Jaya Prakash Narayan had declared that total revolution is a combination of seven revolutions—social, economic, political, cultural, ideological or intellectual, educational and spiritual. This may be increased or decreased. For example, cultural revolution may include educational and ideological revolution … Economic revolution may be split up into industrial, agricultural, technological revolutions etc.’47 The idea is that there is need for total transformation of the human beings. But, it is not clear as to what is the reference point of this transformation. Total transformation of human beings for what, to achieve what and to what end? Which of the seven aspects of revolution were the reference point, where to start and how to coordinate. These were some of the problematic questions that one has to address to think of total revolution. J. Ps concerns were that there should be rural-based industries, planning from below, reduction of inequalities, saving villages from urban onslaught, social ownership of large industries, encouragement of inter-caste marriage, integral community consciousness, humanization of science, etc.. How would social ownership of industry be achieved or how would inter-caste marriage be made possible? J. P’s revolution would follow the Satyagraha mode of revolution, revolution and transformation through non-violent means. His method approves of both agitational and commu-nicational methods (propaganda, etc.). What J. P. wanted to impress upon was that the revolution or transformation of individuals requires a multidimensional change and that means a revolutionary change in as many as seven aspects of human life. Seven revolutions provided a dream vision to many of J. P.’s followers including Ram Manohar and others.
Our survey of political resistance reveals that it has provided an important framework for many theorists and activists such David Henry Thoreau, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Yasser Arafat and other anti-colonial, anti-imperialist and civil rights and equality movement activists. Thoreau in his book Civil Disobedience (1864) advocated passive resistance as means of resistance against the American government during the slavery abolition struggle. It implies civil opposition to the policies of the government by the general citizenry. Gandhi realizing the importance of this policy of civil disobedience against the powerful colonial government evolved his policy of Satyagraha, moral insistence or persuasion based on truth. This meant non-violent civil opposition and resistance against the policies, authority and institutions of the government, in that case, the colonial rule in India. Gandhi’s famous Champaran Satyagraha (1917), Non-Cooperation Movement (1921), Salt Satyagraha (1930), Civil Disobedience Movement (1930–1) are examples of civil disobedience against the policies of the colonial government. Ambedkar applied strategy of resistance against social discrimination and caste segregation in India. He campaigned, struggled and put resistance against the practice of untouchability, which discriminated against those placed at the lowest in the caste hierarchy. Various temple entries and accessibility to public places movements were organized by Ambedkar including Mahad Satyagraha which was for gaining access to drinking water at public places. Martin Luther in 1960s also applied passive resistance for insisting the rights of the Black people in America even after a century of slavery abolition. Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress applied political resistance in the struggle against the white dominated government in South Africa, which practised apartheid, a policy of racial segregation. Yasser Arafat used political resistance against the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory and Israeli government’s policy of occupation. The concept of political resistance has also provided tools for feminist, environmental and indigenous people resistance and rights movements. In India, in 1970s, anti-congress opposition staged political resistance against the alleged maladministration and corruption and subsequently the Emergency rule.
Presently, in India, we have a variety of resistance movements of both intra-systemic and extra-systemic types including the civil society resistance movements such as the Narmada Bachao Andolan, sectional interest movements such as the Anti-Reservation Movements, statehood and regional autonomy movements and ultra and extremist movements such as the Naxalite and the secessionist movements, etc. In modern democratic states, limited representative governments based on consent have to grapple with the issues of lack of consensus and limited political obligation. Is it a mere question of fragmented consensus, reluctant majority, deficit of political obligation and sporadic political resistance, or, is it a symptom of crisis of legitimacy? Possibly, a mix of both!CopycopyHighlighthighlightAdd NotenoteGet Linklink
Leave a Reply