BOOK REVIEW

Racial Inequality, Coolie, and

Collective Mobilisation
Gandhi in South Africa
Hira Singh

his is an important and ambitious

book. Its main objective is to address the competing constituencies,
ambiguities and tensions surrounding
Gandhis South African years. Set against
the dominant narrative of Gandhi as a great
inventor of the new tactic and theory of
non-violent popular anti-colonial politics,
it seeks to demonstrate that, principally,
Gandhis political imagination was limited
to equality within the Empire, and his
tactics were shaped by a conservative
defence of class, race and caste privilege.
Its main objective is to challenge the story
of Gandhi transforming from a Mohandas
to a Mahatma on African soil (pp 2428).
At the end, the book presents a homogenised image of Gandhi focused on his
personal and political failings, to counter
the iconic image of the Mahatma in mainstream historiography by removing the
very ambiguities and tensions it promises
to highlight. Out of a number of important issues raised in the book, I want to
focus mainly on three interrelated areas
that preoccupied Gandhi in South Africa:
racial inequality, Indian indenture, and
social movements.
Racial Inequality
Gandhi came face to face with the race/
colour question soon after he landed in
Africa in 1893. Everyone and everything
32

The South African Gandhi: Stretcher-Bearer

of Empire by Ashwin Desai and Goolam Vahed, New
Delhi: Navayana (2015); pp 343, Rs 595.

in South Africadead or livinghad a

colour code, and Gandhi was pushed to
confront it head on. As the authors rightly
cite, the privilege enjoyed by Europeans
in settler coloniesSouth Africa, Canada,
and New Zealandwas given legitimacy
by the ideology of racism that privileged
Europeans over people of colour:
Whiteness and blackness came to define
the social body (p 33).
Race had become a dominant theme in
Western intellectual life in the nineteenth
century (p 45).

Considering this, Gandhis political

imagination, limited to equality of races
within the Empire, if at all that were
ever possible, was not conservative but
revolutionary. Gandhi challenged the
claim of racial superiority of colonisers
by claiming and demanding equality
between white Europeans and Indians
in cultural terms, treating race as social
historical, long before the notion of race
as social construction gained recognition in the social sciences. He questioned
the colour hierarchy on the basis of the
Indians fitness for an equality with the
civilized races in terms of culture and
civilisation (CWMG 1: 285).1

On 14 July 1894, he wrote that Indian

boys schooled in South Africa in every
respect, become as fit for the Franchise
privilege as any European (CWMG 1:
168). Indians were as much civilized as a
model European, he claimed (CWMG 1:
286). Hence, their exclusion from franchise or other rights was an insult to
the whole Indian nation (CWMG 1: 170).
Identifying the treatment of Indians
in South Africa with honour/dishonour
of Indian nation was part of Gandhis
political tactics from the very beginning.
He hope[d] our countrymen throughout India realise that [our struggle for
equality] has been undertaken to save
Indias honour it is the greatest struggle
of modern times (p 138).
On another occasion (25 October
1894), he wrote: You, in your wisdom,
would not allow the Indian or the Native
the precious privilege [of franchise]
under any circumstances, because they
have a dark skin. ... So long as the skin is
white it would not matter to you whether
it conceals beneath it poison or nectar
(CWMG 1: 183; italics added). I read in
your leaders expressions of very lofty
and humanitarian sentiments... for the
poor Indian, these sentiments are set
aside (CWMG 1: 269).
Colour distinction, he argued, was
against the norms of civilisation and
Christianity: Suffer little children to
come unto me, said the Master. His
disciples (?) in the Colony would improve
upon the saying by inserting white
after little. On yet another occasion
(December 1894), he writes: there can
be no doubt that the Indian is a despised
being in the Colony. ... If that hatred is
simply based upon his colour, then, of
course, he has no hope. ... No matter

april 2, 2016

vol lI no 14

EPW

Economic & Political Weekly

BOOK REVIEW

what he does, he will never have the

white skin (CWMG 1: 187). He found it
an affront to the dignity of the British Indians, who not only do not enjoy any
political rights in the South African Republic but are treated as little more than
chattels, because they are not white
(CWMG 1: 282).
The dominant colonial narrative in
South Africa was that of racial superiority
of whites. Gandhi inserted another competing discourse, that is, equality between white settlers and Indians in civilisational terms. His response to racial
inequality, apart from rejecting it in
theory, was collective mobilisation. As
early as December 1895, he wrote,
had not an attempt been made to tread upon
their commercial pursuits... to degrade them
to the condition of pariahs of society... there
would have been no franchise agitation
(CWMG 1: 29495).

The Indians as British subjects are

equal to British subjects of any colour,
creed, or nation, he emphasised. He justified his demand for equality between
Europeans and Indians on the basis of
the Imperial Proclamation of 1858, under
which the British Indian subjects were
granted equality of status with the British
European subjects. A breach of the Proclamation of 1858 to discriminate against
the Indians, he warned, would mean
perpetual agitation (CWMG 1: 349).
Indenture
From the very early days of his arrival in
South Africa, perpetual agitation, not
capitulation, was Gandhis real strength.
The foundation of that strength in South
Africa was the population of indentured
(and ex-indentured) Indians. The idea
that Gandhi got involved in the affairs of
indentured Indians only towards the
end of his stay in the country in 1913 is to
misread the entire historical context.
The Indian question in South Africa
from the beginning to the endwas the
question of Indian indenture. Labour
exploitation, racial inequality, treatment
of Indian women, forms of daily resistance and subsequent organised protests
in South Africa, and the reaction in
India to what was happening to Indians
in the country was based on a single
most important factor: Indian indenture.
Economic & Political Weekly

EPW

april 2, 2016

Fight over right to own land, engage in

business, right to move and marry, the
three pound tax, access to education,
and right to franchise were issues confronting indentured and unindentured
Indians in common.
It was indentured (and ex-indentured)
Indians, their ongoing resistance and
struggle in spite of their lowly position in
the labour force, and the existing social
order of the time that provided for
Gandhis socialisation in mass politics.
That is where Gandhi discovered the most
powerful weapon he used in his fight
against colonial racial discrimination in
South Africa and, more importantly,
against colonial rule in India: power in
the peoples movement. The claim that
Gandhi was in alliance with the Indian
elite, ignoring indentured labourersthe
overwhelming majority of Indians in South
Africais rather misplaced. Between the
1860s and the 1910s, talking of the Indian
elite in South Africa is using a misnomer,
since all Indians in the country irrespective of their internal differentiation
belonged to one category: coolie.
As cited by the authors, passengers
(Indians who were not indentured) were
soon to discover that in this white mans
world, Indians were herded into a single
category, and subjected to racial discrimination (p 49). Mr Coolie, the
black man were the generic terms for
all Indians in South Africa (p 34). To his
credit, Gandhi was quick to recognise
that the fair fields of Natal that are
its pride were made by Indian labour
(p 105). Indian historiography of colonialism has not until now recognised the
contribution Indian indentured labour
made to the British Empire; indeed, to
the making of the modern world, as did
slavery before emancipation.
The question is not what Gandhi did
for the indentured. The real question is,
what did the latter do for Gandhi? Indians of indenture descent in South Africa
are aware of what they did for Gandhi. I
have to narrate an anecdote for illustration. In 1993, I was in South Africa doing
archival and ethnographic field research
on Indian indentured labour and its
legacy. It was the 100th year of Gandhis
entry into South Africa and Gandhi was
very much in the air, particularly among

vol lI no 14

the descendants of indentured labourers. One evening, I was invited to the

house of a very elderly person who had
heard of my research and was interested
in meeting with me even though he was
terminally ill.
When I arrived there, he was in his
bed surrounded by family and friends.
Notwithstanding his illness, the ambience
was very lively and vibrant. We were conversing informally, when suddenly the
conversation turned to Gandhi. In the
audience was a frail elderly woman in
her early 90s (as I was later told), who
was until then sitting quietly in a corner.
Suddenly, her face lit up when she started
speaking. We made Gandhi Gandhi,
she said. I asked her what she meant.
And, what she said was very revealing.
Gandhi came to South Africa to represent the case of Indian traders and he
was going nowhere shuttling between
the courts. Then, one day, Indian (read
coolie) women filled the jails of South
Africa and the next morning Gandhi
became the subject of world news: Gandhi
became Gandhi.
It is the story of the struggles of indentured Indians (women and men) and the
contribution they made to Gandhis
political socialisation and his eventual
transition to Mahatmahood that has
been overlooked by the authors who
have focused on Gandhi, the Mahatma,
albeit with fatal flaws. This, combined
with their preoccupation with the elite is
particularly problematic.
The case of Indian indenture in the
Empire was indeed more central than
what the historiography of the Empire
and indenture has been able to recognise
and record so far. Indian indenture contributed to civilising England (turning
the civilising mission upside down) by
providing England, the leader of slave
trade, with an alternative form of bonded
labour for the plantation economy of the
Empire in South Africa (the Caribbean
Islands and Fiji), without engaging in
the barbaric practice of slave trade; a
unique advantage in intercolonial rivalry
for unfree labour in the age of imperialism. Imperial subjectswhite settlers in
the coloniesin turn, ill-treated indentured Indians, denying them equality on
account of assumed racial superiority.
33

BOOK REVIEW

Gandhi was able to see this irony to

conclude that the resolution of the Indian
question in South Africa (and other colonies) was not possible without dissolution of colonial rule in India. That is the
real contribution of his South African
experience with indentured Indians to
Gandhis political transformation.
Gandhi and South African Blacks
The authors clearly demonstrate how
not only in his writings and speeches,
but also in his political conduct, Gandhi
was exclusionary and discriminatory
towards the blacks in South Africa, and
disrespectful to their history and culture.
This lapse and lack of judgment on
Gandhis part in this regard cannot and
should not be condoned in the name of
Gandhi being a man of his time. He was
just as much a man of his time in saying
and doing everything he is credited for.
The book is factually correct in identifying Gandhis shortcomings regarding his
treatment of South Africans. The problem
is the interpretation.
Gandhis unwillingness and inaction
towards cooperating with the blacks
against white racism and colonial

subjugation is a point well taken. Did

the sufferings of South Africans trigger
in Gandhi a feeling of affinity or a need
for alliance with them? is a legitimate
question (p 22). Neither Gandhi, nor
South Africans for that matter, thought
or took action to forge a united anticolonial front. And, it is futile to blame
that on the colonisers tactics of divideand-rule. Whatsoever success anti-colonial struggles had anywhere was a result
of the colonised overcoming the colonial
tactics and their ruling strategy. Unity of
the colonised in the colonial or/and
postcolonial era is historically a significant question and making an exception
of Gandhi for his failure to accomplish
that in South Africa, where he was fighting for the lowliest of the low of the time
and the placethe coolieis partisan.
The question, however, is the reaction
and the action of the later generations of
South Africans, who staked their lives
to fight the institutionalised racism of
apartheid, for example, President Thabo
Mbekis assessment of Gandhi as one of
the greatest opponents of colonialism and
racism, cited by the authors (p 24). The
authors also mention the installation of

Gandhis statue in Pietermaritzburg to

commemorate the May 1893 incident
when Gandhi was thrown out of the
train en route to Pretoria (p 23). I was
incidentally present at the installation.
Nelson Mandela was the keynote speaker
and Desmond Tutu unveiled the statue,
the first ever statue of a black person
in South Africa. To mark the end, the
African National Congress (ANC) choir
sang the national anthem and all four
races of South Africa (the classification
of four races was the artefact of the
apartheid regime) formed a circle holding hands to join the anthem; a truly
historic moment.
South African blacks tribute to Gandhi
is above all an act of magnanimity,
accepting Gandhi as black and honouring
him. It is also indicative of their understanding of Gandhis overall treatment
of South Africans, their history and culture. And, it is farthest from the authors
labelling of Gandhi as the first architect
of apartheid. Their explanation in terms
of sanitising the image of Gandhi by the
leaders of the post-apartheid period to
serve the political expediencies of the
day (p 23) is not convincing.

Must-have resources from SAGE!

` 750

New

` 950

From the Margins to the

Mainstream

Philanthropy in India
Promise to Practice
Meenaz Kassam, Femida Handy and
Emily Jansons
Philanthropy has a very long tradition in
India. All practicing religions embody the
idea of philanthropy and the concept of
daanworks across religions and cultures.
This book provides unique sociological
and empirical perspectives, contrasting
what is happening in India vis--vis
other countries. It documents various
government policies that have influenced
philanthropy and identifies successful
strategies practiced by the general population as well as organizations.

Institutionalising Minorities in South Asia

Edited by Hugo Gorringe, Roger
Jeffery and Suryakant Waghmore
Muslims, Dalits and Adivasis continue their
struggle to seek entry into the institution
from which they seem to be barred.
Drawing on in-depth case studies the
book explores how marginalized groups
that achieve a degree of political inclusion
often discover that it amounts to adverse
incorporation which is disempowering
because it requires them to moderate or abandon key demands.
2016 332 pages Hardback (978-93-515-0623-2)

2016 252 pages Hardback (978-93-515-0752-9)

To avail discount write to marketing@sagepub.in with code EPWAPR0116!

w ww.s agepub.in
34

Los Angeles | London | New Delhi | Singapore | Washington DC | Melbourne

april 2, 2016

vol lI no 14

EPW

Economic & Political Weekly

BOOK REVIEW

Three components of Gandhian strategy

emerged at a very early stage of his
political involvement in South Africa:
demanding racial equality between whites
and Indians, organising social protests
against racial inequality and its various
manifestations (affecting the land rights,
marriage, movement, immigration, settlement and citizenship of Indians in
South Africa), and connecting the two
with the fate of the Empire in India.
Gandhi combined collective mobilisation to fight racism and ill-treatment of
Indians publicly with how one should lead
ones personal life (pp 6465). In 1903, he
launched Indian Opinion considered a
mark of civilisation (p 66)with the
objective to publicise the grievances of
Indians locally to the whites and the
government in South Africa, and outside
in India and in England. He also sought to
unite all Indians cutting across the distinctions between Hindus, Muslims, Gujaratis,
Tamilians, and Calcuttawalas, overcoming
the diversity of diversity and the division
(religious, ethnic, class, regional, linguistic) among Indians. In the newspaper, he
included extracts from the writings of
European thinkers, Islamic philosophers,
Sufi saints, and Indian thinkers, religious
and secular, like Leo Tolstoy, Henry David
Thoreau, John Ruskin, William Salter,
W E B Du Bois, and Omar Khayyam. He
was also a keen observer of the social
protests of his times, the suffragette
movement in London (pp 61 66, 7273).

India that Gandhi developed had deep

implications for the South African struggle, a level of coordination that was the
envy of Africans (mainly because the
latter did not have the organisation and
leadership comparable to that of the
Indians). Then, there was the India factor, a prime consideration for England
and the colonial administration in India.
South Africa was in the process of being
colonised. It had not yet developed these
international linkages as it did later on
in confronting the apartheid.
Gandhis tactics and strategy of collective mobilisation reached its culmination
in the strike of 1913. As quoted by the
authors, One would think that the
Indian element [coolie] was the power
in Durban and the white race the interlopers (p 230). Whites who were used
to the servility of the Indian waiter, and
the power of the gun that had defeated
the Zulu, found the new circumstances
difficult to countenance There was a
sense that things were spinning out of
control this tussle with Gandhi had
spun out of control, that it had become
too costly a face-saving way to back
down had to be found (pp 23234).

Voice of Indians

The authors observe that during

190612, the main site of Gandhis
political action was in the Transvaal,
while the majority of indentured Indians
were concentrated in Natal (11,000
Indians lived in the Transvaal as compared to 1,10,000 in Natal). Gandhi did
not turn to them until 1913. Thus, the
Indians who bore the brunt of white
exploitation received scant attention
from him (p 133). Is it realistic to argue
that indentured Indians in Natal were
insulated from political activities Gandhi
was involved in before the strike of 1913?
The issues taken up by Gandhi, his
associates and the organisations they
formed, the contacts they made, the
networks they developed, negotiations
they were engaged in were related to the

By 1903, Gandhi had become the voice

of Indians, recognised even by the
hostile Republicans in South Africa (p 95),
and he used it to articulate the grievances
of Indians. When the British government gave its approval to the Black Act
on 11 May 1907, Gandhi came out with
his own announcement the same day
that Indians would resist this murderous law (p 124). Responding to his call,
thousands of people were imprisoned
opposing the Black Act, while equally
strong numbers repeatedly courted imprisonment, and thousands of registration
certificates and trade licences were
burnt at mass meetings.
Transnational linkages and solidarities
with eminent persons in England and in
Economic & Political Weekly

EPW

april 2, 2016

The strike was a declaration of war between

capital and Indian labour the spectre
of the strike and its capacity to paralyse the
city had forced the government to ... stretch
its resources The strike brought home just
how dependent white society had become
on the services of the unwanted race
(pp 23840).

vol lI no 14

basic concerns of all Indians, indentured

Indians in particular. But for these networks and political experience of the
previous movements, the strike of 1913
could not have acquired the momentum
and dynamism it did.
Indentured Indians were not immune
to daily forms of struggle. However, to
transform the daily forms of struggle
into sustained protest, it needs organisation, leadership, network, and ideology,
which could not be developed in a
vacuum. Ongoing political mobilisations
that Gandhi was part of had prepared
the runway for the 1913 strike to take off.
It was not all Gandhis making. Movements are made by people under particular circumstances in which leaders
play a role. Gandhis role in the strike of
1913 should be seen in that light. By 1913,
Gandhis name had become something
of a floating signifier (p 227). How must
one understand that?
The only explanations the authors provide are rumours, and Gandhis mystique
combined with the masses own way of
dealing with it. Perpetual agitations, building of organisations, publicity by media,
consciousness raising and mass mobilisation, including the March to Tolstoy
Farm in eight instalments of 25 miles
each, and the galvanising impact it had
are ignored by the authors. This, to give
precedence to rumours and mystique, borrowed from the vocabulary of Subaltern
Studies, to explain Gandhis significance,
or lack of it, in the movement.
Bidding farewell to South Africa,
Gandhi was hosted by white mayors or
their representatives. Was not this the
kind of recognition that he had craved
from the very beginning? ask the authors
(p 278). The appropriate answer to their
question is provided by Jan Smuts on
behalf of the Union of South Africa:
The saint has left our shoresI sincerely
hope for ever (p 279).
Hira Singh (hsingh@yorku.ca) is at the York
University, the UK.

note
1

CWMG 1 refers to Volume 1 of The Collected

Works of Mahatma Gandhi [Electronic Book],
98 volumes, Publications Division, Government of India, New Delhi, 1999, available at
http://www.gandhiserve.org/e/cwmg/cwmg.
htm.

35