{"id":402,"date":"2013-07-13T01:27:47","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:27:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=402"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:27:47","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:27:47","slug":"016-the-morality-of-boycott-vol-01-bande-mataram-volume-01","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/01-works-of-sri-aurobindo\/01-sabcl\/01-bande-mataram-volume-01\/016-the-morality-of-boycott-vol-01-bande-mataram-volume-01","title":{"rendered":"-016_The Morality of Boycott.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n

\nThe Morality of Boycott*<\/b><\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

 <\/font> <\/font>
\n               
\n<\/font><\/span>A<\/font><\/b>GES<\/font><\/span>
\nago there was a priest of Baal who thought himself commissioned by the god to
\nkill all who did not bow
\nthe knee to him. All men, terrified by the power and
\nferocity of the priest, bowed down before the idol and pretended to be his
\nservants; and the few who refused had to take refuge in hills and deserts. At
\nlast, a deliverer came and slew the priest and the world had rest. The slayer
\nwas blamed by those who placed religion in quietude and put passivity forward as
\nthe ideal ethics, but the world looked on him as an incarnation of God.<\/font><\/p>\n


\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>A certain class of mind shrinks from aggressiveness as if it were a sin.
\nTheir temperament forbids them to feel the delight of battle and they look on
\nwhat they cannot understand as something monstrous and sinful. ‘Heal hate by
\nlove’, ‘drive out injustice by justice’, ‘slay sin by righteousness’ is their
\ncry. Love is a sacred name, but it is easier to speak of love than to love. The
\nlove which drives out hate is a divine quality of which only one man in a
\nthousand is capable. A saint full of love for all mankind possesses it, a
\nphilanthropist consumed with a desire to heal the miseries of the race possesses
\nit, but the mass of mankind does not and cannot rise to the height. Politics is
\nconcerned with masses of mankind and not with individuals. To ask masses of
\nmankind to act as saints, to rise to the height of divine love and practise it
\nin relation to their adversaries or oppressors is to ignore human nature. It is
\nto set a premium on injustice and violence by paralysing the hand of the
\ndeliverer when raised to strike. The Gita is the best answer to those who shrink
\nfrom battle as a sin, and aggression as a lowering of morality.<\/font><\/p>\n


\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>A poet of sweetness and love, who has done much to awaken
\nBengal , has written deprecating the boycott as an act
\nof hate. The saintliness of spirit which he would see brought into politics is
\nthe reflex of his own personality colouring the political ideals<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/font> <\/font> <\/p>\n


\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>*This article was intended for the Bande Mataram <\/i>but could not be
\npublished. It was seized by the Police and made an exhibit in the Alipore
\nConspiracy Case (May, 1908).<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPage-124<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nof
\na sattwic race. But in reality the boycott is not an act of hate. It is an act
\nof self-defence, of aggression for the sake of self- preservation. To call it an
\nact of hate is to say that a man who is being slowly murdered, is not justified
\nin striking at his murderer. To tell that man that he must desist from using the
\nfirst effective weapon that comes to his hand, because the blow would be an act
\nof hate, is precisely on a par with this deprecation of boycott. Doubtless the
\nself-defender is not precisely actuated by a feeling of holy sweetness towards
\nhis assailant; but to expect so much from human nature is impracticable. Certain
\nreligions demand it, but they have never been practised to the letter by their
\nfollowers.<\/font><\/p>\n


\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>Hinduism recognises human nature and makes no such impossible demand. It
\nsets one ideal for the saint, another for the man of action, a third for the
\ntrader, a fourth for the serf. To prescribe the same ideal for all is to bring
\nabout varnasankara<\/i>, <\/i>the confusion of duties, and destroy society and
\nrace. If we are content to be serfs, then indeed, boycott is a sin for us, not
\nbecause it is a violation of love, but because it is a violation of
\nthe Sudra’s duty of obedience and contentment. Politics is the ideal of the
\nKshatriya, and the morality of the Kshatriya ought to govern our political
\nactions. To impose in politics the Brahmanical duty of saintly sufferance is to
\npreach <\/font> varnasankara<\/i>.<\/font><\/p>\n


\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span><\/i>Love has a place in politics, but it is
\nthe love of one’s country, for one’s countrymen, for the glory, greatness and
\nhappiness of the race, the divine ā<\/font>nanda <\/i>of self-immolation for one’s
\nfellows, the ecstasy of relieving their sufferings, the joy of seeing one’s
\nblood flow for country and freedom, the bliss of union in death with the fathers
\nof the race. The feeling of almost physical delight in the touch of the
\nmother-soil, of the winds that blow from Indian seas, of the rivers that stream
\nfrom Indian hills, in the hearing of Indian speech, music, poetry, in the
\nfamiliar sights, sounds, habits, dress, manners of our Indian life, this is the
\nphysical root of that love. The pride in our past, the pain of our present, the
\npassion for the future are its trunk and branches. Self-sacrifice and
\nself-forgetfulness, great service, high endurance for the country are its fruit.
\nAnd the sap which keeps it alive is the realisation of the Motherhood of God in<\/font><\/p>\n


\n <\/font> <\/font> <\/i><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage-125<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nthe
\ncountry, the vision of the Mother, the knowledge of the Mother, the perpetual
\ncontemplation, adoration and service of the Mother.<\/font><\/p>\n


\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>Other love than this is foreign to the motives of political action.
\nBetween nation and nation there is justice, partiality, chivalry, duty, but not
\nlove. All love is either individual or for the self in the race or for the self
\nin mankind. It may exist between individuals of different races, but the love of
\none race for another is a thing foreign to Nature. When therefore the boycott,
\nas declared by the Indian race against the British, is stigmatised for want of
\nlove, the charge is bad psychology as well as bad morality. It is interest
\nwarring against interest, and hatred is directed not really against the race,
\nbut against the adverse interest. If the British exploitation were to cease
\ntomorrow, the hatred against the British race would disappear in a moment. A
\npartial adhyā<\/font>ropa <\/i>makes the ignorant for the moment see in the
\nexploiters and not in the exploitation the receptacle of the hostile feeling.
\nBut like all mā<\/font>yā<\/font>, <\/i>it is an unreal feeling and sentiment and is not
\nshared by those who think. Not hatred against foreigners, but antipathy to the
\nevils of foreign exploitation is the true root of boycott.<\/font><\/p>\n


\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>If hatred is demoralising, it is also stimulating. The web of life has
\nbeep made a mingled strain of good and evil and God works His ends through the
\nevil as well as through the good. Let us discharge our minds of hate, but let us
\nnot deprecate a great and necessary movement because, in the inevitable course
\nof human nature, it has engendered feelings of hostility and hatred. If hatred
\ncame, it was necessary that it should come as a stimulus, as a means of
\nawakening.<\/font><\/p>\n


\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>When tamas, <\/i>inertia, torpor have benumbed a nation, the strongest
\nforms of rajas <\/i>are necessary to break the spell; there is no form of rajas
\n<\/i>so strong as hatred. Through rajas <\/i>we rise to sattva <\/i>and for
\nthe Indian temperament the transition does not take long. Already the element of
\nhatred is giving place to the clear conception of love for the Mother as the
\nspring of our political actions.<\/font><\/p>\n


\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>Another question is the use of violence in the furtherance of boycott.
\nThis is, in our view, purely a matter of policy and expe-<\/font>
\n<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPage-126<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\ndiency.
\nAn act of violence brings us into conflict and may be inexpedient for a race
\ncircumstanced like ours. But the moral question does not arise. The argument
\nthat to use violence is to interfere with personal liberty involves a singular
\nmisunderstanding of the very nature of politics. The whole of politics is an
\ninterference with personal liberty. Law is such an interference; protection is
\nsuch an interference; the rule which makes the will of the majority prevail is
\nsuch an interference. The right to prevent such use of personal liberty as
\nwill injure the interests of the race, is the fundamental law of society. From
\nthis point of view the nation is only using its primary rights when it restrains
\nthe individual from buying or selling foreign goods.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>It may be argued that peaceful compulsion is one thing, and violent
\ncompulsion, another. Social boycott may be justifiable, but not the burning or
\ndrowning of British goods. The latter method, we reply, is illegal and therefore
\nmay be inexpedient, but it is not morally unjustifiable. The morality of the
\nKshatriya justifies violence in times of war, and boycott is a war. Nobody
\nblames the Americans for throwing British tea into <\/p>\n

Boston<\/p>\n

harbour, nor can anybody blame a similar action
\nin <\/p>\n

India<\/p>\n

on moral grounds. It is reprehensible from the
\npoint of view of law, of social peace and order, not of political morality. It
\nhas been eschewed by us because it is unwise and because it carried the battle
\non to a ground where we are comparatively weak, from a ground where we are
\nstrong.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>Under other circumstances we might have followed the American precedent,
\nand if we had done so, historians and moralists would have applauded, not
\ncensured.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>Justice and righteousness are the atmosphere of political morality, but
\nthe justice and righteousness of a fighter, not of the priest. Aggression is
\nunjust only when unprovoked; violence, unrighteous when used wantonly or for
\nunrighteous ends. It is a barren philosophy which applies a mechanical rule to
\nall actions, or takes a word and tries to fit all human life into it.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>The sword of the warrior is as necessary to the fulfilment of justice and
\nrighteousness as the holiness of the saint. Ramdas is not complete without Shivaji. To maintain justice and prevent the strong from despoiling, and the
\nweak from being oppressed, is<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPage-127<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nthe
\nfunction for which the Kshatriya was created. "Therefore," says Sri
\nKrishna in the Mahabharata<\/i>, <\/i>"God created battle and armour, the
\nsword, the bow and the dagger."<\/font><\/p>\n


\n           
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>Man is of a less terrestrial mould than some would have him to be. He has
\nan element of the divine which the politician ignores. The practical politician
\nlooks to the position at the moment and imagines that he has taken everything
\ninto consideration. He has, indeed, studied the surface and the immediate
\nsurroundings, but he has missed what lies beyond material vision. He has left
\nout of account the divine, the incalculable in man, that element which upsets
\nthe calculations of the schemer and disconcerts the wisdom of the diplomat.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPage-128<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Morality of Boycott*                     AGES ago there was a priest of Baal who thought himself commissioned by the god to kill all…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-402","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-01-bande-mataram-volume-01","wpcat-8-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/402","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=402"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/402\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=402"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=402"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=402"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}