Within few years of his return from South Africa, Gandhi emerged as an undisputed leader of the Indian national Congress as well as that of the Indian masses. His emergence on the national arena in 1919 marked the beginning of a new phase in the National Movement of India. For the next twenty-eight years he was at the helm of affairs and no wonder the period from 1919 and 1947 has come to be regarded as Gandhian Era of the Indian Nationalism. He imparted a new direction to the national movement covering the social, economic as well as political aspects. This was to be accomplished through truthful and non-violent methods. It may be observed that Gandhi was a great supporter of the British Government and extended full support to the British during the First World War. But the tragedy of Jallianwala Bagh, the Martial Law in Punjab and the findings of the Hunter committee gave a rude shock to his faith in the British sense of justice and fair play. Therefore, he thought it desirable to change the methods of fight against the English. This conviction was further confirmed by the failure of the moderates, extremists and the revolutionary nationalists to attain any substantial gains. It was Gandhi who was able to effectively turn the Congress in a mass organization and bring the masses on a large scale in the fold of India’s freedom struggle through his innovative yet simple ideas.

Limitations Of The Moderates, Extremists And Revolutionaries

• The methods and techniques of Moderates (petition, prayer and protest) disillusioned people as they failed to gain anything substantial from the colonial government. The moderates also failed to bring any relief to the common people or include them in the national movement. The Congress remained an organization run by western-educated middle class intellectuals. 

• The Extremists were able to reach the masses but they failed to mobilize them on a large scale. They evolved several techniques of mass participation and political agitation like boycott, Swadeshi and courting arrest to fill the prisons, but they remained unsure about their ability to control the masses once they were aroused. 

• As far as the Revolutionaries are concerned, they also failed to mobilize the masses. They engaged in the acts of violence and individual heroism to expel the British. The peace-loving masses sympathized with them but they did not support the violent approach of the Revolutionaries.

The moderates, extremists and revolutionaries failed to provide an effective leadership to the Indian masses who were eagerly waiting for a leader who could channelize their energy and help them in removing their hardships. Gandhi’s philosophy and political programme gained wide popular appeal over time as it was spiritually noble. He offered something refreshing and new to the young generation that was frustrated by the internal squabbles of the moderates and the extremists. He claimed a centrist position for himself by tactfully combining the goal of the moderates with the means of the extremists. His non-violent ideology appeared appealing to the masses instead of the violent methods of the revolutionaries. In this ideology they saw a remedy to their problems. The socio-economic environment created in the background of the First World War helped in his emergence as an undisputed leader.

Satyagraha and Non-Violence: An Alternative Strategy

Gandhi’s prior experience and success in South Africa came handy in strengthening his ideology, methodology and achievements, back home, in the following ways:

• The concept of Satyagraha was evolved during the struggle against the local government of Pretoria to concede the demands of the Indians related to poll tax, registration certificates, solemnization of marriages, and immigration. 

• It was his experience of leading poor Indian labourers in South Africa that built up his faith in the capacity of Indian masses to participate and even make sacrifices for a noble cause.

• He got the opportunity to lead Indians belonging to different regions, religions, communities and socio-economic groups (Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Parsis, Gujaratis, South Indians, indentured labourers and rich merchants).

• His success in South Africa not only made him an international celebrity, it also developed his potential to emerge as an all India figure from the beginning of his work in India unlike other leaders like Tilak, Lajpat Rai or Bipin Chandra Pal who were, at best, leaders with regional bases.

• Gandhi also learned the benefits of the press to spread his message. He edited the paper ‘Indian opinion’ in South Africa and continued that legacy in India through ‘Young India’ and ‘Harijan’.

• The most important thing which he learned was that leadership does not mean facing the ire of the opponent alone but sometimes that of one’s own followers when it comes to take hard decision.

Gandhi returned to India on 9th January 1915 but initially he kept away from the political matters. He decided to first study the Indian situation before intervening. Throughout 1915 and 1916 he travelled across the country and organized his ashram in Ahmedabad. In India, he not only enchased his South African experience but also enriched it in the following ways:

• Gandhi understood very well the limitations of the moderates, extremists, and revolutionaries and the Indian masses. At the same time he also understood their strengths. He effectively used many techniques of the moderates and extremists along with his own to mobilize the masses in a non-violent manner. He added a novelty value to the political methods (Satyagraha, Non-Cooperation, Civil Disobedience, courting arrest, Hartal, Hunger Strike, Marches, Processions, and Picketing) which became an indispensable part of the nationalist programme and strategy.

• He also utilized other political groups like Home Rule League, Satyagraha Sabha and Khilafat Committee to create an all India movement. 

• Unlike any other leader he consciously developed a unique personality. He cultivated simple and saintly habits such as vegetarianism, herbal medicine, nature therapy, travelling in general compartments, using simple language, quoting religious texts, humanitarian values, wearing simple clothes and celibacy. All such traits helped him in connecting with the common people. He could win the hearts and minds of the Indian people and make them feel as if he was one among them. By rooting himself in the Indian traditions he was able to emerge as a natural leader. He was easily acceptable to the masses. 

• Gandhi’s interventions to solve local issues in Champaran, Ahmedabad and Kheda served many purposes for him. They provided him with the necessary experience to launch future movements at the all-India level. His political style and techniques were demonstrated to the country at large, and grounded his feet among the masses. He got the chance to study their problems and understand their strengths and weaknesses.

• These early Satyagrahas also earned him the respect and commitment of many political workers and young leaders like Rajendra Prasad, J. B. Kripalani, Vallabhbhai Patel and Mahadev Desai. These young followers served as Gandhi’s life-long lieutenants and played a vital role in mobilizing peasants and workers. They represented the emergence of western-educated and vernacular elite of backward areas and small towns in Indian political life, men who would rival and even replace the western-educated elite in presidency towns (Calcutta, Madras and Bombay). They enabled Gandhi to capture the imagination of the masses and strengthened his hold on the Congress by setting an example before the masses. In fact, Gandhi was the first Indian nationalist leader who identified his life and manner of living with the life of the common people. 

• These workers mediated Gandhi’s invitation to the people for active participation in political movements like Non-Cooperation, Civil Disobedience and Quit India. Truth (satya) and non-violence (ahimsa) were used as the core tools. Ahimsa bridged the gap between morality and politics, between private conscience and public responsibility. Gandhi’s authority derived not so much from the reasonableness of his programme as it derived from moral claims of personal courage and sacrifice and patent adherence to truth. It ensured total commitment from his people. The general awakening he brought about in India was tremendous. His policy based on the principles of truth, non-violence and simplicity, as such, had no defects. The limits to this policy were underlined by the imperfect mobilization of the masses as on certain occasions they turned violent.

It is quite difficult to imagine India’s independence without Gandhi. In his absence it would have taken a much longer time. Violence or force would have been used as a major tool where people’s participation would have been a limited affair. The sense of national unity was strengthened by the Congress consciously over an extended period of time more so under the inspiring leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. What distinguished Gandhi from the other leaders was Satyagraha, his weapon of political agitation which seemed to meet the need of the day. Satyagraha could involve people and bring them directly into the fold of national agitation. It gave them a sense of participation and belongingness. Once the masses had been aroused it was not possible for the British to keep them under bondage for long. The nature of India’s freedom struggle was completely changed with the emergence of Gandhi. It was only Gandhi who converted India’s freedom struggle from a middle-class movement into a mass movement. He had a clear vision of the plural nature of the Indian society which he wanted to preserve in the united India. According to Judith Brown, Gandhi’s rise to power was made possible by his work among the groups like Muslims, low-caste Hindus, peasants, workers, propertied classes and commercial men i.e. the groups that had no place in Congress politics because their interests were not those of educated few.

The ultimate aim of the Gandhian struggle was not simply the political freedom. It also included a life of dignity for the masses. Gandhi wanted to overcome all such forces that promoted exploitation of the poor by the rich. His ideas and activities transcended political boundaries unlike the moderates, extremists, revolutionaries, and other political groups. They exhibited a deep concern for social transformation; moreover his economic outlook also subsumed deep social content. His concerns for Hindu-Muslim unity, for the upliftment of Harijans, raising the status of women, village reconstruction, and promotion of khadi displayed a broad social outlook. Even his socio-economic programme helped to spread the message of nationalism down to the lowest and most oppressed sections of the society. Thus, it facilitated the development of a pan-Indian loyalty towards the Congress and the national movement.

Gandhi’s leadership provided a brilliant opportunity for interaction and coming together of formal institutional politics and informal and autonomous subaltern politics. His appeal was very different from leaders like Tilak in Maharashtra and Aurobindo Ghose in Bengal who anticipated, with considerable success, the connection between popular religion and mass politics. According to Ravinder Kumar, Gandhi’s success lay in his ability to understand the nuances of the structure of the Indian society. He had a deep insight into the social loyalties of the individual and how they could be invoked for political action. Unlike his predecessors who assumed the existence of a homogeneous political society, Gandhi perceived India as a loose constellation of classes, communities and religious groups. He did not take it as a drawback and effectively appealed to the loyalties of distinct groups bringing about a mass mobilization with no parallel in the history of India. Thus what others could not do, Gandhi did it easily. Without taking away any credit from other leaders and prevailing circumstances that contributed to India’s freedom we can say for sure that the Indian freedom struggle became mass oriented only due to Gandhi. Mass action and participation brought immense pressure on the British Government which compelled it to give political concessions to Indians from time to time finally culminating into India’s independence.