj-1858-1914/.
“Indian Independence Struggle (1930-1931).” International Center on Nonviolent Conflict. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/indian-independence-struggle-1930-1931/.
“Jinnah-Gandhi Talks and the Causes for their Failure.” History Pak. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://historypak.com/jinnah-gandhi-talks-and-the-causes-for-their-failure/.
“Mahatma Gandhi.” Biography.com. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.biography.com/political-figures/mahatma-gandhi.
“Mahatma Gandhi and the Environment.” The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI). Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.teriin.org/article/mahatma-gandhi-and-environment.
“Mahatma Gandhi.” UCLA Center for India and South Asia. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://southasia.ucla.edu/history-politics/gandhi/.
“Mahatma Gandhi in South Africa.” High Commission of India, Pretoria. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.hcipretoria.gov.in/page/mahatma-gandhi-in-south-africa/.
“Non-Cooperation Movement.” Sleepy Classes. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://sleepyclasses.com/non-cooperation-movement/.
“Quit India Movement.” The Nonviolence Project. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://thenonviolenceproject.wisc.edu/2021/08/19/quit-india-movement/.
“Relevance of Satyagraha as a Weapon of Conflict Resolution.” M. K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.mkgandhi.org/articles/relevance-of-Satyagraha-as-a-weapon-of-conflict-resolution.html.
“Sarvodaya.” SJAHSS. Last modified October 27, 2024. https://sarcouncil.com/download-article/SJAHSS-205-2025-29-30.pdf.
“The Gandhi-Jinnah Talks, 1944.” Mega Lecture. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://megalecture.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Topic-21-The-Gandhi-Jinnah-Talks-1944.pdf.
“Why Did Gandhi Accept Partition?” National Herald. Accessed October 20, 2024. https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/opinion/why-did-gandhi-accept-partition.
Wikipedia contributors. “Assassination of Mahatma Gandhi.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Last modified October 15, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Mahatma_Gandhi.
Wikipedia contributors. “Caste system in India.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Last modified July 12, 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India.
Wikipedia contributors. “India in World War II.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Last modified October 18, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_in_World_War_II.
Wikipedia contributors. “Mahatma Gandhi.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Last modified October 19, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi.
Wikipedia contributors. “Non-cooperation movement (1919–1922).” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Last modified October 10, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-cooperation_movement_(1919%E2%80%931922.
Wikipedia contributors. “Opposition to the partition of India.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Last modified October 5, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_partition_of_India.
Wikipedia contributors. “Sarvodaya.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Last modified September 28, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarvodaya.
Wikipedia contributors. “Swaraj.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Last modified October 12, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swaraj.