Symbolism And Methods Of Gandhi's Satyagraha Movement

The Satyagraha method advocated by Gandhi for his movements were unique in their character. These were demonstrations and processions, observance of National Days and Weeks, distribution of party pamphlets amongst the masses, observance of hartals and strikes in a non-violent way, no-tax campaign, boycott of schools, colleges, courts and councils, picketing, courting of imprisonment without physical resistance, resignation from government service, fasting, constructive programmed, and last but not the least, non-possession.

With Gandhi, the cult of non-violence was not a celestial concept but it was a mundane concept. This is the reason that he happened to choose a mundane symbol—charkha, used by common Indian. By doing so he had the firm

Undoubtedly, Gandhi gave a remarkable twist to the political fabric of nationalism. Earlier, as it is evident, the emotional and moral ingredients were provided by the extremist leadership which held a way over the Indian National Congress. The course of the national movement in the first and a half decade of the twentieth century, till Gandhi .emerged on the scene, was marked by the ideological conflict between liberalism and extremism and experimentation in the new techniques of passive resistance in contrast to the established method of petitions and

With Gandhi’s experiments with the technique, its character was broadened and refinements made. Conscious efforts were made in developing the strategy and tactics. The number of specific forms or methods of action was enlarged. He linked it with a programme of social change, and the building of new institutions... A link was forged between means of mass struggle and a moral preference for non-violent means, although for participants this preference was not necessarily absolutist in character.’ It is indeed pertinent to notice that Gandhi’s role in politics was rather peculiar. He was not a political theoretician or analyst. But, in many ways, he was an innovator in politics and was well- conversant the political realities of his period. He had a remarkable capacity to sense the feelings and capacities of ordinary people of India, whom he met and conversed with them at close quarters. He even did not fail to understand numerous problems being faced by peasants. With such an understanding of the diverse problems, he thought, the non-violent action in politics would be quite viable, convenient and