Purpose:
To speak to the public about the Quit India resolution; to
describe to them his points of view on various issues such as nonviolence and
attitudes towards the British; to explain why it would be in everyone’s best
interest for India to be free
Audience:
Directly, the people of India (specifically those who are
activists for the end of British Imperialism in India) and less directly, the
British Empire
Context:
All-India Congress had just ratified the Quit India
resolution, India was at a tipping point in terms of freedom from British
imperialism, the time was optimal for mobilizing public opinion in favor of
freedom.
Part
One: Explaining Himself and the Principles of his Mission
Purpose:
To describe the nature of the movement that he is about to
start and that the tactics and principles that he has been promoting have not
changed. Anticipates opposition by making his position clear
Appeals:
Ethos. Establishes himself as a respectable and familiar figure (“Let me,
however, hasten to assure you that I am the same Gandhi as I was in 1920.”). Defends
the credibility of his position on the subject of nonviolence in spite of
recent changes (“I attach the same importance to nonviolence that I did then
[…] There is no real contradiction between the present resolution and my
previous writings and utterances.”)
Techniques:
Giving credibility/power to the audience (“You are right in asking that
question”), anticipating opposition (the fact that he repeatedly calls himself
the “same Gandhi” seems to suggest that he is anticipating accusations that he
has changed), repetition (calls himself the same person he was in 1920 twice),
reference to an authority figure (“God has vouchsafed to me a priceless gift in
the weapon of Ahimsa”).
Effectiveness:
Generally, very effective. All of his claims are credible, and placing this
reassuring passage at the beginning of his speech ensures that those who agree
with him but might be doubting him will be on board with him for the rest of
the time that he is speaking.
Part
Two: Explaining the Usefulness of Ahimsa/Nonviolence
Purpose:
To explain to his audience why nonviolent protest is still
an effective means to an end in terms of gaining independence from the British
Empire; to distinguish India’s revolutionary drive for Independence from a
selfishly motivated drive for power
Appeals:
Ethos: Characterizes the power that India will gain from independence as a
benefit of secondary importance, instead emphasizes its struggle for freedom as
something that is motivated by the literal ideal of freedom alone. This
portrays them as noble and idealistic rather than selfish and myopic (“Ours is
not a drive for power, but purely a nonviolent fight for India’s independence”
/ “The power, when it comes, will belong to the people of India[…]”). Logos:
Logically explains why Ahimsa is the most useful form of protest by describing
alternatives and the factual benefits of nonviolence (“In a violent struggle, a
successful general has been often known to effect a military coup and set up a
dictatorship.” / “[…] but in Ahimsa, there is no final failure or defeat. I
have faith, therefore, that if […] the big thing does happen, it will be
because God wanted to help […].”). Pathos: Associates India’s struggle for
independence with high morals and glory (“I believe that in the history of the
world, there has not been a more genuinely democratic struggle for freedom than
ours.”)
Techniques:
Understatement (avoids the use of rhetorical hyperbole and keeps his language
very straightforward in spite of the sensitive topic), anticipating opposition
(establishes the credibility of their struggle as noble and just to avoid
accusations of other motivations from the British “Ours is not a drive for
power, but purely a nonviolent fight for India’s independence.”)
Effectiveness:
Very effective. In this section of the speech, Gandhi uses skillful rhetoric in
order to inspire his audience into action, but constantly qualifies his claims
in a way that keeps all of his ideas very grounded in reality.
Part
3: Addressing the Issue of the British
Purpose:
To discourage his constituents from breeding hate against
British people and imperialism; to qualify himself and his movement in the eyes
of the British empire; to make the British Empire more sympathetic to his
movement in this way and to help them see the benefits to them of granting
India its freedom
Appeals:
Logos. Separates the British people from the British imperialism that they are
trying to eradicate (“The people make no distinction between British imperialism
and the British people. To them, the two are one. […] Our quarrel is not with
the British people, we fight their imperialism”), explains how India’s
independence makes logical sense and what usefulness lies in granting it its
freedom (“It is not a happy position for a big country like India to be merely
helping with money and material obtained willy-nilly from her while the United
Nations are conducting the war. We cannot evoke the true spirit of sacrifice
and valor, so long as we are not free.”), suggests that there is danger to
Britain if they don’t withdraw and therefore it makes moral and logical sense
for India to encourage them to do so (“It, therefore, becomes my duty to warn
them of their danger even though it may, for the time being, anger them to the
point of cutting off the friendly hand that is stretched out to help them.”)
Techniques:
Understatement (does not mention the atrocities that Britain’s imperialism
inflicted on India), anticipating opposition (the entire paragraph arguably serves
the purpose of qualifying himself in the eyes of the British).
Effectiveness:
Depends on which audience member is in question. To an Indian person, I imagine
that this might be somewhat alienating, especially if they had been personally
harmed by British imperialism. To a British person, however, this might have
been very effective in terms of making them sympathetic to Gandhi’s cause.
General
Evaluation: Revolution is a very sensitive topic, and leaders of
revolutions have been known to use a myriad of techniques in order to obtain
the following that they need. I think that in this speech, Gandhi has portrayed
a significant level of skill in striking an even balance between inspiring
pride and a certain degree of nationalism in his audience while at the same
time maintaining a relatively friendly stance towards the British and his
nonviolent ideals. This speech may not have been as effective in terms of mass
mobilization as a speech that is fraught with pure nationalist rhetoric, but it
is a remarkable and memorable speech nonetheless.
