Gandhi and King – A Comparison of Leadership

The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy. – Martin Luther King, Jr.

Darkness cannot be defeated by darkness
Darkness can only be defeated by light
Similarly, hate cannot be defeated by hate
It can only be defeated by love.
– Mahatma Gandhi

By Sanjay Chaturvedi.

On the occasion of the birth date of Mahatma Gandhi, I am reproducing an essay I wrote in 2002, comparing two of the greatest figures of the 20th century.

Throughout history, human rights violations have plagued our earth. From the persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire to the genocide in Rwanda, diverse peoples have struggled to survive in a world often filled with fear and hatred. In the early 20th century, India was not at peace. Since the 18th century, India had been a colony of British rule, afflicted with unfair foreign laws and Anglo-Saxon traditions. Gandhi taught his followers to search for their inner strength through a higher moral conscience than that of their oppressors. Gandhi was a compassionate peace hero who led the Indian people on a remarkable journey for peace, civil rights and freedom.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. led a heroic mission to educate, awaken and revolutionize the American people to fight the injustices inflicted upon African Americans. Like Gandhi, he fought the injustices with love, respect, and non-violent protest. Besides common personal feelings about right and wrong , a common influence in the lives of both Dr. King and Gandhi was Thoreau’s Essay on Civil Disobedience. The civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King Jr. in the 1950s and ’60s was the embodiment of Gandhi’s ideas of nonviolent protest. Both Gandhi and Dr. King have been idolized world wide as the first leaders of mass non violent movements in India and America, respectively. Their ability to lead the masses through unproven paths offers lessons relevant even today and it is worthwhile to examine their leadership qualities.  

Personal Backgrounds

Gandhi also known as Mahatma Gandhi, was born in Porbandar in the present state of Gujarat on October 2, 1869, and educated in law at University College, London. Gandhi was the fourth child from the fourth wife of his father who had less than grade 3 education and his mother was illiterate. Gandhi was married at age 13 and had fathered a son by age 16. He was too shy to participate in any extra-curricular activity and had not read a newspaper until he was 18. In fact he did not show any sign of leadership up to the age of 23. In 1891, after having been admitted to the British bar, Gandhi returned to India and attempted to establish a law practice in Bombay, with little success. Two years later an Indian firm with interests in South Africa retained him as legal adviser in its office in Durban. Arriving in Durban, Gandhi found himself treated as a member of an inferior race. He was appalled at the widespread denial of civil liberties and political rights to Indian immigrants to South Africa. He threw himself into the struggle for elementary rights for Indians. And then, slowly but steadily, he rose to become one of the greatest leaders that this world has ever seen. Gandhi was assassinated on January 30, 1948.

Slaves were brought to America by Kings and a King was destined to empower former slaves. This King (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.) was born on January 15, 1929 in Atlanta, Georgia. Both his father and grandfather were Baptist preachers who had been actively involved in the civil rights movement. King graduated from Morehouse College in 1948. After considering careers in medicine and law, he entered the ministry. King earned his own Bachelor of Divinity degree from Crozier Theological Seminary in 1951 and earned his Doctor of Philosophy from Boston University in 1955. While at seminary King became acquainted with Mohandas Gandhi‘s philosophy of nonviolent social protest. After his marriage to Coretta Scott, King became pastor of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama. King was an eloquent Baptist minister and leader of the civil-rights movement in America from the Mid-1950s until his death by assassination in 1968. King promoted non-violent means to achieve civil-rights reform and was awarded the 1964 Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts.

Challenges Faced and Actions Taken

Gandhi was a lawyer, on a business trip to South Africa and he was greeted with prejudice and discrimination against the fellow Indians living there. What was supposed to be a trip, ended up being a 21 year stay as he began to work towards a cause he believed in, human rights. He launched a newspaper titled, “Indian Opinion” that was published weekly. Gandhi threatened the South African Government during the first and second decades of the 20th century as no other man did. He established the first anti-colonial political organization in the country, if not in the world, founding the Natal Indian Congress in 1894.  It was there that he developed his creed of passive resistance against injustice, satyagraha, meaning truth force, and was frequently jailed as a result of the protests that he led.  The protest reached its climax in 1913 with the epic march of 5,000 workers indentured on the coal mines of Natal. Before Gandhi returned to India with his wife and children in 1915, he had radically changed the lives of Indians living in Southern Africa.

At the age of 60, on March 12, 1930, Gandhi and seventy-eight men and women challenged the injustice of Indian discrimination by completing a two hundred mile march to the seacoast. The British had a monopoly on salt manufacturing and Indians were forbidden to extract salt from the water. This event led to a nationwide boycotting of British goods and services. His teachings of non-violent resistance were very successful, for many protesters never lifted an arm to those who ruthlessly attacked their bodies. When Gandhi called for a total suspension of economic activity, to demonstrate the Indians’ demands for respect of their rights, a British General retaliated with the killing of 379 Indians at a peaceful protest. Yet Gandhi would not seek peace at the expense of blood drenching. 

When Gandhi assumed India’s leadership, the average life span of an Indian woman was only 27 years. Babies and the pregnant women ran a high risk of dying young. Child marriage was very common and widows were in very large number. Only 2% of the women had any kind of education and women did not have an identity of their own. In North India, they practiced the Purda (veil) system. Women could not go out of the house unless accompanied by men and the face covered with cloth. The fortunate ones who could go to school had to commute in covered carts (tangas). It is in this context that we have to recognize the accomplishment of Gandhi’s leadership. Gandhi claimed that a woman is completely equal to a man and practiced it in strict sense thus empowering many women to take part in public activities. Thousands and millions of women, educated and illiterate, house wives and widows, students and elderly participated in the India’s freedom movement because his influence. Gandhi faced with the daunting task of organizing a society divided on caste, religion, region and language into one political force. This required uniting all various fractions for a common cause and Gandhi’s view that all men are equal echoed with the masses. He declared untouchability to be a crime against humanity. In a nation engulfed by religious divisions and political persecution, Gandhi welcomed all into his heart. This was a calculated risk for there existed the possibility for Gandhi to lose the support of traditional upper caste men. 

Gandhi never left any public gathering without raising some money for one of his projects. He asked everyone to donate some amount, any amount. He urged women to part with some of the jewelry that they were wearing and he asked the men to donate their shirt-buttons, cuff links, pens or anything that they possessed which was not a basic need. Gandhi would then auction every item, including the gifts or souvenirs that he himself had received. The entire fund so raised would then go to the buying of cotton for weaving clothes for the poor or for supporting one of the projects in a nearby village. Since the items touched by Gandhi, and auctioned by Gandhi himself, fetched high values, Gandhi soon became famous as an extraordinary auctioneer and this funded the social reform and freedom campaigns.

Dr. King’s involvement with the civil rights movement began with the arrest of Mrs. Rosa Parks on December 1st , 1955. Mrs. Parks, a African-American seamstress on her way home from work, was arrested for not giving a white bus rider her seat. Mrs. Parks was not the first African-American to be arrested for this “crime”, but she was well known in the Montgomery African-American community. On the same day, Dr. King was named the president of the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) by leaders in the black community. He led the African-American residents of the city to a non violent boycott of the bus company by walking and driving instead. The United States Supreme Court ended the boycott, which lasted 381 days, by declaring that Alabama’s state and local laws requiring segregation on buses were illegal. The boycott was a resounding success and Dr. King’s peaceful leadership had brought about a huge social change.

In January 1957 the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLSC) was formed with Dr. King as their president. The following May 17, Dr. King lead a mass march of 37,000 people to the front of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC. Dr. King had become the undisputed leader of the civil rights movement. Partly in response to the march, on September 9, 1957, the US Congress created the Civil Rights Commission and the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, an official body with the authority to investigate voting irregularities. Dr. King and the SCLC organized drives for African-American voter registration, desegregation, and better education and housing throughout the South.

After his return to America from a visit to India, Dr. King returned home to Atlanta, Ga. where he shared the ministerial duties of the Ebenezer Baptist Church with his father. The move also brought Dr. King closer to the center of the growing civil rights movement. In January 1963 Dr. King announced he and the Freedom Fighters would go to Birmingham to fight the segregation laws. An injunction was issued forbidding any demonstrations and Dr. King and the others were arrested. Upon his release there were more peaceful demonstrations. The police retaliated with water hoses, tear gas and dogs. All this happened in the presence of television news cameras. It would be the first time the world would see the brutality that the southern African-Americans endured. The news coverage would help bring about changes as many Americans were disgusted and ashamed by the cruelty and hatred. Continuing the fight for civil rights and to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, on August 28, 1963, 200,000 people gathered in the front to the Lincoln Memorial. It was a peaceful protest, made up of African-Americans and whites, young and old. This is where Dr. King delivered his famous “I have a dream” speech.

In the winter of 1965 Dr. King led a march from Selma, Alabama to the state capital in Montgomery to demand voting reforms. 600 marchers would begin the march but after 6 blocks the marchers were met by a wall of state troupers. When the troopers with clubs, whips and tear gas advanced on the marchers it was described “as a battle zone.”  The marchers were driven back while on the sidewalks whites cheered. 2 ministers, 1 white and 1 African-American, were killed and over 70 were injured with 17 hospitalized. It was the most violent confrontation Dr. King had experienced. A court order overturning the injunction against the march was issued and the marchers were allowed to proceed. When they arrived in Montgomery the marchers were greeted by 25,00 supporters singing ‘We Shall Overcome.” On August 6, 1965 a voting rights bill was passed allowing African-Americans to vote.

Personal Qualities, decisions and behaviors accounting for success or failures

Both Gandhi and Dr. King undoubtedly recognized that charisma was one of many leadership qualities at their disposal, but they also recognized that charisma was not a sufficient basis for leadership in a modern political movement enlisting numerous self-reliant leaders. Moreover, they both rejected aspects of the charismatic model that conflicted with their sense of their own limitations. Rather than exhibiting unwavering confidence in their power and wisdom, Gandhi and King were leaders full of self-doubts, keenly aware of their own limitations and human weaknesses. King was at times reluctant to take on the responsibilities suddenly and unexpectedly thrust upon him. During the Montgomery bus boycott, for example, when he worried about threats to his life and to the lives of his wife and child, he was overcome with fear rather than confident and secure in his leadership role. He was able to carry on only after acquiring an enduring understanding of his dependence on a personal God who promised never to leave him alone. Once upon his arrest, Gandhi was faced with the moral dilemma of whether to pay the fine and assist his wife, who was sick or stay in prison. Ultimately, he chose to stay in prison and labeled this as one of the toughest decisions of his life.

However, their charisma did not place them above criticism. They both had their share of detractors and non-believers. Instead of viewing himself as the embodiment of widely held Afro-American racial values, King willingly risked his popularity among blacks through his steadfast advocacy of nonviolent strategies to achieve radical social change. This created a friction between him and other more extremist black leaders such Malcom X. Gandhi too was always at odds with the more extremist freedom fighters (such as Bhagat Singh) who were more than willing to adopt violent means to freedom. Interestingly, both King and Gandhi shied from a public debate with the more extreme detractors and never publicly denounced them. Ironically, when Bhagat Singh was executed by the British in 1931, Gandhi paid tribute to the patriotism of the young martyr while disagreeing with his revolutionary methods.    

Gandhi and King were undoubtedly progressive leaders of their times. They believed in the equality of all men and women and welcomed people from all backgrounds into their peaceful movements. Gandhi personally exemplified the concept of ‘equality’ and ‘work pride’ by cleaning his toilet everyday (traditionally a role for the lower castes).  Dr. King readily included women into the ranks of his lieutenants but was not very successful at attracting non black members into his organization. They both effectively managed large organizations through careful delegation of responsibility. However a key difference between them was that Dr. King would reprimand his juniors for an ill performed task whereas Gandhi never admonished his colleagues.  

Gandhi was a warrior who disavowed violence. He was a leader who never held high office. He was a politician who kept a deep moral code. He was a preacher of love who shunned sex. His life was remarkably multi-faceted. Trained as a lawyer in Britain, he later renounced materialism and wore the garb of an Indian peasant. He preached like a charismatic saint and negotiated like a shrewd tactician. And despite a following of millions, he never hesitated to act alone, even if it meant the ultimate sacrifice, as with his famed “fasts unto death”. King too made several personal sacrifices and often led by example. King did not completely renounce materialism as Gandhi but he did lower his material needs. He divided the Nobel prize money, $54,000, among various civil rights organizations.  

King’s success as a leader was based partially on his intellectual and moral cogency and his skill as a conciliator among movement activists who refused to be simply King’s “followers” or “lieutenants.”  The success of the black movement required the mobilization of black communities as well as the transformation of attitudes in the surrounding society, and King’s wide range of skills and attributes prepared him to meet the internal as well as the external demands of the movement. King understood the black world from a privileged position, having grown up in a stable family within a major black urban community; yet he also learned how to speak persuasively to the surrounding white world. Alone among the major civil rights leaders of his time, King could not only articulate black concerns to white audiences, but could also mobilize blacks through his day-to-day involvement in black community institutions and through his access to the regional institutional network of the black church. His advocacy of nonviolent activism gave the black movement invaluable positive press coverage, but his effectiveness as a protest leader derived mainly from his ability to mobilize black community resources.

While King was well known for his almost theatrical oratorical skills, Gandhi was not an exemplary public speaker (spoke in monotone). He often relied on the oratorical skills of his lieutenants such as Nehru and Patel. But what is common in both King and Gandhi is that they were both supremely confident about their mission and were able to clearly communicate this to the followers. This translated into confident followers.

Gandhi’s complete rejection of technology has remained an enigma. It is strange than a man open to novel ideas about society would completely reject technology as an opportunity to improve the living standards of the same society. Gandhi’s brand of “small is beautiful” economics, for example, died even before he did. His plan for a village-based cooperative economy quickly went by the wayside in 1947 as the leadership of the newly independent nation endorsed the centralized, urban industrial economy it still pursues today.

The doctrine of nonviolence as preached by Gandhi and King has not fared very well in the modern world. Today, we live in a violent world with more weapons of mass destruction than these leaders would ever have imagined. United States has the world’s largest stockpile of nuclear arsenal and India too has joined the race. Maybe, both Gandhi and King overestimated the humane qualities of the social animal (Homo Sapiens). 

Both Gandhi and Martin Luther King agreed that nonviolence succeeds by transforming the relationship between antagonists and that it’s strength lies in the individual’s commitment to truth and justice. Yet Gandhi seems to emphasize a need for personal suffering in the practice of nonviolence, a posture that is somewhat less militant than King’s call to self-sacrifice. And there is a similar difference between Gandhi’s belief that nonviolence achieves its goals through patience and non-cooperation and King’s belief that it takes “creative tension” and a degree of confrontation to accomplish change. Both Gandhi and King proved their ideas in practice by leading nonviolent social revolutions that shattered the law of oppression in their countries.

While Gandhi and King were great leaders of their times, I would add that the notion that appearances by Great Men (or Great Women) are necessary preconditions for the emergence of major movements for social changes reflects a pessimistic view of the possibilities for future social change. Waiting for the Messiah is a human weakness that is unlikely to be rewarded more than once in a millennium. Gandhi and King were certainly not the only significant leaders of the civil rights movement in their time and examination of their lives offers support for an alternative optimistic belief that ordinary people can collectively improve their lives. Without undermining the efforts of these great leaders, I would argue that there exists tremendous capacity of social movements to transform participants for the better and to create leaders worthy of their followers.