Non-violent and Non-cooperative Movement (September1920 ~ February 1922) Under the influence of the First World War and the October Revolution, India set off the climax of the national liberation movement. In order to consolidate colonial rule, on the one hand, Britain prepared to carry out constitutional reform to appease and win over the Indian upper class, on the other hand, it promulgated the Rollat Act (1965438+February 2009) to strengthen repression. 1965438+April 2009 13, Amritsar tragedy happened, and the anti-British struggle rose rapidly. 1920 In September, Gandhi put forward a plan of non-violence and non-cooperation. Gandhi declared that the purpose of the struggle is to achieve autonomy, "if possible, implement internal autonomy of the empire, if necessary, implement autonomy from the empire." Under the call of Gandhi, people held strikes, strikes, rallies and demonstrations, which merged into an anti-British flood. On February 5th, 1922, 2,000 farmers in Jory Jolla Village, Poole County, Gollac, United Province (now Uttar Pradesh) and the police station burned 22 policemen to death. This movement went beyond the scope of non-violent struggle, and Gandhi quickly stopped it when he heard it. 12 In February, the Congress Party passed the bartoli resolution condemning the "deviant" behavior of the masses and decided to stop the non-violent and non-cooperative movement indefinitely. 10 In March, Gandhi was imprisoned and the movement was brutally suppressed.

In the history of national liberation struggle in the world, India's "non-violent and non-cooperative movement" led by Gandhi has an important position. An accurate and comprehensive understanding of "non-violent and non-cooperative movement" is helpful to improve our ability to understand history by using historical materialism and dialectical materialism. We can understand the "non-violent non-cooperative movement" from three aspects: struggle, strategy and weakness.

First: enterprising and revolutionary.

From the historical background, due to the long-term colonial oppression and exploitation by Britain, the development of Indian national capitalism has been suppressed in various ways, and there are sharp contradictions between national capitalism and British colonial rulers, and between Indian nation and suzerain Britain. Ever since the western colonists set foot in India, a beautiful land with a long history of civilization, the Indian people have waged various forms of anti-colonialism struggles. The Congress Party, which leads the non-violent and non-cooperative movement, and its leader Gandhi represent the interests of the Indian national bourgeoisie. Although the Indian national bourgeoisie is relatively weak, its position inevitably determines the strong revolutionary and combative nature of this movement. We should first see this when we understand this movement. Revolution and struggle came first, which was of positive significance at that time.

Second: strategic and realistic.

First of all, the means of struggle is "non-violence" In the face of powerful enemies, Gandhi's only weapon of struggle is to adhere to truth and non-violence. In Gandhi's words, truth is God, and non-violence is a means to pursue truth, that is, to know God. Gandhi believes that this is the weapon of the strong. This abstract and mysterious theory seems puzzling, but it contains important political content and has great practical value. Because in India, a colonial country with mixed races, multiple religious beliefs, caste segregation and divided rule by Britain, Truth is God is actually to unify various religious beliefs in India, to integrate religious gods with realistic ideals, and to arouse people's unity regardless of race, religion, sect and caste under the banner of truth in a language and form that people are familiar with and understand. This is undoubtedly an effective weapon for the Indian bourgeoisie to publicize, organize and attract the masses to participate in the anti-British struggle. At the same time, because it advocates non-violence, it not only adapts to the reality that people are deprived of armed rights and paralyzed by religious prejudice under British colonial rule, but also can be accepted by colonists with parliamentary democracy and rich ruling experience to a certain extent; It can not only mobilize the masses, but also control the mass movements within a certain range. It is very suitable for the Indian national bourgeoisie to use the anti-imperialist struggle of the masses to achieve its political and economic goals, and it can also prevent the in-depth development of the workers' and peasants' movements from endangering its own interests. Although the national liberation movement in modern India suffered setbacks, it lasted for a long time and eventually forced the British colonists to withdraw from India. It should be said that Gandhi's "non-violence" thought played an important role in this process.

Secondly, in the goal of struggle, firstly, it is "autonomy", and gradually put forward "independence" in the later "non-violence" movement; The so-called "autonomy" means that the national bourgeoisie exercises some powers under British rule. This cannot be simply understood as its compromise. Judging from the situation at that time, Britain colonized India for more than half a century, and the colonial institutions were basically stable. Moreover, India is the colonial center of the British Empire in the Far East, and its colonial power is quite strong. It is unrealistic to achieve "independence" at once, and it is more likely to be opposed by the British colonial authorities. And "autonomy" is more realistic, relatively speaking, it is moderate and easy to be accepted by Britain. With the decline of Britain's own strength and the growth of Indian national bourgeoisie, the slogan of "complete independence" was gradually put forward in the second and third "non-violence" movements. This strategy from "autonomy" to "independence" reflected the spirit of seeking truth from facts to a certain extent and played a positive role at that time.

Third, weakness and compromise.

Of course, Gandhi regarded non-violence as a religious belief and an unchangeable principle, which obviously had various drawbacks and defects and had some negative effects on India's national liberation movement. For example, absolute non-violence cannot be achieved; Denying all violence, formulating rules and regulations for mass movements, and not crossing the line will inevitably constrain the enthusiasm of the masses; If we stop the movement as long as there is violence, it will inevitably dampen morale, lose the revolutionary opportunity and prolong the revolutionary process; The self-suffering and self-sacrifice of the public are always limited by time and environment; Under the suppression of counter-revolutionary violence, unarmed resistance can only be meaningless sacrifice; Non-violent religious color caters to the ignorance and backwardness of the masses, which is not conducive to the real awakening of the masses and so on.