This week marks the 78th anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination. Today, I celebrate the occasion through remembering the incredible nuance that marked Gandhi’s commitment to spiritual nonviolence.
In 1939 and 1940 Gandhi famously wrote two letters to Adolf Hitler, in an attempt to dissuade him from continuing aggression. In these letters, even though information about German camps and atrocities was beginning to circulate, Gandhi chose to address the German dictator as “Dear Friend”.
Why would Gandhi write to Hitler in this way?
Luckily, he opens the letter with an explanation:
That I address you as a friend is no formality. I own no foes. My business in life has been for the past 33 years to enlist the friendship of the whole of humanity by befriending mankind, irrespective of race, colour or creed.
Gandhi is writing to explain how “a good portion of humanity who have been living under the influence of that doctrine of universal friendship views your action.”
And this where things get really good. Because Gandhi — in typical Gandhi fashion — is not going to criticize Hitler, he’s going to praise him. And he’s going to draw that stark Gandhian line between the man and his actions, no matter how horrible those actions had been.
We have no doubt about your bravery or devotion to your fatherland, nor do we believe that you are the monster described by your opponents. But your own writings and pronouncements and those of your friends and admirers leave no room for doubt that many of your acts are monstrous and unbecoming of human dignity…
The praise is sincere.
Gandhi is obsessed with bravery and doing the right thing under pressure. All of his strange sexual and dietary practices are based in practicing courage over pleasure, so when he was faced with violence he would do the right thing, not the easy thing. So he would react calmly instead of explode. So he would protect others instead of saving himself.
The criticism is also sincere.
Obviously, Hitler is doing the exact opposite of what Gandhi would want. But he’s going to leave space for Hitler to grow. If you call someone a monster, and they believe you, they will continue to act like a monster. What choice do they have?
But if you distance the person from their actions, you can safely judge the (horrific, even in 1940, before the worst of things began!) actions while leaving opportunity for change.
Gandhi thought that extending that goodwill would resonate with the dregs of humanity still present in Hitler and help them to flourish.
This is known as the Pygmalian Effect.
Employees who are treated with respect tend to be more autonomous and responsible, while those who are treated as cretins and thieves often behave as such.
Students and athletes rise to the high expectations of their teachers and coaches, or sink to the level of their insults.
Here’s how I imagine Gandhi’s reflection:
How can I use my moral authority to stop this madness? If I criticize this guy he’s just going to ignore me. But if there’s some coal of humanity left in there — and there always is — maybe the best I can do is to nurture it.
There’s another reason that Gandhi can’t see Hitler as Pure Evil: it would be another form of dehumanization. Clearly, it’s not as bad as bombing civilians or murdering and enslaving the “lesser races”, but it still draws a line of “I’m fundamentally different and better than you are”.
As such, it denies your intrinsic impulse towards empathy and connection, and you end up dehumanizing yourself.
That’s right… Dehumanizing others ends up dehumanizing yourself.
It’s kind of like when Dr Dre said:
‘Cause when you diss Dre you diss yourself [bleep]
(But also somewhat different.)
And Gandhi is not about to dehumanize himself (or diss Dre).
Thus, the challenge today is to rehumanize yourself by rehumanizing somebody you can’t stand.
Come on!
You knew this was coming. We can’t have all this spiritual nonviolence talk without a challenge.
We make the road by walking, not through theory alone.
I suggest we write our own letters.
- Pick somebody it would be very easy to dehumanize. Maybe it’s Trump or Musk or whoever’s leading Hamas these days, Nayib Bukele, Paris Hilton, your evil Stepfather, or the lame neighbors next door.
- Find something you admire about them. Ouch. But in doing so, you’re building a bridge of similarity.
- Now imagine a goal or need that you both share. Presume a shared intention. Make it plausible.
- Finally, make a request of them that would advance this (imagined) shared intention. Something that would make both of your lives better, but couched in a language they can hear.
Once you’ve done the hard mental work, actually write the letter (longhand!), incorporating points 2, 3, and 4.
Whether or not you send it, the point is to rehumanize yourself by understanding what we share with those we despise. There is also a strategic point: How can we make our demands more palatable to our “opponents”?
Note: Gandhi’s letter, it turns out, was held by the British censors and never delivered. Not that I gave it high odds of succeeding...
Ankur Shah Delight: Community and Conflict 