I was not unprepared for the exhibition of wrath from Germany over my articleabout the German treatment of the Jews. I have myself admitted my ignorance ofEuropean politics. But in order to commend my prescription to the Jews for theremoval of their many ills, I did not need to have an accurate knowledge ofEuropean politics. The main facts about the atrocities are beyond dispute. Whenthe anger over my writing has subsided and comparative calmness has returned,the most wrathful German will find that underlying my writing there wasfriendliness towards Germany, never any ill will.
Have I not repeatedly said that active non-violence is unadulterated love -fellow-feeling? And if the Jews, instead of being helplessly and of necessitynon-violent, adopt active non-violence, i.e., fellow-feeling for the gentileGermans deliberately, they cannot do any harm to the Germans and I am ascertain as I am dictating these lines that the stoniest German heart will melt.Great as have been the Jewish contributions to the world`s progress, thissupreme act of theirs will be their greatest contribution and war will be athing of the past.
It passes comprehension why any German should be angry over my utterlyinnocuous writing. Of course, German critics, as others, might have ridiculedit by saying that it was a visionary`s effort doomed to fail. I thereforewelcome this wrath, though wholly unmerited, against my writing. Has my writinggone home? Has the writer felt that my remedy was after all not so ludicrous asit may appear, but that it was eminently practical if only the beauty ofsuffering without retaliation was realised?
To say that my writing has rendered neither myself, my movement, norGerman-Indian relations any service, is surely irrelevant, if not alsounworthy, implying as it does a threat; and I should rank myself a coward if,for fear of my country or myself or Indo-German relations being harmed, Ihesitated to give what I felt in the innermost recesses of my heart to be centper cent sound advice.
The Berlin writer has surely enunciated a novel doctrine that people outsideGermany may not criticise German action even from friendliest motives. For mypart I would certainly welcome the interesting things that Germans or otheroutsiders may unearth about Indians. I do not need to speak for the British.But if I know the British people at all, they, too, welcome outside criticism,when it is well-formed and free from malice. In this age, when distances havebeen obliterated, no nation can afford to imitate the fabled frog in the well.Sometimes it is refreshing to see ourselves as others see us. If, therefore,the German critics happen to see this reply, I hope that they will not onlyrevise their opinion about my writing but will also realise the value ofoutside criticism.
Segaon, December 8, 1938