Communicator nonpareil

The great American Civil Rights activist, Martin Luther King Jr., once stated that Gandhian philosophy "was the only morally and practically sound method open to oppressed people in their struggle for freedom”. This observation would certainly call for discussion; many might not agree with it. However, the Gandhian method displayed a unique art of social assimilation, striking the world with awe. Sending a message of protest and rebellion without raising arms or resorting to violence was remarkable. Because it was different, many people began following it, with some achieving success through it. This art of communication has bequeathed a sort of legacy, trod upon by many social activists. Figures ranging from the Dalai Lama to Aung San Suu Kyi have expressed their deep admiration for the Gandhian method of protest. From his early days in South Africa to his return to India in 1915, Gandhiji believed in connecting himself to the people. Upon his return, his responses to three major issues—Champaran, the Ahmedabad Cotton Mill Case, and the Kheda Satyagraha—opened the eyes of the common people, who perhaps had never realised how powerful non-violent protest could be.

In one of his insightful observations on Gandhiji, Louis Fischer remarked that Gandhiji’s "power was nil, his authority enormous”. This authority was a result of his exceptional communication skills. Whenever he wanted, he connected with the masses with remarkable success. This was no small feat, as the masses he aimed to reach were his teeming countrymen, afflicted with abject poverty, illiteracy, and concomitant maladies. To make matters more challenging, they were divided by numerous faiths, castes, ethnicities, and languages.

Gandhiji, in flesh and blood, has remained an enigma to the Western mind, as they could not understand how a frail, gaunt figure, bare-bodied except for a loincloth and holding a walking staff, could lead a vision of freedom for his people. At his call, millions flocked from all corners. He had virtually no mass media at his disposal, except for the newspapers he edited, yet even the full range of mass media could not match his power of communication. It was so far-reaching that Winston Churchill famously referred to Gandhi as a "seditious half-naked fakir”.

In one of his writings in 1921, Rabindranath Tagore highlighted Gandhiji’s success as a communicator by stating that Gandhiji "came and stood at the door of India’s destitute millions, clad as one of them, speaking to them in their own language”. Tagore asked, "Who else has so unreservedly accepted the vast masses of the Indian people as his own flesh and blood?" This was Gandhiji’s unique selling point as a communicator—no artificial sophistication, no wordplay, no rhetorical flourish, just simple words that easily reached the ears of the uneducated masses. His written communications, through his publications like Indian Opinion, Young India, and Harijan, urged the masses to prepare for a struggle that was not just political but also aimed at social upliftment. It created a feeling of social regeneration among the masses.

It may be worthwhile to briefly refer to a couple of instances illustrating how Gandhiji operated as a communicator. Before he undertook the Dandi March for the Salt Satyagraha in 1930, there was careful consultation within the leadership. Subhas Bose and Jawaharlal Nehru suggested setting up a parallel government in Delhi, while Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel proposed a march to Delhi. However, Gandhiji realised that to make the movement long-drawn and inclusive, the masses had to be involved. Thus, the defiance of the Salt Law was chosen as the initial subject of Civil Disobedience. Gandhiji aimed to mobilise international support, or at the very least, expose the exploitation of the Indian people under the British Raj. In his own words, written to the Press, he stated, "I want world sympathy in this battle of Right Against Might”.

By the standards of an effective communicator, Gandhi ji chose the form of struggle, the people to be involved, and the figurative language of the campaign. Everything was done by assessing public psychology. Starting from the Non-Cooperation Movement to the Quit India Movement, both internal and external factors were considered. A good communicator must be a keen reader of human psychology, and Gandhiji demonstrated this truth. There are few instances in world history where an individual has sustained mass leadership and launched mass movements for more than four decades.

The worldwide psychological turmoil through which we are passing needs redressal. Gandhiji’s philosophy of tolerance offers great hope in these trying times. Across the globe, almost all human rights activists are influenced by Gandhi in their form of protest. They toe the line of Gandhian communique.

Gandhiji’s communication strategy revolved around adopting the lifestyle of the masses to create an impression of oneness. He devised a plan of communication rooted in the traditional socio-cultural milieu of the people, and he could involve the elites by disseminating his ideologies. Without television and with limited use of the radio, Gandhiji formed a synergistic combination of mass media and interpersonal networks. His papers had a wide circulation. Young India at one stage reached a circulation of 45,000. He spoke in short sentences with home-spun examples, easy to understand. He could dramatise issues without being sensational. His newspapers relied on common idioms, and Gandhiji could substantiate his arguments without hurting the sentiments of the people. He maintained a wonderful harmony between language, expression, and context. By using a term like "Ramrajya”, he conveyed the idea of righteous administration. The story of Ram is known even to the remotest villager. Similarly, the term "Harijan"—a simple word, yet so meaningful in the crusade against untouchability—resonated emotionally with people wherever he went.

Mahatma Gandhi combined within himself the politician, the philosopher, and the preacher to cogently inspire generations with peace and moral courage.

The writer is an educator from Kolkata. Views expressed are personal