Gandhi as the Figure of a Leader.

¶ … Gandhi as the figure of a leader. In this sense, particular emphasis will be attributed not to certain political events in Gandhi's life but rather to conceptual ideas that shaped his purposes. The practice of non-violence for which he has become famous will be assessed as well as certain social positions and economic perceptions.

Key terms: non-violence, unity, sacrifice, truth, economy.

Gandhi was the idealist. He was neither the first nor the last to advocate for a changing of humankind and society but he was unique such as all great leaders are and, for that matter, the wholeness of us mere mortals. He was an idealist because he believed that the world can change. He was idealist in that he believed in changes for the better. His ideal was for all people to work together to achieve by means of peace mutual understanding. By all this and more, Gandhi was the idealist leader. However, the world is anything but ideal. There is not a single country on Earth that would disarm itself voluntarily. On the contrary, wars of the twentieth century have demonstrated the states' competitiveness for arming. There is no capitalist society that would seek the well being of masses before personal interests, be it economical, religious, ideological, international interests, or otherwise. But what does being an idealist imply if not the courage to refute the standardization of the world as it has become. In some ways, the majority of people reject societal practicalities but it takes an extraordinary mind to understand the ways of the world and to impact other people's lives such as Gandhi has done. Such as ?it is conceivable that extraordinary individuals lead lives that are so distinctive that no generalizations can emerge from intensive studies of their particular wrinkles, ? (Gardner, 1997, p. 4) it is unconceivable to think of Gandhi and not be inspired by the image of a leader who sought that government was indeed of the people, by the people, and for the people and acted as such.

Mahatma Gandhi is a figure which many researchers whether on the psychological side or on the historical, cultural, economical, etc. verge choose to address. Howard Gardner (1993), placing the former side by side with other irrefutable names such as Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, Pablo Picasso, Igor Stravinsky, T.S. Elliot, Martha Graham, has noted that the ?impact on our time has been compelling? (p. 4) due to their contributions and their power to affect masses of people. He is also among many to acknowledge that Gandhi ?crafted and practiced a form of civil disobedience that continues to inspire millions around the world. (Gardner, 1997, p. 2) Further, Warren Cohen (2009) thinks of Gandhi as ?closest to a universal conception of saintliness. (p. 3) Indeed, Gandhi has been often associated with all that is positive and productive and, in this paper, the image of Gandhi is also sought, however his leadership figure will be explored more than anything else. Emphasis will be attributed to certain key concepts that the former employed and which provide relevant insight as to his qualities as a leader and his vision upon a successful ruling. Gandhi is not remembered as having impacted India alone but indeed his influence has sprung worldwide which further indicates that he is a leading figure of the world even if the expression attains merely a conceptualization.

When Gandhi was born in 1869, India was at the hands of British imperial rule. His family, although by class legacy and by name, was originally of grocers, had come to posses some relevant political positions in various Indian states (Gandhi, 1969, p. 4). His mother's combined religious beliefs of Hindu and Muslim tradition and the environment of non-violent practice religions such as Jainism undoubtedly influenced Gandhi's childhood and future beliefs although personally he did not claim any religion until later on. In fact, Gandhi would never stand by any particular belief in totality whether of religious offspring or political nature. Indeed, he may have been a conservative about one given issue while, at the same time, a socialist or capitalist by another. Gandhi studied in England between 1888 and 1891 as a law student. This was also the period he became acquainted with Christian religion though not embracing it, as well as Hindu and Buddhism. In 1893 he left for South Africa, which would become his home for the next twenty one years. A year later he led the Natal Indian Congress campaign against voting rights being taken away from Indian people. Various similar actions aimed at conserving and strengthening Indian positions in Africa followed within the next years.

Gandhi set out himself on a prowl for moral development having become convinced that it is a political leader's responsibility to attain to nothing that is impure. This comes into the context of his struggles to batter injustices against Indians in Africa. Many had come to the continent for work purposes and had remained after the expiring term only to confront the many restrictions imposed upon them. Cohen (2009) noted that ?he [Gandhi] was seized by a sense of mission, a sense that he should attempt to lead the Indian community toward acceptance as equal to whites, to put an end to the denial of their rights. (p. 7) This was indeed the first of a series of actions that would ultimately define Gandhi as a leader. It is important to understand that his objectives became thoroughly influenced by how he came to perceive life and he dwelled upon ideas insofar as they provided some sort of purpose in his life. This is one of the most important traits which would come to influence many of his later positions and thinking. Moreover, it was in Africa where Gandhi set the foreground of the non-violent civil disobedience philosophy for which he has become famous. This philosophy was of course part of the traditional concept of non-violence which had fused the Hindu Scriptures, Buddha, Christ, and Mohammed. He was as well immersed in Confucian thought and furthermore, during his time in Africa, Gandhi, having read Thoreau's On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God is Within You, and John Ruskin's Unto This Last, absorbed many of the writers' ideas as they appeared to centralize the fragmentation of the world.

Dwellings on the three books allowed Gandhi to formulate personal ideas. In fact, the impact that the reading had on him was far more outstretching determining Gandhi to change his life according to the ideals in the books. Perhaps most important in relation to the time Gandhi spent in Africa was the gradual transformation from a young shy lawyer that would flee the courtroom rather than having to address a judge into a self-confident, convincing political leader. Indeed, ?as Gandhi matured into middle age, it was clear he had become a singular type of 'politician,' one prompted by ideals and beliefs more than the pursuit of power, and that he had moulded his life to match his message. (Brown, 2011 p. 4)

It must be noted that politics, such as Gandhi saw it, was a matter of spiritual truths. Richard Gregg (1960) acknowledged that ?The unity of the human species is not only a biological and physiological fact; it is, when wisely and fully asserted and acted upon, a great power. Human unity is actual in man's universal capacity to think, feel, will, understand and act and to apprehend spiritual truths. (p. 10) Gandhi's experiments with truth relied a great deal on spiritual setting. His vision on society encompassed universal unities of kinship of men of no matter what caste, nationality, religion, etc. His idealist vision of a non-violent society was dependent on basic principles of love which intrinsically represent the basis of most religions. This idealist society Gandhi addressed it through Satyagraha, a key term and concept that thrived on reaching objectives, subsequently political objectives, through means of action that do not propagate further violence but are nevertheless fiercely resistant as to dismiss injustices. Satyagraha, which translates as ?truth/soul force, ? (as cited in Cohen, 2002, p. 32) was thus a philosophical approach of taking action against the suppression forces of the ruling society. The underlying factors of this political philosophy were love, truth, non-violence, non-cooperation, and civil disobedience. This implied that, when fighting against the propositions of a society, one had to refute the system not by armed resistance but by voluntarily revoking the alleged advantages put forth by the society in cause. Moreover, Gandhi's approaches were interrelated to the urging desire of uncovering truths and by this, achieve an understanding of the supreme force that is God. This is to say that a social order, such as he saw it, implied a voluntarily and consistent effort to do that which is righteous.

The non-violence propagated by Gandhi became means to achieve both social and political upheavals. For Gandhi, the very definition of violence implied both the arming of nations as well as states' abuse of power that produce certain changes which negatively affect the common individual. His strategies thus resolved to take hold of violence under whatever form it constituted itself, whether corruption, moral evil, etc. His societal vision comprised of individualistic scenarios which is to say that each individual was to be actively engaged and permanently vivid of the environment around him. But it also included centralities of daily societal concerns which were brought about by certain external factors of economic, cultural, ideological concerns by which the mere individual was affected. Gandhi believed that the more individuals seek to acquire luxury the difficult it becomes to maintain a state of peace and mutual caring as people become immersed into a process of wanting more rather than living. He noted: I have found that life persists in the midst of destruction and therefore there must be a higher law than that of destruction. Only under that law would a well-ordered society be intelligible and life worth living. (Gandhi, 1969, p. 86) The ?way of life? he assumed himself involved sacrifice for the good of others which, in his opinion, was the model that leaders generally must adhere to in order to protect the people under their governance. It has been noted that Gandhi's ?rejection of all 'normal' pleasures, acquisitive and sensual, and his oft-repeated retreat from the brink of victory can best be understood in light of his passionate resolve to suffer and experience in daily life all the pain and deepest sorrow sustained by India's poorest peasants and outcastes. (Wolpert, 2001, p. 4) Thus, what Gandhi did was to present a model of sacrifice that, in his opinion, was required of leaders who wanted to partake in the citizens' model of life. He believed that a leader could not understand the issues that society was confronted with unless he was willing to behold the multitude of factors affecting the individuals within it. The decentralization of power was required in order to achieve equality and unity. A peasant and a leader could never meet in unity, Gandhi believed, if they are not bound by the same truth. Therefore, for Gandhi, the discovering of truth was the end and the practice of non-violence was the means by which to achieve the former. Moreover, to reach an understanding of the truth, Gandhi was able to practice personal sacrifices as means to uncover the truth.

About his experiences in South Africa, Gandhi (1969) noted:

If I found myself entirely absorbed in the service of the community, the reason behind it was my desire for self-realization. I had made the religion of service my own, as I felt that God could be realized only through service. […] I had gone to South Africa for travel, for finding an escape from Kathiawad intrigues and for gaining my own livelihood. But as I have said, I found myself in search of God and striving for self-realization. (p. 19)

When Gandhi returned in India, in 1914, much of his leadership foundation had been established due to his ensuing collaborative efforts to foreground rights for the Indian community in Africa and batter unfair legislation. By the time of his return home from Africa, he had already become a prominent political figure for the British as well as the overall European scene and, within the following years, he will also establish himself as India's nationalist leader. However, while his sense of self-realization had only been satisfied with merely a few successes, some great, others less prominent, and a number of failures also, his work in South Africa merely constituted the first step toward his mission. Gandhi became convinced that this mission involved far greater dimensions: My mission is not merely brotherhood of Indian humanity. My mission is not merely freedom of India, though today it undoubtedly engrosses practically the whole of my life and whole of my time. But through realization of freedom of India I hope to realize and carry on the mission of the brotherhood of man. (1969, p. 119) Now that he had accumulated the knowledge as well as the practice of social and political reform, he felt capable to fulfill his self-realization. His image of a leader was by now comprised of his philosophy and tactics of non-violence, love, civil disobedience, spiritual truths. These concepts and practices of Satyagraha stood at the basis of the campaigns led by Gandhi in India until the rest of his life.

The two world wars brought into attention the need to address international conflicts. However, Gandhi's approach, partly at least, aimed at addressing the general causes which lead to the unfolding of armed conflicts. In this sense, he believed that societies should resort to mutual support of economic upheaval that will ultimately lead to states' self-confidence and a voluntary disarming because there would be no reason to fear. Nevertheless, he did not promote economic prosperity because he believed this to lead to a demoralized society. To his knowledge and experience, material prosperity brought about an abuse, whether moral or practical by the rich inflicted upon the poor. He opposed capitalism and industrialization generally and favored less the Western civilization over the ways of the Indian nation, the latter of whom he believed laid intrinsically on moral law as perpetuated by its religious traditions. His vision on the economy of India relied on principles of ethicality in that economic objectives deter one's sense of unity. And when economy results in engaging a competitive race of acquiring financial prospects, the ethical principles dissolve to give way to selfishness. Because of this, ?it can be clearly seen that his reservation was with regard to limitless material prosperity in the society. (Iyengar, 2005, n.p.) Indeed, this perception on Gandhi's economic thought has often been disputed and widely disapproved. However, it cannot be denied that Gandhi sought to solve India's problems by speaking through the voice of its peasants rather than of the economically superior class. The economics he had in view was one that would allow each individual to ensure basic needs and comfort. Therefore, this included some sort of economic development but not the development of industrialized countries which history has shown to favor the ruling and rich class rather than the poor. It was not the dismissal of economic development that constitutes the premises for Gandhi as an effective leader but that ?under a Gandhian scheme, reduction of inequalities, provision of full employment, and the eradication of poverty would be the dominant goals, and economic growth would not be a separate growth objective. (Charles, n.y., n.p.) Therefore, Gandhi actually perpetuated the premises and achievable, for that matter, for the constructing of a society that is not ruled by selfish economic purposes but rather economic development coming about naturally after leading figures have resolved to address imminent societal difficulties of the twentieth century world.