The same Gandhiji who withdrew the Non-Cooperation Movement on the issue of violence at Chauri Chaura refused to condemn people's violence during the Quit India Movement. Do you think that he was losing faith in the efficacy of non-violence and was willing to deviate from this path? Elucidate.

Answer:

Gandhi's withdrawal of Non-Cooperation after Chauri Chaura (1922) and his different stance during Quit India (1942) raise the question whether he had abandoned non-violence. A closer look shows a change of circumstance rather than of core faith.

Chauri Chaura and Withdrawal

• The mob burning of policemen convinced Gandhi that the masses were not yet trained in disciplined non-violence.
• He feared the movement would degenerate into anarchy, so he suspended it to preserve the moral basis of satyagraha.

Quit India and the Changed Context

A different situation:

• By 1942 Gandhi issued the call "Do or Die"; almost the entire leadership was arrested at once, leaving the movement leaderless.
• Popular violence (against symbols of authority) was, in his view, largely a reaction to prior state repression.

Gandhi's position:

• He did not endorse violence but distinguished the people's spontaneous anger under provocation from organised violence, and refused to condemn the masses while himself in prison.

Assessment

• His commitment to non-violence as a creed remained firm; the difference lay in context, provocation and his own inability to guide events from jail.
• He continued to uphold ahimsa throughout his life.

Therefore, Gandhi was not losing faith in non-violence; his contrasting responses reflected different circumstances and degrees of provocation, not a deviation from his fundamental principle.