The other step that he advocates is abstention from the new councils.
His followers generally have not voted at the elections or have stood
for election. His reason given at the Calcutta Congress in September
1920 when he moved his resolution on non-co-operation is this. "I now
come to the burning topic _viz._ the boycott of the councils. Sharpest
difference of opinion existed regarding this and if the house was to
divide on it, it must divide on one _viz._ whether Swaraj has to be
gained through the councils or without the councils. If we utterly
distrust the British Government and we know that they are to-day
unrepentant now can you believe that the councils will lead to Swaraj
and not tighten the British hold on India"? I can only ask him to read
the history of the Parliamentary struggle for freedom in England which
will show how freedom is won from reluctant monarchs and privileged
classes. Even in India the subsequent history of the Legislative
councils has shown that the Government is willing to meet the councils
half way and almost every question taken up by the councils has been
advanced nearer solution. But I doubt whether there is any use of
arguing with Mr. Gandhi. The real truth is as he has candidly avowed in
his "Indian Home Rule" that Parliamentary Government is in itself bad
and India should not strive after it as it will stand in the way of his
spiritual Swaraj. I need not argue this point so far as the followers of
Gandhi are concerned as they are heartily sorry that they boycotted the
councils. I refer on this point also to the Thana Conference President's
speech (App. VII). They feel ashamed of themselves the majority of them
desire the dissolution of the present councils and a re-election so that
they might utilize these councils for more powerful Parliaments. Perhaps
I should add that considering the undisciplined fanaticism of the
non-co-operator and his total ignorance of development of political
organization, it is probably just as well that the councils were in
their inception preserved from such a calamitous invasion. The council
and the assembly have even in the short duration of their existence,
achieved good results which are carrying us far and quietly on that true
road to Home Rule from which Mr. Gandhi seeks to divert us. Had the
Non-Co-operators been members of these councils and had they acted in
their present temper, they might well have wrecked the Reforms and have
set back the clock of India's progress even more than they have done
already. The boycotting is therefore in all probability a blessing
though designed as a curse. Still the fact remains that the Councils
might have done even more had Mr. Gandhi been endowed with the wisdom to
see that India's interests would best be served by using the councils
and the assembly as levers to obtain further freedom on sane, safe, and
constitutional lines.