Is there some valuable Gandhi legacy for the twenty-first century? Do his philosophy and practices have significant meaning and relevance today? As has been noted throughout this book, Gandhi was widely admired but also controversial during his lifetime, and he remains so today. There is no need to repeat all of the analysis and conclusions in earlier chapters that indicate Gandhi’s possible relevance and significance in terms of his philosophy and practices regarding violence and nonviolence, truth, morality, economics and politics, religion, class and caste, gender and other oppression, freedom and equality, environmental destruction, and other major topics today. We’ll focus on a few of the key contributions in Gandhi’s philosophical legacy for the contemporary world.
Some of the Gandhi controversies, which continue to generate heated debate, relate to Gandhi’s life, individual practices and personal idiosyncrasies. Here one finds such controversies as those arising from some of Gandhi’s assertions and practices regarding sexual desires, brahmacharya or celibacy, women and gender relations, birth control and rape; his relations with his wife Kasturba and his four sons, especially the tragic life of his son Harilal; and his medical cures, diets and fasts.
Some of the continuing controversies relate to Gandhi’s general philosophical, moral, economic, political, cultural, religious and educational views and practices. Here one finds such controversies as those arising from his claims about progress, technology and ‘Modern Civilization’; his approach to contemporary multidimensional and structural violence, including today’s religious violence, terrorism and war; and whether the application of his approach to politics, economics, education, development, industrialization, globalization, independence and freedom today is reactionary and completely irrelevant.
Even in India today there are four large groupings of Indians who strongly oppose Gandhi and Gandhian approaches. First, there are Hindutva (‘Hinduness’, a word probably coined by Gandhi’s opponent V. D. Savarkar) Hindus, who tend to be rightwing nationalists, claiming that true India is a Hindu nation. A Savarkar follower and Hindutva ideologue, Nathuram Godse, assassinated Gandhi. Hindutva proponents often charge that Gandhi favoured Muslims and other minorities over Hindus, was responsible for the India–Pakistan Partition and for the Kashmir crisis, and made Hindus and India weak by insisting on nonviolence. Hindutva political parties and movements remain strong in various parts of India, and an alliance led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (‘Indian People’s Party’), often expressing strong Hindutva values, was the ruling party in India from 1998 to 2004.
Gandhi certainly sympathizes with the backlash expressed by Hindutva proponents against the insults, humiliation and oppression directed at India in general and at Hinduism in particular. However, he is strongly critical of Hindutva’s approach to Indian nationalism, religion, violence and militarism, and its fundamental dichotomous orientation of Hindu self versus non-Hindu other.
Second, there are dalits, the most oppressed and downtrodden, perhaps numbering 250 million. As was seen, Gandhi calls these ‘untouchables’ or ‘outcastes’ Harijans (‘Children of God’). Anti-Gandhi dalits, usually Ambedkarites, charge that Gandhi really favours an oppressive, hierarchical, caste-based Hinduism, even if he claims to oppose the practice of untouchability. They charge that Gandhi was paternalistically disempowering in his approach, claiming that he could represent untouchable voices; that in focusing on the voluntary change of caste-privileged Hindus, he in fact allows for the continuation of the violent, caste-based status quo; and that he refuses to unequivocally reject the Hindu caste system.
In defence of Gandhi one can submit that his philosophy and practices are essentially anti-caste; that beneath some idealized caste formulations and pragmatic contextualized reasons for compromising and not wanting to alienate caste Hindus, Gandhi himself is against caste. This is evidenced in his ashram practices, promotion of intercaste marriages and willingness to sacrifice his life for the cause. Even today the overwhelming majority of untouchables retain a very positive view of Mahatma Gandhi. Antagonists focus on and exacerbate differences and overlook how much even Ambedkar and Gandhi have in common. One can reformulate a Gandhian philosophy, consistent with his principles and practices, that now emphasizes the need to eliminate caste.
Third, there are the Naxalites, an informal name that refers to various revolutionary communist groups and is taken from a peasant uprising in the West Bengal town of Naxalbari in 1967. Usually classified as Maoist and described by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as the biggest internal threat to India, military and other government reports in 2010 claim that Naxalites are very active in at least thirteen states and have increasing control over about one-third of India. Fuelled by reaction against the exploitation of peasants and tribals, the Naxal movement appeals to millions of impoverished, oppressed, suffering Indians, who are part of the ‘other India’ and not beneficiaries of ‘modern India’. These impoverished and exploited Indians are victims of the growing class inequalities, lack of real development, government corruption and repressive police and other forms of violence.
Gandhi certainly shares a lot with the Naxalites in their moral commitments, sense of injustice and identification with the needs of the most disadvantaged, as seen in their selfless service, sacrifice and willingness to die. However, Gandhi rejects their ruthlessness, violence, terror, armed insurrection and their view that their ends justify any means.
Fourth, there are ‘modern’ Indians, the most influential and powerful grouping, who have become very successful and privileged economically, politically and socially. Perhaps 400 million Indians have in a short period of time developed a new sense of self-confidence in their rising standard of living and in the future of a superpower India. For most of them Gandhi is simply irrelevant when it comes to their values, world view and ways of living. However, to some of them, Gandhi’s example and his powerful message are an annoyance and at times a threat to their personal priorities and to India’s rising economic, political and military power.
‘Modern Indians’, who often express admiration for the sacrifices and ideals of Mahatma Gandhi, correctly recognize that Gandhi is very critical of their modern India of ego-driven materialism and consumerism, with the exploitation of human and natural resources and with an anti-Gandhian view of standard of living and progress. Gandhi’s extensive critique of ‘Modern Civilization’, as analysed in the previous chapter, applies to these ‘modern’ Indians.
What has been said about admiration for Gandhi, controversies and anti-Gandhi values, priorities and policies in India is mirrored throughout the contemporary world. For example, the fastest growing religions and religious forces throughout the world express diverse contextualized reactions against the values and effects of dominant modern Western civilization. Such religious forces usually express a very anti-Gandhi orientation. This is seen in their religious justifications of war and violence, of hierarchical privilege and power, of religiously defined states and violent legal systems and of the oppression of women and minorities. Perhaps the greatest contrast with Gandhi’s philosophy of truth and nonviolence can be seen in how these religious forces embrace their fundamental classifications of the nonbelieving ‘other’ as essentially different, as evil and as an object of intolerance, unworthy of respect and justifying severe multidimensional and structural violence.
The most pervasive and dominant illustration of anti-Gandhi values as the ‘modern’ way of being in the contemporary world can be seen in how Western industrial civilization provides the model for transnational corporations and globalization, for the military-industrial complex and the modern state, and for assessing development, progress and success or failure in China, South Korea, Brazil, the United Kingdom, the United States and other nations. In such a modern world, admiration for Gandhi may at times seem like admiring some premodern relic in a museum.
Such a presentation of Gandhi’s legacy as largely irrelevant offers a one-sided and false picture, not only with regard to his continuing influence during the past six decades, but especially with regard to the present and future significance of his philosophy and practices in addressing the most pressing contemporary crises. There are, of course, millions of human beings who acknowledge their indebtedness to Gandhi’s exemplary role model, philosophy and practices. This is most obvious in the tributes paid to Gandhi by numerous political, moral and spiritual leaders, including Nobel Peace Prize recipients. A very limited sampling of such well-known leaders, who acknowledge their indebtedness to Gandhi or are identified as Gandhian figures, includes Martin Luther King Jr, César Chávez, Lanza del Vasto, Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, the Dalai Lama, Vaclav Havel, Thich Nhat Hanh and Aung San Suu Kyi.
This indebtedness to and identification with Gandhi and his legacy is also apparent in the frequent documentation of Gandhi-inspired nonviolent resistance and liberation movements throughout Asia, Africa, Central and South America, North America and Europe. A very small sampling includes many human rights and pro-democracy struggles, antiwar and peace activism, campaigns for nuclear disarmament, environmental movements, the u.s. civil rights movement, the Polish Solidarity movement, the Czech Velvet Revolution, the overthrow of Marcos in the Philippines, the School of the Americas Watch and numerous nonviolent resistance movements in Latin America.
What is often overlooked, and is even more consistent with Gandhi’s philosophy and practices, are the millions of unrecognized ‘ordinary’ human beings, really extraordinary human beings, who are part of Gandhi’s powerful legacy. In so many diverse, admirable ways they embrace Gandhi values in their personal lives and actions, their ways of relating to others and to nature, their noncooperation and nonviolent resistance to dominant violent modern economic, political and military policies, and their experiments with alternative ways of being in the world through nonviolent and truthful constructive work.
What may be most significant in assessing Gandhi’s legacy is the profound influence, often unacknowledged and usually unexpected, that Gandhi has had on policymakers, ordinary citizens and major historical developments. For cynics or so-called ‘realists’ it may be tempting to dismiss such influences as mere lip service, hypocrisy or utopian dreaming unrelated to actual practice, but they would be only partially correct and would sometimes be out of touch with reality.
Four remarkable illustrations from India of such profound, unexpected and usually unacknowledged Gandhi influence, may be cited. This small sample of major Gandhi influences from India is also significant in its relevant lessons dealing with contemporary crises in other nations and in our globally interconnected world.
First, for several decades after independence, scholars and others wrote numerous pieces on why ‘India’ as a modern, democratic nation state was an impossible experiment. With its extreme poverty, illiteracy, overpopulation and underdevelopment, with its extreme divisions based on regional, linguistic, communal, caste and religious identities, and with its lack of modern unifying historical and cultural forces of nationalism, the artificially constructed ‘India’ was destined to either fall apart or barely survive as a failed state. Remarkably, even acknowledging its violence, corruption, poverty, secessionist movements, human rights violations and other unresolved crises and weaknesses, India has survived, developed and even flourished as a vibrant, modern, democratic nation. For many this has been nothing short of ‘miraculous’, especially considering India’s daunting challenges and when comparing modern India with its neighbours and with numerous ‘failed’ African and other nations throughout the world.
What should be appreciated is the profound influence Gandhi’s example and his continuing legacy play in modern India. Here one finds a Gandhi legacy with his emphasis on inclusivism, tolerance, mutual respect, freedom and equality, democratic empowerment, civilizational harmony, nonviolent relations, duty and rights, open-ended experiments with truth and new ways of living. Here one also finds Gandhi’s pride in India’s ethical and cultural past and his confidence in its unlimited future and even in its vital contributions toward global harmony and civilizational development.
Second, after several decades of growing non-Gandhian and anti-Gandhian developments among those with power and privilege, there has been a remarkable renewed interest in Gandhi and his legacy in the twenty-first century. In numerous ways a profound Gandhi influence is having effects in the concerns, thinking and policies of modern India, even among a significant minority of highly educated and powerful Indian elite. And even much more significant is the potential influence of integrating Gandhi’s insights, contributions and legacy as a vital part of new, urgently needed approaches for dealing with present and future crises.
In this regard one finds an increasing serious openness to Gandhi and his legacy on the part of economic and political leaders, experts on terrorism and security, educators, environmentalists, scientists and engineers. Here one finds recent writings on such topics as Gandhian economics and management, Gandhian engineering, Gandhian education, Gandhian ecology and Gandhian inclusive democracy. An increasing number of outstanding scientists and other experts are fully aware that their dominant modern models, approaches and priorities may have contributed to short-term material and other gains for many but are now economically and environmental unsustainable. Even if focusing only on global climate change or some other particular threat to human life and the planet, experts increasingly recognize the need for new para digms with new ways of assessing success, standard of living, progress, happiness, self-realization and fulfilment. In this regard Gandhi is often the catalyst for allowing modern human beings to rethink our inadequate and dangerous world view. This is increasingly true not only in India but also in the West and throughout the world.
An important illustration of this Gandhi influence with policymakers can be seen in recent important legislation, such as India’s National Rural Employment Government Scheme and the Right to Information Act. Key policymakers in the Government of India, very aware of China’s different economic model, are under tremendous pressure from the Indian and foreign elites to invest resources in infrastructure development. But there is also an Indian context, informed by Gandhi’s life and legacy, in which the number one priority should not be the infrastructure priority of the modern elites. Policymakers have to deal with grassroots social movements, articulated needs and demands and prospects of noncooperation and resistance. The result is that the Government of India has recently promoted the priorities of social programmes, ‘inclusive growth’ and ‘inclusive democracy and development’ over maximum infrastructure investment.
Third, something truly astounding occurred after the Mumbai terrorism of 2008, and this can only be fully understood by appreciating Gandhi’s exemplary model and continuing influence. Considering the history of India–Pakistan wars and tensions, the ongoing Kashmir crisis, clear documentation of Pakistani-initiated and supported past terrorism and November 2008 terrorism within India, and Hindu–Muslim violent communal relations, one might have expected massive retaliation by India’s military and by Indian Hindus. Indeed, after the 26–29 November terrorist attacks ended there were strong Hindu forces that, in both extreme rhetoric and calls for action, promoted using military force to finish Pakistan off once and for all and to repress ‘unpatriotic’ Indian Muslims.
Quite remarkably, often citing the philosophy and spirit of Mahatma Gandhi, India’s Government and its Hindu and other masses showed tremendous self-restraint, resisted calls for violent retaliation, remained calm and rational in approaching the crisis and emphasized the need to preserve human rights and promote communal harmony. India’s approach to this terrorism cannot be fully appreciated without taking into account the influence of Gandhi and his legacy. In the aftermath of Mumbai terrorism India demonstrates how an understandable concern with security and the need for justice can be integrated with a far greater intelligence, maturity, nonviolence and insistence on truth than was exhibited by ‘modern’ U.S. governmental, military and corporate interests after 9/11.
Fourth, Gandhi’s legacy continues, often in unexpected ways, through his influence in popular culture and a continuing universal appeal. To provide but one of numerous possible illustrations, the 2006 Bollywood movie Lage Raho Munnai Bhai, directed by Rajkumar Hirani, became an unexpected huge hit in India, reviving interest in Gandhi, especially among a new generation. The movie has the Bollywood appeal of a musical comedy but what makes this film unusual is that the spirit of Mahatma Gandhi keeps appearing to the gangster don, Munnai Bhai. He gradually begins to promote what he calls ‘Gandhigiri’: how Gandhi principles can be put into practice in the everyday lives of ordinary people to help them solve their problems and to organize moral nonviolent protests. This movie led to a popular ‘Gandhigiri’ movement of how to apply Gandhi nonviolence and truth to one’s life. It revived interest in Gandhi, especially among a younger generation, resulted in a sharp increase in sales of Gandhi books, established Gandhi as ‘hip’ and as a ‘new pop icon’ and has influenced millions to rethink their values and to consider the significance of Gandhi today.
The remarkable appeal of Lage Raho Munnai Bhai, not unlike the appeal of Attenborough’s movie Gandhi, not only in India, but also to viewers throughout the world, raises the larger issue of Gandhi’s continuing influence. On the one hand, on world leaders, such as u.s. President Barack Obama during his November 2010 visit to India, when he chose first to spend time at Mani Bhavan Gandhi Sangrahalaya in Mumbai. President Obama paid homage to Mahatma Gandhi, indicating that he looks to him for hope and inspiration and that Gandhi remains ‘a hero not just to India but to the world’. On the other hand, on millions of ordinary students and citizens who, when exposed to Gandhi’s writings and principles for the first time, experience Gandhi as touching something deep within them, as bringing out what we recognize as morally, culturally and spiritually best in us and desperately needed in the world.
Gandhi’s greatest relevance today can be seen in his philosophy and approach to violence and nonviolence. Gandhi allows us to address our most pressing contemporary crises as expressions of our humanly caused, relational, economic, psychological, political, military, cultural, religious and other dimensions of violence and the dominant structural violence of the status quo. Gandhi provides ways for us to understand that perpetuating such multidimensional and structural violence will not lead to the resolution of contemporary crises of war, terrorism, civilizational disharmony and conflict, and environmental destruction. His philosophy also allows us to consider qualitatively different, transformative, preventative methods that offer some hope for a sustainable future of greater nonviolence, peace, truth, morality, love, compassion and meaningful ways of relating with integrity to all beings and to nature.
As has been shown, Gandhi’s greatly broadened and deepened philosophy and approach to violence and nonviolence is integrally related ethically and ontologically to his philosophy and practice of truth. A selectively appropriated and creatively reformulated Gandhi-inspired approach provides a powerful critique of dominant characteristics of violent and untruthful modern civilization. It offers transformative nonviolent methods of noncooperation and resistance, along with the need to engage in constructive work to create alternative ethical and spiritual relations. Gandhi’s philosophy of nonviolence offers desperately needed preventative approaches to violence and for conflict resolution, to deconditioning the dynamics of war-making and engaging in real peacebuilding, and to engaging in and transforming violent economic, religious and cultural conflicts. Gandhi’s holistic, harmonious way of being in the world challenges us to consider unalienated and meaningful ways of relating to our self, to others and to nature; to live active, self-determining, meaningful, joyful lives of selfless service and integrity allowing for self-realization.
We may conclude our assessment of Gandhi today by considering two remarkable topics central to Gandhi’s life and philosophy. Both topics have a profound relationship to crises in the twenty-first century. First, there is a key question regarding Gandhi’s remarkable self, and, second, there is Gandhi’s view of human evolutionary development and untapped human potential.
In chapter Six we observed how Gandhi equates self with truth, God and reality, and this is often used interchangeably with nonviolence and love. In this regard Gandhi repeatedly expresses his conviction that the entire purpose of life is self-realization, which is equivalent to truth-realization, God-realization and the realization of nonviolence and love. We observed that Gandhi uses ‘self’ in diverse ways, including the true individual inner self, the social relational self and the universal, unifying, absolute Self. We also noted that he often emphasizes the self as swabhava, one’s unique, dynamic, individual, physical, mental and social self-nature to which each of us must be true in our relative, contextualized, relational path to greater self-realization.
The key question regarding Gandhi’s self, that has inspired but also baffled even his admirers, is the following: what is the source of Gandhi’s almost superhuman dedication, strength, fearlessness, and energy?1 Even during the darkest periods of greatest personal despair, such as the time of unrestrained horror, terror and slaughter at Partition and his heroic pilgrimage through the devastated and hate-filled villages of Noakhali, where did Gandhi find the extra-ordinary strength and energy to struggle, suffer, sacrifice and serve as such an exemplary moral being?
In different contexts one can find diverse partial answers to this key question about Gandhi’s self. Over the decades, through his many experiments with truth, Gandhi develops an extraordinarily strong will with a rare capacity to embrace sacrifice and voluntary suffering, to overcome his fears and act with courage, to take on vows and keep them and to undertake challenging commitments and fulfil them. This remarkable will allows Gandhi to embrace lofty ethical and spiritual ideals and then dedicate his life to making them a living reality. In many contexts of despair he also gains strength through his faith in God that Gandhi claims has always showed him the true way, or in truth and nonviolence that Gandhi claims have always emerged victorious throughout history.
The key to the source of Gandhi’s dedication, strength, fearlessness and energy can best be identified with his philosophy and practice of renunciation. He finds the source for such self-development and self-realization in the Hindu tradition of the Upanishads, Patanjali’s Yoga Sutra and other religious and philosophical texts. For Gandhi the Bhagavad-Gita is his guide to daily living and is his best source for self-transformation and self-realization. He especially identifies with the Gita’s path of karma yoga, or renunciation in action, and with the last eighteen verses of Second Chapter, portraying the ‘perfect sage’ or ideal human being, upon which he meditated every day. He also asserts that this is a universal message that can be found in the Sermon on the Mount and in other lofty philosophical, ethical and spiritual texts throughout the world.
The key to the developed ethical and spiritual self is renunciation of ego-attachment to results with the performance of selfless service to meet the needs of others. Something remarkable occurs when one engages in the difficult transformative process of reducing one’s ego to zero and engages in selfless service to meet the needs of others, especially the most disadvantaged.2 This attitude and sense of purposive self is beautifully presented in Gandhi’s famous ‘A Talisman’, remarkably written in August 1947, during Gandhi’s last year and in the midst of overwhelming violence and terror.
I will give you a talisman. Whenever you are in doubt, or when the self becomes too much with you, apply the following test. Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man whom you may have seen and ask yourself if the step you contemplate is going to be of any use to him. Will he gain anything by it? Will it restore him to a control over his own life and destiny? In other words, will it lead to swaraj for the hungry and spiritually starving millions?
Then you will find your doubts and yourself melting away.3
How does this renunciation of ego-attachment to results with the performance of selfless service lead to Gandhi’s energy, endurance, fearlessness and strength? Gandhi asserts that when we are motivated by ego-desires and attachments we worry about results, become entrapped in endless desires and needs, live fragmented lives without unified focus and lack self-rule and freedom. We experience daily lives of insecurity and multi dimensional violence in which we construct violent defence mechanisms to protect the illusory ego. We live ego-defined lives of illusions and untruths that separate us from the unifying, interrelated, moral, spiritual and cosmic nature of reality.
Through his experiments with truth and gradual self-transformation Gandhi found that something remarkable occurs when one renounces such ego-attachments to results and engages in selfless service: one taps into incredible sources of energy, strength and creativity. Our ego-attached psychological, epistemological, moral and ontological obstacles and barriers arise from and perpetuate relations of fear, insecurity, violence and untruth. When they are removed, one is able to live a focused, integrated, empowered life of perseverance, fearlessness, peace, joy, and hope. By engaging in the process of reducing the ego-self to zero, embracing voluntary sacrifice (yajna) and suffering, and dedicating one’s life to selfless service, Gandhi’s transformative renunciation as self-realization allows him to harness incredible released energy. It allows him to live fully in the present as an integrated mind–body–heart whole, and to live an integrated life empowered by the laws and forces of love, nonviolence and truth.
It should be obvious that Gandhi’s philosophy and practice of renunciation is diametrically opposed to the dominant modern economic, political, psychological, cultural, educational, consumerist orientations. We are repeatedly told that it is ‘human nature’ for human beings to be motivated by ego-desires and ego-attachments to results. That is the basis for working hard, personal growth, competitive success and creativity and innovation.
Support for Gandhi’s alternative view of human motivation and the source of self-transformation and realization can be found in healthy, meaningful, personal, family and community living and also in great ethical and spiritual traditions throughout the world. Gandhi’s alternative philosophy and practice of self and renunciation are especially relevant today because of the urgent growing conclusion that our present ego-defined desires, needs and attachments are extremely violent and economically and environmentally unsustainable. In addition there are some recent, rather startling, encouraging developments in the modern West that lend support for Gandhi’s perspective. We shall mention only briefly two illustrations.
There are numerous self-help advocates with millions of devoted followers in the u.s., India and other parts of the world. Devotees are drawn overwhelmingly from the relatively privileged and usually successful sectors of the population. These ‘modern’ human beings experience ego-driven lives of great stress, alienation, meaninglessness and unfulfilment. Representative of such modern ‘gurus’ is Wayne Dyer, author of The Power of Intention and other best-selling works. Advocating a very positive and hopeful philosophy, Dyer is featured on television and at numerous other gatherings where enthusiastic participants embrace his message. Central to his message is the insightful observation that if we experience things negatively this creates a negative sense of our self and our world. In this regard the ego is an impediment. The ego separates us from the infinite, the creative source of all, of which we are a part and that is our true identity. Through our inner world of intentions, including surrounding ourselves with what is good, we connect to the invisible force, the infinite empowering source that allows us to awaken our ‘divine’ nature or true self. This is the key to our well-being and to living lives of meaning and happiness.4
What is revealing in Dyer’s message, and what is representative of messages of numerous other modern ‘gurus’, is that it shares much with Gandhi’s approach to the source of self-transformation and self-realization. In this regard it also critiques dominant characteristics of the modern ego-attached orientation as leading to illusion, stress, meaninglessness and alienation.
Of course, in appealing to a privileged Western audience and readership, the messages usually focus on the modern individual’s personal well-being and happiness without including much of Gandhi’s transformative philosophy and practice. Omitted is Gandhi’s renunciation philosophy of the need for voluntary sacrifice, suffering, nonviolent struggle and resistance, and of how the privileged benefit from or are complicit with the structural violence and untruths of the status quo. Nevertheless, the widespread appeal of such modern approaches indicates some of the potential and relevance of a more comprehensive and more adequate Gandhi approach to our contemporary crises.
In addition there are numerous recent scientific studies that bring into question the effectiveness of modern ego-defined incentives in motivating human beings toward greater performance, even leaving aside questions of personal satisfaction, meaningful labour, morality, violence and truth. Best-selling author Daniel Pink reports on the latest ‘science’ on ‘drive: the surprising truth about what motivates us’. He cites a study commissioned by the u.s. Federal Reserve Bank and conducted by top modern economists. They found that a system of higher monetary rewards, such as better payments and bonuses, along with punishments, does not produce better performance. In fact, in what would at first strike modern thinkers as ‘counter-intuitive’, they found that such ego-attached rewards had the opposite effect.5
It is true that when people are not paid enough, are living under necessity and are asked to perform the simplest straightforward tasks, ego-defined incentive rewards can motivate performance. This is the level at which Gandhi said that if people are suffering and living at the level of necessity, you first must address and fulfil their basic material needs. However, if people are paid enough to live comfortably and are engaged in more complex tasks, requiring some creative conceptual skill, the motivational structure of greater reward actually produces worse performance. According to Pink, what do numerous modern scientific studies tell us about what truly motivates us to better performance, leaving aside ethical, social, environmental and other concerns? There are three major factors that motive modern human beings to better performance: autonomy or self-direction (not unlike Gandhi’s self-rule), mastery or the urge to get better, and purpose. In fact the science shows that when human beings have such a ‘purpose motive’ they perform better, are more creative and are often highly motivated to do skilled work in their extra time, without financial remuneration, and even to share or give away what they produce that is of value to others.
Once again these recent scientific studies may be seen as consistent with and lending credence to Gandhi’s approach to the source of energy, motivation, creativity, meaning and perse-verance of self-transformation and self-realization. Of course Gandhi goes far beyond these scientific motivational studies of raising performance level in economic productivity, athletics and other areas of human endeavour. Or, to put it differently, for Gandhi, ‘performing better’ includes developing character, renunciation and selfless service, voluntary sacrifice and self-realization based on truth and nonviolence. Nevertheless, one cannot overestimate the significance and relevance of modern scientific approaches that complement and may be integrated with a new Gandhi philosophy and practice for addressing contemporary crises.
Gandhi leaves us with a rather hopeful view of human potential and evolutionary development. Although Gandhi has an optimistic view of human beings as basically good, he rejects any absolute, rigid view of human nature. Gandhi is well aware of the incredible violence, untruths and humanly caused suffering throughout history. What he classifies as our ‘brute’ nature, our ‘lower’ nature, our ‘animalistic’ nature is part of our mode of being in the world. But human beings also experience and express our ‘higher’ mind–body–heart nature, our potential for developing love, nonviolence and truth that elevates and distinguishes us as truly human. For Gandhi there is unlimited potential for harnessing our ethical and spiritual capacities for self-transformation and realization.
Many modern thinkers reject Gandhi as a utopian dreamer who denies the dynamics of human evolutionary survival and development. Gandhi certainly rejects the kind of ‘social Darwinism’ with its version of ‘survival of the fittest’ defined by might makes right and whoever possesses the economic, political and military power is victorious. Gandhi, whose philosophy is much more compatible with Charles Darwin’s approach to survival of the fittest in terms of natural selection and adaptability, claims that the brute force modern version is refuted by real human history and evolution. If humans behaved in such a brute manner, as is emphasized in history books and in the media, they would have become extinct long ago. What has allowed human beings to survive, evolve and flourish is our remarkable capacity for compassion and love; to be moved by the needs and suffering of others and to respond through selfless service. In other words, it is our ‘higher’ ethical and spiritual nature, our capacity to tap into love and nonviolent forces, soul and truth-forces, that provides the unifying force that allows us to realize our selves as integral parts of meaningful interconnected wholes. It is the self-realization of our higher nature that allows us to survive, develop and evolve.
What this means is that humankind today, faced with our severe crises, needs a radical, qualitatively different, paradigm shift as key to our evolutionary survival and development. We need new criteria for evaluating success, happiness, well-being, standard of living, development and progress. As Gandhi repeatedly asserts, we desperately need a more human-centric, moral-centric world view and way of being in the world. For Gandhi what is most significant and hopeful is that such a paradigm shift, away from the dominant modern violent civilizational orientation, is not an impractical romantic utopian dream. It is not an escape from reality. Indeed, it expresses tapping into and developing the ethical and spiritual forces and potential that are actualized every day in diverse ways. Such a civilizational shift toward greater truth and nonviolence is not only humanly possible and relevant today, but it in reality defines what it is to live an unalienated, meaningful, creative, joyful, truly human existence.