Dalton, Dennis. "Gandhi: Ideology and Authority". Modern Asian Studies, Vol.3, No.4 (1969): 377-393.

Dalton, Dennis. "Gandhi: Ideology and Authority". Modern Asian Studies, Vol.3, No.4 (1969): 377-393.

• The concept of ideology used by Dr. Dalton in this article is based on similar conceptions advanced by Dr. J. C. Scott and Dr. Edward Shills. It stressed the importance of ideology as being a total theory encompassing all elements of the state and society and directing them towards the formation of an 'ideal society' (377-378).
• Ideology seeks, through appeals to some moral claim or sacred authority, to advance the authority of its goals whilst robbing the opposing viewpoint of similar authority. Gandhi's use of appeals to sacredness in Indian practice while simultaneously discrediting British rule fits into this rubric for the engaging between ideology and authority (378).
• Much of Gandhi's moral authority within politics depended on his claim that he only exercised power by belief and acted political only through a religious dedication towards seeking the truth. Regardless of the verity of these claims, they provided him with public authority and a sacredness, while simultaneously discrediting all other politicians as corrupt because they did not make similar claims about moral engagement (379).
• Gandhi provides a condensed form of his ideological tenants at the end of Hind Swaraj, his seminal text against British colonialism, arguing three points: that true swaraj is self-control; the way to swaraj is satyagraha; and in order to exert the non-violent power of satyagraha, complete swadeshi [self-sufficiency] is necessary (379).
• 'Swaraj' is defined as freedom via self-control, the same sense intended by St. Augustine. Rather than being free from external constraints, swaraj implies a freedom from personal desire, allowing for truer freedom (380). Rousseau advances this same conception of freedom as obedient to self-imposed law (390).
• All the concepts used by Gandhi are intensely interrelated. 'Brahmacharya' is the means of self-reflection through which swaraj is attained; then satyagraha is the method for applying the principles of brahmacharya to achieve national swaraj. The important of swadeshi is key all of these activities, since an inward focus is necessary to achieve swaraj on a national and political scale (380).
• The relationships which Gandhi establishes regarding power as an internal force associated with ahimsa have implications for the nature of authority within Gandhi's philosophy and politics. Since inward authority and self-control is a precondition for effective and moral outward or political control, only morally enlightened leaders -- like Gandhi himself -- could be considered to possess legitimate political authority under his ideology (380).
• Gandhi's writing on non-violent resistance and satyagraha is littered with military imagery and terms, with comparisons to practitioners as a peaceful army and civil resistance as a war (381). Further, his work specifically recommends a military lifestyle as important for developing positive moral characteristics, and indeed he viewed military authority as necessary to guide morality and prevent mob rule (382).
• Gandhi's use of fasting and public penance as a way to exercise moral authority also demonstrates the interesting placement of moral authority within his political practice. Although useful as an individual way to demonstrate brahmacharya, Gandhi discovered while in South Africa that fasting could be used publicly to create remorse and thus force compliance with his moral commands. Taking public penance enhanced his moral authority as a pure leader and thus robbed all other actors of the authority for political action not in accordance with his wishes (384-385).
• Dr. Dalton proposes comparing the philosophies of Gandhi and Rousseau, who, the author argues, despite their differences, have created similar concepts of the position of morality in human society. Both believe in an absolute moral standard which can, theoretically be achieved, but the fallen nature of man prevents most from realizing their potential (386). The solutions which each philosopher suggests as a solution to this issue are the topic of the author's comparison (387).
• The philosophy of each philosopher stems from a moralism and tendency towards value judgements developed from a religious childhood, with Gandhi learning orthodox Hinduism from a conservative family, and Rousseau being born in a Geneva recovering from Calvinist theocracy. This encourages both authors to reject Western immorality and sin in their writings, calling for a realization of human morality and virtue (388).
• Rousseau's writing supports many of Gandhi's styles of leadership, as he admits that most men will not realize the divine voice advocating the common good and will thus require other 'legislators' to direct them towards it. This very much fits within Gandhi's practice of using moral authority to coerce 'the mob' into submission to his beliefs (392-393).
• Gandhi and Rousseau both believe that the ideal system of politics would be non-plural, without an factionalism or conflicting interests. As a result, they both construct systems of societal organization which would eliminate individual interests in favor of a unified societal interest (389).
• Although systems of state-governance based on their respective principles as well, both Gandhi and Rousseau idealize the morals of small village life, which they consider to be ruled on ideas of public ownership, consensus, and reflection about communal needs; traits which both believe need to be taken to the national level (390).