MAHATMA GANDHI ON MACHINERY
MAHATMA GANDHI ON MASS PRODUCTION
MAHATMA GANDHI ON INDUSTRIALIZATION
MAHATMA GANDHI ON WESTERN CIVILIZATION
MAHATMA GANDHI ON MODERN CITIES v/s.
VILLAGES
MAHATMA
GANDHI ON MASS PRODUCTION
Question : ''Do you feel, Gandhiji, that mass production will raise
the standard of living of the people?''
''I
do not believe in it at all, there is a tremendous fallacy behind
Mr. Ford's reasoning. Without simultaneous distribution on an equally
mass scale, the production can result only in a great world tragedy.''
''Mass
production takes no note of the real requirement of the consumer.
If mass production were in itself a virtue, it should be capable
of indefinite multiplication. But it can be definitely shown that
mass production carries within it its own limitations. If all countries
adopted the system of mass production, there would not be a big
enough market for their products. Mass production must then come
to a stop.''
''I
would categorically state my conviction that the mania for mass
production is responsible for the world crises. If there is production
and distribution both in the respective areas where things are required,
it is automatically regulated, and there is less chance for fraud,
none for speculation.''
''Because
while it is true that you will be producing things in innumerable
areas, the power will come from one selected centre. That, in the
end, I think, would be found to be disastrous. It would place such
a limitless power in one human agency that I dread to think of it.
The consequence, for instance, of such a control of power would
be that I would be dependent on that power for light, water, even
air, and so on. That, I think, would be terrible.''
*******************************************************************************************************************
Question
: Have you any idea as to what Europe and America should do to solve
the problem presented by too much machinery?
''You
see,'' answered Gandhiji, ''that these nations are able to exploit
the so-called weaker or unorganized races of the world. Once those
races gain this elementary knowledge and decide that they are no
more going to be exploited, they will simply be satisfied with what
they can provide themselves. Mass production, then, at least where
the vital necessities are concerned, will disappear.''
Question
: ''As a world organization?''
''Yes.''
Question
: ''But even these races will require more and more goods as their
needs multiply.''
''They
will them produce for themselves. And when that happens, mass production,
in the technical sense in which it is understood in the West, ceases.''
Question
: ''You mean to say it becomes local?''
''When
production and consumption both become localized, the temptation
to speed up production, indefinitely and at any price, disappears.
Question
: If distribution could be equalized, would not mass production
be sterilized of its evils?
''No,''
The evil is inherent in the system. Distribution can be equalized
when production is localized; in other words, when the distribution
is simultaneous with production. Distribution will never be equal
so long as you want to tap other markets of the world to dispose
of your goods.
Question
: Then, you do not envisage mass production as an ideal future of
India ?
''Oh
yes, mass production, certainly,'' ''But not based on force. After
all, the message of the spinning wheel is that. It is mass production,
but mass production in people's own homes. If you multiply individual
production to millions of times, would it not give you mass production
on a tremendous scale? But I quite understand that your 'mass production'
is a technical term for production by the fewest possible number
through the aid of highly complicated machinery. I have said to
myself that that is wrong. My machinery must be of the most elementary
type which I can put in the homes of the millions.'' Under my system,
again, it is labour which is the current coin, not metal. Any person
who can use his labour has that coin, has wealth. He converts his
labour into cloth, he converts his labour into grain. If he wants
paraffin oil, which he cannot himself produce, he uses his surplus
grain for getting the oil. It is exchange of labour on free, fair
and equal terms-hence it is no robbery. You may object that this
is a reversion to the primitive system of barter. But is not all
international trade based on the barter system?
Concentration
of production ad infinitum can only lead to unemployment.
******************************************************************************************************
Mass production through power-driven machinery, even when State-owned,
will be of no avail.
(16-5-1936)