Economic Ideal

158.Ideas derived by Gandhi from Ruskin’s Unto This Last in the year 1904:

(1) That the good of the individual is contained in the good of all.

(2) That a lawyer’s work has the same value as the barber’s, inasmuch as all l have the same right of earning their livelihood from their work.

(3) That a life of labour, i. E. the life of the tiller of the soil and the handicraftsman is the life worth living.

-Auto, 365.

159. Every human being has a right to live, and therefore to find the wherewithal to feed himself and where necessary, to clothe and house himself.

–Nat, 350 (273).

160. According to me the economic constitution of India and for the matter of that of the world, should be such that no one under it should suffer from want of food and clothing. In other words everybody should be able to get sufficient work to enable him to make the two ends meet. And this ideal can be universally realized only if the means of production of the elementary necessaries of life remain in the control of the masses. These should be freely available to all as God’s air and water are or ought to be; they should not be made a vehicle of traffic for the exploitation of others. Their monopolization by any country, nation or group of persons would be unjust. The neglect of this simple principle is the cause of the destitution that we witness today not only in this unhappy land but in other parts of the world too.

–YI, 15-11-28, 381.

161. Violence is no monopoly of any one party. I know Congressmen who are neither socialists nor communists, but who are frankly devotees of the cult of violence. Contrariwise, I know socialists and communists who will not hurt a fly but who believe in the universal ownership of the instruments of production, I rank myself as one among them.

–H, 10-12-38, 366

162. Q. Is it possible to defend by nonviolence anything which can only be gained by violence?

A. It followed from what he had said above that what was gained by violence could not only not be defended by non-violence, but the latter required the abandonment of ill-gotten gains.

Q. Is the accumulation of capital possible except through violence whether open or tacit?

A. Such accumulation by private persons was impossible except through violent means, but accumulation by the State in a nonviolent society, was not only possible, it was desirable and inevitable.

Q. Whether a man accumulates material or moral wealth, he does so only through the help or co-operation of other members of society. Has he then the moral right to use any of it mainly for personal advantage?

A. The answer was an emphatic no.

–H, 16-2-47, 25(Corrected with reference to the original).

163. If they were to prefer death to dishonour, they had to have the heart of a fakir, not the fakir of old who went about with a staff and a beggar’s bowl. That was time when there were rich and poor. Then there was room for beggars. Society’s thought had advanced since, though practice had not kept pace with thought. The society of the future was to be a society in which there was to be no distinction between rich and poor. Then there was room for beggars. Society’s thought had advanced since, though practice had not kept pace with thought. The society of the future was to be a society in which there was to be a society in which there was to be no distinction between rich and poor, or colour and colour, or country and country. –H, 3-11-46, 388.

Economics and Morality

164. That economics is untrue which ignores or disregards moral values. The extension of the law of non- violence in the domain of economics means nothing less than the introduction of moral values as a factor to be considered in regulating international commerce. –YI, 26-12-24, 421.

165. True economics never militates against the highest ethical standard, just as all true ethics to be worth its name, must at the same time be also good economics. An economics that inculcates Mammon worship, and enables the strong to amass wealth at the expense of the weak, is a false and dismal science. It spells death. True economics, on the other hand, stands for social justice, it promotes the good of all equally including the weakest, and is indispensable for decent life. –H, 9-I0-37, 292.