The Industrial Curse (by Mr. K. Gandhi)

We have translated a selection of writings from the thought of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi about the machinery and industrialization that spread misery in India during colonization. These reflections were published in the 1960s in the form of a collection of texts entitled The Mind of the Mahatma Gandhi, by R.K. Prabhu & U. R. Rao.

Most of Gandhi's criticisms are right, for example, on the empowerment of villages synonymous with freedom and emancipation for the Indian people. On the other hand, other remarks are questionable, especially when he talks about putting machines at the service of the people and not at the service of the accumulation of wealth by a minority. Machines were designed to fit into — and reinforce — an extremely hierarchical and unequal social organization, so it is highly improbable that these same machines could have any use in a democratic society. As the technical historian François Jarrige recalls, one of the central functions of the emerging machinery was “to control the workforce, to discipline the work force in order to adapt it to the new requirements of capitalism.^[1].”

With regard to the state, Gandhi makes another rather naive statement when he talks about a non-violent state that would behave kindly towards the people. If he had been forced to govern, he would have quickly realized how far this idea is from the reality of how a state works. Historically, the State is a political, religious and military elite that parasitizes a productive population in order to appropriate the fruits of its labor and control it politically. The monopoly of violence and the quest for power are embedded in the program of the state machine. We recommend reading the excellent analysis by sociologist Charles Tilly here.^[2].

Despite its flaws, Gandhi's analysis remains valuable for feeding technocritical thinking.

Image on one: human remains from the industrial disaster in Bhopal, India. In 1984, a toxic product leak in a pesticide factory killed several thousand people and poisoned half a million others. Industrialism is indeed a scourge that we need to eradicate.

It is good to have faith in human nature. I live because I have that faith. But this faith does not blind me to the historical fact that, even if all is well in the end, individuals and groups called nations have already perished. Rome, Greece, Babylon, Egypt, and many others are a permanent testimony to the fact that nations have already perished because of their misdeeds.

What we can hope for is that Europe, thanks to its fine and scientific intelligence, realizes the evidence, retraces its steps and finds a way out of demoralizing industrialism. It won't necessarily be a return to the old absolute simplicity. But it will have to be a reorganization in which village life will predominate, and in which raw and material force will be subordinated to spiritual force. (YI, 6-8-1925, p. 273)

The future of industrialization is bleak. England has successful competitors in America, Japan, France, and Germany. It has competitors in a handful of factories in India, and as there was an awakening in India, so will there be a revival in South Africa with its much greater resources — natural, mineral and human.

The powerful English look like dwarves in front of the powerful African race. They are noble savages after all, you will say. They are certainly noble, but not savages; and within a few years, Western nations may stop finding a dump for their goods in Africa. And if the future of industrialization is bleak for the West, wouldn't it be even darker for India? (YI, 12-11-1931, p. 355)

Industrialization will, I fear, be a curse for humanity. The exploitation of one nation by another cannot last forever. Industrialization depends entirely on your operating capacity, the opening of foreign markets and the absence of competitors. (YI, 12-11-1931, p. 355)

When I look at Russia, where the apotheosis of industrialization has been reached, I don't like the life that reigns there. In the language of the Bible, “What would it be for a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul? ” In modern terms, it is unworthy of man to lose his individuality and become a mere cog in the machine. I want each individual to become a full and full member of society. (H, 28-1-1939, p. 438)

God forbids India to embark on industrialization in the manner of the West. If an entire nation of 300 million people engaged in similar economic exploitation, it would plunder the world like locusts would ravage fields. Unless the capitalists of India contribute to the avoidance of this tragedy by becoming guardians of the well-being of the masses, and by devoting their talents not to amassing wealth for themselves but to serving the masses in an altruistic spirit, they will end up either destroying the masses or being destroyed by them. (YI, 20-12-1928, p. 422)

India, when it starts exploiting other nations — as it will have to do if it industrializes — will be a curse for other nations, a threat to the world. And why should I think about industrializing India to exploit other nations? Can't you see the tragedy of the situation, which is that we are able to find work for our 300 million workers, but England cannot find work for three million and is facing a problem that baffles England's greatest minds. (YI, 21-11-1931, p. 355)

Alternative to industrialization

I don't think industrialization is necessary for a country, under any circumstances. It is much less so for India. Indeed, I believe that independent India can fulfill its duty to a world in distress only by adopting a simple but ennobled life by developing its thousands of small houses and by living in peace with the world. A thought that seeks elevation is incompatible with a complicated material life based on the high speed imposed on us by the Mammon cult [that is, the cult of material wealth, NdT]. All the graces of life are only possible when we learn the art of living nobly. [...]

The question of whether such a simple life is possible for an isolated nation, however large it may be geographically and demographically, in the face of a world armed to the teeth that spends its time congratulating itself, is a question open to doubt by the skeptic. The answer is simple and straightforward. If a simple life is worth living, then you should try it, even if only one individual or group makes the effort.

State control

At the same time, I believe that some key industries are needed. I don't believe in living room socialism or armed socialism. I believe in acting according to my beliefs, without waiting for general conversion. Therefore, without having to list key industries, I would have state ownership, where a large number of people have to work together. Ownership of the product of their work, whether qualified or not, will be vested in them by the State. But since I can only conceive of such a state on the basis of non-violence, I would not dispossess moneymen by force, but I would invite their cooperation in the process of conversion to state property. There are no outcasts in society, whether millionaires or indigent. Both are the wounds of the same disease. And all are men of equal worth. (H, 1-9-1946, p. 285)

The revival of rural industries

Translator's note: the word “industry” was not originally related to mechanization and machines; the term had a different meaning in the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century.

By seeking to revive village industries that can be revived... I am trying to do what all lovers of village life do or try to do, anyone who realizes the tragic meaning of the disintegration of villages. How am I setting back the course of modern civilization when I ask villagers to mill their own grain, to eat all of it, including the nutritious wheat bran, or when I ask them to turn sugar cane into Gur for their own needs and not for sale? Am I turning back the tide of modern civilization when I ask villagers not only to grow raw produce, but to turn it into marketable products and thus add a few more recipes to their daily income? (H, 4-1-1935, p. 372)

The revival of the village is only possible when it is no longer exploited. Large-scale industrialization will necessarily lead to the passive or active exploitation of villagers when competition and marketing problems arise. Therefore, we need to focus our effort on empowering the village, with the latter manufacturing primarily for its own use. If this character of village industry is maintained, there is no objection to villagers also using modern machines and tools that they can make and afford to use. Only, they should not be used as a means of exploiting others. (H, 28-1-1946, p. 226)

Real planning

I wholeheartedly agree with the proposition that any plan that seeks to exploit a country's raw materials and neglects the potentially more powerful human force is unbalanced and can never tend to establish human equality.

[...]

Real planning is about making the best use of India's entire workforce and distributing India's raw products to its many villages instead of sending them outside and buying back the finished products at exorbitant prices. (H, 23-3-1947, p. 79)

M.K. Gandhi