________________
(b) It is only effective against weak opposition: “It would never have worked against the Nazis.”
Both are controverted by the single figure of Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan. Khan raised a non-violent 'army of fierce Pathans who renounced a centuries old tradition of retaliation and turned their phenomenal courage instead to the patient bearing up under savage oppression from British military authorities-an oppression fully equal to Nazi determination and savagery For that matter, limited, cultivated non-violence worked very well against the Nazis themselves and against the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 (Sharp, 1985). Success in Non-violence
The most widespread criticism of non-violent philosophy is that it has hardly any success, that is to say, it is ineffective and utopian. It is commonly suggested that Gandhi and, to a lesser extent, Martin Luther King, Jr., succeeded with their non-violent campaigns only because they were dealing with civilized oppressors or, in the case of king, a country in which the basic law and social consensus favoured them. Critics of non-violence also suggest that because non-violent strategies often depend on influencing public opinion, non-violence is some how a failure. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Gandhi's non-violent campaign succeeded despite British civilization. The British record, particularly in the 19th century, had been as bloody and racist as that of most other nations, save Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia. In repressing a Moslem revolt, British troops slaughtered ten thousand Dervishes at Omdurman (1896) (Morehead, 1960).
British troops had repressed violent rebellions in India with heavy casualties for the rebels. They showed with compunction about fixing into crowds of unarmed Indian civilians during Gandhi's campaign. Thus the suggestion that the British were specially civilized, while flattering to the British, is unsupported by the facts.
So, too, with King's campaign, which while its aims were for more limited, encountered entrenched and violent opposition that led is beatings, jailings and even death for non-violent resisters. Nor did the social consensus favour King's campaign. Though his name is remembered now with a holiday, Martin Luther King, Jr., was considered by many to be a dangerous radical
40
a
grant un Bid 140
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
