I'd like to bust one more myth about Gandhi's non-violent action. This one is held both by many of Gandhi's critics and by many of his admirers. In fact, the misunderstanding is so common and so basic that I have to say that many-maybe most-admirers of Gandhi's methods really miss the point.
How then to oppose injustice and reform society? I hoped that Gandhi held the answer. It seemed to me he had meant to work out just what I was looking for a way of defeating and overthrowing the oppressors of the world, but by moral means.
That was my myth about Gandhi; that was my filter. I had to read an entire book and a half about Gandhi before it struck me-and it struck me hard-that Gandhi was not talking about defeating or overthrowing anyone.
Satyagraha-Gandhi's non-violent action-was not a way for one group to seize what it wanted from another. It was not a weapon of class struggle, or of any other kind of division. Satyagraha was instead an instrument of unity. It was a way to remove injustice and restore social harmony, to the benefit of both sides.
That concept did not pass at all easily through my filter, and I understand why so many others miss it entirely. But it is, really, the essential difference between Gandhi's Satyagraha and so much of the non-violent action practiced by others.