4

 

THE WORKING OF MASS NONVIOLENT RESISTANCE

 

ASSUMING THAT THE DISCIPLINE of nonviolence can be and has been attained, how does it actually work in group or mass use?

Since war is the most highly developed and best understood mode of mass struggle, we will find our explanation first from authorities on the science and art of war.

Marshal Foch showed clearly by many examples that the method of war is primarily psychological, or what he calls "moral"

 

"Proofs and instances could be given indefinitely of that great importance of morale in war. Von der Goltz himself tells us that: 'It is not so much a question of destroying the enemy troops as of destroying their courage. Victory is yours as soon as you convince your opponent that his cause is lost.' And again; `One defeats the enemy not by individual and complete annihilation, but by destroying his hopes of victory."'

 

Marshal Saxe remarked: "The secret of victory lies in the hearts, of human beings." Napoleon stated that "in war, the moral is to the physical as three is to one." Caemmerer, speaking of Clausewitz's book on war says, "As he pictures war, the struggle between the spiritual and moral forces on both sides is the center of all." Captain B. H. Liddell Hart wrote that World War I confirmed "the immemorial lesson of history-that the true aim in war is the mind of the enemy command and government, not the bodies of their' troops, that the balance between victory and defeat turns on mental impressions and only indirectly on physical blows."

The object of nonviolent resistance is, partly analogous to this object of war. War seeks to demoralize the opponent, to break his

THE WORKING OF MASS NONVIOLENT RESISTANCE         49

will, to destroy his confidence, enthusiasm and hope. Nonviolent resistance demoralizes the opponent only to re-establish in him a new morale that is finer because it is based on sounder values. Non­violent resistance does not break the opponent's will but alters it; does not destroy his confidence, enthusiasm and hope but transfers them to a finer purpose.

As Hocking points out, "Morale is at the bottom a state of will or purpose." It seems to rest largely upon such factors as the in­dividual soldier's confidence in himself, in his comrades, in his army, in his leaders, in the methods used, in the cause for which the war is being waged, in his government, in the civilians of the nation be­hind them all. It also contains such elements as habit, tradition, humor, a sense of being merged into the larger unity of the army, appreciation of risk and a relish for adventure.

Suppose a group of nonviolent resisters were opposed to a com­pany of soldiers, and that the soldiers attempted clubbing tactics or bayonet work. Let us assume also that the civilians have been non­violent from the start and there is no shooting by the soldiers. But suppose there is some violence by the soldiers, and arrests of the civil­ians. Conceivably a troop commander might lose his head and cause a massacre; such a case will be discussed later. Omitting this considera­tion for the present, let us further assume that the cause is so strong that as fast as any are arrested, others come to take their places. What, presumably, would be the effect of this on the morale of the soldiers?

To a certain extent, the effect would be the same as that de­scribed in the preceding chapter where an individual person violently attacks a nonviolent resister. But the discipline and habits of the sol­diers would largely prevent this from happening at first. The in­dividual soldier's will has become merged with the general will of the army, and wholly subordinated to that of the commanding officer. He is used to rough tactics and is not at all squeamish about inflicting pain and injury on others.

Nevertheless, as Rivers points out, "One of the chief results of military training is to increase the suggestibility of the private." He notes this suggestibility chiefly in relation to the officers, but no doubt the soldiers are also suggestible in relation to the acts and conduct of their opponents or "enemies" because such acts and con-

THE POWER OF NONVIOLENCE                                    50

duct are the whole object toward which the morale of the soldiers has been built up. This is also indicated by Clausewitz: "War is a constant state of reciprocal action, the effects of which are mutual." Caemmerer notes also that "every action in war is saturated with mental forces and effects.... War is a constant reciprocal effect of action of both parties." This fact then would presently tend to offset the discipline and hardness of the soldiers.

The conduct of the nonviolent civilians would cause surprise in the individual soldier and thus start him thinking. Frederick the Great wrote, "If my Soldiers began to think, not one would remain in the ranks." As soon as a soldier begins to think of certain sorts of things, he begins to be an individual, to separate himself from the mass mind, the will and personality of the army. If, then, the soldier is made to think for himself in the midst of a conflict, a start has been made toward the disintegration of his morale. I do not mean to say that modern soldiers do no thinking at all, but in these days of mass communications a very large proportion of all people do very little thinking for themselves. And among soldiers, this is still more true over a still wider range of affairs.

As the struggle proceeds, suppose the nonviolent civilians maintain their discipline and keep cheerful but also keep stating their side of the case earnestly and in all sincerity. Sooner or later the soldiers will begin talking about it among themselves. The total absence of retaliation or vindictiveness even in looks or, tone of voice, on the part of the civilians, contrasts effectively with the harsh or stem commands of their officers. The situation will tell on the nerves of both officers and soldiers. This sort of thing is new to them. They do not know how to treat it. "These civilians seem wholly inoffensive and harmless and honest. What is their crime? Why were we soldiers called out for such a job? We are for war work, but this is peace." Thus they will question in their minds and perhaps among themselves. They will begin to fraternize with the civilians and learn more about the dispute in which they are engaged. It will no longer appear to be a clear-cut case of right vs. wrong, but the opponent's case will appear to have elements of reason.

If the officers forbid them to fraternize with the opponents, the soldiers may think that the order is stupid or that the officers are timid. This lessens respect for their officers and lowers morale.

THE WORKING OF MASS NONVIOLENT RESISTANCE         51

If there really is solid truth in the position of the nonviolent resisters, the soldiers will presently begin to question the validity of their own cause. They may become slack in obeying orders. They will see no good to be gained by their being there, and no evil or danger to be averted. "When doubt comes, morale crumbles." The Duke of Wellington put it forcefully: "No man with any scruples of conscience is fit to be a soldier." One of the important elements in a soldier's morale, as Hocking has indicated, is his consciousness of being a protector. If he is deprived of that, he feels useless and perhaps a little absurd. There is no exhilaration in using violence against nonviolent resisters. The soldiers may even feel that the authorities or their officers have morally let them down.

Meanwhile, the situation is unpleasant for the officers, too. If they make any serious mistake, they may lose the respect of the private soldiers as well as of the general public. If they order any shooting, there is almost sure to be a wave of public indignation. They know how to fight, but they feel that this situation is "a mess." As Lt.-Col. Andrews says, "Officers naturally dread riot duty," and while there is no rioting here, the situation is felt to be just as delicate, perhaps even more so. Soldiers are trained for action but this encounter is nearly all quiet. Inaction is notoriously hard on a soldier's morale.

Someone may object that nonviolent resistance is so passive that it would be fully as hard on the morale of those using it as on that of the soldiers opposing them. Not so. The conduct of the nonviolent resister is not one of mere passive waiting or endurance. Toward his opponent he is not aggressive physically, but his mind and emotions are active. He wrestles constantly with the problem of persuading the latter that he is mistaken, seeking proposals for a better way out and examining his own cause and organization to see what may be its mistakes or short-sightedness. He is thinking constantly of all possible ways of winning the truth for both sides. And among his own group, he is ceaselessly active in strengthening the organization, improving its members' unity, discipline and understanding, helping to remove every possible cause of reproach. He is as busy as any top sergeant of a regiment.

The lives of most private soldiers are filled with monotony and irresponsibility. The conduct of these civilians will be new to them and will elicit their interest and attention.

51

THE POWER OF NONVIOLENCE                                    52

The courage and persistence of the nonviolent resisters will call forth the admiration of the soldiers and onlookers or general public. All parties begin to feel that the authorities have chosen the wrong method. They tend to feel that this is a matter for a court or arbitration or discussion. This feeling makes rifts between the troops and the higher command or civilian authorities.

As the situation drags on, the officers become increasingly restive. It is undignified to have to proceed thus against harmless, decent, defenseless people. They begin to feel themselves in a ludicrous position. Neither the officers nor the enlisted men can feel that they are protecting anyone or any property, since it is evident that the nonviolent civilians pose no threat of harm. That consciousness tends to lower self-respect. The near mutiny of British troops occupying the Ruhr after the World War I Armistice, while the "starvation blockade" of Germany was still in effect, affords a clear illustration. A more recent if less conclusive example is that of American soldiers who staged "demobilization strikes," in Germany and the Philippines in 1945.

Perhaps there has been a campaign to make the nonviolent resisters Seem despicable. They have perhaps been accused of bodily uncleanliness, dirt, disorder, illiteracy, ignorance, bad manners, mental and moral degeneracy. They are said to be "beyond the pale," "barbarous," "beneath contempt," etc., etc. We all know this method of bolstering up one's own pride and self-esteem. It is easy to find faults in a stranger, or differences that seem like faults; and a little unconscious pharisaism helps immensely to increase one's morale and salve one's conscience. But the soldiers in immediate contact with the nonviolent resisters may find that in fact they are clean, orderly, well disciplined, determined, intelligent, "very decent" in behavior, and very courageous. It is impossible to be contemptuous of such men: And when respect begins, the instinct for fair play asserts itself. By that time, morale is not very prominent. That such things can happen even in unlikely circumstances is proved by the fraternizing between the German and Allied troops on the first Christmas of World War I. If at the beginning the nonviolent resisters are not very well disciplined, yet are faithful to their ideal, their discipline will grow.

Suppose one of the officers loses his head, or believes in "making an example" and teaching by terror, and orders the soldiers to fire

THE WORKING OF MASS NONVIOLENT RESISTANCE         53

on the unarmed nonviolent resisters, and many are wounded and killed. The effect is indeed electrical. The immediate beholders may be terror-stricken for a short time. But the news inevitably spreads, and the public indignation against the officer and soldiers will be overpowering. This was the case with the Jallianwala Bagh tragedy in India. By the manner of their death, the hundreds who died there did more to further the cause of Indian political freedom than could the deaths of three times that number in violent rioting or attack upon the army. News of the massacre was a blow to British prestige throughout the world, as well as to British self-respect.

There have undoubtedly been similar cases of violence by troops of every nation that likes to consider itself a "trustee" for other nations, tribes or races. A similar instance occurred in the United States in the winter of 1929, when Pennsylvania coal company police killed a miner on strike. Such deeds are not peculiar to any nation but only to a particular purpose and set of beliefs. The point to be emphasized is that nonviolent resistance, even in the extreme case where its users are killed, has afar higher probability of weakening the morale of the violent opponents and of promoting the aim sought for than violent resistance would have.

If the government uses police instead of soldiers, this process of morale destruction will operate somewhat differently. Police are usually drawn from the same district where they work, and so are not likely to be so prejudiced. They are more likely to be married men and so, through their wives, more open to public opinion. If many new police are brought in, their discipline will be weak and they will be apt to indulge in excesses which will rouse public opinion against the government 'as well as themselves.

What might happen where the soldiers use tear gas, or bomb attacks by airplanes? Nonviolence is not likely to incite such an act, but it has happened. In such an event there would temporarily cease to be direct effective contact between the soldiers and the nonviolent resisters. Therefore, the morale of the soldiers would probably not be weakened. The problem for the nonviolent resisters now becomes temporarily reduced to the endurance of physical suffering and caring for the wounded.

In war the sight of wounded men being sent back from the front lines, says Captain Liddell Hart, "tends to spread depression among

THE POWER OF NONVIOLENCE                                    54

the beholders, acting on morale like the drops of cold water which imperceptibly wear away the stone."

This is not the case where nonviolent resisters are concerned. For a soldier, being wounded or Suffering means the negation of the role for which he has been trained-to cause wounds and inflict suffering. For the nonviolent resister, however, it is only the extension to an extreme of his basic purpose: to touch people's feelings and make them think differently, and he is therefore prepared to meet it with loftier courage than the soldier can muster. For this reason, the sight of the nonviolent wounded creates a purer, wider, more active and more enduring sympathy and unity with their cause than does the sight of wounded soldiers. In nonviolent resistance the suffering is itself a weapon or means of winning. Hence, such casualties do not decrease the morale of the nonviolent resisters. Similarly, when nonviolent resisters are imprisoned they are not thereby rendered useless to their cause. Instead, their endurance of hardship increases the general sense of human unity and sympathy for their cause.

Sooner or later, there will be parleys between the nonviolent resisters' leaders and officers of the army or emissaries from the government. Such parleys mean contact, hence an opportunity further to convert the opponents, or, in military parlance, to alter their morale.

Whenever the violent opponents ask to negotiate, the leaders of the nonviolent party will enter into negotiations, even though it may seem that by refusing to do so and going on with the struggle the violent opponents may be compelled to yield, and even though the request may be or Seem to be a stratagem on the part of the opponents to gain time or to break up the unity of the nonviolent party. This willingness to negotiate proves to the violent opponent and to the world that the nonviolent resisters are not seeking to humiliate their opponents, and thus paves the way for the conversion of the opponents and for the only kind of victory worth having. Some examples of this were Gandhi's negotiations with Viceroy Lord Irwin during the Indian struggle of 1930-31, and later with Viceroys Lord Linlithgow, Lord Wavell and Lord Mountbatten.

It should be remembered that ruthless deeds tend to become known to the world at large and then to lessen the respect of other nations for the nation indulging in them. The government in question, besides receiving foreign censure, will be severely criticized by its own more

THE WORKING OF MASS NONVIOLENT RESISTANCE         55

decent citizens. They may create a very considerable pressure of public opinion against the government and compel it to alter its tactics. It is true that distant civilians who have been blinded by their own pride and long-continued propaganda are very often harder to touch than the hostile soldier on the spot. The armchair warriors at home during Word War I were unbelievably cruel and hard, and worse in America than in England or France because they were farther away and felt realities less. Yet once their morale gets a little undermined, they crumble rapidly, for they lack the discipline of soldiers.

The experienced person will say that such events are always hidden by the censorship of such a government. Sometimes this is so. Acts of the American marines in Haiti and Nicaragua were hidden that way for months. The American government's treatment of the Japanese Nisei in concentration camps in World War II was practically ignored by the American press. The news of Jallianwala Bagh at Amritsar in India did not reach the United States for eight months after the event. But the tendency is for such news to leak out sooner or later. People of all nationalities go to all parts of the world nowadays. Travel and trade are ubiquitous. Newspaper reporters are always keen for scenting a "story," and as soon as they learn of a censorship anywhere they are still more eager. The modern press services have long stimulated people's curiosity. And if curiosity finds itself balked or thwarted, it will never rest till the story is known. And Western nations are all so jealous of one another that each is eager to learn and publish something discreditable to the others. (I am not trying to criticize, but merely to state facts,-weaknesses among those who are addicted to violence, against which the stronger forces of nonviolence will effectively operate.) Any considerable struggle in which one side rigidly sticks to nonviolent resistance with any degree of success makes wonderful news. It is so unusual and dramatic. Newspaper reporters and correspondents have a sense of "news value," and can be trusted to try hard to evade government censorship. The mere knowledge that censorship has been employed arouses doubt in neutral minds of the violent assailant's case. If, in the area where the struggle goes on, the opposing government does not permit the newspapers to publish adequate news of the struggle, the people cease to believe the official statements, and give credence instead to oral rumor or information passed about among themselves.

THE POWER OF NONVIOLENCE                                    56

Of course powerful ruling groups and countries rely chiefly on pride, disdain and disgust to censor the news. They or their supporters vilify these protesting groups or nations, and the general repugnance thereby created acts as a screen against the truth. Many a trade unionist knows the truth of this out of his own hard experience. So also do the Negroes, Chinese and Indians, poor immigrants in the United States and many others.

But any oppressed groups anywhere, in non-Communist countries anyhow, may also be sure that sincere prolonged nonviolent resistance on their own part will surely break down barriers and rouse enough curiosity, respect and wonder, to reveal at least a part of the truth and thus effect a more satisfactory adjustment of the conflict. Whether all this applies in Communist lands I shall consider a few pages later.

In nonviolent resistance as practiced by Gandhi there is another element which serves to weaken censorship. That is his rigid adherence to truth. He never tolerated secrecy of any sort. He invited the police to meetings and answered all their questions fully. He always notified the authorities amply in advance of any action he planned to take which might affect them, and was frank about his beliefs and position. Examples of this may be found in his campaign in Champaran, his long letter to Viceroy Lord Irwin in March 1930, and his telegrams to Viceroy Lord Willingdon in December 1931 and January 1932. Such a policy gives the public full advance notice of what is likely to take place, and thus makes a subsequent censorship much more difficult to maintain. Clean fighting such as this retains every moral advantage of the noblest chivalry, i.e., what General J. F. C. Fuller has called "the cultivation of respect in an enemy for or by his opponent" Secrecy would indicate or seem to indicate fear as well as untruth, or suggest them with the effect of auto-suggestion, and thus would spoil the morale of the resisters and deprive the method of its power.

But the nonviolent resisters must realize that they cannot decrease the prestige of their opponents or create dissension among their opponent's supporters until they break through the censorship of governments, press associations, or popular disdain; that they cannot break through these censorships until they have conducted themselves with high excellence, discipline, unity, coherence, cleanness and cour-

THE WORKING OF MASS NONVIOLENT RESISTANCE         57

age so as to compel respect, admiration and wonder. Therefore, their chief efforts should be not in talking to reporters or appealing for help from outsiders, but with themselves, to increase their own discipline and organization, their courage, courtesy, intelligence, cleanness and order. They should strive for such details even as clean bodies, clean clothes, clean houses, clean streets, clean talk. These create self-respect and respect from others. Military discipline is thorough and detailed like this. Nonviolent discipline must be the same. Such resisters must realize that if ever they fail in their discipline and fall into violence, untruth, secrecy or disorder, they set back their cause and delay their victory; and if they do not recover their discipline, they will suffer complete defeat. For these reasons there is need for the utmost energy, determination, persistence and will-power on the part of nonviolent resisters, whether they be national groups or labor unions or what not. This discipline, chiefly directed toward themselves, will not arouse outside opposition. They will compel respect when they deserve it and not before. And when they can compel respect, they are on the road to upsetting their opponents' morale.

 

ONE MORE POLICY of ruthlessness must be considered, namely that of starvation. This was used against the Germans with fearful effect in World War I. But it is a weapon that cuts both ways. It not only weakened the Germans greatly during the war but so interfered with their recuperative ability after the "peace" that it reduced the prosperity of the whole world. The Allied bankers and merchants suffered from the loss of German purchasing power in the aftermath of World War I. Not only this, but the punitive approach of the Allies set the -

stage for Hitler's rise to power. Fortunately after World War II this policy, embraced in the Morgenthau Plan, was quickly abandoned in favor of democratization and Marshall aid.

Against smaller groups a government might attempt starvation, but if such groups are really in earnest, have a good cause, and main= tain good discipline, their resistance will surely affect public opinion and lower the morale of their opponents. Compare, for instance, the effect of MacSwinney's hunger strike in prison during the Irish struggle for freedom.

Any persons who feel aggrieved by the policies of the ruling groups of either Great Britain or the United States may count on help,

THE POWER OF NONVIOLENCE                                  58

from the strong desire of the peoples of those countries always to justify their conduct morally, to give it at least a moral tone or appearance. When the Germans invaded Belgium in 1914, Britain and the Allies used this violation of treaty to stiffen their own morale and secure help from neutrals. It enabled them to play the part of chivalrous defenders of the weak. It served to cover up many mistakes, faults and evils of the Allies, and kept them all feeling splendidly self-righteous for several years, at least till the secret treaties leaked out. The political effect of this attitude of mind is a desire for and reliance upon prestige-a superiority complex which is designed to create an inferiority complex among other nations or races, and thus facilitate the task of dominating.

The maintenance of this prestige requires respect, awe or fear from others. Now if any of these Anglo-Saxon governments or ruling groups engage in harsh violence against a group of truly nonviolent resisters, the news surely leaks out sooner or later and lessens the prestige of that ruling group in the eyes of the rest of the world, as well as in the eyes of the more honest and intelligent persons in the nation in question. The highly moral attitude and tone of that government's professions begin to look thin and ludicrous. Its dignity and prestige are Shaken and its morale weakened. Public opinion today all over the world condemns ruthless violence and cruelty as such, once the cloak of disgust, disdain or fear propaganda has been removed. Thus the need of those who rely on prestige for respect from the rest of the world, becomes a weak spot in their armor, the minute they do an act which does not deserve or actually win respect. The nonviolent resisters' weapon of love of truth is directed immediately at this weak spot and pushed home with all courage and fortitude.

It is true that the Germans under Hitler and the Communist Russians have persecuted, tortured, oppressed and destroyed human beings on a vaster scale than any known before in the history of the world. It might seem, then, that against such foes, organized mass nonviolent resistance would be futile folly, and that in view of man's weaknesses and examples of history, skepticism about the power of nonviolence against such people and such institutionalized ideas is only sensible. But if man had been wholly obsessed with the failures recorded in history, he would never have learned how to live in cities of over two million population, how to fly, to send messages by radio,

THE WORKING OF MASS NONVIOLENT RESISTANCE     59

or create a hydrogen bomb, to say nothing of many other things done for the first time in history. And though man is often weak, he can, by using the right means, become more often strong. Let the skeptic, therefore, suspend judgment until he has finished reading all this book and then has carried out some of the simple experiments suggested in the last chapter.

We can now see that nonviolent resistance "reduces the utility of armaments as instruments of policy," to use Madariaga's phrase. It does so partly in direct and positive manner, proposing and aiding in the creation of new terms of settlement, new roads out of conflict. It also does so by disintegrating the morale of the opponent-the morale of troops, of commanders, of civil authorities and of their home civilian populations. The breakdown of the violent opponent's morale is really a change of heart. He does not merely become discouraged about fighting or about his power. He ceases to want in the same way the things he wanted before; he ceases to maintain his former attitude toward the resisters; he undergoes a sort of inner conversion. In the case of a very proud and obstinate opponent, there may have to be a complete outward defeat before the change of heart really takes place, but such a change is sure to come. In case of industrial strikes, nonviolent resistance would tend to raise doubts in the minds of the stockholders of the corporation involved. It tends to lower the prestige of any controlling power or group that is not acting as true servants of the people within their governance.

General (then Colonel) Fuller pointed this out as early as 1923:

"The principle of demoralization has for its object the destruction of this morale: first, in the moral attack against the spirit and nerves of the enemy's nation and government; secondly, against this nation's policy; thirdly, against the. plan of its commander-in-chief; and fourthly, against the morale of the soldiers commanded by him. Hitherto, the fourth, the least important of these objectives, has been considered by the traditionally-minded soldier as the sole psychological objective of this great principle. In the last great war the result of this was-that the attack on the remaining three only slowly evolved during days of stress and because of a faulty appreciation of this principle during peace time."

Nonviolent resistance operates to lower all these different kinds of morale, and it may be effectively aided by economic boycotts or in some extreme instances perhaps by non-payment of taxes.

We see, therefore, that nonviolent resistance is not wholly unlike

THE POWER OF NONVIOLENCE                                    60

the principles of military demoralization. It is merely a step further in the logic, and in military history.

Besides decreasing the opponent's morale, mass nonviolent resistance does much to enhance the morale and unity of those who use it. We have noted the unifying effect of the sight of voluntary suffering. This operates not only upon the resisters themselves but also, by sympathy, upon all beholders who hitherto may have been neutral. This happened repeatedly in India during the campaigns for national independence. The sincerity and earnestness of the sufferers, if the suffering continues long, convinces many others and wins them over to support the cause. The sight of leaders themselves enduring hardships, insults and wounds, going to jail, sacrificing their fortunes and lives for their cause is far more potent to produce increase of numbers, unity, enthusiasm, devotion and increase of effort than the sight, in violent war, of generals and politicians dwelling in comfort and safety and telling others what to do and how to fight. "The blood of the martyrs was the seed of the Church," and the same result comes in any situation where nonviolent methods are steadily used.

In situations where there is such rigid government censorship that little news of the oppression and violence of soldiers and police against the nonviolent resisters gets to the outside world, this unifying effect and winning of sympathy from neutral or timid onlookers is very important. The example of steady, long-continued nonviolent resistance creates within the censored area a public opinion that compels aid from all sorts of men who may have been entirely and strongly opposed to the resisters. Intellectual reasons for not joining the group crumble away, sometimes slowly, sometimes quickly. The feelings engendered by the prolonged sight of nonviolent suffering for a cause end differences of mind and also of feeling.

In situations that involve wide differences of custom or culture (e.g., struggles for colonial independence or racial equality), it may take many months for the unifying effect of nonviolent resistance and its search for social truth to go far enough to bring success. Nevertheless, the process is sure and, if the method is faithfully adhered to, the result certain.

It may be that while the resisters are in jail, some of the conservative, selfish or comfort-loving members of their general group engage in "politics" and palaver with the opponents. This took place in India

THE WORKING OF MASS NONVIOLENT RESISTANCE         61

during the struggle for independence. As that sort of thing goes on, perhaps for months, the contrast between them and those who are suffering jail terms and hardships grows so glaring that more and more people turn away in disgust and mistrust from the politicians and pin their faith on those who are in jail. The politicians sense this loss of their prestige and are in turn compelled to follow the crowd and cease cooperating with the opponents.

This unifying power of nonviolent resistance may often take effect more rapidly than does the breaking down of the morale of the opponents. It is also a factor in that loss of morale. As time goes on, the access of numbers, strength and unity in the group of nonviolent resisters begins to impress the violent opponents, to fill them with misgivings, and thus to injure their morale still further. Strength compels respect, and in this case the respect is for moral qualities as well as for numbers or political power.

War also acts to unify nations engaged in it. But the unity engendered by nonviolent resistance is deeper, more closely knit and more permanent than that produced by war, for reasons already discussed. The unity of a nation at war is achieved at the expense of any higher unity, while the unity of the nonviolent group is not based on exclusion of the enemy.

If, as often happens, the group or nation that is using nonviolent resistance has been under political, economic or social subjection for many years, it may have lost much self-confidence, self-reliance and self-respect. This new method of struggle tends to put ax end to that weakness.

The contrast between the brutal deeds of the exasperated violent party and the nonviolent sufferings of the resisters is so startling as to produce in the ranks of the resisters a feeling of immense moral superiority. Presently the rage of the violent party leads them to make false statements or commit various stupidities which make the resisters realize that their superiority is intellectual as well as moral. This intellectual contrast grows still more marked if the resisters adhere faithfully to truth in all their words as well as actions. If the stimulus of these contrasts is continued long enough, the inferiority complex of the resisters' group vanishes and their self-respect, self-confidence and self-reliance steadily increase. Thus another element of their former disadvantage is done away with. Students of psychology have

THE POWER OF NONVIOLENCE                                    62

now learned what rulers have known for centuries-that an inferiority complex, firmly created in childhood and judiciously maintained by regular stimulus through the period of development, is the most potent of all methods of restraining independent creative action among individuals and masses of people. It makes them feel utterly helpless and deprives them of hope, imagination or will even to try to struggle, and in times of crisis it creates a fatal hesitation and lack of confidence. Hence this creative power of nonviolent resistance, putting an end to inferiority complexes, makes it a very important weapon for oppressed nations, classes and groups everywhere.

Another reason why mass nonviolent resistance is effective is that, like individual nonviolence, in course of time it wins for its users the support of public opinion. It is well known that the gaining of public opinion is one of the principal objects of war

The techniques of "psychological warfare" played a very important part in World War II, and in large degree comprised the backbone of the Cold War of the 1940s and '50s. To use another term, it is recognized that the conflict is a "struggle for the minds of men."

Victories in war are imposing and terrifying, but the alliances and cooperation gained thereby are notoriously unstable. Such allies come more because it seems expedient than because they really want to. A victory by nonviolent resistance does not carry with it a further latent threat to harm anyone. It carries conviction of sincerity and friendship, whereas a victory through violence always has in it at least a suspicion of selfishness and possible further aggrandizement. In quality a victory by nonviolent resistance is far more gallant and joyous than one by violence can ever be. It requires no lying, distortion or suppression of the truth, no slaughter or threats. It leaves no bad conscience or bad taste in the mouth. The public opinion it gains is weighty and lasting.

Still another way in which mass nonviolent resistance operates is to end and clear away social defects, economic mistakes and political errors. The semi-military discipline of the resisters, the getting rid of bad habits, the learning to struggle without anger, the social unity developed, the emphasis on moral factors, the appeal to the finest spirit of the opponents and onlookers, the generosity and kindness required-all these constitute a social purification, a creation of truer values and actions among all concerned. If the struggle involves many

THE WORKING OF MASS NONVIOLENT RESISTANCE         63

people and lasts a long time, the discussion of the issues becomes so widespread, intense and detailed that much that was previously hidden or misunderstood is revealed and made clear to all. It is a period of great public education. The nature of the struggle and its prolongation bring into unmistakable action the real purpose of the two parties, and show a great many of the implications of their respective aims and attitudes not previously seen or understood. The struggle tests the sincerity of both parties. It corrects errors among the violent party, too. This evolution of more social truth is a gain to both sides. Like war, nonviolent resistance is a method of deciding great public questions, and this clearing away of errors is an essential part of the settlement of such great disputes. "The truth shall make you free" is no mere sentiment. When truth is more nearly approximated in action there is a tremendous gain in strength as well as a liberation. Although a long war also clears away some social, economic and political errors, it is not very effective for this purpose because the angers and hatreds of war tend strongly to becloud the truth, as has been clearly shown by the propaganda of two world wars and the present cold war.

Possibly to some readers this whole chapter may seem to be a structure of untried theory. Who in this actual world of hard realities does or ever would for an instant fear this so-called weapon of nonviolent resistance?

The answer is known to every student of history, every detective, secret-service man or C.I.D. officer, every really "hard-boiled" ruthless executive of an American industrial corporation which has had a strike of employees, every American trade union leader, every leader of a subject people striving for political freedom. The answer is that every "blood and iron" type of governor fears nonviolent resistance so much that he secretly hires agents provocateurs who go among the nonviolent resisters pretending to be of them, and invite them to deeds of violence or. actually throw bombs or do deeds of violence themselves. This was the method of the Tsarist government of. old Russia. The rulers in power immediately make great outcry, stir up public indignation against the "miscreants," call out the police or soldiery, and "repress the uprising" with considerable brutality, meanwhile assuring the world that these are stem but necessary steps taken only in the interests of public safety, law and order. Those striving for freedom or more privileges are indeed often violent in the first

THE POWER OF NONVIOLENCE                                    64

instance. But if they are not violent, their opponents or the underlings of their opponents frequently stir up violence in order to take ad-: vantage of the public reaction against it. That they feel they need to adopt such tactics shows how much they fear nonviolent resistance.

Nonviolent resisters must face this fact without anger or bitterness. It is simply one item in the whole situation with which they have to contend. Their defense is to build up a thorough discipline of nonviolence in feeling, thought, word and deed within each one of their members. They must see the whole meaning of what they are trying to do. They are trying to discipline and control the emotion of anger and the instinct of pugnacity in the same way and to the same extent that military discipline controls the emotion of fear and the instinct of flight. Therefore, under this new discipline, violent words and actions directed against the opponent or his interests are to be made as traitorous to the cause as desertion is in the army. Anger is as disgraceful and socially reprehensible among nonviolent resisters as cowardice is among schoolboys or soldiers.

Once that understanding, attitude and discipline are attained. among the group of nonviolent resisters, any agent provocateur who comes whispering among them or preaching violence, retaliation or revenge will be immediately known for what he is and repudiated. And the group will soon prove its tactics so clearly to the public that the latter will not be deceived by the act of an agent provocateur bomb thrower or inflammatory speaker.

"But," says the shrewd critic, "even if we grant the efficiency of this new weapon provided it could once get under way, would it not quickly be rendered impossible merely by the killing, imprisonment or deportation for life of the few leaders who understand it and see its possibilities?"

The answer, outside countries ruled by Communists, again is No. The idea has already gone too far. Before long, new leaders would appear and new attempts be made. The success of nonviolence in India was so dramatic and widely heralded that it is being tried again in several countries. There is the success in the bus boycott by the Negro community at Montgomery, Alabama, and its continuing use by non-whites in South Africa. It will probably be used increasingly in America in movements for economic and social justice not aimed against the government. In North America there is enough knowledge

THE WORKING OF MASS NONVIOLENT RESISTANCE         65

about Gandhi's ideas and work to create wide sympathy for any groups who sincerely use this method to gain justice. Public opinion will support such use in enough cases to promote the prestige and further success of the method.

Its use by black Africans and Indians in South Africa, while not yet successful, has won respect in most other parts of the world. There is a fair probability that it will be used by the black peoples of other parts of colonial Africa. Ghana, the new member of the British Commonwealth in West Africa, won its freedom in 1957 after a ten-year nonviolent struggle. Its leader, Kwame Nkrumah, in his autobiography says explicitly that the campaign for freedom was "based on the principle of absolute nonviolence as used by Gandhi in India," and "We repudiate war and violence." The campaign was actually so carried out. Futhermore, he says explicitly that he intends to help the peoples of other parts of Africa to attain their freedom from colonial status, exploitation and social inequalities by this method. There is evidence of inconsistency in the use of the principle in Ghana and India but this is natural in the learning of any deeply new method.

There is some danger of thought control being so widely and deeply persuasive in America by means of radio, television, movies and newspapers that any movement for nonviolent resistance might be smothered. Though prophecy is risky for anyone, my guess, for what it may be worth, is that such complete thought control would fail. I think the method of nonviolence will prove so successful in many different situations that it will gather great momentum, understanding, confidence and prestige. Exploited groups suffering injustice everywhere will want to try it.

As for countries under Communist rule, they all want industrialization. That involves education, especially in science. The reasoning of modem science, especially physics, is contrary to the teachings of Marx and Lenin in regard to the primacy of matter. Modern science and money will, I believe, undermine Marxism. Communism, like everything else in the world, is changing, and one of the changes is a weakening of dogmatism and cruelty and persecution. As Louis Fischer has noted, the quiet heroism of Boris Pasternak in writing and publishing Doctor Zhivago and his behavior since then have apparently won the respect of the Russian government. The changes will accelerate, like all other changes in all countries.