Sri Aurobindo
Karmayogin
Political Writings and Speeches — 1909-1910
Karmayogin: A Weekly Review
Saturday 4th September 1909 — No.11
Facts and Comments
The Social Boycott
The reason why we have drawn so much attention to this case is its intimate connection with the question of social boycott.
We are advocates of this weapon not in all cases, but in circumstances where milder expedients are impotent to prevent a wound to the body social or body politic by refractory or conscienceless individuals who wish to enjoy all the benefits of social existence while disregarding the vital necessities of the society.
We are aware of the grave consequence1 of the misuse of the social boycott to prevent the legitimate exercise by the individual of his free reason and honest conviction.
We therefore advocate it only in very serious instances where the whole community is attacked in a vital point and is practically at one in resenting the act as fatally injurious to it.
For instance when the turbulent Mahomedans of Eastern Bengal made an organised attack on the property of Hindus and on the honour of Hindu women, the Hindu community of East Bengal would have been perfectly justified in boycotting Mahomedans as servants.
Similarly, now that the educated classes of the Hindu community are at one in the belief that the Swadeshi movement supported by Boycott is necessary to the economical existence of their community, to say nothing of the whole nation, they are justified in refusing to have any dealings with those who out of personal and selfish motives deal a blow at that movement by persisting in the purchase of foreign articles.
The use of this weapon of self-defence by Hindu castes became hurtful because it was applied without discrimination and not always with honesty.
Had it been confined to cases of gross moral depravity destructive of social order, there would have been no revolt against it.
The penalising of the pursuit of education in foreign countries and similar blunders recoiled on the caste system and it is notable that communities with a strong democratic common-sense like the Mahrattas have even while adhering to orthodox religion avoided the worst of these errors.
But the misuse of a necessary instrument is no argument against its necessary and discriminating use.
We hold the use of this instrument, not in all cases but in the most heinous, to be legitimate in protecting the life of the nation.