What Gandhi Says
about the bookabout
Long treated as a moral icon, Mahatma Gandhi remains one of the most demanding and misunderstood political thinkers of the modern era.
There is much that will surprise in these pages: Gandhi was not a pacifist; he believed in the right of those being attacked to strike back and regarded inaction as a result of cowardice to be a greater sin than even the most ill-considered aggression. Gandhi's calls for the sacrifice of lives in order to shame the oppressor into concessions can easily seem chilling and ruthless.
Drawing on extensive readings of Gandhi’s copious oeuvre, Norman Finkelstein sets out, in clear and concise language, the basic principles of Gandhi’s approach and applies this thinking to the Israel–Palestine conflict.
The wave of protest movements that gathered force in the early 2010s—from Occupy to the uprisings that inspired it— renewed global attention to Gandhi’s work on nonviolent resistance, articulated during the struggle for Indian independence and later echoed in Tahrir Square, Puerta del Sol, and Zuccotti Park. Yet admiration for Gandhi’s influence has often obscured the rigor and severity of his thinking.
This book confronts that gap directly, examining Gandhi’s insistence on courage as an active and demanding virtue, his rejection of passivity and moral evasion, and his belief that resistance must be judged by its consequences in human lives. Central to this argument is Gandhi’s conviction that peaceful resistance, however exacting, is ultimately less costly in human terms than armed opposition, and that the role of a protest movement is not to persuade people of something new but to compel them to act on behalf of what they already accept as right.In doing so, it restores the sharp political edge of Gandhi’s thought and demonstrates its continuing relevance to contemporary struggles for justice and democracy.
About The Author / Editor
Preview
A wave of popular revolts is now sweeping the planet.
In many instances, it was an act of nonviolent civil resistance that either sparked the local uprising or marked its turning-point
In Tunisia, it was the self-immolation of a street vendor. In Cairo, it was the assault by goons on camelback against nonviolent protesters in Tahrir Square. In New York City, it was the voluntary mass arrest of demonstrators on the Brooklyn Bridge.
These actions "quickened" the public conscience. People who had stood by indifferently and passively for decades suddenly came to life.
The acts of nonviolent resistance resonated with a broad public because of an already existing consensus that the system was unjust.
In spirit and form, the epic events of the past year appear like a page out of Gandhi's life.
But it is also easy to see the limitations of Gandhi's teachings.
Neither Ben-Ali of Tunisia nor Mubarak of Egypt was "melted" by the people's self-suffering. They had to be forced from power. Neither the liberal mayor of Oakland nor the liberal mayor of New York let their bleeding hearts prevent them from brutally clearing out the "Occupy" movement.
Self-suffering might sting the conscience of the 99 percent and get them to act. But only the concerted and courageous power of the overwhelming majority will get the 1 percent to budge and be gone.
in the media
Related Interest
Related Interest
What Gandhi Says
about the bookabout
Long treated as a moral icon, Mahatma Gandhi remains one of the most demanding and misunderstood political thinkers of the modern era.
There is much that will surprise in these pages: Gandhi was not a pacifist; he believed in the right of those being attacked to strike back and regarded inaction as a result of cowardice to be a greater sin than even the most ill-considered aggression. Gandhi's calls for the sacrifice of lives in order to shame the oppressor into concessions can easily seem chilling and ruthless.
Drawing on extensive readings of Gandhi’s copious oeuvre, Norman Finkelstein sets out, in clear and concise language, the basic principles of Gandhi’s approach and applies this thinking to the Israel–Palestine conflict.
The wave of protest movements that gathered force in the early 2010s—from Occupy to the uprisings that inspired it— renewed global attention to Gandhi’s work on nonviolent resistance, articulated during the struggle for Indian independence and later echoed in Tahrir Square, Puerta del Sol, and Zuccotti Park. Yet admiration for Gandhi’s influence has often obscured the rigor and severity of his thinking.
This book confronts that gap directly, examining Gandhi’s insistence on courage as an active and demanding virtue, his rejection of passivity and moral evasion, and his belief that resistance must be judged by its consequences in human lives. Central to this argument is Gandhi’s conviction that peaceful resistance, however exacting, is ultimately less costly in human terms than armed opposition, and that the role of a protest movement is not to persuade people of something new but to compel them to act on behalf of what they already accept as right.In doing so, it restores the sharp political edge of Gandhi’s thought and demonstrates its continuing relevance to contemporary struggles for justice and democracy.
About The Author / Editor
Preview
A wave of popular revolts is now sweeping the planet.
In many instances, it was an act of nonviolent civil resistance that either sparked the local uprising or marked its turning-point
In Tunisia, it was the self-immolation of a street vendor. In Cairo, it was the assault by goons on camelback against nonviolent protesters in Tahrir Square. In New York City, it was the voluntary mass arrest of demonstrators on the Brooklyn Bridge.
These actions "quickened" the public conscience. People who had stood by indifferently and passively for decades suddenly came to life.
The acts of nonviolent resistance resonated with a broad public because of an already existing consensus that the system was unjust.
In spirit and form, the epic events of the past year appear like a page out of Gandhi's life.
But it is also easy to see the limitations of Gandhi's teachings.
Neither Ben-Ali of Tunisia nor Mubarak of Egypt was "melted" by the people's self-suffering. They had to be forced from power. Neither the liberal mayor of Oakland nor the liberal mayor of New York let their bleeding hearts prevent them from brutally clearing out the "Occupy" movement.
Self-suffering might sting the conscience of the 99 percent and get them to act. But only the concerted and courageous power of the overwhelming majority will get the 1 percent to budge and be gone.