Path versus Goal

The whole conflict between Gandhi and Bhagat can be reduced to a generic debate between path and goal. For Gandhi it was Non violence (path) which was more important and for Bhagat it was Freedom (goal).

But then the question to ask is What was more important among the two for India? 


I ask another question. Were we truly ready for freedom? At the dawn of freedom, I am sure there would have been women and children who would have died of Hunger and Malnutrition. There would have been thousands of people who were left unprotected and poor. There would have been thousands of farmers under huge debts of their land lords.


All we got was just a political freedom without social and economic freedom. We were still caught in the web of social stigmas like caste system, sati system, child marriage and so on. Our farmers were grilled day and night by our own people from the rich community i.e land lords. Poor farmers were still paying high taxes to these neo rulers.


Britishers left us high and dry to cope with our own poverty and helplessness. What Gandhi and Bhagat were fighting was for political freedom but with a difference. Bhagat was inspired by Russian revolution and turned a revolutionary. But Gandhi was experienced in these movements as he succeeded in South Africa.


I personally feel that since Gandhi was an experienced player, he should have helped Bhagat come out of his ideology. Instead, by outrightly condemning the acts of violence in chauri chaura and by putting an abrupt end to the almost won battle of Non cooperation movement, he sent a wrong signal to all the youth of India.

I completely support Gandhi for his social and economic movements all over India like Khadi weaving, Self reliant village programs, fighting untouchability and other social stigmas. It was first of its kind. This struggle of Gandhi was for our social and economic freedom which took a back seat, the moment we gained political freedom.


Therefore I personally feel that it is more important to gain Social and Economic freedom first before we can fight for our political sovereignty.

So finally who is correct?  I feel Gandhi should not have concentrated on political freedom at all. He should have put all his energy onto social and economic building of the nation. He gave undue importance for nonviolence and distracted the whole movement. He should have left the political struggle to others like Bhagat and Subhash who would have hastened the movement towards success.


The present situation in India has its roots in the incomplete social and economic struggles. If only we would have waited for these movements to succeed, the situation would have been completely different. 


Organisations are born out of Civilizations. Politics is born out of Organizations. Therefore, if the society is civilised, the politics born out of it would automatically be honest and ethical. Therfore, first change the society to change the politics.