India after Independence

Integration of StatesSardar Patel's strategy to consolidate native states

1. Atlee had declared that £ didn't intend to hand over her paramountcy over Indian states to any

government in India. Consequently the states began to harbor dreams of independence. Their

desires were supported by Jinnah  in a speech in June 1947 in an obvious attempt to keep

India weak. However £ began to realize the complications of cold war and by now they

changed their stance somewhat and Atlee said that he hoped that the states would join one

dominion or the other.

2. The people of the states had suffered side by side with the people in £ India in the INM. Both

movements marched hand in hand and thus it was not possible for nationalist leaders to leave

the people of the state on the mercy of the princes. 

3. By April 1947, some states had showed wisdom and joined the constituent assembly. But a

majority of them stayed away and some even openly declared their intent for claiming an

independent status. In June 1947, Patel set to the task of integrating the states. INM had

become deep rooted in princely states as well - too strong that it was impossible for them to

ignore it. Had they ignored it, they faced possibility of internal revolts. Patel made the rulers

realize this by saying that he won't be able to stop their people from revolting. He appealed to

all the princes whose territory fell in India to accede to the union on 3 subjects - foreign

relations, defence and communications. 

4. He followed a policy of stick and carrot. The carrot was that he guaranteed the continuation of

personal privileges of the princes in India. A privy purse would be established and they would

draw pensions from it. No enquiries would be initiated against the princes as well. Although

there was some criticism of the privileges accorded to the rulers, it was a small price to pay for

the integrity of the union. Consolidation of the states indeed healed the wounds of partition to

some extent.

Hyderabad

Before Independence1. Hyderabad had a feudal setup. ~10% of land was reserved for the Nizam and 30% given out as

jagirs. Muslims received preferential treatment and non-Muslims were even persecuted.

2. Political agitations first reached state on the Khilafat issue. Khilafat merged with the issue of a

responsible government in the state and enhanced civil liberties.

3. A cultural movement started in Telangana under the leadership of Andhra Mahasabha which

advocated Telugu language and literature and promoted press. In 1938, all the major

associations in the state merged together to call Hyderabad State Congress (not a branch of

INC). 

4. Hyderabad State Congress had close connections with INC and used the methods of

satyagraha, INC leaders too personal interest including Gandhiji. Gandhiji actively guided the

1938 satyagraha and also wrote to Hyderabad government to agree to their demands.

However, due to a launch of a parallel satyagraha by Arya Samaj, Gandhiji urged Hyderabad

State Congress to withdraw their satyagraha so that it doesn't get associated with a communal

agitation.After Independence

1. Patel was in no hurry to force an accession on Hyderabad since the Nizam had made a secret

commitment not to join Pakistan and also £ had refused to give the dominion status to

Hyderabad. Moreover Mountbatten himself was involved in negotiations with the Nizam. So

Patel felt that time was on his side. But at the same time he made it clear that India will not

tolerate an 'island' in the middle of its territory.

2. In November 1947, the Nizam signed a standstill agreement with GoI which called for

immediate restoration of peace. Behind signing this standstill agreement while GoI hoped that

Nizam would be made to see the reality and could be forced to accept a representative

government in his state, Nizam hoped to build up his military strength and force the GoI to

accept his sovereignty. So he hoped to prolong the negotiations.

3. While negotiations were on, violence kept on increasing. Nizam had organized a muslim

communal organization which had an armed wing called Razakars. On 7 August 1947, the

state congress unit launched a powerful satyagraha to force the nizam to accept a

representative government. Nizam unleashed a reign of terror on the people through his band

of Razakars leading to merciless communal prosecution. As a result CPI was able to expand its

cadre in Hyderabad and powerful peasant struggles began to come up and the CPI led struggle

turned violent. Peasant groups began to be formed to resist with arms the attack of Razakars.

The GoI restrained for several months but as the negotiations and killings showed no signs of

ending, it had to send in the Indian army. in September 1948. Kashmir

1. 80% of the population was Muslim while 20% was Hindu. The king was a Hindu. He wanted to

stay independent. The stand of Indian leaders was clear that only people can decide on their

fate and they supported a plebiscite.  But Pakistan not only refused to accept the principle of

plebiscite but also tried to short circuit the decision by sending in armed tribals and forces in

Kashmir in October 1947. In panic, he appealed to India. 

2. Nehru (on the advise of Mountbatten) said he will only send army if Kashmir is integrated with

India. So on 26 October the maharaja signed the instrument of accession. Even though both

the maharaja and National Conference (led by Sheikh Abdullah) wanted a firm accession,

Nehru said he will get the instrument of accession ratified by holding a referendum once peace

and law had been restored in Kashmir. Indian troops went in and pushed back the invaders to

some extent. Then on advise of Mountbatten again, Nehru decided to submit the matter to the

arbitration of UN on 30 December 1947. 

3. In 1951, UN passed a resolution providing for a referendum under UN supervision after

Pakistan had withdrawn its troops from PoK. It has remained unimplemented since as Pakistan

has refused to withdraw its forces from PoK.

Junagarh

1. Majority population was Hindu in this case but the ruler was a Muslim. He wanted to remain

independent but when popular pressure began to grow, he declared accession to Pakistan

which Pakistan accepted. 

2. A mass revolt broke out and he fled to Pakistan. Indian leaders anyways stood for the

sovereignty of the people and not of the ruler. The Diwan of Junagarh asked the Indian

government to intervene and signed instrument of accession with India. A plebiscite was

organized in which an overwhelming majority voted for merger with India.

Full Integration of Former Princely States

1. This was even more difficult than the initial accession. Once again Patel showed great vigor in

completing the full scale integration within an year. Smaller states were either merged in the

neighboring provinces or were merged together to form 'centrally administered areas'. 5 new

unions were formed vis Patiala and East Punjab States Union (PEPSU), Madhya Bharat,

Rajasthan, Saurashtra and Travancore - Cochin. States of Hyderabad, J&K and Mysore were

allowed to remain in the original form.Step 1: Fast-track integration

1. The first step in this process, carried out between 1947 and 1949, was to merge the smaller states

that were not seen to be viable administrative units either into neighboring provinces, or with other

princely states to create a princely union. This policy was contentious, since it involved the

dissolution of the very states whose existence India had only recently guaranteed in the Instruments

of Accession. Patel and Menon emphasised that without integration, the economies of states would

collapse, and anarchy would arise if the princes were unable to provide democracy and govern

properly. They pointed out that many of the smaller states were very small and lacked resources to

sustain their economies and support their growing populations. Many also imposed tax rules and

other restrictions that impeded free trade, and which had to be dismantled in a united India. Such

mergers took place in many provinces and HP. 

2. The Merger Agreements required rulers to cede full power to the India. In return it gave privy purses,

protection of private property, personal privileges, dignities and titles. Succession was also

guaranteed according to custom. 

3. Although the Merger Agreements were principally intended for smaller, non-viable states, they were

also applied to a few larger states. Kutch, Tripura and Manipur, all of which lay along international

borders, were also asked to sign Merger Agreements, despite being larger states. Similarly Bhopal

and Bilaspur also had to go.

Step 2: Princely Union and Rajpramukhs

1. The bulk of the larger states, and some groups of small states, were integrated through a

different, four-step process. The first step in this process was to convince groups of large states

to combine to form a princely union through the execution by their rulers of Covenants of

Merger. Under the Covenants of Merger, all rulers lost their ruling powers, save one who

became the Rajpramukh of the new union. The other rulers were associated with two bodies—

the council of rulers, whose members were the rulers of salute states, and a presidium whose

members were elected by the rulers of non-salute states. In return for agreeing to the extinction

of their states as discrete entities, the rulers were given a privy purse and guarantees similar to

those provided under the Merger Agreements.

2. Through this process, Saurashtra, Madhya Bharat, PEPSU, Travancore - Cochin and

Rajasthan emerged. Only Kashmir, Mysore and Hyderabad were left now.

Step 3: Democratization1. These mergers did not meet the expectations of the Government of India so it suggested requiring

the rulers of states to take practical steps towards the establishment of popular government. The

States Department accepted this suggestion, and implemented it through a special covenant signed

by the rajpramukhs of the merged princely unions, binding them to act as constitutional

monarchs. This meant that their powers were de facto no different from those of the Governors of

the former British provinces, thus giving the people of their territories the same measure of

responsible government as the people of the rest of India. 

2. The result of this process was an assertion of paramountcy by the Government of India over the

states. While this contradicted the British statement that paramountcy would lapse on the transfer of

power, the Congress position had always been that independent India would inherit the position of

being the paramount power.

Step 4: Centralization and Constitutionalization

1. Democratization still left open one important distinction between the former princely states and the

former British provinces, namely, that since the princely states had signed limited Instruments of

Accession covering only three subjects, they were insulated from government policies in other

areas. So in May 1948, a meeting was held in Delhi between the Rajpramukhs of the princely unions

and the States Department, at the end of which the Rajpramukhs signed new Instruments of

Accession which gave the Government of India the power to pass laws in respect of all matters that

fell within the seventh schedule of the Government of India Act 1935. Subsequently, each of the

princely unions, as well as Mysore and Hyderabad, agreed to adopt the Constitution of India drafted

by the constituent assembly as the constitution of that state, thus ensuring that they were placed in

exactly the same legal position vis-à-vis the central government as the former British provinces. The

only exception was Kashmir, whose relationship with India continued to be governed by the original

Instrument of Accession, and the constitution produced by the state's Constituent Assembly.

2. The © classified the constituent units of India into three classes, which it termed Part A, B, and C

states. The former British provinces, together with the princely states that had been merged into

them, were the Part A states. The princely unions, plus Mysore and Hyderabad, were the Part B

states. The centrally administered areas, except the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, were the Part C

states. The only practical difference between the Part A states and the Part B states was that the

constitutional heads of the Part B states were the Rajpramukhs appointed under the terms of the

Covenants of Merger, rather than Governors appointed by the central government. Step 5: State Reorganization

1. The distinction between Part A and Part B states was only intended to last for a brief, transitional

period. In 1956, the States Reorganization Act reorganized the former British provinces and princely

states on the basis of language. Simultaneously, the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution

removed the distinction between Part A and Part B states, both of which were now treated only as

"states", with Part C states being renamed "union territories". 

2. The Rajpramukhs lost their authority, and were replaced as the constitutional heads of state by

Governors, who were appointed by the central government. Step 6: Other Colonial Territories

1. French:  At independence, the regions

of Pondicherry, Karikal, Yanam, Mahe and Chandernagore were still colonies of France. An

agreement between France and India in 1948 provided for an election in France's remaining

Indian possessions to choose their political future. A plebiscite held in Chandernagore in 1949

resulted in merger with India. In the other enclaves, however, the pro-French camp used the

administrative machinery to suppress the pro-merger groups. Popular discontent rose, and in

1954 demonstrations in Yanam and Mahe resulted in pro-merger groups assuming power. A

referendum in Pondicherry and Karikal in 1954 resulted in a vote in favor of merger. A treaty of

cession was signed in 1956, and following ratification by the French National Assembly in

1962, de jure control of the enclaves was also transferred.

2. Portugal:  On 15 August 1955, five thousand non-violent demonstrators marched against the

Portuguese at the border, and were met with gunfire. In 1960, the United Nations General

Assembly rejected Portugal's contention that its overseas possessions were

provinces. Although Nehru continued to favor a negotiated solution, the Portuguese

suppression of a revolt in Angola in 1961 radicalized Indian public opinion, and increased the

pressure on the Government of India to take military action. On 18 December 1961, following

the collapse of an American attempt to find a negotiated solution, the Indian Army entered

Portuguese India and defeated the Portuguese garrisons there. Goa was incorporated into

India as a centrally administered union territory and, in 1987, became a state. In 1954, an

uprising in Dadra and Nagar Haveli threw off Portuguese rule. The Portuguese attempted to

send forces from Daman to reoccupy the enclaves, but were prevented from doing so by Indian

troops. 

3. Sikkhim:  Historically, Sikkhim was a British dependency with a status similar to that of the other

princely states, and was therefore considered to be within the frontiers of India in the colonial period.

On independence, however, the Chogyal of Sikkhim resisted full integration into India. Given the

region's strategic importance to India, the Government of India signed first a Standstill Agreement

and then in 1950 a full treaty with the Chogyal of Sikkim which in effect made it a protectorate which

was no longer part of India. India had responsibility for defence, external affairs and

communications, and ultimate responsibility for law and order, but Sikkim was otherwise given full

internal autonomy. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Chogyal, supported by the

minority Bhutia  attempted to negotiate greater powers, particularly over external affairs. These

policies were opposed internally and in April 1973, an anti-Chogyal agitation broke out; the agitators

demanded the conduct of popular elections. Chogyal was reduced to the role of a constitutional

monarch, his opponents won an overwhelming victory, and a new Constitution was drafted providing

for Sikkim to be associated with the Republic of India. This resolution was endorsed by 97% of the

vote in a referendum held in 1975, following which the Indian Government amended the constitution

to admit Sikkim into India as its 22nd state. 

Integration: Critical Analysis

1. Ian Copland argues that the Congress leaders did not intend the settlement contained in the

Instruments of Accession to be permanent even when they were signed, and at all times privately

contemplated a complete integration of the sort that ensued between 1948 and 1950.  He points out

that the mergers and cession of powers to the Government of India between 1948 and 1950

contravened the terms of the Instruments of Accession, and were incompatible with the express

assurances of internal autonomy and preservation of the princely states which Mountbatten had

given the princes. 

2. Menon in his memoirs stated that the changes to the initial terms of accession were in every

instance freely consented to by the princes with no element of coercion. Copland disagrees, on the

basis that foreign diplomats at the time believed that the princes had been given no choice but to

sign, and that a few princes expressed their unhappiness with the arrangements. He also criticizes

Mountbatten's role, saying that while he stayed within the letter of the law, he was at least under a

moral obligation to do something for the princes when it became apparent that the Government of

India was going to alter the terms on which accession took place, and that he should never have lent

his support to the bargain given that it could not be guaranteed after independence.  One of the

reasons why the princes consented to the demise of their states was that they felt abandoned

by the British, and saw themselves as having little other option. 

3. Lumby takes the view that the princely states could not have survived as independent entities

after the transfer of power, and that their demise was inevitable. They therefore view successful

integration of all princely states into India as a triumph for the Government of India and Lord

Mountbatten, and as a tribute to the sagacity of the majority of princes, who jointly achieved in

a few months what the Empire had attempted, unsuccessfully, to do for over a century—unite

all of India under one rule.

4. In the context of the history of political integration in Northeast India, it is found that the integration

with the Indian union politically remained a serious issue. The mode of integration of the

Northeastern states has been sought through negotiations, promises, baits and force. Some areas

like Manipur and Naga Hills refused to merge with India and expressed desire for withdrawal from

the Union which resulted in secessionist demands. The late realization that such integrationist policy

was erroneous has led the government to concede autonomy demands of ethnic groups, which led

to creation of separate states. However the formation of new states had a cascading affect leading

to new demands from other smaller ethnic groups vying different levels of autonomy.

Other Internal ChallengesCommunalism

1. There was great danger that the wounds of partition may refuse to seal and the communal riots

may linger on promoting hatred in the society and leading to further violence and disintegration

of the nation. Communalism was the Indian version of fascism. Even many Congress leaders

came under its sway but thanks to the strength of the nationalist sentiments, the top leadership

remained committed to secularism and integration of the nation. It was on the grounds of

checking communalism that Nehru got the © amended and inserted 'reasonable restrictions' on

the fundamental right to freedom of speech.

2. After the killing of Gandhi, realizing that RSS was a spreading communalism and fascism in

India and was behind the assassination of Gandhi, Nehru got RSS banned. But Patel, in 1949,

got the ban revoked on the guarantee that RSS would refrain from any involvement in politics.

The Punjab Problem 

1. The Punjabi Suba agitation had different colours and complexions. Initially the agitation had ethnic

and language connotations, founded by a feeling of distrust over the Punjabi language, between the

Hindu and Sikh communities, but the same was given the shape of religious nationalism

subsequently which ultimately led to ripping the ground to a secessionist movement with insurgent

activities. 

2. The acceptance of the Hindi language as the mother tongue, vis-a-vis the local Punjabi, in the

sixties by the Hindus may have marked the beginning of the problem and was one of the major

reasons, which led to the division of Punjab in 1966. 

3. The distrust was further forged by the religious communalism of the seventies and by the insurgent

activities in the eighties, with the connivance of cross-border hostile forces supporting the demand

for separatism, leading to violent reprisal and counter-reprisals. 

Left Wing Extremism

1. CPI in 1948 proclaimed a beginning of a general revolution in India as it branded Nehru as an

agent of imperialist and feudal forces! And to this extent it launched violent movements in many

parts of the country. Nehru was appalled but he resisted banning CPI until it was impossible for

him to not to do so. Still he banned it only in Bengal and Madras where it was most active. 

2. He believed that the best way to combat the communists was to bring the fruits of development

to the people. As soon as the CPI gave up its programme of waging an armed struggle and

accept parliamentary process, Nehru saw to it that the ban was revoked everywhere.Rehabilitation of Refugees

1. This was a great destabilizing problem but was handled efficiently, specially in west, and by

1951 the refugees from west were amicably settled. But the task was more challenging in the

East. This was because while in the west most of the hindus and muslims had migrated in one

go, in the east, the inflow of hindus continued for years. Many Hindus in the east Pakistan had

stayed on but as the communal riots spread there, they were forced to migrate to W Bengal

and Assam. 

2. In the west most of the immigrants cold occupy the land and property left by the muslim

emigrants in Punjab, UP and Rajasthan. But in the east, this was not the case. 

3. Also due to linguistic affinity it was easier to resettle the immigrants in the west in Punjab, HP,

western UP, Delhi, Haryana and Rajasthan. But in the east, it was only possible to resettle

them in W Bengal and to some extent in Assam and Tripura.

Linguistic Reorganization of States 1. The biggest desire was to preserve the ethnic and political identity and not

to be swamped by linguistic or ethnic majorities.1. In 1953 Andhra Pradesh was created after the riots broke out following the  death by fasting for

this cause of Potti Sriramulu, a noted Andhra linguistic enthusiast. Subsequently, the

Government appointed the ‘States Reorganization Commission’ to examine and suggest a

rational solution for the reorganization of States, based on language. 

2. The Commission, after consultations and interactions with various groups of people, reported to

have found the public will in favour of linguistic reorganization. The rationale was that language

being the most faithful reflection of the culture of an ethnic group, ethno-lingual boundaries

would be considered the most stable and suitable arrangement for the effective working of

democratic entities and institutions. It was also perceived that the same would also have the

advantage of ease for people’s interaction with the government.

3. Linguistic division of States and reshaping of the political boundaries took place in the year

1956. The bi-lingual Bombay and Punjab were subsequently bifurcated to form unilingual

Maharastra and Gujarat, in the West, and Punjab and Haryana in the North, in 1960 and

1966 respectively. 

4. It allowed for accommodation of diversity within the larger framework of federal  unity and

without weakening the Nation’s integrity. In social terms, it removed a major source of discord,

and created homogenous political units which could be administered through a medium, the

local language, that the vast majority of the population understood. Anti-Hindi Movement 

1. The dispute was not one of national language since the view that one language should be the

symbol of national identity was rejected and out © adopted almost all the major different

languages as the national languages. The issue was of the official language since the official

work couldn't be carried out in so many languages. Only 2 candidates were available - £ and

Hindi. 

2. Even before the independence, the leadership of the INM had felt that £ can't continue as the

official language. As early as 1937, JLN while accepting that £ was the world language had

clearly stated that at best it can be pursued as a second optional language. Hindi had been

accepted by the nationalist leaders of non-Hindi belt as well since the overriding need at that

hour was to display unity and independence (in every field including culture and language).

Thus leaders like Tilak, SCB, Rajgopalachari, Gandhiji etc. were all votaries of Hindi. In its

sessions and political work too, INC used hindi and other regional languages. Thus in the 1928

Nehru report, it was laid down that 'Hindustani' as written in Devanagari or Urdu script would be

the common language of India and that £ may continue only for some time. The © accepted

this stand only replacing Hindustani by Hindi.

3. The choice between Devanagari and Urdu script was the first dilemma of the constituent

assembly. Both Gandhi and Nehru were strong advocates of Hindustani (in both Devanagari

and Urdu) but the question was settled by the partition (and as Pakistan claimed Urdu to be the

language of Muslims and Pakistan). In a vote held the votaries for Hindi in devanagari won

although by a razor thin majority.

4. The next question was what should be the time frame for replacing English with Hindi. This is

the issue which led to most serious divides between the Hindi and the non-Hindi areas. While

the proponents of Hindi wanted an immediate switchover, the non-Hindi speaking people

wanted a long (if not an indefinite) switchover time. Nehru wanted Hindi as the official language

eventually but wanted £ to continue in the transition time and that the transition should only be

gradual.

5. The © provided that Hindi in Devanagari script (with international numerals) will be the official

language of India. £ will continue as the official language till 1965 when it would be replaced by

Hindi. Until then Hindi will be introduced in a phased manner and it would be the duty of the

government to promote the spread of Hindi. The parliament will have the power to provide for

the use of £ for specified purposes even after 1965. The state legislatures could decide on the

state language though for all union-state communications, Hindi will be used. The hope was

that by 1965, Hindi proponents would be able to overcome its weaknesses, develop the

language and win over the confidence of non Hindi people. It was also hoped that because

Hindi will be the medium of instruction in education and universal education would anyways be

provided by 1960, Hindi will come to be accepted by all as the official language. 

6. But this never happened. Education never grew in India and Hindi proponents, instead of trying

to calm the anxieties of non Hindi people and win their confidence, began to look for

government imposition of Hindi. Also instead of simplifying and developing the language, they

made it too complex in the name of 'purification'. Comprehensive literature in Hindi was never

developed and by no means it was ready to be accepted as the official language of the union.7. It was launched pre-independence by DMK under Periyar

E.V.Ramaswamy Nayakar to agitate against the introduction of Hindi as a compulsory subject in the schools of the then Madras Presidency. It succeeded in preventing compulsory teaching of Hindi in the schools of the Presidency. 

8. The agitation of the post- independence period was conducted to ensure the continuation of English as an official language and to prevent Hindi from becoming the sole official language of the Republic. The Government responded with the constitution of the first Official Language Commission in 1955. The commission recommended a number of steps to eventually replace English with Hindi. But the report was not unanimous and had dissenting notes from non-Hindi speaking Members of the Commission from Tamil Nadu and West Bengal. 

9. The report was further reviewed by a parliamentary committee which recommended that Hindi should be made the primary official language with English as a subsidiary one. Both these reports were opposed by many non-Hindi groups. As the opposition grew stronger the government English would continue as the associate language for an indefinite period. 

10. However, as the deadline of 15 years  stipulated in the constitution for switching over to Hindi as primary official language approached, the government efforts to spread

Hindi’s official usage stepped up. But the Official Language Bill, 1959 was brought up for

continuation of English.

Factors Responsible for Promoting National Unity

1. Unified army, all india services etc. Unified economy, large scale planning, communication and

transport system etc. Steel plants, fertilizer plants, hydro electric dams, higher educational

institutions, Nehru's foreign policy etc. all became a symbol of national unity and development.

2. Commitment of the national leadership. Centralized tendencies in our ©. The commitment to

reduce social injustice also promoted unity.

3. The language policy followed was not that of suppression and imposition from top. But this

multiplicity was accepted and the system evolved to live with it without giving rise to persistent

conflicts.

Foreign PolicyPhase 1 (1880-1919)

1. The early nationalists used to oppose the aggressive use of Indian resources in military

operations outside India by the £ government. Thus they opposed the Afghan war in 1878-80,

Egypt expedition in 1882 to protect £ interests there. They opposed 1885 annexation of Burma,

1903 attack of Tibet and the forward policy followed by £ in NW of India supposedly to 'defend

India from Russian designs'.

2. They expressed solidarity with people fighting for independence and liberation elsewhere in the

world like Ireland, Turkey, Russia etc. 

3. They expressed pan-Asian consciousness. Thus Japan's rise was hailed earlier until it attacked

China, attack on Burma and China by £ was condemned. 

4. They clearly saw the role of foreign capital in expanding imperialism. Foreign capital went first

and soldiers later in order to 'protect the capital'.

5. In the war, though officially the nationalists supported £ effort there was little sympathy for £.

Phase 2 (1919 onwards)

1. INM grew more conscious of foreign developments and began to express opinion on almost

every major event happening worldwide. Indians continued to express solidarity with people

fighting for independence and against fascism. 

2. Indians opposed the Treaty of Sevres, the mandate system was rightly labeled as a cover for

imperialism, Congress favored Burma's independence from India and opposed an attack on

Afghanistan. Congress supported the revolution in China by Sun Yat-Sen. 

3. JLN traveled to Brussels in 1926-27 to attend Congress of Oppressed Peoples. He met many

leaders there but didn't meet Mussolini. Thus while criticizing colonialism, he made clear that

INM was no friend of fascism. He also condemned US imperialism over Latam which was

previously ignored by Indian nationalists. They extended support to Chezchoslovakia and

Spanish people. It was basically ideology based.

Relations with Pakistan

1. Even after the Kashmir complications, in January 1948, GoI decided to pay Pakistan Rs. 55 cr

as a part of the partition plan even though that money could be used against it in Kashmir. 

2. Pakistan also ridiculously laid claims on the property of the migrants who had fled to Pakistan

leaving their land and property in India. Such issues had to be resolved by negotiations.

3. Another source of discord between the two nations was the treatment of Hindus in east

Pakistan specially where they were subject to communal hatred and extermination. This led to

a steady inflow of refugees in India and worsening of situation. While this strengthened the calls

for a military intervention in east Pakistan, Nehru always resisted and tried to resolve the issue

by negotiations. He also took a clear stand against a similar prosecution of Muslims in some

areas of W Bengal. At the same time he always urged Pakistan to end the communal frenzy

and provide security to the religious minorities in east Pakistan. In April 1950, he was able to

sign a pact with Pakistan on the issue of protection of minorities (which was resented to by the

communal forces in India) but the problem continued despite the pact.

4. Another source of tension was the river waters of Indus and both countries signed a treaty to

share its water under the auspices of WB after India showed generosity.

Politics of Separation

MLBackground

1. By the middle of 19th century, Hindus had forged ahead due to awakening created by socio-

reform movements which were liberal and progressive. A middle class had emerged which had

modern ideas. On the other hands, the reform movements in the Muslim society were

backward looking. They emphasized on purity of Islam and were orthodox. 

2. Since Muslims formed the political elite before £, they were quite discontent with the £. So

participated in large numbers in 1857 revolt. So after the 1857 revolt, £ followed a politics of

discrimination against Muslims. As a combined result, Muslims were left behind in government

jobs and middle class professions.

3. Some Muslim intellectuals realized the causes and made attempts to befriend the £ and to

embrace western education. Many schools and colleges were opened.Phase 1: Secular interests linked to religion (1888-1906)

Nature & Character1. The dominance of Hindus and religious policies of £ created a sense that secular interests were

linked to religion and Muslims as a community shared common interests. Terms like "Muslim

interests" came up and issue of safeguarding it as well.

2. Once such a thing came up, £ fanned it by beginning to favor Muslims and encouraging liberal

communalists who claimed to champion Muslim interests. £ associated with MAO College @

Aligarh and encouraged Syed Ahmed Khan.

3. in 1885, INC was founded. £ attempted to gave it a Hindu color and won over Syed Ahmed

Khan to their side. He became a communalist now. In 1888, he setup United India Patriotic

Association to counter INC. In 1893, he setup MAO Defense Association to 'protect Muslim

interests'. In 1893 when Tilak began the ganpati festival, he found the Mohammedan Defence

Association.

4. In 1888, he even emphasized that Hindus and Muslims were 2 separate nations, separate

people with separate needs and aspirations. He introduced the idea that because of numerical

majority, Hindus will annihilate Muslims in any sort of representative government.

5. Essentially secular things were increasingly being given communal color (examples are

Wahabi, Faraizi, Arya Samaj, Urdu agitation) - often by vested interests like the landlords who

found it an effective way of retaining their influence. Thus Hindi became a language of Hindus

and Urdu became a language of Muslims, cow became a reason worth spilling blood for and

things like playing loud music within the audible range of a mosque became communal issues.

Involvement of political leaders from both communities gave the issues a political color as well.

An example is the political recruitment of Ganpati by TIlak in 1893.

6. The 1st muslim organization in bengal was the Mohammedan Association or Anjuman-i-Islami

in 1855 with the objective of 'protecting muslim interests' and 'professing loyalty' to £. Then

came Hunter's thesis in 1871 that the exclusion of muslims from the education and

administrative posts was mainly responsible for the popular appeal of the anti £ sentiment in

the community (the wahabi and the faraizi movements). Soon a close collaboration between

educated muslims and the maulavis developed and communalist ideas began to spread in rural

areas as well. Then came swadesi and until then not all muslims were separatists or loyalists,

but the movement soon put on the unmistakable stamp of otherness. The anti-partition

campaign began to appear as anti-muslim campaign to them. 

Syed Ahmad's Concept of Nationalism1. His idea of being a muslim was not opposed to being an Indian but he did not visualize India as

a nation state based on individual citizenship. Instead it was to be a lose federation of

communities or qaums and in this federation of qaums the Muslims should get preferential

treatment from the virtue of being the past rulers. 

Factors Responsible

1. Rise of modern politics:  Earlier people's involvement in politics was negligible. But the modern

politics was people based and public opinion mattered. So people had to be mobilized.

Naturally they had to be organized along some lines. Caste, religion, region etc. formed natural

organizing lines and became political identities. Even some of the nationalists used symbols of

Hinduism to rally people and thus made it easier for the communalists to point fingers. 

2. Colonial government:  It always stroked communalism to divide Indian people and deny

existence of India. So while normally such political identities give way to modern identities

based on economic lines, this never happened in India because £ supported communal

division. They supported communal forces, communal press and extended concessions to

them. They favored the concept of communal electorates. The colonial government always

tried to project Muslims as a homogenous community. The Indian census made religion as the

fundamental category for ordering and classifying demographic and developmental data. The

breakup of education and occupation statistics gave an objective expression to the vague

communal thoughts.

3. Rise of middle class:  Communalism is a middle class phenomenon, fanned by them, to protect

their interest. Reservations in legislatures and jobs sound appealing to all though they benefit

mainly the middle class. Colonial rule here played an important role again because as a result

of destruction of industries, the middle class had to rely mainly on government jobs. 

4. Social differences:  At the same time the structure of Indian society too made things easier for

communalists. In entire areas, certain classes or religious communities dominated the

resources and power. So it was easier for communalists to point finger and rally people behind

them. So tenant-landlord struggles were repeatedly given religious color. It was also easier to

rally people in the name of religion as religion had always played an important role in Indian

society.

5. Intensification of rivalry:  Once communal tendencies evolved in one group, other groups' radical

elements too gained popularity by pointing fingers. This only worsened the situation. Revivalist

movements in both communities fueled it. The Wahabi and Faraizi movements rejected the

earlier syncretism and sought to Islamize the muslim culture by purging customs of un-Islamic

origin. Thus communalism began to percolate among the masses as well.

Phase 2: Interests are divergent (1906-1937)

Nature & Character1. ML was founded in 1906 @ Dhaka. Its members were aristocratic elements and ML truly

represented their interests in the name of representing 'Muslim interests'. It began with the

demand of communal electorates for Muslims. While earlier the jagirdari elements had

managed to keep the ulamas distant from the center stage of politics, now the Aligarh school

ulammas came to be directly involved in central politics.

2. Though from 1912-1924 ML purged its jagirdari elements and moved towards Congress, its

nationalism was flawed in the sense it was not fully secular. Protecting Muslim interests

remained the core and nationalism was taken too because it was though Muslim interests could

be better served via the nationalist cause. Instead of fighting £ for political and economic

reasons, they fought them on question of Caliph and holy places. They viewed the Balkan and

the Tripoli wars as a conspiracy of the west to weaken the muslim turks. This was a step back

because it introduced the tendency of looking @ purely politico-economic questions from

religious viewpoint.

3. Congress too failed to check communalism at this stage because its policy was flawed. It

followed a policy of negotiating with Muslim communal leaders first in 1916 and then in 1919-20

instead of expanding its base among Muslims. This had many negative effects - (a) It gave

legitimacy to Muslim communal leaders' claims of 'representing Muslims'. (b) It made life tough

for Muslim leaders inside Congress as they lost the ground of their existence to the communal

leaders. (c) It accepted the notion that there were things such as 'Muslim interests' and 'Hindu

interests'.

4. Hindu communalism also began to grow and it was used as a means of justification by Muslim

communalism. Chicken and egg problem. Both used each other to justify that the interests of

two communities were divergent. Hindu Mahasabha was founded in 1915 and RSS in 1925.

There was a 'crisis of unity' after the NCM.1. Communal riots broke out after the end of the khilafat and the NCM. Issues like cow and music

before the mosque became the issues of the riots. The 1926 elections were fought openly on

communal issues. There was not a single muslim congress candidate in Bengal. Elsewhere all

congress muslim candidates lost. The majority of elected congressmen were pro hindu

sympathizers. The uncomfortable association of the local congress leaders with hindu

mahasabha also complicated the situation. Naturally in such situation communal institutions of

both communities gained following. Even Dr. Kitchlew for whom Jalliawalah happened became

a hard core communalist. Shaukat Ali in 1929 observed that congress had become a hindu

organization.

2. Within ML as well there were issues between the supporters of communal electorates and the

opposers. 

Additional factors

1. Swadesi & Boycott Movements:  These were immensely powerful movements and to counter

this, government had to form ML and encourage separatist elements.

2. Congress' Policy:  It was bound to fail as - (a) By negotiating with communal leaders, Congress

gave them political space and legitimacy. (b) It accepted notions of 'communal interests'. (c) It

made life difficult for secular Muslim leaders. (d) When one set of demands were fulfilled, other

more radical communal demands came up - either from new leaders or from the same ones.

This led to progressively increasing communalism and even the liberal communalists were

forced to become radical to save their careers. 

Phase 3: Interests are conflicting and incompatible (1937 onwards)

Nature & Character1. Idea of a separate state was propounded in 1916 by Abdul Sattar while participating in 2nd

Comintern @ Moscow. In 1924, Lala Lajpat Rai echoed separate state theory. In 1930, @

Allahabad session of ML, Mohd. Iqbal proposed a separate state in NW parts of the country. In

1933, Rahmat Ali proposed Pakistan. It was @ Karachi meeting of the Sind branch of ML

presided over by Jinnah that a resolution was passed which mentioned the need for 'political

self determination of the 2 nations' and asked ML to think of appropriate measures to realize it.

This was the 1st official declaration of the 2 nation theory by ML. Some commies however

argued that this was not separation yet  and it merely signified muslims becoming a 'nation'

from a 'minority' and thus any © development in India must take consent of the muslim nation

as well.

2. But still none of the important leaders of ML supported the 2 nation theory including Jinnah.

Only after ML lost the 1937 elections and faced an existential threat that it began to cry 'Islam in

danger' and 'Pakistan'.

3. The 1937 elections were fought by ML largely on a liberal agenda which resembled INC's. On

the other hand the Krishak Praja Party of Fazlul Haq in Bengal fought the election on class

issues by rallying lower class muslims and low caste hindu peasants. In Punjab Sikandar Hayat

too formed a coalition of Hindu and Muslim upper peasant elements and won. ML had no issue

left since its demand for communal electorates had been fulfilled. So it merely wanted more

reservations and to protect 'Muslim interests'. In the elections, it fared badly. It got only 4.4% of

the Muslim votes and only 110/485 seats reserved for Muslims. Congress ditched ML.

4. After the defeat and facing existential threat, it took resort to extremism. It came up with a

series of fabricated reports telling tales of oppressions of Muslims in INC ruled states and took

resort to communal riots. Of course, policy of INC to tackle communalism also has to be

blamed since it never made a serious effort to reach out to Muslim masses. It always followed a

policy of negotiating with communal Muslim leaders. This not only gave these leaders

legitimacy but also discouraged Muslim leaders inside Congress.

5. Communalism now became increasingly radical, mass based and violent. The reactionary

elements in the society like zamindars increasingly turned to communalism for the defense of

their interests. 

Additional Factors1. Existential threat to reactionary elements:  The CDM and Congress governments had

considerably strengthened INM and now the zamindars couldn't justify defending their interests

plainly. So they took recourse to communalism to protect their interests.

2. Exhaustion of other sources of division:  Other division lines like caste, region, leftist-rightist

ideology had been defeated by the INM. So £ took gave their full support to communalism.

3. Nature of communalism itself and Congress' mistakes:  Appeasement of communalism leads to

its radicalization inevitably. By the Communal Award of 1932 and GoI Act of 1935 almost all

major demands of communalists had been accepted. So they resorted to something more

radical to save their careers. Congress was finally realizing its mistake and pushing out

communalists and also launching a mass contact program among Muslims under JLN but it

was already too late.

Logic of communalism - Jinnah a case studyNationalist --> Communal Nationalist --> Liberal Communalist --> Radical Communalist.

1. Jinnah was one of the most secular Muslim leaders earlier on. His first step towards

communalism was taken  perhaps unintentionally when he entered legislature on a Muslim

electorate seat. Then in 1913 he joined Muslim league and became a communal nationalist. He

still opposed communal electorates but increasingly spoke on behalf of 'Muslim interests'.

2. In 1919-20 when Congress took a turn towards mass movements, liberals like Jinnah faced the

threat of political end. So he turned to communal politics and became a liberal communalist. He

revived ML in 1924. He raised demands on 'protecting Muslim interests' and the strategy

worked well until CDM. 

3. In this phase he tried to develop Muslims into vote banks i.e. they should organize themselves

as one unit and press for their demands @ all forums. Gradually he kept on surrendering to

more radical demands. By 1937 elections, all his demands were fulfilled and he fought on a

liberal ideology. 

4. Facing existential threat after the elections, he unleashed Pakistan. In Hindus, communal

leaders like Madan Mohan Malviya retired from active politics after 1937 but their place was

taken over by fascist communalists like Gowalikar. 

5. Congress leaders couldn't have negotiated with him because he insisted that Congress

declared itself a Hindu organization.

Hindu Mahasabha1. In 1909, Punjab Hindu Sabha was founded and its leaders focused their anger on Congress for

appeasing Muslims and sacrificing 'Hindu interests'.

2. In 1915, HM was founded under the leadership of Maharaja of Kasimbazar.

3. By 1937, its place was taken over by RSS and they evens supported fascist Germany and Italy.

Independence 

Post-War Scenario in India

1. £ legitimacy was gone. When the leaders came out of the jail they expected to find demoralized

people. But they found jubilated masses. Freedom was in the air and everybody could sense it.

2. Labor party had come to power in £. It wanted to resolve the issue at the earliest so ban on

Congress was revoked, elections were held and Congress was invited for the talks. The most

significant part of the elections was that it mobilized people against £ - the elections were to

prove end of £ legitimacy in India. Nationalist issues were @ the forefront in the campaigning.

Main issues were reopening cases of repressions during QIM and enquiries, INA trials.

Why there was a dissent in pillars of £ rule - bureaucracy, police and military

1. QIM had completely undermined the £ legitimacy. Post war international scenario, £

government and strength of nationalist movement had convinced days of £ rule in India were

limited and power would go in the hands of Congress. So bureaucracy chose to support their

new masters.

2. The elections of 1945 were fought on the issues of reopening cases of official excesses during

QIM! Nothing can be worse for the morale of bureaucracy. The government failed to check

such speeches of enquiries.

3. INA trials brought out the sympathies of military with INA men in open. Military personnel and

bureaucrats openly took part in the meetings in support of INA men and even donated.

Debate: Why did £ finally quit? Why did Congress accept partition?

(a) Colonial version

1. It was fulfillment of long term £ promise of granting India self-government.

2. Partition was unfortunate and happened because the 2 communities failed to arrive at any

mutually acceptable conclusion on how to transfer power.

(b) Communist version

1. £ left India because of the uprisings and radical action in 1945-46.

2. Bourgeoisie Congress frightened of a mass uprising struck a deal with £ and agreed to partition

to grab power quickly.

(c) Nationalist version

1. Since the beginning Congress had a 2 fold task - (a) to mobilize various communities against

the colonial  rule and to exert pressure on £. (b) to unite all communities sufficiently into a

nation. While it succeeded in the first one and united them sufficiently to exert pressure on £,

they failed in the latter task and couldn't weld them into a nation. 

2. Prove that the reforms of 1909, 1919, 1935 were not a means of delegation of power to Indians

with the objective of self government but was to maintain the essentials of £ rule in India. Even

in 1950s the £ were thinking of means to consolidate their hold over other colonies in Africa and

Asia.

3. The growing pitch of nationalism and defiant mood in the country had made £ rule almost

impossible by the end. Even the strongholds of £ rule - the loyalists, the bureaucracy and the

military were flinching. The beliefs that £ were mai baaps of India and they were invincible were

gone.

4. £ had been weakened considerably and the cold war international politics couldn't give them a

chance to continue their rule.

5. £ were losing the economic control of India. From 30s, London had little control over the

economic policies of GoI, protective tariffs had been imposed, India became a creditor from a

debtor to £ (£ owed India £1.3 bio now), £ had to pay for the use of Indian army now, £ empire

in other parts of the world was shaky so strategic defence argument also didn't work.  India was no longer her imperial asset, rather had become a source of weakness. And this situation arose

due to strength of the nationalist movement and not by any £ designs. Even though Labor party

had Indian independence on its manifesto since 1935, after coming to the power they turned

out to be remarkably unradical in their approach. But India by now was beyond manageable for

£.

6. £ strategy was that of force and conciliation i.e. carrot and stick. After Cripps mission and Quit

India, there was no room for further reforms and only thing they could negotiate was on how to

transfer the power. A policy of suppression couldn't have been carried on for perpetuity.

7. Congress accepted partition because it had failed and had to accept what people wanted. The

interim government had failed. Direct Action and communal riots could be countered only by an

early transfer of full power. Also the balkanization of the country had to be prevented. Gandhiji

in his prayer meeting said, "you ask me why I accepted partition. I accepted it because you

wanted it."Whatever pre war tendencies may have existed, the pattern of post war decolonialisation was impacted by the war.

1. The QIM and its brutal repression ruptured the relationship between the £ and the people and

lay hollow their claim of being mai baaps. The Bengal famine, the war time food security, INA

question had eroded the moral legitimacy of the Raj. 

2. Then there were international realities of cold war. Also £ were losing the economic control of

India.

India response to British rule

Revolt of 1857The Indian Rebellion of 1857 was not one rebellion, it was many.

1. Colonial historians have emphasized that the various players in the revolt had their own

grievances and shared nothing in common except perhaps a suspicion of the £ for allegedly

destroying their religion.It was primarily a mutiny, the civilian unrest being a secondary phenomenon which happened as the unruly elements took advantage of the breakdown of law and order.

Perhaps the only common trait that pervaded all the layers of the society was a suspicion of £ rule, allegedly threatening their religion.

There is a widespread agreement that it was something more than a sepoy mutiny, but something less than a national revolt.

1. It was not national because the popular character of the revolt was limited to 'Upper' India alone

and the regions and groups which had benefitted from the £ raj remained loyal as they

had material interests in the new order, and often a deep, ideological commitment to the new ideas. The Punjabi princes hated the Hindustani soldiers and shuddered at the thought of the

resurrection of the Mughal empire. On the other hand those who had rebelled had various

motives which were not always connected to any specific grievance against £. 

2. This so called 'agreement' has been widely questioned in recent years. It can hardly be denied

that there was no concept of Indian nation in the modern sense among the rebels of 1857.

Peasant actions too were local affairs. Yet unlike the previous revolts there was now a greater

interconnection across the territories and rebels from one area frequently tried to help those in

the other. The common distaste for £ was in no way limited to merely an alleged attempt to

destroying their religion, it manifested in every sphere of their lives. All of them wanted to go

back to the pre-colonial state which was that of a decentralized Mughal empire. Thus if Laxmi

bai was fighting for Jhansi it can't be said that her cause was aloof from that of Nana Saheb.

Both of them had the same aim. Similarly the aim of the taluqdars, the peasants etc. all

coincided with restoration.

This loyalty, it may be true, springs nearer from the head than from the heart.1. This is in reference to the loyalty of the Bengali intelligentsia.

Was it an elitist revolt?1. Some historians think that during the revolt the feudal elements were the decision makers and

much of the revolt was determined and shaped by them for it was only they who could give the

direction to the revolt (being the natural leaders of the people).

2. But this position obviously is incorrect and trivializes the role of the masses. So far as the

feudal elements are concerned, in many cases, they were reluctant to give leadership (Bahadur

Shah, Nana Saheb, Laxmi Bai) and had to be pressurized. Even when they gave leadership as

in the case of Bahadur Shah the actual operations were planned and carried out by a military

council comprising the soldiers as well. In many cases these feudal lords were the first ones to

compromise and the revolt went on even after that.

3. Similarly in case of taluqdars, even though they were the leaders invariably, many of them were

turncoats or never supported. The peasants had to force them in many cases to provide

leadership (because this was the state system back then, there was no concept of ordinary

people providing leadership). 

4. Above all the main initiatives came from sepoys. Almost everywhere rebel action was preceded

by panchayats or open gatherings of the rebels.

The annexation of Oudh shook the loyalty of these sepoys, as it was for them an ultimate proof of untrustworthiness of the £.

1. Mention the caste policies of £ followed wrt the army. Mention the economic exploitation. 

Bound by ties of kinship and feudal loyalty, the villagers were happy to acknowledge the claims of their lords and joined hands against their common enemy, the £.

1. The £ in their settlement in Oudh and NW provinces had disregarded all the traditional rights of

the taluqdars as they made settlements with the actual occupiers of the land or the village

bodies. It was hoped that the move would win the loyalty of the peasants and get rid of the

unwanted and unproductive intermediaries. This left the taluqdars no better than ordinary

tenants. So they had a natural cause to revolt.

2. The peasants joined the rebellion because they too were hit hard by the high revenue demands

of the company. The ownership rights were of no avail precisely due to this reason and they too

had their own cause to fight the £ and not just out of sense of loyalty to their erstwhile 'lords'.

Individual Episodes

1. Lucknow Pact:  It was issued by rebels in Lucknow underlying the reasons for rebelling - £ had

endangered their religion, lives and property.

2. Bakth Khan:  He fought in Rai Barelli and then took his forces to Delhi where he was appointed

commander-in-chief of the rebel forces.

3. Tantia Tope:  He was betrayed by a zamindar friend Man Singh @ Narwar and hanged in April

1858 in Shivpuri.

4. Maulvi Ahmedullah:  He commanded rebel forces in Faizabad.

5. Rajputana:  Man Singh of Jodhpur & Swarup Singh of Udaipur participated in it.

Nature & Character 

1. Unplanned vs Planned Controversy:  Some historians have put forth the view that the revolt was

planned in London in 1856 between the advisors to Nana Sahib and Hazrat Mahal. They also

point out that its quick spread, lotus flowers and chapatti codes prove its planned character. But

in reality, the £ made every effort to prove the conspiracy theory so that Bahadur Shah Zaffer

could be charged for sedition and killed so as to devoid the only rally point of the Indians. But

they couldn't even prove these in £ courts. Bahadur shah himself was surprised and accepted

the leadership after lot of persuasion.

2. Mutiny vs Popular Revolt Controversy:  In reality, it began as a mutiny but turned into a popular

revolt. This is evident from the participating masses as well as those who were persecuted later

on. 

3. Reactionary:  They wanted to turn the clock back and go back to pre-£ setup.

4. Anti-colonial, anti-£.

5. First of its kind:  It wasn't the first revolt, but it was first of its kind. The earlier revolts were

localized revolts but this one was big - in spread as well as social composition. In terms of

challenge posed, £ rule ceased to exist for some time. In terms of repression, it was

unprecedented as well.

6. Though the concept of nation was absent and leaders lacked the clear sense and were fighting

for personal gains, some actions show that a vague sense of belonging was there. It was not

merely parochial and personal but a greater cause was there as well.

Spread 

1. Rohillakhand, Doab, Oudh, Allahbad, Bihar, Rajasthan were the maximum affected areas. The

mutiny mainly affected the Bengal army, the Madras and the Bombay regiments remained

quiet, while the Punjabi and the Gurkha regiments actually helped to suppress the revolt.  The

maximum number of Indian sepoys were in Bengal regiment and if we look at overall numbers,

~ 50% of the Indian sepoys had revolted. 

2. The £ presence in the Bengal army was also minimal. It also came from the high caste

background and most of them were recruited from the peasant families of Oudh.

Causes of Failure

1. Reactionary attitude:  This was the reason it always remained weak. People with personal

grudge fought. Intelligentsia stayed away.

2. Lack of awakening:  Thats why people in other parts of the country didn't participate. Even in

revolt areas, not everybody supported it. Until then the state system was people have nothing

to do with politics or state except for paying taxes. People were tied with local loyalties.

3. Violent character:  So it could never have been a mass phenomenon. 

4. £ won as they had committed unlimited amount of resources to the cause while rebels had

limited resources only. 

5. Rebels showed a remarkable centripetal impulse to congregate at Delhi which prevented the

rebellion from spreading as much as it could. The extremely localized nature of the rebellion

helped £ in quelling it with ease.

Was 1858 a great divide?

What is more important, the earlier reformist zeal of a self-confident Victorian liberalism now evidently took a back seat, as many believed now that Indians were beyond reform.

Politics1. Company vs £ crown.

2. Policy of territorial expansion abandoned.

3. Before 1858, the trend was centralization. By Charter Act of 1833, the legislative powers of the

4. provinces were taken away and vested in Bengal. After 1858, the trend was decentralization

albeit a slow one.

5. £ policy towards the native states changed from subordinated isolation to subordinated union. 

Military1. Number of € soldiers increased, key posts reserved, caste and regional divisions in army,

martial and non-martial races. 

Economy 

1. Policy of direct and open exploitation gave way to indirect and silent economic exploitation.

Earlier one way free trade policy was followed; now finance capitalism was followed and

amount of home charges was increased substantially. 

2. Policy towards landlords changed from being anti to friends. 

Social 1. The social policy was changed from liberal and progressive to regressive. 

2. Racial discrimination increased further due to the fight. 

Rise of Indian NationalismFactors Responsible

+ve Impact of £ Rule1. Political and administrative unity. Uniform laws.

2. Modern press, railways, post.

3. Modern education and ideals.

4. Emergence of educated middle class. 

-ve Impact of  £ Rule 

1. Isolation of Indian villages was broken. What happened in one country began to affect others.

2. People saw their problems had same root.

3. The unpopular actions like Vernacular Press Act of 1778, Ilbert Bill controversy ( the effeminate babu was not fit to preside over the trial of a manly £ not could he be expected to honor the dignity of white women as they did not respect women in their own household), Lex Loci Act

(which gave christian converts the right to inherit their ancestral property), imposition of income

tax in 1860 and raising its rate subsequently, Indian Council Act 1861, government proposal to

cut back on funding of higher education in Bengal (and instead to route the funds into

elementary education - mai baap politics), reducing the maximum age for civil services exam

from 21 to 19 and refusing to conduct a simultaneous exam in india, Arms Act of 1878 (which

introduced a licensing system but excluded the Eurasians and Europeans from the need of any

license), Inland Emigration Act (which condemned the plantation workers to serfdom) worked to

bring out the true nature of £ rule in India and also helped in rallying Indians. 

Socio-Cultural Reform Movements1. Highlighted the commonalities in Indian culture and worked to eliminate the divisive forces.

2. They were egalitarian, humanist, rationalist, modern.

3. Nationalist historians instilled sense of pride. 

Project Revival

The purpose of the social reform movements in 19th century was to 'purify' and 'rediscover' an Indian civilization that would be conformant with the European ideals of rationalism, empiricism, monotheism and individualism. Thus the movement was meant to fashion a 'modern' national culture that is nevertheless not Western.

1. The reformers, by a re-interpretion, tried to show that the Indian culture was not inferior in any

way to the £ culture and in fact on one count vis spiritualism even surpassed it. This sense of

spiritual essence of the Indian society provided the ideological foundation of the modern Indian

nationalism.

The modern revivalistic project created an identity that was inclusive as well as exclusive at the same time.

1. However this revivalistic project had its own drawbacks like uncritically accepting all practices

of the past, bypassing the long Muslim rule, presenting the golden and the dark ages etc.

Reform vs Revival1. The reform movements in which a number of moderates too were involved attempted to

change Hindu institutions and social customs to bring it in conformity with the post

enlightenment western ideas. Thus a National Social Conference was setup in 1887 as an

adjunct body to congress. These movements were thus inspired by the western ideals as well

as represented a response to the western critique of hindu civilization and the westernizing

forces. 

2. It was this second aspect of the reform movements which led to the revivalist project while the

former aspect was made secondary to the second.

Nationalism and reformism seemed to be contradictory ideas.1. To many Indians the relentless western critique of the hindu civilization and the growing

pressure (with state patronage) of the westernizing forces meant a surrender to the colonial

rule (as they viewed it as being sponsored  by the colonial rule). Hinduism became an identity,

a symbol of sovereignty and since the reform movements were anchored in the western ideals

and criticized hindu practices they were viewed with suspicion by a section of nationalists. 

2. This led to the growth of anti-reformism based on a sense of pride on everything Hindu (and

thus also sanctioned the theory of a glorious hindu past marked by a degeneration under

muslims and threatened by £). And this revivalism thus acquired a strong political overtone (as

it became a weapon to resist colonial ideology). 

The educated middle class in the 19th century often found the domain of reason to be oppressive, as it implied the historical necessity of the 'civilizing' colonial rule.

1. Mention the role of reform movements, how their inspiration was drawn from £ ideals, and how

their activities sought to change hinduism. But the same social reforms were also being

sponsored by £ and thus the reformist movements came to be associated as westernizing

force. Thus began the revivalist reaction.

2. This reaction sought to legitimize any and every defence of Hindu traditions. They began to

invent precedents in ancient India for every modern scientific discovery of the west. The whole

propaganda thus took an active form. This was accompanied by works in literature and other

arts (although more sophisticated sometime as those of Bankim Chandra Chatterjee who wrote

Anand Math, portrayed krishna as the modern politician and a nation builder, invented the icon

of mother goddess for the nation and wrote Bande Mataram). Behramji Malabari in 1884 in

Maharashtra wrote a 'note' on child marriage leading to enforced widowhood which led to a

countrywide debate on the issue. Rukhma Bai a 22 year old widow was taken to Bombay high

court by her husband because she refused to recognize his conjugal rights out of a child

marriage. In this he was supported by the hindu revivalists even though reformers like Malabari

tried to defend Rukhma Bai. The hindu revivalists also opposed the Age of Consent Act, 1891

for it was being imposed by a colonial government while incidentally they had no hesitation in

taking resource to the same colonial government to impose their viewpoint in the Rukhma Bai

case.

3. In these circumstances (growing revivalist tendencies) Ramkrishna Paramhansa and

Vivekananda captured the imagination of the nationalist masses.

While Brahmo Samaj's appeal was to intellect, that of Ramkrishna was to the mind and emotions.1. Unlike the brahmo samajists, he was a man who was a saint and was completely untouched by

any westernizing influence. He offered simplistic interpretations of Hinduism, often based in the

ancient Indian practice of bhakti which had the same effect of conforming to some of the

reformist ideals and doing so without succumbing to any of the westernizing forces. Thus

casteism should not be followed because in conformance with the ancient Indian practice of

bhakti all are children of god and he will not make any such distinction among his bhaktas and

not because such a thing was inhumane as per the post enlightenment thinking of the west.

Thus the humanism ideal of enlightenment was incorporated by Ramkrishna as 'the best way to

serve god is to serve his poor children'.

2. His teachings also contained an open rejection of the values imposed by the western education

and the westernized life and jobs Thus he became immensely popular with the middle class

western educated bengalees as his teachings conformed with their ideals and yet were based

on a completely indigenous interpretation which in no way undermined the prestige of their

culture. 

To describe Ramkrishna as a revivalist is to ignore the 'universalistic' aspects of his teachings.1. He was not exactly a revivalist for he did include a form of assimilation of religious ideas. He

thus argued that there are various ways to achieve god but one must stick to his own path. He

argued that assimilation was the essence of Hinduism. He advocated social service and didn't

remain confined to the elites and in fact criticized the other social movements for being too

elitist.

Hindu revivalist project selectively retained the teachings of Vivekananda and Ramkrishna.1. His evocation of Hindu glory mixed with patriotism and restoration of Hindu masculinity had a

tremendous influence on the popular mind. While this aspect of his teachings was highlighted,

his call to change some of the evil hindu practices was ignored. His philanthropic activities were

never emulated and his criticism of brahmanical and gender oppression was scarcely ever

taken seriously.

The term revivalism itself remained problematic as it did not mean resurrecting an old forgotten past, but reconstituting the past in the service of the present.

1. Many of the practices being 'revived' were actually already being practiced. Many others were

simply conveniently forgotten. An example is Ramkrishna's teachings.

Singh Sabha Movement1. It was a sikh revivalist movement as it sought to revive the 'glory of the 17th and 18th century'

Sikh. It spread due to the emergence of an elite sikh class and also a sense of exclusion of

sikhs from education and administrative posts. One of its aim was to restore the control of the

holy places. 

The colonial state, therefore could confidently claim itself to be the real champion of the interests of the masses.

1. Between 1892 and 1909, about 20% of the delegates attending congress sessions were

landlords, 40% were lawyers and 15% were traders. Among the lawyers and traders as well

many were related to landlord families or had landed interests. The congress could therefore

never take a coherent logical stand on peasant question. They demanded extension of PS in

the interest of zamindars, opposed a survey on measuring the extent of land holdings and their

values in 1893-94 which could have protected the peasants from the manipulations of the

zamindars, its leaders opposed the Bengal Tenancy Act 1885. 

2. The representation of the pro commercial classes also prevented congress from addressing the

worker question. Thus they opposed the Factory Acts of 1881 and 1891, Mining Bill and other

labor reforms. It was the pro landlord and pro bourgeoisie policies of the congress that allowed the colonial government to project itself as the real protector of the poor.

3. Further they were high caste hindu leaders and couldn't overcome their social conservatism

while the £ government on the recommendation of the Indian Education Commission,1882

even set aside special funds for the education of the backward classes.  It were the colonial

education, christian missionary philanthropy and their own initiative which inspired their

awakening and guided it into an anti-brahman movement and not anti-£ (it may be noted that

even now the nationalists did nothing to enlist their support and it had to wait until the arrival of

the mahatma). They looked at the emerging nationalist movement as a conspiracy to establish Brahmanic hegemony over the new institutions and viewed the colonial government as their patron and liberator. By trying to portray Hinduism as a religion of a book, they also tended to

ignore the numerous folk cultures and other cultures.

4. Moreover they alienated the Muslims in their project revival and in their failure to criticize the

cow riots. After the 1891 Nagpur session of congress, the Gaurakshini samiti held its meeting

within the congress pavilion and was attended by a large number of congress leaders and thus

only increasing muslim misgivings. Then they also opposed the Age of Consent Act, 1891. In

their agitation also they never tried to enlist the support of the masses.

Thus the nationalism, which grew in strength in the late 19th century, was beset with contradictions from the very beginning.Politics of Associations

1. Earlier Raja RM Roy had carried out a modest © agitation for such demands as separation of

powers, trial by jury, indianization of services and freedom of press. 1st political body to be

found was Bengal Bhasa Prakashika Sabha in 1836. In 1838 Zamindar Association was formed

which was the first example of a constitutional lobbying group. In 1841 Desh-hitashini sabha

was founded which promoted the ideas of Young Bengal movement. Gopal Harideshmukh was

first to plead swadesi, Bhaskar Pandurang Tarkhadkar was first to write militant criticism of

colonial rule. 

2. A series of associations had been founded. But these were too narrow in their thought and

objectives and had outlived their utility. For example, the £ Indian Association of Bengal had

increasingly associated itself with zamindars. Unlike its predecessor Landholders' Society

which had many non official £-Indians in it, the £ Indian Association had Indian members only.

It was created on the eve of the renewal of the charter of the company to send petitions to the £

parliament to express the demands of the Indian subjects. It initially tried to coordinate the

efforts of the other presidencies as well but failed (mainly ego clashes). They demanded

greater participation in the administration, more efficient administration, protested against

legislations unresponsive to the feelings of the people, high taxation, salt and opium

monopolies and neglect of education and public works. Obviously £ parliament paid no heed.

3. On the failure of the £ Indian Association to create a national level representation, the Bombay

Association (D Nairoji, Fardoonji) and Madras Native Association came up but they too had

become reactionary. Only the Poona Sarvjanik Sabha continued as before. But they had

created a basic level of awakening in the country. So need was there for a more radical and

national level organization.  

4. Thus the Indian Association was founded in 1876 by SN Bannerjea and Anand Mohan Bose

which was free from the landed plutocracy and represented the middle class. IN the same year

the Bombay Association was given a new life when Dadabhai Nairoji and Ferdunji joined it but

the Poona Sarvajanik Sabha remained the main organization. In 1884 Madras Mahajan Sabha

was founded by S Iyer, PA Charlu and C Raghavchari. In 1885 Bombay Presidency

Association was found by PS Mehta, B Tyabji. These new associations demanded separation

of power, indianization of legislative council (50% elected representation from local bodies,

chambers of commerce, universities etc.) and bureaucracy, 2 Indian members in the GG's

executive council, reduction of military expenditure and home charges, extension of PS to other

parts of India (in the support of zamindar group). Where they differed from the old politics

(zamindar associations) was that they were demanding a share in running their own country.

The older ways survived in various forms.1. Despite the founding of the new associations which were led by middle class intellectuals, the

older lobby of landlords survived in the form of dals which were dominated by absentee

landlords. They presided over an informal but effective social network of the landed gentry

across Bengal and took position in support of or in opposition to many public issues depending

upon their interests. In united provinces too the older forces were channeled by the caste and

communal associations.

2. Moreover the new middle class too had land connections of its own it was only in Bombay that

an industrialist class could come up. This is revealed in their continuous raising of zamindari

interests and opposition to the Bengal Tenancy Bill, 1885.

Congress  

Safety Valve Hypothesis 

1. The theory was put forward by Lala Lajpat Rai in 1916. Before him WC Bonnerjee had put

forward a similar view that 'Congress was the brainchild of Dufferin'. He also cited Hume's

biography by William Wedderburn written in 1913.

2. According to this, in 1878, Hume came across 30k secret reports while in Shimla. He also had

a large number of mysterious godmen who used to keep him informed.

3. But Lala was an extremist and he was biased against congress. Hume was i revenue

department. How can he access files meant for home department? +  

True Character

1. A series of associations had been founded. But these were too narrow in their thought and

objectives and had outlived their utility. For example, the £ Indian Association of Bengal had

increasingly associated itself with zamindars. Similarly the Bombay Association and Madras

Native Association had become reactionary. Only the Poona Sarvjanik Sabha continued as

before. But they had created a basic level of awakening in the country. So need was there for a

more radical and national level organization.  

2. The press was growing and spreading nationalist ideas and integrating people all over the

nation.

3. A series of campaigning against unpopular acts of government had already given experience

and confidence to Indian leaders. Vernacular press act, arms act, afghan war, land revenue,

ilbert bill. 

4. The new leaders and press were already pressing for the cause of a national level political

association. 

Programme and Objectives of Early Congress

The Indian patriots of the late 19th century were not questioning the imperial connection. But Her Majesty's loyal subjects were also gradually turning into conscious citizens, demanding their rights from an authoritarian colonial state.

1. Anti-Colonial Rule:  The early demands were mild - like reduction of LR, reduction in war

expenses, more education, health, Indians in civil services etc. But these were demands which

ran contrary to the very nature of a colonial rule and couldn't have been fulfilled. 

2. Nation Building:  This process had just started in India, so they had to continue it. This had to be

done by emphasizing common nature of problems, promoting unity across regions, religions,

mobilizing public opinion and raising issues of national importance.

3. Create a common political platform:  Where workers from different parts of India could gather

and conduct their activities to educate and mobilize people all over India. To give a proper

organizational structure and leaders for them to work around.

4. Guiding the INM on modern path:  Changing concepts, bringing modern ideas to Indian public,

to draw them into politics. New politics meant involvement of people, so to mobilize public

opinion.

5. Expose the true nature of £ rule:  This would enable people to focus and channelize their

opinions. They believed Indian poverty is not God sent but man made due to actions of £.

Economic development means development of modern industries. The economic development

in India should happen with Indian capital only and not foreign capital. They disagreed that £

rule was good for India because it had established law and order. They said the law and order

only means that £ could bleed India dry with minimal resistance. Development of railways etc.

served the same purpose. The policy of free trade was ruining Indian industry.  

Drain of Wealth

The economic theory by linking Indian poverty to colonialism was trying to corrode the moral authority of colonial rule, and also perhaps by implication challenging the whole paternalistic imperialism or £ benevolence.

Factors Responsible1. Rise of £ as political power - diwani and nizamat rights.

2. Colonial nature of £ rule.

3. Return of £ officials to home. 

Instruments1. Indian Investments:  The £ used Indian revenues to buy Indian products and export to £. So

India got nothing for the exports.

2. Home Charges:  Expenses of the India office in London including salaries, pensions (expenses

of £ company's London establishment till 1858 and then by the office of SoS for India in

London); dividends / charges paid by the £ company; interest on loans taken by GoI (earlier

company); pensions. The amount of home charges was 10% of total revenues of GoI in 1858,

24% in 1900, 40% in 1921.

3. Wars fought by £ outside India:  They had no relation to India but India had to pay for it.

4. Excessive employment of £:  They came expensive and took away all wealth to £.

5. € Capital:  The profits went back as dividends / interest.

6. Coercive Practices:  Used to coerce Indians into labor and buy low, sell high. 

Critique of DoW Theory (Curzon et al)1. They said there was an inflow of bullion into India. But bullion as a commodity can be

purchased.

2. They said £ arranged loans for India @ concessional rates. But did India ask for it?

3. Railways brought benefit to India. But it was colonial in character. 

Moderates (1885-1905)

Nature & Character1. They were young and more radical compared to the previous generation who were too narrow

minded. 

2. They were liberals believing in constitutional means and processes. They protested against the

colonial element in the £ rule. They had full faith in £ sense of justice. They were totally non-

violent. And they considered © as inviolable and hence the faith in © methods. 

3. They were democratic in thought and even structured INC on democratic lines. They were

assimilatory, secular, egalitarian and tolerant. Yet they were not always forthright enough to

rise above their sectarian interests despite claiming to do so.

4. Their social outlook was also progressive. They represented the modern enlightened chain of

thought in India. They supported the Age of Consent Act of 1892.  

5. They were the western educated intelligentsia of India. They were journalists. They belonged to

upper middle class and were elitist. They had no faith in efficacy of masses. Their social

support base was urban, yet their issues and activities were pan-Indian in character and were

sympathetic towards peasants.

6. They were primarily guided by utilitarian theories, the administration should be efficient, the

government should be guided by expediency and not by any traditionalism or moral laws. 

The moderates had wanted the Indian nation to develop along a modernistic course; but modernism being a western concept, this meant an advocacy of the continuation of the colonial rule.

Thus their immediate demand was not for full self government or democracy, they demanded democratic rights only for the educated members of the Indian society who would substitute for the masses.

1. They wanted abolition of the India Council which prevented the SoS from initiating liberal

policies in India. They also wanted to broaden the Indian participation in the central and the

provincial legislative councils by having 50% members elected not by the general public, but by

local bodies, chambers of commerce, universities etc. They wanted 2 Indian members in the

GG's executive council and 1 such member in each of the provincial council. 

2. The budget should be referred to the legislature which should have the right to discuss it,

amend it and vote on it. They also wanted the right to appeal directly to the £ parliament

against the GoI.

Limitations of Moderates1. Between 1892 and 1909, about 20% of the delegates attending congress sessions were

landlords, 40% were lawyers and 15% were traders. Among the lawyers and traders as well

many were related to landlord families or had landed interests. The congress could therefore

never take a coherent logical stand on peasant question. They demanded extension of PS in

the interest of zamindars, opposed a survey on measuring the extent of land holdings and their

values in 1893-94 which could have protected the peasants from the manipulations of the

zamindars, its leaders opposed the Bengal Tenancy Act 1885. 

2. The representation of the pro commercial classes also prevented congress from addressing the

worker question. Thus they opposed the Factory Acts of 1881 and 1891, Mining Bill and other

labor reforms. It was the pro landlord and pro bourgeoisie policies of the congress that allowed the colonial government to project itself as the real protector of the poor.

3. Between 1892 and 1909, ~90% of the delegates attending congress sessions were hindus and

only 6.5% were muslims. Even in Hindus ~40% were brahmans and rest were upper caste

hindus. This led to social orthodoxy and lack of clear communal policies (even though in 1888

congress passed a rule that no decision will be taken which was opposed by an overwhelming

majority of any community and in 1889 in its resolution demanding reforms in legislature it

recommended proportional reservations for minorities). Muslim participation declined even

further after the 1883 communal riots and congress' silence on it. After the 1891 Nagpur

session of congress, the Gaurakshini samiti held its meeting within the congress pavilion and

was attended by a large number of congress leaders and thus only increasing muslim

misgivings. And no major initiative was launched by the congress to bring the muslim in its fold.

Successes of Moderates1. Political reforms were taking place and Indian Councils Acts of 1892 and 1909 were passed.

2. Their economic critique and nation building activities + founding fathers of modern India in

many ways.

3. The Public Service Commission was setup in 1886. They succeeded in getting a resolution

introduced in £ parliament on holding civil services examination in India as well.

4. A Welby Commission was setup to look into the ways of better management of Indian

resources. 

Extremists (1905-1919)

Political extremism in the late 19th century was not just a reaction to moderate failures; it drew its inspiration and ideology from a cultural and intellectual movement that developed simultaneously with and parallel to moderate politics of the Congress.

Nature & Character1. Congress under the moderate leadership was being governed by an undemocratic ©. Despite

repeated attempts by Tilak no reforms were carried out. The congress was also financially

broke as the capitalists didn't contribute and the patronage of a few landed elements was never

sufficient. The social reformism of the moderates also went against popular orthodoxy. Then

came Curzon and he passed a string of unpopular acts including the Calcutta Municipal

(Amendment) Act, 1899 (which sought to reduce the number of the elected representatives in

it), the Indian Universities Act, 1904 (which placed Calcutta university under government

control) and the Indian Official Secrets (Amendment) Act, 1904 (which placed further

restrictions on press). His unpopular Calcutta university convocation address too stoked

discontent.

2. They were more radical than moderates in their demands and means. They had no faith in

constitutional processes and resorted to agitations on streets, public speeches, fiery press

articles, traditional festivals, boycotts etc. Basically they sought to broaden the support base of

the INM.

3. They were non-violent but had sympathies with violent actors against £. They themselves never

asked for violence neither openly supported it.

4. They demanded not constitutional reforms but home rule. They had no faith in £ sense of

justice.

5. Though they were generally progressive and secular in outlook, they often took recourse to

religion and reactionary elements to garner support. Their source of inspiration was past glory

of Indian culture. They opposed the Age of Consent Act, 1891.

6. Their support base was still urban, though it widened to include lower middle class as well. At

its height, it also entered villages to a limited extent. 

Partition of Bengal

Partition Plan1. East Bengal would have 18 mm Muslims & 12 mm Hindus. INC would oppose it thus Muslims

will feel that INC doesn't want to give them a Muslim majority province. W Bengal will have 17

mm Bengalis and 37 mm non-Bengalis. Also any measure to reduce the importance of Calcutta

would weaken the INM and Congress. 

2. Had the partition been purely on administrative grounds then the government would have

accepted the alternative proposals offered by a number of civil servants suggesting more

logical partition plans based on linguistic division rather than religious division of the population.

But Curzon rejected all these proposals on political ground that linguistic unity would further

consolidate the position of the Bengalee politicians.

Response (1903-early 1905)1. Sarkar (1973) has identified 4 major trends in Swadesi politics which ran more or less

simultaneously throughout - the moderate trend, the constructive swadesi, the political

extremism and the revolutionary terrorism. Initially the moderates held sway. They wrote in

press, speeches, public meetings assuming that the £ would be amenable to arguments. Some

of the largest public meetings were held in this period. They were trying to build public opinion

against the partition. They also tried to build opinion in £ and in £ parliament against the plan.

But when they failed to do so the movement widened into a call for the boycott of £ goods - led

by the moderate SN Banerjee himself. But despite the wider call, the strategy of the moderates

remained the same - they only sought to pressurize the £ parliament to secure an annulment of

the partition and couldn't conceptualize of boycott as a method for the development of national

economy and resistance.

2. As a reaction to the boycott, a new trend developed with the emphasis on self reliance and

many constructive projects to develop swadesi education and businesses were launched. The

difference from the political extremist version of swadesi and this constructive swadesi was that

the emphasis was on non political programmes and religious revivalism. Atmasakti became the

creed of Bengal. Arbitration courts were created and the Swadesh Bandhab Samiti settled over

500 cases.

3. But as it developed the political extremists began to argue that without political freedom no

atmasakti or self reliance was possible. And thus the movement took a new turn and became

wider than just Bengali sub nationalism. Now the goal changed from annulment of the partition

to swaraj.

In 1911 the Curzonian aim of weakening the Bengali politicians was achieved in a different way and now with less resistance.

1. Also refer to the transfer of capital out of Calcutta to Delhi.

Swadesi Movement 

Gandhi vs Swadesi - Swadesi was the 2nd failure of congress (1st was to keep muslims within its fold).

1. Although the tools were similar like boycott of £ goods and institutions, development of their

indigenous alternatives, violation of unjust laws and agitation against £ excesses yet there were

important differences.

2. Swadesi also allowed for violent agitation in the face of £ excesses while Gandhi emphasized

completely on non violence.

3. Hindu religious revivalism was the main feature of swadesi while Gandhi had a universal

assimilatory philosophy. He too used religious idioms and songs but his was not a revivalist

tendency but referring to religious morality. His goal was a moral goal and he never defined

swaraj.

4. Swadesi failed in developing mass support as its leaders were not particularly keen to include

lower peasantry and lower castes in their fold. They were dominated by high caste hindus and

sometimes used coercive practices and social boycott etc. to enlist their support. Swadesi thus

failed to recognize and accommodate the social aspirations of lower classes. It was primarily

because of this failure of mass mobilization that the boycott movement failed to affect £ imports

into India.

5. Gandhi's swadesi was firmly based on Indian ideology whereas the earlier swadesi was on

borrowed ideology.

Tools 

1. It began when it became obvious that moderate methods had failed and government will not

stop @ them. Spontaneous meetings and processions took place.

2. Mourning day was observed and rakhis tied. Picketing, strikes, boycotts, women, students,

Indian enterprises. It was pan-India and took place in other parts of India as well. Songs,

festivals.

3. Corps of volunteers were setup to spread the message in villages as well. 

Impact(a) Social

1. Education:  National Council of Education was setup comprising of leading nationalists.

Vernacular languages were promoted. Indian schools and colleges were setup to

accommodate expelled students.

2. Social Base:  Usual suspects + class of zamindars. Instilled sense of self-sacrifice. Peasantry,

changed concept of modern politics! 

3. It led to increased participation of workers in mainstream INM as well. For the first time, INM

began to turn pro-worker. Swadesi led to politicization of workers, their demands were no

longer immediate economic ones but now linked to national cause.

(b) Political

1. Emerging Trends:  Transition to Gandhian methods could be seen in fragments. Mass

involvement, constructive work in villages, women, student, peaceful picketing, swadesi,

passive resistance.

(c) Cultural

1. Patriotic songs were composed which inspire till date. Folk music was influenced. 

2. Vernacular languages got a boost. 

3. Abanindranath Tagore and Nandalal Bose sought to revive Indian style of painting and end

victorian domination. 

Surat Split

The all India political alignments in 1906-07 could best be described as in a state of confusion.1. The Bengali moderates cherished their connection with the more conservative Bombay group

but the local political compulsions in Bengal (swadesi was most active there and the pressure

of extremists was hardest there too) imposed upon them a more radical course. The Bombay

group, led by Mehta and Gokhle, couldn't appreciate their radical tendencies at all.

2. Among the non Bengali extremists, Lala and Tilak was clearly in favor of restraint and wanted

reconciliation between extremists and moderates. But other extremists were clearly against any

compromise and wanted to press further on.

3. The even bigger issue was how far to carry the radical programme @ Congress. INC embraced

swadesi in 1905 and swaraj in 1906 under the pressure of the extremists who got support from

Bengali moderates despite the machinations of Mehta. Now differences emerged over whether

to extend boycott to other things apart from £ goods as well and whether to extend it to other

parts of India as well. Mehta was against the retention of the 4 Calcutta resolutions (on swaraj,

swadesi, boycott and national education). 

Home Rule Movement

Methods Used1. Organization, associations, committee. Several committees of dedicated workers were formed -

6 by Tilak and 200 by AB.

2. Press was used. They published journals, used newspapers, distributed pamphlets in which

they clearly articulated their demands.

3. They used vernacular languages in their writings, speeches and promoted political education

and discussion.  

4. Gradually its extremist tendencies were growing. After the arrest of HRM activists including AB,

Tilak began to talk of a passive resistance or civil disobedience movement. He sent out a

proposal in this regard to all provincial congress committees who wanted more time to launch it.

Significance1. Swaraj no longer seditious, filled political vacuum etc. 

2. Home rule leagues had good membership in areas like Gujarat, Sind, UP, Bihar which had

hitherto not participated to any appreciable extent in the mainstream INM.

3. Created a dedicated cadre for the nationalist cause. To play an important role in Rowlatt

Satyagraha and peasants' movements. 

Revolutionary Extremism 

Changing Character of REM

1. Growing Organization:  In the beginning they were little organized, lacked clear understanding

of the £ rule in India. They were driven more by emotions and self sacrifice than by real world

considerations. In 1920s it turned more organized and pan-India. In 1940s, INA was formed

which was a highly organized effort. 

2. Changing Methods:  In the beginning, they followed the model of individual bravery and didn't try

to get any mass support. The Gadhar Party made attempt to involve the army into it. By the

time of Bhagat Singh, need was felt to involve the masses into the struggle and individual acts

merely became a means and not an end in themselves. INA was a proper organized army.

3. Growing Socialistic Influence:  The impact of socialistic ideals gradually grew. Hindustan

Republican Association and HSRA were openly socialist in their leanings. INA was completely

socialistic.

4. Growing Secularism:  The early REM took oath in the name of religion and were confined to

Hindus. But the groups in 1920s abandoned Hindu oaths and no longer excluded Muslims.

Impact of REM

1. On Princely States:  They helped a lot in spreading the nationalist ideas in princely states as

they used to hide in these states after committing their acts.

2. They were egalitarian and secular in character. 

Beginning Phase (1900s till 1920s)  

Factors Responsible1. Economic hardships faced by people during closing years of 19th century. There were massive

famines repeatedly.

2. Hindu revivalism - Vivekananda's emphasis on masculinity, akharas.

3. Failure of mainstream movement:  The Swadesi and Boycott movements had aroused the

urban youth. The speeches of extremist leaders and slogan of swaraj had fired their

imagination. But the extremists failed to provide them any guidance from thereon and the youth

were forced to adopt a path of violence.

4. International factors like defeat of Italy at the hands of Ethiopia, Japan's victory over Russia and

methods of Irish revolutionaries and Russian nihilists encouraged them. 

Nature & Character1. They tried to follow the model of Irish militants and Russian nihilists instead of trying to organize

a mass revolt or an army mutiny. Their model was based upon leading by action. 

2. They lacked proper understanding of the strength and character of £ rule. 

3. They got active support of press and even had some dedicated newspapers. Important ones

were Jugantar and Abhinav Bharat.

4. They organized themselves into secret societies. Important ones were Anushilan Samiti and

Jugantar.

5. They were also spread outside India. 

6. They were Hindu biased as they took religious oaths and excluded Muslims.

Early Acts1. In 1877, Basudeo Balwant Phadke gathered around him a small band of backward classes and

engaged them into dacoities to collect money for his plans of an armed revolt against £. 

2. In 1902 4 groups were formed. 1st one was Midnapur Society, 2nd was an akhara by Sarala

Ghosal in Calcutta, 3rd was Atmonnoti Samiti in Calcutta & 4th was Anushilan Samiti by Satish Chandra Basu in Calcutta.

3. The 1st swadesi dacoity to collect funds was organized by Anushilan @ Rangpur (Barindra

Kumar Ghose, Prafulla Chaki, Hemchandra Qanungo). A bomb making factory was started in

Maniktala @ Calcutta. In 1907, an unsuccessful attempt was made on the life of Lieutenant

Governor of Bengal.

4. In 1908, Prafulla Chaki and Khudiram Bose threw a bomb in a carriage believed to be carrying

an unpopular judge of Muzaffarpur.

5. In 1912, Rash Behari Bose and Sachin Sanyal made an attempt on life of Viceroy Lord

Hardinge.

6. Jatin Mukerjee in Bengal tried to smuggle arms from Germany during WW1 but was

suppressed ruthlessly in a battle with £ police @ Balasore in Odisha.

Second Phase (1920s & 30s)

Factors Responsible1. Failure of mainstream nationalist movement.

2. Socialistic ideals:  Success of Russian revolution. Growing importance of worker class and trade

unions in India which they wanted to harness for the nationalist revolution.

Nature & Character1. They aimed at creating mass revolutions now. They particularly wanted to target working class.

The individual acts were means to spread their propaganda and not ends in themselves.

2. They had close association with communist leaders, trade unions etc.

3. In some places like Bengal, the REM had close association with Congress. Their cadre

continued to work for INC while working for REM as well. This provided them cover. After the

death of CR Das, Bengal Congress leadership got divided into two - Yugantar teamed up with

JM Sengupta while Anushilan teamed up with SC Bose. They carried out a few attempts but

failed and stagnated.

4. Surya Sen led REM in Chittagong. They wanted to organize a rebellion, however small in scale,

to demonstrate that it was possible to challenge £ might with arms. So they carefully planned to

capture armory, seize its arms, cut off telegraph and railway lines to Chittagong and then fight

the invading £ force. 

5. Women participated in large scale. They acted as messenger, provided shelter, took care of

arms and even fought.

6. They no longer took religious oaths and excluded Muslims.

Significance1. The Chittagong armory raid fired the imagination of youth and REM activities reached their

peak from 1930-32.

2. The REM led by Bhagat Singh transformed the meaning of nationalist struggle. It no longer

meant end of imperialism only. It took heavy socialistic color. It now meant end of oppression of

man by man. Revolution was no longer associated with violence only.

Bengal

Nature & Character1. In some places like Bengal, the REM had close association with Congress. Their cadre

continued to work for INC while working for REM as well. This provided them cover. After the

death of CR Das, Bengal Congress leadership got divided into two - Yugantar teamed up with

JM Sengupta while Anushilan teamed up with SC Bose. They carried out a few attempts but

failed and stagnated.

2. Surya Sen led REM in Chittagong. His was a group attempt instead of individual. They wanted

to organize a rebellion, however small in scale, to demonstrate that it was possible to

challenge £ might with arms. So they carefully planned to capture armory, seize its arms, cut off

telegraph and railway lines to Chittagong and then fight the invading £ force.

3. Women participated in large scale. They acted as messenger, provided shelter, took care of

arms and even fought.

4. They no longer took religious oaths and excluded Muslims.

Benoy, Badal, Dinesh1. They attacked the Writers' Building in Calcutta during the CDM and became heroes.

Punjab,   UP, Bihar

Nature & Character1. They shed their religious bias as they no longer took religious oaths and excluded Muslims.

2. Young women took part in large numbers as messengers, custodians, shelter providers as well

as fought with weapons.

3. They had heavy socialistic leanings. They wanted to use individual heroic acts to spread their

propaganda, specially among the working class and communists. They were working for an

organized armed rebellion.

4. They had a solid intellectual background behind them which was full of socialistic, republican

and modern ideas. The revolutionaries were well read and their leaders often took lectures to

spread their ideas.

5. By his end, Bhagat Singh had begun to believe in non-violent mass movements. Still he took

recourse to violent methods. (a) The changes happened quickly. They became slaves of their

past. Once they indulged in violence, built their career and name on it, they couldn't abandon

their organization. (b) To arouse the masses, they had to somehow spread their propaganda.

They had to differentiate themselves from Congress.

Gadhar Movement 

Nature & Character / Significance

1. It was based in W Coast of US and had its base in Punjabi immigrants. The liberty of US made

it easier for them to carry it there.   

2. They made good use of press. Various circulations like Free Hindustan, Gadar, Gadar di Gunj

were brought out. In Gadhar, they made good use of the economic critique theory of

moderates.

3. They organized themselves into secret societies.

4. They worked to instigate Punjabis and the Indian army to revolt against £.

5. They were secular, free of ethnic / regional biases. They had people of all religions, regions.

Rash Behari Bose, Barkatullah Khan. They condemned Punjabis for serving in £ army and

looked upon Muslims as brothers.

6. They were egalitarian and democratic in outlook. Their stated aim was to establish a republic in

free India.

7. They used press, speeches, tours, travels to India and contacts in the Army to instigate a

revolt.

8. They lacked clear understanding of the true depth of £ rule in India, so were badly crushed. 

9. They were international in outlook and kept themselves updated. The WW 1 and Komagatu

Maru ship incident triggered them to launch their revolt. They used to cooperate with other

international revolutionary extremists. 

Berlin

1. Raja Mahendra Pratap and Barkatullah Khan were involved in talks with Amir of Afghanistan

and even setup a provisional government of free India there during WW 1. 

INA

1. The idea of INA was first conceived in Malay by Mohan Singh, an Indian officer in £ army when

he decided not to retreat with £ army and instead went to Japanese for help. From thereon

Indian PoWs were handed over to Mohan Singh who tried to recruit them in INA. The fall of

Singapore was crucial as lot of Indians lived there. By the end of 1942, INA strength was

40,000 men.

2. The outbreak of QIM gave INA a chance to enter India. But by December 1942, differences

arose between INA and Japanese as Japanese wanted to take only a token INA force of 2,000

men to India while INA wanted 20,000 men. Mohan Singh was arrested.

3. With the coming of SC Bose, phase 2 of INA began. They invaded India but never succeeded

due to the discriminating treatment at the hands of Japanese as well as overall defeat of Japan.

Congress Strategy towards INA trials1. JLN wrested the initiative when he raised the demand for leniency towards INA convicts - Shah

Nawaz Khan, GS Dhillon, PK Sehgal. £ were already planning leniency but JLN's act made

their announcement seem like a reaction.

2. Congress leaders never raised the question of law or anything. They asked leniency on the

grounds of maintaining good relations between India and £. Thus the entire issue became an

issue of friendly relations between 2 nations and £ had to yield. It became an issue of India's

sovereignty as to how can £ try Indians.

3. Congress leaders ran their election campaign on this issue, organized meetings in support of

INA men, fought their cases and collected funds for them.

Significance of INA Trials1. INA trials generated unprecedented level of intensity. The famous upsurges of Calcutta in

November 1945 and February 1946 are examples. In these upsurges, generally a group defied

the authority, then other people in the city joined in their support and soon all country began to

express their support and solidarity.

2. INA campaigned wide level of solidarity. This solidarity could be seen at grass root level,

between Hindus and Muslims, all classes of society. Initially these men were labeled as

misguided patriots but later on they became the symbols of most heroic patriotism. Entire

country united behind them.

3. INA meetings arose the sympathy of loyalist sections, bureaucracy and military as well. Military

men openly collected funds for INA convicts.

4. Upon convicting and then remitting the sentences, the commander in chief noted, "Any attempt

to enforce the sentence would have led to chaos in the country at large and probably to

mutiny".

Royal India Navy Revolt (February 1946)

Discipline in army can't be tempered with, we will need an army even in free India.1. It began @ HNS Talwar when the naval ratings protested against racial discrimination, bad

food and punishment @ boots. Soon ratings of 2 other ships joined them and sympathetic

token strikes took place in over 75 ships.

2. In next phase, people of Bombay descended on streets and expressed their solidarity with the

ratings despite £ suppression. Soon situation turned violent and lathi-bhata battles were fought

@ the barricades. The communists also poured in.

3. The 3rd phase began when people all over the country began to express their support. Naval

ratings in other parts of the country began to go on strike to express their solidarity. 

4. These uprisings were not a result of any particular group or party calling for one. But they were

spontaneous uprisings and the support of people was spontaneous as well. Like all

spontaneous things it was short lived.

Debate: Significance of Naval Revolt and Calcutta Uprisings(a) Communist version - potentially game changers

1. They argue that the communal unity witnessed in these uprisings, if built upon, could have

avoided partition. 

2. RIN revolt is seen as the event which marked the end of £ rule as now the fundamental pillars

of £ had revolted. These were violent, flagrant (in the face) challenges to £ raj. 

(b) Nationalist version - limited significance

1. Communal harmony seen in these uprisings was shallow and only cause specific. It was merely

a sentimental solidarity and as soon as the cause went, rivalry resurfaced. These very cities

witnessed communal riots only a few weeks later. Communalism had become too big a

monster by then.

2. RIN revolt was a manifestation of the mood of defiance prevalent in the country. People were

convinced £ raj would end anytime. If not the naval revolt, such a mood would have found

expression in form of something else.

3. In the violent battles fought with the establishment, only the most radical elements fought, not

the masses. Masses expressed support no doubt but they didn't fight. Moreover the upsurges

were short lived. 

Peasant Movements and Tribal UprisingsResistance to colonial rule was therefore as old as the rule itself.Factors

1. £ rule in India which manifested itself in local issues. This led to high rents, control of forests,

spurt in moneylending and indebtedness, displacement from land, new court and legal systems

which protected the oppressors. The new legal system led to disruption of traditional ways of

life and the poor had no recourse to justice. 

2. Christian missionaries. 

3. Breakdown of pre-Mughal compromise, creation of property right in land, restructuring of

economy. 

Nature & Character

Composition of Peasant Society in £ days1. It was a pyramidal agrarian society with ~70% being non owners of land. There were the rural

land magnates who were building upon their power as landlords, there were rich peasants and

there were poor peasants. £ rule managed to severely affect all the sections of Indian

peasantry which drove them into revolting.

Pre-1857 Revolts1. These were apparently local in spread and support base. The apparent factors were also local

in character. Most of these were a result of anguish against the new zamindars or

moneylenders. Yet these were national and had underlying commonness in a sense. The

factors were a manifestation of character of £ rule in India. The revolts though targeted against

moneylenders, zamindars, had £ as ultimate target.  

2. They were not sudden isolated events but were the result of years of exploitation. Thus the

tribal revolts of Bhils in 1819, Kolis in 1829 in Ahmadnagar were all due to interference of £ in

the local society and economic restructuring. 

3. They were violent, backward looking in character. The leaders sometimes claimed religious

powers. They revolved around medieval social setup.

4. Ethnic and local ties were an important element in these revolts. Still not all outsiders were

attacked and the poor ones facing similar conditions even helped them. Generally only the

oppressors were attacked.

5. They have also been labeled as 'restorative rebellions' as they were started by disaffected local

rulers who were supported by the peasant via traditional caste, customs, ties and sought to

reinstate the old order. The polygar revolts were an example. While the £ treated them as

ordinary zamindars they were used to being sovereign powers in the post Vijaynagar kingdom

era. The revolt of Velu Thampi of Travancore state is also an example.

These rebellions were a problem of law and order.

These were primary resistances i.e. a traditional society's act of violent defiance, from which usually follows the imposition of colonial rule in response.

These were 'pre-political' uprisings, because of their lack of organization, programme and ideology.

The rebellions were not apolitical acts, they constituted political action that demonstrated the political consciousness of the peasant society.

1. It is clear from the examples (Rangpur, Santhal, Faraizi, Moplah, Kol etc.) that the rebels had a

clear awareness of the altered power relations in their society and a determination to overturn

that structure of authority. They knew that the economic restructuring done by £ lay behind their

grievances. They knew that their oppressors were zamindars, moneylenders, merchants and

ultimately the £ and they attacked them only. They also knew their friends were other poor

people. 

2. Their rebellions were open rebellions often conceived after long open political meetings and

thus can't be labeled as crimes. The rebels formed their own parallel governing structures,

levied taxes to fund the rebellion and held parallel courts. 

3. They had a proper leadership and in many cases like Rangpur they even elected their leaders.

In pre-capitalists societies where class consciousness is less developed, religion / ethnicity

naturally plays an important rallying role. The leaders are often associated with divine powers

and blessings from the gods. But this doesn't mean they were mere religious or ethnic

movements.

Shift in Character post-1857 

1. Pre 1857, they were generally under zamindars, princes. But they were crushed in 1857 or

turned colonial allies. Post, they fought themselves. So the new revolts were modern in their

outlook not regressive.

2. Pre, they generally were violent. Post, the non-violence element grew in importance as a

tool. The new movements also represented a sense of natural justice and strong notions of

legitimacy. They didn't kill money lenders just destroyed their books which were full of fraud.

They didn't resist against paying any LR but only what was considered unjust. Post 1857

revolts show higher level of unionism and political awareness. They began to use legal means.

3. Earlier they were directed against £ but now they were directed against their immediate

enemies like moneylenders, zamindars, planters. Earlier their target was £ colonialism and very

broad wide reaching ones. Now their targets were immediate, specific and local and they went

back to cultivation after these specific targets were met. These targets were invariably

economical issues.

4. While earlier revolts had a religion / ethnicity played an important role, the post revolts showed

complete H-M unity. However this doesn't mean that the earlier movements were religious

movements. Religion, religious symbols, religious places, slogans etc. were just used to rally

people behind what were essentially secular causes. Examples are the Satnami and Fakir

movement, the Pagalpanthi sect of Tipu Shah in 1833. 

Satnami and Fakir Movement, Bihar 1763 - 18001. The dasnami sanyasis were armed wandering monks involved in landholding, moneylending

and petty trade while the madari fakirs enjoyed rent free tenures and retained armed followers

in Mughal days. Both these groups were affected by the £ as apart from the obvious economic

factors £ couldn't tolerate presence of armed strong groups in the countryside.

Impact

1. They were a reason why 1857 revolt didn't spread to S India, W and E. But they were source of

inspiration and established a tradition of resistance. 

Rangpur Ding (1783)

1. This led to impeachment proceedings against Warren Hastings. The reason for the revolt was

heavy tax assessment. The initiative was taken by the peasants themselves. The revenue

farming system of Hastings had led to severe exploitation of peasants for the usual reasons.

The peasants initially sent a petition to the £ asking for redress against the illegal activities of

the ijardars like Debi Singh and Ganga Gobind Singh. When it fell on deaf ears, they organized

themselves, elected their own leader, raised an army and fought with whatever primitive

weapons they had. Both H-M peasants fought side by side and stopped paying revenue. 

2. They even sought to legitimize their move by invoking the pre-colonial symbols. Thus they

began to call their leader 'nawab', started their own government and levied charges to meet the

cost of their movement. It was suppressed by £ army.

Kol Rebellion, Chota Nagpur (1832) 

1. They used to enjoy independent power for centuries but £ rule threatened to transfer the

powers of village headman from the tribal heads to outsiders. Also the 'raja' of Chota Nagpur

began to drive out Kols who had lived there for centuries to farm out the land to outsiders for

higher rent. This led to an uprising.

2. The attackers went for the property of the outsiders and not their lives.

Wahabi Rebellion (1862)

1. It was based on radical ideas and purity of Islam and was popular in NWFP @ Sittana.  It was

first preached by Abdul Wahab in Arabia and in India by Syed Ahmed of Barelli.

Faraizi Movement

1. It developed under Haji Shariatullah and after him Dadu Mian. It sought to purify Islam by

purging all un-Islamic beliefs and practices. Its social base was among the poor Muslim

peasants of east Bengal and they revolted against £ planters, zamindars, and £ rulers. 

2. Their anger was against zamindars and both Hindu and Muslim zamindars had to suffer. They

had a strong egalitarian philosophy and declared that land belonged to God and thus collecting

rent or levying taxes was against divine law. They also levied taxes to meet the expenses and

held local courts.

Mopla Rebellion in Malabar (1841-1920)

1. Moplahs were descendants of Arab traders who had married local Hindu women. Later their

ranks also swelled with the conversion of the emancipated slave caste of Cherumars in 1843

(Slavery Abolition Act). They were a community of petty traders, small tenants, landless labor

and fishermen. The £ system deprived them of their lands and all the land ownership rights

were given to the landlords. To this was added the usual £ exploitation and they were ready for

a revolt in 1840s. But the peasants here were mostly muslims while the LL were Hindus.

2. They rallied behind religious symbols, used religious places, raised religious slogans but their

grievance was essentially for a secular cause.

3. The 1920 rebellion had close connection with the Khilafat movement. Peasants could now see

the true nature of £ rule and connect their local grievances with the national ones. 

4. However, once the repression began, the anti-government and anti-LL movement turned into

communal riots. It was so badly crushed that they couldn't dare to rise for the rest of their lives. 

Santhal Hul (1855)

1. It was directed mainly against dikus and petty government servants. Again they were driven

into desperation by the transfer of their land to outsiders. By 1854, the tribal leaders had begun

to discuss the possibility of a revolt. 

2. In 1855, an assembly of all local Santhals was called and it was decided to raise the banner of

revolt. Their principal leaders, Sido and Kanhu, claimed to have blessings of God.

3. People were mobilized, and in bands of 1500-2000, they attacked local dikus, zamindars,

police stations etc. They were also helped by poor non-tribals.

4. A massive military campaign was launched and they were suppressed. But a separate Santhal

Parganas district was created.

Indigo Rebellion (1859-60)

Earlier Indigo Rebellions1. In 1832, Titu Mir rallied the local peasants in Bengal against the indigo planters. Then the

Faraizi movement under Dudu Mian too had indigo planters as its targets.

Factors 

1. The indigo planters (mostly €) compelled the peasants to grow indigo on their best lands, gave

loans in advance, bought output @ low rates, and recovered loans even if crops failed.

2. Planters resorted to local goons to coerce peasants and in courts as well were difficult to be

brought to justice. There was a saying 'jay rakshak, tey bhakshak'.

3. The revolt broke out when their cause seemed to get government support in 1859. The Lt.

Governor of Bengal John Peter Grant was sympathetic to the peasants' cause and the deputy

magistrate of Kalaroa exceeding his capacity issued orders to police that indigo cultivators

could not be coerced or evicted from their land. The news spread and peasants stopped

growing indigo. 

Nature & Character1. Initially the movement was peaceful but when it failed, the peasants took to violence. The

planters came back with their goons and police. The peasants initially tried to get redress

through official means. When they failed they resorted to violence and evicted the planters and

police. This spread in entire Bengal and indigo cultivation was paralyzed.

2. This saw unionization of peasants. They fought jointly. The peasants also collected themselves

and filed class action suits in courts. Finally a committee was setup, planters closed their

business and went away. Digambar and Vishnu Biswas were important leaders and Govindpur,

Nadia, Murshidabad and Pabna were important centers.

3. The panic struck planter lobby managed to get a legislation passed compelling the peasants to

fulfill their current contractual obligations. But Grant refused to extend the legislation beyond its

life of 6 months and issued orders to the magistrates not to compel the peasants. This saw

peasants trying to get their objectives by using legal means. Shows level of awakening.

4. It received the support of intelligentsia and press. Hindoo Patriot wrote articles supporting it, Nil

Darpan was a play on it, Hindoo Patriot, Somprakash and £ Indian Association came to the

side of the indigo peasants. Missionaries too supported the peasants. After the rebellion much

of the indigo cultivation shifted from Bengal to Bihar where it had to wait the arrival of Gandhi to

be stopped.

Agrarian League of Pabna / The Pabna Experiment (1873)

1. The Rent Act of 1859 had some pro-tenant clauses and under the Act if a tenant was cultivating

a piece of land continuously for 12 years he was entitled to protection of his tenancy rights by

law. This movement was spurred by the attempts of landlords to destroy their occupancy rights

by preventing the tenants from cultivating continuously for 12 years. Thus this movement

clearly shows a high level of awareness by the peasants of their rights and the £ laws.

2. The movement, though spearheaded by the high peasantry, had mass base among the lower

peasants as well and it used non violent © means and courts for grievance redressal. It

professed complete faith in sense of £ justice and in fact demanded to become the ryots of her

majesty itself. They formed the Agrarian League to collect money and fight cases for their

cause.

3. Their successful experiment was repeated in other parts of Bengal as well. Due to their efforts,

Bengal Tenancy Act 1885 was passed which provided for greater protection of tenancy rights.

However, the middle class remained ambivalent since their interests naturally coincided with

the landowning class (some of them being landowners themselves). This was the contradiction which remained till the very end. Thus the same Hindoo Patriot which had taken pro-peasant

position in the indigo revolt now took a pro landlord position and so did the Amrita Bazar

Patrika. But on the other hand, Bengalee took a pro peasant position.

Deccan Uprising (1875)

Factors 

1. It broke out in Supe village, Pune and Ahmadnagar under the Ryotwari system. But high LR

had led to indebtedness at the hands of outsiders - the Marwaris and Gujjus. Earlier too the

moneylenders used to lend tot he peasants but never took more intimate control over their

lands. But the introduction of RS made land a tradable property and this led to large scale

transfer of land to these elements and the original owner was not made the tenant cultivator on

his own land. 

2. The US civil war had led to first a rise and then a sharp fall in cotton prices. This volatility had

pauperized many.

3. In 1867, the government raised LR by 50 - 200% (on the grounds of extension of cultivation

and rise in prices) and then there were a series of bad harvests. So peasants fell into the

clutches of money lenders.

4. Role played by early nationalists like MG Ranade. He increased their awakening and asked

them to resist the payment of enhanced LR. 

Nature & Character - Riots or Revolt?1. The peasants tried to appeal to the sense of natural justice. They first tried to resort to

customary punishments and norms which were peaceful. For example initially when they failed

to persuade a moneylender from bringing down a peasant's house, they resorted to his social

boycott. This boycott soon spread to other areas.

2. But only when the boycott proved ineffective that peasants resorted to violence. Even this

violence was not aimed at taking lives but just to destroy the money lenders' book of accounts

which were the symbols of oppression and that too when they refused to peacefully hand it

over. Thus the 'rioters' had clearly identified their target, their source of grievance, had a clear

policy of addressing it and so this can't be called a 'riot'.

3. The government suppression was again not brutal since the fight was never consciously

against government. It even led to Deccan Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1879. However the

government failed to address the real causes of the revolt (high LR assessment and the

associated inflexibility) and thus when the crops failed again in 1896-97 there was a no tax

campaign again.

4. It got support of intelligentsia. MG Ranade and his Poona Sarwajanik Sabha had played an

important role in their awakening. 

Munda Ulgulan (1899-00) 

"... naughty boys making a disturbance in the schoolroom when they believed the school master's attention was momentarily diverted".

Indian Forests Act, 18781. This act established complete government monopoly over the Indian forests. This was driven

by the imperial need for commercial timber production. The act divided the forests into 3

categories - reserved, protected and unclassified. In the reserved forests government had a

monopoly over all produce and felling of trees was completely prohibited. In protected forests

the traditional right holders could collect timber for personal use but not for sale. Initially they

could do it free of cost, but later government imposed charges for doing so.

Rampa Rebellion (1879)1. This broke out when the commercial exploitation of forests began, roadways were constructed

and the infiltration of outsiders happened who began to take hold of their tribal lands and force

them into bonded labor. The tribes used to practice shifting cultivation which was banned and

their rights over forest produce were also charged by the £. The local muttudars often coerced

by the tribals provided the leadership and religion played an important role.

Munda Revolt1. The Munda sardars had been struggling against the exploitation for over 30 years. Then came

Birsa Munda who claimed to have vision of God and declared himself His prophet possessing

magical powers. Under the influence of sardars, his religious movement soon turned political

and he began to organize people against dikus. In 1899, he proclaimed a revolt. 

2. But what was more important was their greater awareness of the wider political realities of the

colonial state. Birsa's ambitions were no longer localized. The aim of his movement was no

longer just to drive out the dikus, but to put an end to the Raj itself.

Peasant Movements of 1920s  

Change in character compared to earlier uprisings 

1. Earlier movements were based on immediate local economic issues, later ones combined the

local issues with the national ones. While the earlier movements lacked in their vision and

understanding of the true nature of colonial rule, the later ones could clearly see that £ rule was

the cause of their problems.

2. The leadership was twin level now - local as well as national. Kisan sabha members used to

attend INC sessions in large numbers. It was often impossible to distinguish the NCM meetings

from peasant meetings. But in due course, due to adoption of violent means their distance with

INM grew. This divergence has fueled the leftist argument that INC didn't want power to go into

radical hands.

3. These movements were a result of the mass awakening and politicization of the peasants in the

wake of NCM and constructive work of Congress workers. Examples are Bardoli where

congress workers worked for the betterment of outcastes and gained their support. Similarly

Kheda. 

4. The new movements had a wider social base since now both the high and low caste peasants

were a part of it.  

Nature & Character1. These were closely related to and exchanged liberally (methods, ideology as well as leaders)

with the mainstream nationalist movement. 

2. They could clearly see that the ultimate £ rule was responsible for their miseries. This was the

result of large scale politicization of the peasants in the wake of NCM and constructive work.

Grass root level politicization was achieved through kisan sabhas, prabhat pheris, magic

lanterns. 

3. It cut across caste lines and both high and low classes of peasants participated in it.

4. The Oudh Kisan Sabha comprised of NCM peasants. It asked peasants not to pay illegal

cesses, forced labor and eviction from land. It mainly relied on large scale demonstrations and

passive resistance comprising lacs of peasants. However, after some time these movements

tended to run violent against zamindars, money lenders and police. A classic example is the

Eka Rebellion in UP. It began as a non-violent movement against illegal extraction of excess

rent and oppression by local goons under the leadership of national leaders. However, soon

grass root leaders emerged who began to use violent methods and the movement grew

divergent from NCM.

5. These movements didn't aim at overturning property relations or had deep rooted socialistic

mindset. They never wanted abolition of rent or zamindari system. They merely fought against

illegal cesses and excess rent. The divergence of local leaders and national leaders on peasant

movement reflects not the bourgeoisie bias of national leadership but their faith in non-violence

methods. 

Baba Ramchandra1. He was the grass root leader of Oudh Kisan Sabha.

Impact1. They showed success of constructive work done by the INC. INC could now rally both the high

and low castes behind it.

2. Success of these movements led to loss of prestige of £, loss of fear etc. Example in Bardoli,

after the initial tax hike of 30%, the independent commission settled for a hike of 6% only.

3. It had a domino effect. Success or mobilization @ one place led to mobilization in others. Every

such effort brought swaraj nearer. 

4. It gave moral strength as well as mass strength to the mainstream INM. No mass movement

can be successful without the participation of the class which comprises of 80% of the

population.

Factors1. Exploitation. Zamindari powers had been increased following the revolt of 1857. Land

settlement systems. No checks and illegal cesses.

2. HRM. Its members initiated the process of organization of of the peasants in the Kisan Sabhas.

Peasant Movements in 1930s & 40s

Additional factors responsible1. Depression of 1929. No decrease in rent. Bakasht lands.

2. CDM.

3. Socialism. CSP worked to form kisan unions. All India Kisan Sabha was founded in 1936 and it

had close contact with the mainstream nationalist leaders like JLN and Lohiya. 

4. Formation of Congress ministries in provinces.

Congress Ministries and Peasant Movements1. The peasant movements used tools of and were integrated with mainstream national

movement. The main stress was on peasant mobilization and huge gatherings were organized

which were addressed by national leaders as well. Such meetings would air peasant demands

and pass resolutions. Campaigns or marches would be carried out in neighboring villages prior

to such meetings. Sometimes long marches would be organized to press for peasant demands.

2. Although each committee was local, all movements combined affected large parts of India. The

demands were of a similar nature, methods used were similar and factors responsible were

similar as well. When it became clear that congress ministries were not interested in following

any real pro peasant programme (all the pro tenants legislations were significantly watered

down in the face of the pressure from congress right) the peasants began to agitate to press on

for their demands. 

3. In Malabar in 1938, meetings were organized for amending the tenancy laws, in AP 2000

peasants organized a march for 1500 miles and presented their petition to the provincial

legislature which called for debt relief. In Bihar, effect of socialism was more pronounced, and

in 1938 - 39 one lac strong rallies were organized protesting against congress and demands

were raised to abolish zamindari. They also demanded the return of bakasht lands (lands

confiscated in depression years for non-payment of rent and cultivated thereafter on a

sharecropping basis). In Punjab, it was directed against the illegal feudal levies and excess rent

and even spread to princely states. In Patiala, demand was raised to restore illegally

confiscated land by officials. In UP too the congress government significantly watered down a

legislation which was expected to reduce rent by half. In Odisha it was the same story and

finally the peasants had to organize a mammoth rally in 1938. In all these provinces the

congress governments used the government power to suppress these movements.

4. When the WW2 broke out and Congress ministries resigned, these movements were subdued

because of severe suppression by the government. Then due to the attitude of CPI, the

communist and non-communist strands of peasant movements split. 

5. After the war, a new spirit was evident as freedom was anticipated and peasants began to

assert their demands with new vigor. Zamindari abolition struggle gained primacy. In Bengal,

the tebhaga struggle broke out where the sharecroppers said they would only pay one-third and

not half the produce and store grains in their own godowns instead of landlords' before sharing.

Movements spread to princely states as well and turned violent there.

Kisan Sabha Movement in Bihar - Swami Sahajanand Saraswati1. In 1929 he founded the Bihar Provincial Kisan Sabha to mobilize the peasants against

zamindar attacks on their occupancy rights. Initially it was meant to promote class harmony but

by 1935 it increasingly adopted abolition of zamindari as its main programme.

Kisan Sabha Movement in AP - NG Ranga1. He organized a number of peasant marches in 1930s and also demanded abolition of

zamindari. In 1935 he along with Namboodripad tried to take the movement to other linguistic

areas of Madras presidency as well and formed the S Indian Federation of Peasants and

Agricultural Labor. Next they made efforts for the establishment of an all India body.

Kisan Sabha Movement in Odisha1. This was led by CSP activists and they formed Utkal Kisan Sangha in 1935 and organized

some militant peasant movements along the demand of zamindari abolition.

All India Kisan Sabha (1936)1. It was founded at the Lucknow session of the congress ion April 1936 with Sahajanand

Saraswati as its first president. It brought out a Kisan manifesto which adopted radical

demands like zamindari abolition, graduated LR on agricultural income, grant of occupancy

rights to all tenants and scaling down of interest rates and debts. 

2. As a result of this body, Congress in its Faizpur session in December 1936 adopted the

Agrarian Programme.

Impact1. They had a significant impact on the mainstream national movement. Impacted the policies and

aims of Congress. This manifested itself in the Economic Policy, election manifesto and

Planning Committee. IN most places, peasants enrolled for the kisan sabha and Congress

simultaneously.

2. They created the environment which necessitated the post-independence agrarian reforms.

Thus zamindari system was abolished. 

3. Their impact on Congress was quite immediate and significant. As a part of the Quit India

Movement, Congress explicitly stated that it believed that the land belonged to the tiller and not

zamindar. If a zamindar was on government's side, rent shouldn't be paid to him at all.

Limitations1. Demands of agricultural laborers were not taken up.

Gandhian PhaseRise of Gandhi

Debate #1 Gandhi's Rise an Act of Manipulation?  

1. Gandhi's Critics:  He was a great manipulator. He systematically eliminated all other leadership.

2. Real Reasons:  (a) The INM was rudderless and directionless at that time. The old methods had

failed, people were looking for alternatives. (b) There was already a leadership vacuum. (c) G

was not a noob. He was known for his SAF affairs. His early successes in India too proved the

same.  

Socio - Economic Circumstances Around the Rise1. The phenomenal increase in defence expenditure during the war refused to come down even

after the end of the war and kept on increasing. This meant heavy public debt and more taxes.

Since LR was fixed in PS areas, indirect taxes on commerce were raised which stroked

inflation. Thus the general prices from 1914 to 1920 nearly doubled.

2. The growth of industry in the war period meant a growth in labor class as well. And they were

the worst hit by the general rise in price levels.

3. There was an under production of food crops and there were successive famines in 1919-20.

Still the export of food grains continued unabated creating tough conditions in India. The prices

of cash crops didn't increase sufficiently and left the peasants dissatisfied. There was a marked

increase in peasant indebtedness and hence a resulting loss of land rights. This also

contributed to the massive growth of peasant consciousness and the kisan sabha movements

around this time.

4. The continued recruitment of Indians in the army was also breeding popular discontent.

Inclusivism became Gandhi's unique style of politics.

1. Highlight Gandhi vs swadesi here.

While Annie Besant failed, Gandhi succeeded in uniting both the moderates and the extremists.1. He claimed a centrist position and alienated none. He adopted the techniques more favorable

to extremists and yet left the definition of swaraj open so that moderates could interpret it in

their own way. His total emphasis on non violence too was to their liking. 

The rise of Gandhi did not symbolize a radical restructuring of political life, rather it signified the rise of western educated and regional language literate elites of backward areas in place of the western educated leaders of the presidency towns.

1. This school argues that Gandhi relied on a network of local elite people - the 'sub contractors'

to mobilize popular support. However this is a gross underestimation - give usual explanations.

2. Time and again the masses deviated from the path of non violence laid down by Gandhi while

still believing at the same time that they were following Gandhi and establishing gandhi-raj. Gandhi himself, let alone his sub contractors, had little control over this Gandhi. In this sense

he indeed represented a radical shift.

By offering an ideological critique of the western civilization in its modern phase, Gandhi was effectively contesting the moral legitimacy of the Raj that rested on a stated assumption of the superiority of the west.

1. To Gandhi, parliamentary democracy didn't reflect the general will of the people but merely that

of the political parties which constricted the moral autonomy of the parliament in the name of

party discipline. So for him it was not enough to achieve independence and then 'perpetuate

the £ rule without the £'; it was also essential to have an Indian alternative to the western

political structures. His alternative was a concept of popular sovereignty where each individual

controls his own self and that was his swaraj - something which had to be experienced by each

one for himself.

2. He always emphasized on the moral rightness which sprang from Indian religion. Also mention

his views on class struggles. His strong point was that he based his ideology firmly in Indian

culture and yet worked for inclusiveness - something like Ramkrishna although different

methodology.

Gandhi was everything to everyone / Gandhi was the undisputed leader of a movement over which he had little control / To the masses, Gandhi was a symbol of freedom and not a source of ideological constraint.

1. Time and again the masses deviated from the path of non violence laid down by Gandhi while

still believing at the same time that they were following Gandhi and working to establish

the Gandhi-Raj. Everybody had his or her own grievances with the colonial authority. By

appealing to this sense and leaving vague the alternative, Gandhi got the imagination of the

masses going. All of them had their own conceptualization of swaraj and all of them followed

his call and fought for their swarajs.

2. By the time his message reached the grass roots via the hierarchical structure of congress

organization, it got transformed - interpreted @ each level according to its vision. What passed

as a Gandhian mass movement actually contained in it various levels of consciousness

informed by different visions of freedom. 

3. NCM:  In Kheda the Patidar peasants started a no revenue campaign even without the formal

approval of congress. In Oudh the peasants interpreted Gandhi Raj in their own way and

initiated a struggle against the taluqdars and the movement continued in the form of Eka

movement even after the congress broke off from it due to ensuing violence. Even Gandhi's

visit to Oudh failed to have much restraining impact on the peasants. In Odisha, peasants

stopped paying rents and forest taxes even against the wishes of the local congress leaders

and continued their stir even after the formal withdrawal of the NCM by the congress. There

were rumors all around which shows that to the peasants swaraj meant an utopian state with

no rent, no exploitation, no money lender, no zamindars. In Punjab the £ government deposed

the ruler of Nabha for his support to Akalis. But when the resulting movement (to demand his

restoration) turned violent Gandhi had to withdraw his support and yet it continued. The tribals

of Kumaon and Garwahl fought violently for the end of bania raj of £ and the establishment of

Gandhi raj. But they were not fighting merely for their own land, they raised slogans in praise of

Gandhi and swatantra bharat. In Andhra the tribal leaders preached the Gandhian message of

prohibition and khadi and yet advocated force for their emancipation. For Bengali tribals,

wearing Gandhi cap or chanting his name meant protection from the police bullets. 

4. CDM:  Women's large scale appearance in the open street and participation in the agitational

politics didn't jeopardize their respectability as Gandhi's name legitimized such actions as the

sacred duty to the nation. 

5. QIM:  "Do or die". People accepted the challenge and interpreted it in their own way.

Here also lay the main paradox of Gandhian politics, for he wanted not just any ass upsurge, but a 'controlled mass movement' which would strictly adhere to his prescribed path. 

1. During the NCM when the prince of Wales arrived in India there was violence in Bombay.

Gandhi was incensed and he postponed the no revenue campaign which was to begin from

Bardoli and also the full scale CDM was postponed.

Rowlatt Satyagraha  

Story 

1. The government was trying to push 2 unpopular Rowlatt Bills through the legislation. Despite

the opposition of all elected members, such Bills were made into laws. This showed complete

disregard of public opinion by the government. 

2. The cadres of HRM were only too eager to join the nationalist calls. They became the mainstay

of the Rowlatt Satyagraha. It was decided to observe a nationwide hartal against the Bills on

April 6.

3. However, the hartals turned violent and G was forced to withdraw it on April 18.

Significance1. As a political campaign it failed for it failed to achieve its only state goal - to repeal the Rowlatt

Acts. It lapsed into violence as well. It was limited to certain cities only and failed to have any

impact in vast regions of India. However, in its failure it highlighted the necessity of a well oiled

organizational machinery for the success of a mass movement. This prompted G to introduce

many changes in the Congress organization. G emerged as the supreme leader.

2. It led to the melting of any goodwill GoI Act 1919 could have created and led to its failure.   

NCM

Factors Responsible1. Nature of £ rule in India.

2. Failure of earlier efforts.

3. Contribution of previous efforts like HRM and Rowlatt Satyagraha in awakening the masses.

4. Enaction of Rowlatt Acts and GoI Act, 1919 increased disillusion. Khilafat question (Treaty of

Sevres) exposed £ intent. Jalliawalah Bagh response of £. £ government refused to prosecute

Dyer and £ public actually contributed money for his cause. 

Khilafat Movement - It was thus a pan Islamic movement in all its appearance as the cause had nothing to do with India

1. It had 3 main demands - (a) Caliph must retain control over Muslim holy places, (b) his pre war

territories must be restored to him so that he can maintain his position as the muslim head, (c)

Arabia, Syria, Iraq and Palestine must not be under non muslim sovereignty. 

2. But Khilafat was being used more as a symbol while the leaders actually had little concern

about altering the political realities in the middle east. It was a found to be a symbol that could

unite the Indian muslims divided across various regional, class, sectarian lines completely. It

was essentially anti £ in character and thus it had everything to do with Indian cause. In fact

this is what led Gandhi to support it.

3. When its demands were not met, the Khilafat committee decided to launch a 4 stage NCM -

boycott of titles; boycott of civil services and police; boycott of army and finally non payment of

taxes.

Gandhi's goal was to forge a grand coalition of various classes and communities and in this sense the Nagpur congress symbolized the emergence of a centrist leadership within the pluralist structure of political India.

1. Gandhi wanted to launch the NC with the aim to redress the khilafat wrong, the punjab wrong,

and to attain swaraj. The special session of congress @ Calcutta in September 1920 approved

Gandhian programme of an extra © passive resistance despite stiff resistance from the old

liberal guard. 

2. There was politics until the December session @ Nagpur but Gandhian resolutions prevailed.

Gandhi needed the congress because without its organization (as he had realized in the

Rowlatt satyagrah) he could not have organized a mass movement. Congress despite its many

voices needed Gandhi because he was the only leader capable of drawing mass support. He

had the muslims behind him, he had the untouchables behind him, he had the labor behind

him, he had the peasants behind him.

3. Also Congress was restructured to transform itself into a truly mass party.

Significance1. 1st great mass movement. Widened social base of INM.

2. Fear of £ rule was erased from the minds and hearts. It highlighted the effectiveness of G

technique. £ can do nothing against peaceful masses. Expressed the power of 'dumb millions'

of India.

3. Triggered women liberation movements, peasant movements as women were drawn into it in

large numbers.

4. Sudden withdrawal led to disillusionment and growth of REM. 

Debate #1 Gandhiji's Intent Behind NCM's Withdrawal?1. Leftist Interpretation (Palme Dutt):  G was afraid of growing militancy and radicalization of

movement as it soared among the farmers and workers. He feared that they would take over

and destroy the capitalist elements for who he cared. They also as a proof point out to the

withdrawal statement where G advised peasants to pay rents. 

2. Real Reason:  He feared that with increasing violence the movement will lose its moral strength.

Government will use violence in one place as an excuse to crack down on peaceful protests at

another. The civil disobedience movement will fail even before beginning. Also it was clear that

NCM was fatiguing. This is the character of all mass movements. He wanted to exit with honor.

Leftist argument is hollow because the peasants in Chauri Chaura did so because of

oppressions of police and not against LL or tried to overturn the structure of property relations.

Congress had at no point sanctioned non-payment of taxes or withhold the rent. So the

statement was merely a restatement of its policy. 

The most significant aspects of NCM were, however, its uneven geographical spread and wide regional variations.

1. Middle class participation was not spectacular, as revealed by the school, court boycott

records, whereas the participation of the peasants and the working class was impressive.

Except in Madras the council election boycott was successful everywhere with the voting %

being < 5%. 

2. Economic boycott was very successful as the £ imports dropped by half. Partly responsible for

this immense success was the active participation of the traders and businessmen who

pledged not to deal in foreign cloth and generously contributed to the Tilak Swaraj Fund.

However the large industrialists remained neutral or pro government during this period.

3. Gandhian social movements which were associated with NCM also achieved fair amount of

success. Anti liquor campaign saw a significant drop in the liquor revenue realized from Punjab,

Madras, Bihar and Odisha. H-M unity remained impeccable throughout the period except in

Malabar (the mopillahs). Although Gandhi himself was involved in the anti-untouchability

campaign, it remained as secondary for most congressmen.

4. NCM was marked by the participation of regions and classes which had not participated to any

appreciable extent in any of the congress movements until then. Thus there was significant

peasant participation in Rajasthan, Sind, Gujarat, Oudh, Bihar, Assam and Maharastra. In S

India only Karnataka lagged behind and participation was impressive in AP, Kerala and TN. 

5. Among the SCs, there was significant participation from Maharastra and AP while among the

tribals AP delta and Bengal led. Labor unrest was high in Madras (cotton mill workers invited

the congress leaders to give leadership), Bengal (massive strike waves in industrial

establishments throughout the NCM) and Assam (tea gardens, Assam - Bengal railways),

Ahemdabad (at least 1 strike per month). 

6. In Kheda the Patidar peasants started a no revenue campaign even without the formal approval

of congress. In Oudh the peasants interpreted Gandhi Raj in their own way and initiated a

struggle against the taluqdars and the movement continued even after the congress broke off

from it due to ensuing violence. Even Gandhi's visit to Oudh failed to have much restraining

impact on the peasants. In Odisha, peasants stopped paying rents and forest taxes even

against the wishes of the local congress leaders and continued their stir even after the formal

withdrawal of the NCM by the congress. There were rumors all around which shows that to the

peasants swaraj meant an utopian state with no rent, no exploitation, no money lender, no

zamindars. In Punjab the £ government deposed the ruler of Nabha for his support to Akalis.

But when the resulting movement (to demand his restoration) turned violent Gandhi had to

withdraw his support and yet it continued. The tribals of Kumaon and Garwahl fought violently

for the end of bania raj of £ and the establishment of Gandhi raj. But they were not fighting

merely for their own land, they raised slogans in praise of Gandhi and swatantra bharat. In

Andhra the tribal leaders preached the Gandhian message of prohibition and khadi and yet

advocated force for their emancipation. For Bengali tribals, wearing Gandhi cap or chanting his

name meant protection from the police bullets.

NCM - Khilafat Equation1. It soon became clear that the khilafat leaders had accepted the Gandhian concept of non

violence opportunistically so as to take the advantage of Gandhi's charismatic appeal than out

of any genuine belief in the principle. The leaders couldn't (perhaps deliberately) control the

situation when it turned violent specially in the Malabar. 

2. They also brought in ulammas in large scale, resorted to excessive use of religious symbols

and rhetoric and evoked religious sentiments among the Muslims. Thus effectively khilafat

began to promote communalism. Thus differences emerged between Gandhi and the Ali

brothers over the use of religious rhetoric. As a result, by the end of the NCM there was a

visible breach in H-M unity and communal riots occurred in 1922-23.

Akali Movement - "... the largest and longest application of the Gandhian programme of satyagraha."1. In 1920, SGPC was formed and its aims were to reform the Sikh gurudwaras and reclaim the

control of Sikh shrines from the hands of government manipulated loyalists. Akali Dal was its

auxiliary and was formed to coordinate the satyagrahi jatthas to wrest the control of the shrines.

While on the face it appears a communal movement, in reality it received wide support because

of the imposition of martial law and Jalliawallah excesses. It was this discontent which was

pouring out.

2. Akalis received active support from Gandhi and congress and were ultimately able to force the

government to surrender the control of the shrines. 

Swarajists

There was a 'crisis of unity' after the NCM.1. Talk of swarajists - no changers; talk of H-M unity; talk of division in ML; talk of rise in political

mobilization of dalits under Ambedkar.

G's Approach to Swarajists1. G was against the idea. When he was released from jail in 1924, £ hoped he would throw them

out. But he worked to avoid a split at any cost. He held his fundamental stand and yet

accommodated them.

2. He never criticized then in public and only highlighted their love for the country. When the

government began to arrest Swarajists for their support to revolutionaries, Gandhiji used the

opportunity to accommodate them fully and still hold high ground by showing full solidarity and

surrendering to them against £ repression.

3. In November 1924, he ended the rift by signing a joint statement where INC declared that

swarajists will carry out INC work in legislatures. 

Reasons for Failure1. Their strategy was doomed to fail. Swaraj could never be won by constitutional means.

2. Their internal differences weakened them.

3. They began to deviate from their stated path of non-cooperation and began to cooperate with

the government.

4. Appointment of Simon Commission made their existence irrelevant. 

Constructive Work

Methods Used1. They sought to educate the upper castes about the evils of untouchability.

2. They also worked directly among outcastes and educated them, asked them to mend some evil

practices. Night schools were organized for adults, day schools for children. They condemned

the Hali system i.e. hereditary labor to serve upper class land owners, exploitation by money

lenders and exploitation of women by high caste men.

3. They used tribal dialects, composed tribal literature and music. Bhajan mandalis were

organized to recite prayers among tribals.  

4. They also led movements like Bardoli movement. 

Significance1. Tribals, untouchables integrated. It gave moral strength to Congress led movement.

2. It promoted grass root level leadership and extended depth of Congress organization.

CDM

Gandhi had to devise a strategy to break out of this impasse and impute a broader meaning into the word 'independence' as opposed to its narrower political connotation that had such a divisive impact.

1. The 1929 Lahore declaration proclaimed complete independence as the goal of congress and

the intention to launch a CDM to attain it. But the reactions of many groups was not so

embracing.

2. Many muslim leaders of congress were unhappy as communal unity (which was a precondition

to the success of the movement) was still not there. ML opposed it since they saw it as a

sinister design of the congress to establish a hindu raj. Sikhs had grown distant from the

congress and even hindu mahasabha declared its opposition to the movement. Business

houses too were apprehensive of the unconstitutional movement.

3. In this impasse, Gandhi placed an 11 point demand before Irwin and a failure to accept them

would necessitate the launch of the movement. These 11 demands contained something for

everybody. 6 were issues of general interest - reduction of military and civil services

expenditure, total prohibition, discharge of political prisoners not convicted of murder, reform of

CID, its popular control and amendment to the arms act. 3 were pro business demands -

revaluation of INR, protective tariffs and reservation of coastal shipping for Indians. 2 were

peasant demands - 50% reduction in LR, abolition of salt tax and government monopoly on

salt. Since salt was an emotional issue with universal appeal, he chose to launch CDM by

violating the salt law. 

CDM Programme1. The violation of salt law would be followed by boycott of foreign cloth and liquor, then non

payment of revenue in ryotwari areas, non payment of chaukidari tax in zamindari areas and

violation of forest laws in central provinces.

Spread1. NWFP:  Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan launched the Red Shirt Movement. Nationalist protests were

organized and even the soldiers of Garhwal regiment refused to fire on the protestors. 

2. UP:  The peasant movements became indistinguishable with the CDM and No Rent Campaigns

became a part of the movement. Prabhat pheris, magic lanterns and peasant meetings became

main methods.

3. Gujarat:  Salt satyagraha, no rent campaigns etc. were organized. The satyagrahis used to

march towards salt depots in waves. When one wave fell to police blows, the next came and so

on.

4. MP, Maharastra, Karnataka:  Anti-forest laws campaigns, salt satyagraha, workers' movements

were organized. The Sholapur Rebellion of workers is too well known. In Nagpur the

participation of the workers was again immense. There were massive strikes in the Grand

Indian Peninsular railways and also in docks. 

5. E India:  Anti-chowkidari tax campaigns (Bihar), anti-municipality tax (Bengal) were organized.

Assam organized anti-Cunningham Circular campaign which asked for parents to furnish a

guarantee of the 'good' behavior of their wards. In Nagaland, Rani Gaidinliu was jailed until

independence.  

6. S India:  Flag agitations, salt satyagraha were organized.

7. Economic:  The £ imports declined by half. Depression contributed to it but most of it was due to

CDM. 

8. Women participation:  They really broke the gates and CDM witnessed massive women

participation. Their appearance in the open street and participation in the agitational politics

didn't jeopardize their respectability as Gandhi's name legitimized such actions as the sacred

duty to the nation.

9. Untouchables:  In Nagpur and Berar which were strongholds of Ambedkar, the CDM failed to

enlist much support among the untouchables.

Capitalists' Movements

Factors Responsible - Indian capitalist class had developed a long term contradiction with imperialism while retaining a relationship of short term dependence on an accommodation with it.

1. Indian capitalists didn't grow up as junior partners to £ and were an independent class. Their

interests often clashed with £ interests. In 20th century, they had emerged as a strong class

dominating most of the organized industrial base in India. This made it easier for them to

organize. Some early capitalist organizations were Bengal National Chamber of Commerce in

1887 and Indian Merchants' Chamber in 1907 @ Bombay. This growth was not a result of

colonialism but happened in spite of colonialism. Thus @ the even of the launch of CDM they

had huge unsold stocks with them and yet the government refused to impose any customs

duty. Now they realized earlier on that Congress was essential for their demands to be met.  £

won't listen to them sans Congress backing. So they supported Congress. 

2. Indian business group, however, were far from one voice. Thus the industrialists were generally

neutral or pro government and were eager to broker peace in the CDM. The traders and the

marketers on the other hand remained staunch supporters of Gandhi. 

3. But at the same time they were also wary of the methods used by the Congress. They realized

that unconstitutional methods of CDM are necessary to press £ but they followed these only till

the point their demands could be met and not more or else a fight against imperialism might

turn a fight against capitalism. They formed its right wing and tended to be the first ones to pull

it towards constitutional process as soon as they realized their demands would be met.

Many Voices in the Capitalist Class1. While the WW1 brought immense profitability to the industrialists, the merchants (who were

mainly importers) suffered due to currency fluctuation and stoppage of imports. The rupee

devaluation by 30% threatened to saddle them with losses. 

2. The 1919 reforms, based on its policy of interest representation, also promised to give political

representation to the industrialist class. Furthermore the £ promised a policy of protection from

imports. This drew the industrialists closer to the £ and their participation in the NCM was little

though Birla and Bajaj became close associates of Gandhi. But Tata and Purshottamdas

Thakurdas formed an anti NCM Society. On the other hand, merchants were alienated by the £

and also Gandhi's moral religious values, his trusteeship theory etc. all appealed to them and

they were active participants in NCM.

3. Post NCM the worsening economic conditions brought the industrialists as well closer to

congress and they actively participated with the swarajists. Moreover when due to opposition

from the Lancashire lobby the government matched a customs duty hike with a hike in excise

duty they realized that aligning with the government only was futile. There was a rising threat of

communism as well and they needed to come close to congress in order to prevent its

communist takeover!

Nature & Character of Capitalists' Policy1. Some early efforts were made by leading industrialists and in 1927 FICCI was formed.  £ soon

recognized FICCI as representative of capitalist class in the hope of keeping a check on INM.

On the other hand, the Indian capitalists saw FICCI as a guardian of Indian economic interests.

2. FICCI (1st head was Purshottamdas Thakurdas) was closely integrated with INM as well and

its leaders clearly emphasized the need to support Congress. So while they supported CDM,

they were opposed to its continuation for long lest it becomes revolutionary and threaten the

existence of capitalist class. Also they felt that they had reached a point where the demands of

their class could be met and thus brokered for truce. They supported constitutionalism. The

traders were active in implementing the boycott of foreign goods and factory owners pledged to

not manufacture coarse cloth which competed directly with the charkha cloth.

3. However opposed the capitalists may be to CDM in its last days, they never supported the

repression unleashed by the colonial government. They needed Congress. But at no stage did

they dominate the Congress. Congress' policies were becoming increasingly pro-people, they

were not mainly dependent on business class for funds, their organizational strength was far

too superior and the leadership was far too decentralized and connected to people.

4. After the CDM when the government announced the proposal of an Imperial Economic

Conference @ Ottawa in 1932 to foster a close economic relationship between the different

industries of the empire, FICCI was initially enthusiastic but the viceroy turned down its offer

and sent only some loyalist industrialists. Thus the Ottawa Agreement of 1932, despite

promising some real benefits to Indian business, got a lukewarm response from FICCI.

5. In QIM, the capitalist class supported the underground leaders of the movement. Sumati

Morarji helped Achyut Patwardhan in evading arrest by providing him different cars.

Women Movements

The male reformers of 19th century treated women as subjects of their modernizing project and could not imagine them to be their conscious equals claiming agency for their own emancipation. 

It was in this area that there was a broad degree of consensus between the colonial state and the nationalist male elites.

1. The education meant for women was never for the emancipation of women. The colonial

government wanted female education as it wanted educated wives so that the english speaking

mothers could inculcate loyalty and english taste in the children from the beginning. The

educated middle class males dreamt of the Victorian ideal of companionate marriage and in

Bengal the educated bhadramahila appeared to be an ideal companion to the bhadrapurush.

This new concept of womanhood was a fine blending of the self sacrificing hindu wife and the

Victorian helpmate. 

2. It must be noted that while such people encouraged women education, they considered the

wrongly educated or the over educated women as a threat. Similarly muslims educators of

women too wanted women who would be better wives, better mothers and better muslims. 

3. Even when the women worked their reproductive role was considered primary and productive

role secondary and their incomes were considered to be supplementary only. Thus they

received low wages and were first to be fired and were not expected to take part in labor

agitations. One Pandita Ramabai took the lead and started Arya Mahila Samaj in Maharastra.

She also started Mukti Mission and Sharda Sadan to uplift the condition of widows. She also

defied many of the social practices like hypogamy, seclusion, conversion etc. And she was

equally criticized by reformers and conservatives.

4. As reformism gave way to revival, Hindu woman became an ideal emblem of the moral order  -

uncontaminated by the influence of west - that symbolized their India. The degraded condition

of women was often used as an attack on Indian culture, so hindu revivalists often imagined a

golden past where women were treated with dignity and honor. Icons of mother india were

created, laxmi had deserted India due to £ and now one had to bring her back. The revivalist

nationalists too emphasized on her reproductive potential by emphasizing on her

motherhood. Thus even in the early revolutionary movement there were a few women who

participated but they were assigned secondary roles only and not the main roles. In swadesi,

the participation of women became an extension of their household duties vis to follow their

husbands. Participation of women was highest where the husbands too participated. In cases

where they defied the husband's command and went on the streets, she was immediately

disowned. And when they participated their role was confined to that of staying between

women and picketing shops.

It was Gandhi's name which ensured that even after marching on the streets, going to jail, suffering indignity there women could come back to their families with no stigma attached. 

1. It was Gandhi who changed this concept and shifted the emphasis from their reproductive

power to their selfless sacrificing power. He always held men and women equal and he had

already seen their capacity of sacrifice in SAF and he sought to harness it. Thus women

flocked in his movements in masses and yet it wasn't considered to be demeaning, for

answering Gandhi's call had become a religious duty. Thus Basanti Devi, Urmilla Devi and Suniti Devi (relatives of CR Das) stunned the nation by participating in open demonstration on

the streets of Calcutta and courting arrest. CDM opened the floodgates. As an influence of

Gandhi the nature of participation of women in the revolutionary activities too went a

fundamental change as now they actually started shooting guns.

Muslim Reforms and Women1. These movements made women a center measurement scale to measure 'progress'. In a high

status muslim home, women would be in purdah - physical as well as psychological. 

Women Movements1. Radhakanta Deb started the School Book Society for women education. In 1882, Tarabai

Shinde wrote a book A comparison between men and women which protested against the

exploitation of women. Yet she was no rebel for she merely wanted a dignified space for

women within the household. Pandita Ramabai took the lead and started Arya Mahila Samaj in

Maharastra. She also started Mukti Mission and Sharda Sadan to uplift the condition of

widows. She also defied many of the social practices like hypogamy, seclusion, conversion etc.

And she was equally criticized by reformers and conservatives. Rashtriya Stree Sangha and

Des Sevika Sangha were setup as auxiliary bodies to congress. 

2. Hunter commission of 1882 also noted that 98% of women in India were illiterate and

recommended special funds to be set apart for their education. 

3. IN 1917, Women's Indian Association appeared @ Madras and it was started by the

enlightened european and Indian ladies like Margaret Cousins and Annie Besant. In 1925

National Council of Women in India was setup as a branch of the International Council of

Women by Tata's wife. The most important organization was the All India Women's Conference

in 1927 - initially as a non political body - to promote education by Margaret Cousins. Later it

lobbied for other female rights as well including political. Sarala Devi Chaudhurani founded

Bharat Stree Mahamandal on 1910 @ Allahbad to promote education. In Bengal, Bengal

Women's Education League was founded for the same purpose. However, instead of preparing

a mass base, these organizations relied on petitioning the £ and appealing to the nationalists.

While the £ remained unsympathetic, the nationalists took up their cause somewhat. 

4. These women organizations failed to create a distinct feminine consciousness in India for

although they recognized the central role of women in public, they envisioned such a role to be

constrained within some social, physical, psychological norms.

5. This concept was only seriously challenged in 1940s when (as we can see in QIM) women

began to claim their rightful place as equal partners. Sucheta Kriplani coordinated the non

violent movement, Aruna Asaf Ali coordinated the underground activities, rural women

participated on their own account in the QIM. SC Bose in 1928 was instrumental in raising

under the leadership of Latika Ghose a congress women volunteer corps which marched on

Calcutta streets in full uniform and later in INA he formed a women's regiment.

By the turn of the 19th century, whatever be said, the fact remains that a number of women in the middle class hindu households were educated. But this did not improve the conditions of their social existence very remarkably.

1. This was because the motivation of such education was never the emancipation of women. The

colonial government wanted female education as it wanted educated wives so that the english

speaking mothers could inculcate loyalty and english taste in the children from the beginning.

The educated middle class males dreamt of the Victorian ideal of companionate marriage and

in Bengal the educated bhadramahila appeared to be an ideal companion to the bhadrapurush.

This new concept of womanhood was a fine blending of the self sacrificing hindu wife and the

Victorian helpmate. 

2. It must be noted that while such people encouraged women education, they considered the

wrongly educated or the over educated women as a threat. Similarly muslims educators of

women too wanted women who would be better wives, better mothers and better muslims.

Did the INM activism and politicization of women promote a feminist consciousness in India?1. For the wider society, the answer is clearly no. The reasons are obvious - the framework in

which women used to participate.

2. But for those women who led these movements, life could perhaps never be same again.

Indian Youth & Student Movements

1. Many of them participated in constructive work. 

2. They gave militant flavor to anti-Simon agitations and rose to prominence thereafter. JLN and

SC Bose were prominent youth leaders.

3. The rise of youth elements also led to the radicalization and socialization of the INM.

Lower Class Movements

Phase 1 (Till 1919)1. The moderate leadership was elitist, middle class. They definitely couldn't take up the cause of

untouchables. The extremist leadership was lower middle class and rested heavily on the

support of caste people. So they too couldn't alienate them by taking up cause of untouchables.

2. The winds of change however couldn't leave them isolated and in 1917, INC passed a

resolution condemning untouchability. But nothing concrete was done in this phase.

Factors Behind Mobilization1. There was a growing realization of the significance of the new sources of status i.e. education,

government jobs, political participation and an awareness that these new sources of status too

had been monopolized by the brahmans. In this the £ policies and Christian missionaries

helped a lot. In fact for some time it was believed that one way of protest against the caste

disabilities was to convert into christianity but it failed for obvious reasons. But as a result

organized caste movements began to grow in many parts of the country - Ezhavas and Pulayas

in Kerala, Chamars in Punjab, UP and Chattisgarh, Nadars in TN, Namasudras in Bengal. 

2. Another important factor behind their mobilization was the spread of the message of bhakti.

Thus Sri Narayan Dharma Paripalna Yogam worked among the Ezhavas and Matua among the

Namasudras and preached the message of equality. There was the Adi Hindu movement

among the chamars in UP.

3. There ensued a process of Sanskritization among the lower classes where those with social

mobility ambitions chose to follow the customs of higher caste hindus like sati, child marriage,

women seclusion etc. There were other social movements as well.

4. At the same time the increasing hindu revivalist tendencies also alarmed them because if for

the brahman hindus the ancient age was a golden age and the present was a dark age, for

untouchables it was the opposite.

Jyotirao Phule and Satyashodak Samaj in Maharastra1. He argued that it was brahman domination and their monopoly over the sources of power which

led to exploitation of the Shudras and ati-shudras. So he turned the orientalist theory of Aryan

invasion upside down. He argued that the shudras and the ati-shudras being the original

inhabitants should have a higher status than the brahman aryas and thus there was a need for

a social revolution. He tried to unite the lower peasantry as well as lower caste labor.

2. Even when after the 1919 Reforms when there was a schism in the movement with the upper

caste (but non brahman) elements breaking off to fight elections, satyashodak samaj continued

to mobilize the dalits. In 1930s it came close to Gandhian movement and merged into it and in

this merger Kesavrao Jedhe played an important role.

Madras Presidency Movements - Justice Party, MC Rajah and Periyar1. Here it was associated with creating a distinct dravidian identity as well. By the late 19th

century, brahmans consisted of < 3% of the population but monopolized over 42% of the

government jobs. They showed a public disdain for Tamil and the dravidian culture and

ethnicity. This motivated the Velalas to mobilize to uphold the dravidian entity and in this they

were aided by the christian missionaries who emphasized on the antiquity of Tamil and the

dravidian culture. They also argued that the status of shudra was an imposed one which the

northern brahmans had done so and the caste system as well was not indigenous to Tamil

land. 

2. In 1916 Justice Party was formed as a formal political party of non brahmans to demand for

separate political representation of the non brahmans and it defied the NCM and participated in

the elections of 1920. Naturally it won a big victory. But soon it became clear that it represented

only the richer classes and thus its social base narrowed as the untouchables moved away

under the leadership of MC Rajah. MC Rajah drew closer to congress and even participated in

CDM making it a resounding success in TN. 

3. Soon another movement, the Self Respect movement by EV Ramaswamy Naicker Periyar

developed which was very radical and championed the dravidian entity and Tamil language. He

had left congress in 1925 accusing it to be a brahman organization and then worked to mobilize

the dalits. He believed that self respect was needed before self rule. Associating Sanskrit and

north India with brahmans he launched scathing attacks on both. He turned Ramayna upside

down and portrayed Ravana as the ideal south indian king. He organized many programmes of

temple entry and public burning of manu smriti. When in 1937 C Rajgopalachari proposed the

introduction of Hindi in TN, he fiercely opposed it. In 1944 he became the DMK.

Phase 2 (1919- 1934)1. By this phase the character of INM had changed. Masses were the key. G was a champion of

lower classes as well. So he drew them in through constructive work. He also gave them the

name Harijan and began to support the temple entry movements. 

2. The lower caste groups in order to assert themselves tried to appropriate collectively some

visible symbols like temple entry, sacred thread, rituals, community pujas etc. hitherto reserved

for the higher castes. Such movements were particularly strong in Kerala the most important

being Vaikkam satyagraha in 1924-25 and the Guruvayur satyagraha in 1931-33. There was

Mushiganj Kali temple Satyagraha in Bengal in 1929 and Kalaram satyagraha in nasik in 1930-

35. Local and national Congress leaders actively participated in a few and organized

satyagrahs and eventually won them temple entries. These temple entry movements created

the widest possible unity. People from highest castes to the lowest outcastes broke social

customs and fought together. People and leaders from all over the country flocked in and

fought. All the methods of INM were used. In Chattisgarh the chamars reinterpreted the

religious symbols to even assert their supremacy over the brahmans. Apart from the religious

rights the lower castes also demanded social rights and when denied organized themselves.

Thus the was an attempt by Nadar women in Kerala to cover their breasts like the higher caste

women and this was violently resisted in 1859. This issue flared up again in 1905 between the

Ezhavas and the Nairs in Quilon in 1905. In Bengal when the high caste kayasthas refused to

attend the funeral ceremony of namasudras they resorted to a boycott of working in their fields.

In 1927 in Mahad, Ambedkar organized a satyagraha to demand water from the public tank. 

3. Then came the political mobilization and this was led by Ambedkar. In 1927 he publicly burnt a

manu smriti. In 1934 he wrote to the temple satyagrahis emphasizing the futility of temple

movements and instead urging them to focus on political representation and education. If

political gates are opened, temple gates would automatically open. He believed that dalit

grievances could be redressed only by a complete overhaul of hindu society and not just by a

reformist approach. In 1936 he founded Independent Labor Party to mobilize the poor and the

untouchables and in 1942 All India SC Conference @ Nagpur with its © claiming dalits to be

separate from hindus.

4. Gandhi distinguished between issue of untouchability and endogamy + dining restrictions. He

wanted INM to focus on untouchability but not on endogamy + dining restrictions because these

were not disabilities imposed on Dalits and were practiced among Dalits and among caste

people as well. Ambedkar asserted that untouchability was an outcome of caste system, so

caste system should be abolished. Gandhiji believed untouchability was a product of thinking of

'high and low' and had nothing to do with caste system so caste system needn't be abolished.

Moreover Gandhi's approach was to dignify the untouchables and to remove various disabilities

imposed on them. But Ambedkar focused more on empowerment. 

Communal Award of 1932

1. When the Communal Award, 1932 gave separate electorates to Dalits, Gandhiji opposed the

communal electorates for Dalits and demanded that increased number of seats be reserved for

them but they should be elected by everyone. He undertook 2 major fasts to press for his

demand on this issue. Ambedkar on the other hand supported the Award while MC Rajah

opposed it since he favored a joint electorate.

2. After the Poona Pact there was a cooperation between Gandhi and Ambedkar for some time

and it led to founding the Harijan Sevak Sangh but it failed to last for long.

But unlike Muslim breakaway politics, dalit self assertion did not go very far and their politics was soon appropriated in the INM in 1940s

1. Ambedkar found in 1942 All India SC Conference @ Nagpur with its © claiming dalits to be

separate from hindus. But still it couldn't break away dalits from INM fold. One reason is that

not many dalits believed in his separatist politics and Gandhi had acquired immense popularity

even among them. His constructive work programme naturally played a big role in allaying their

concerns. This lack of mass support made his movement weak and he couldn't play another

Jinnah. 

2. In 1946 elections his party won only 2 out of 151 reserved seats and on this basis Cabinet

Mission could safely conclude that congress was a genuine representative of the dalits. Even

now a furious Ambedkar tried to prove his base by trying to initiate a mass satyagraha but

failed to get much support. Then congress absorbed him into the © assembly.

Princely India

Factors Responsible1. Exploitative nature and character of £ and princely rule. It was worse than in provinces.

2. REM.

3. Khilafat and NCM led to growth of praja mandals in states.

Phase 1 (1920 - 1939)1. The princely states had never been completely insulated from the happenings in £ India and

both the nationalistic politics and the communal tension spilled over onto them. Thus in 1921 in

Sirohi, Motilal led a Bhil movement in Sirohi to protest against the jagirdari oppression. The

rulers of Alwar and Bharatpur became ardent supporters of hindu revivalist project and actively

patronized Arya samaj activities.

2. Congress allowed people of states to join Congress but barred them from carrying out activities

in states in the name of Congress. They could carry out such activities only under local

organizations or individual capacity. Thus the main emphasis was that the people of states

should build up their own strength. Informal links remained close and throughout the decade

praja mandals began to come up which eventually formed the All India States' People's

Conference in 1927. In 1928, congress passed a resolution calling upon princes to grant a

responsible government in their states. 

3. Reason for such a policy was general lack of civil liberties in states including freedom of

association, their independent legal status, and comparative political backwardness of people

of the states. 

Phase 2 (1939 - 1947)1. The policy changed for closer integration for 3 reasons. (a) The GoI Act, 1935 envisaged a

federation where states would be able to send their representatives to upper house. These

representatives would constitute one-third of the strength of upper house and would be

nominated by the princes, hence form a solid reactionary bloc. This led to a great sense of

urgency for responsible governments in states. (b) Congress ministries. This fired the

expectations of people in states and princes too had to contend with a Congress in power. (c)

The earlier policy was an acknowledgement of the fact that awakening in princely India was

low. Now the time had come for its integration as people were ready. So in 1938 @ Haripura,

Congress made it clear that complete independence included states as well.

2. 1938-39 were years of great awakening of people in states and witnessed large number of

movements demanding for responsible governments. Praja mandals came up in many states

and intensified their activities to an unprecedented scale. Massive agitations took place in

Jaipur, Rajkot, Travancore, Kashmir, Hyderabad which were often led personally by congress

leaders.

3. In 1942 while launching Quit India movement, no distinction was made between £ India and

princely states.

4. Due to heavy and indiscriminate repression, CPI tended to rally peasants behind it and lead the

struggle. Often such movements turned violent.

Reasons for difference from provinces1. Lack of civil liberties, associations etc. meant that space for political peaceful agitations was

small. So there was much greater tendency for use of violence. Gandhian strategy could work

in provinces because £ empire was not a totalitarian state. It was semi-authoritarian or

dominance based on rule of law. Such a strategy had no space in medieval institutions of

princely India.

2. Brutal medieval repression meant struggles were led by communists.

Quit India Movement  

"Do or die". People accepted the challenge and interpreted it in their own way.

Congress' attitude towards war1. A section under Gandhi were strongly anti-fascist and sympathized with £. So much so that

they were ready to extend support to £.

2. Radicals under SC Bose argued that this was an imperialist war fought by imperial states in

both sides for imperial questions. So there is no question of supporting either. Instead the

Congress should use this opportunity to launch a mass movement.

3. JLN like Gandhi made a distinction between fascism and democracy. But like radicals he

believed that even though justice was with £, they were basically imperialists. So unless India is

freed from £ imperialism it can't support £. At the same time, it should not compound £ problem

by launching a mass movement. His view became the official view of Congress. At the same

time it should be felt that demands be presented to government and it be given an opportunity

to negotiate. If negotiations fail and nothing happens, only then a mass movement should be

launched. For this eventuality, Congress' organization should be cleansed and people should

be prepared for the struggle.

4. By end of 1940 it was clear government was not in a mood to negotiate. Hence Congress gave

charge to Gandhiji once again to prepare people for a mass movement. He decided to initiate

a limited satyagraha by a few individuals in each locality. The satyagrahis would be hand-

picked, would inform the magistrate of the venue and time of his satyagraha in advance, go to

the spot, make an anti-war speech and court arrest. If the government didn't arrest him, he

would move into villages and spread the message. The aim of this satyagraha was to inspire

people, prepare them and to give further chance to £ to negotiate and if they don't then to

expose their true intentions to people. So this satyagraha was pretty successful.

5. After the failure of Cripps mission, Gandhiji decided to launch Quit India.

£ response to Congress1. £ were happy the Congress ministries resigned. They refused to accept Congress' demand of

complete freedom after the war and effective transfer of power immediately. They merely said £

were fighting the war to resist aggression and that after the war GoI Act 1935 reforms would be

discussed with various Indian parties.

2. The £ followed their old imperialist policy, tried to harp on differences between ML and

Congress and refused to believe that they will have to leave India.

Reasons for Congress not launching a mass movement in 1939-401. Congress felt that since £ cause in the war was justified, their problems shouldn't be

compounded.

2. They felt Congress organization was not ready for launching a mass movement. It was full of

corrupt self-serving elements as Congress had been in power. Congress had lost touch with

people due to its ministries.

3. Lack of Hindu-Muslim unity could easily have triggered communal riots during the mass

movement and even civil war.

4. Gandhian philosophy argued that a mass movement is most effective only when the possibility

of negotiation is exhausted. Only then people feel what is happening is unjust and pour in. So

decision was made to present demands to £ and try to negotiate with them. At the same time

keep on preparing the people and cleansing organization for the eventual mass movement.

Factors responsible for the launch of Quit India Movement1. Failure of Cripps Mission:  Cripps Mission was never serious about giving independence to India

or to give it any meaningful responsibility for defence during the war. So despite early

reservations about launching a movement, Congress and Gandhiji came to the conclusion that

any further silence would amount to accepting the right of £ to coerce India into the war. Also its

failure had exposed the intentions of £ to people and made them ready.

2. £ war reversals:  The way £ and French were getting swept away led to a popular feeling of

imminent £ fall. Japanese were on the doorsteps. Also the way £ and French had fled from Asia

leaving the natives behind had exposed their true thinking. This way both the legitimacy and the

awe of £ rule was gone. It can be gauged from the fact that there was a run on the banks and

people had started hoarding bullion.

3. War time difficulties;  Like shortages, inflation, famines, coercion etc.

Quit India Movement Phase 1 - Mass Protests (August 1942 - October 1942)1. Mass, mass reaction. Biggest strikes, agitations, the country was paralyzed. Violence

happened everywhere. Symbols of government authority were attacked. Clashes happened

with authorities. Railway stations, post offices, police stations, public buildings were all targets.

National flags were hoisted forcibly on many public buildings. £ rule ceased to exist in many

parts of the country. People actually uprooted railway tracks, blew up bridges, cut telegraph

wires, burnt public property.

2. Many provincial and local leaders who were able to evade arrest returned to their homes and

spread into villages. News and rumors began to reach villages and complete paralysis there as

well. Students and youth participated in immense numbers. They defied the ban on press by

circulating hand written journals. Labor struck work most notably @ Ahemdabad, Bombay,

Jamshedpur, Poona. The reaction was most intense in UP and Bihar where students dispersed

into villages, organized peasants and burnt all symbols of government authority.

3. Suppression was equally brutal which coupled with the fact that leaders had already been

arrested led to quick subsidence of the mass phase.

Quit India Movement Phase 2 - Underground Activities (October 1942 - February 1943)1. The active phase had died. Leaders went underground and began to organize underground

resistance. They also began to coordinate their efforts and developed an underground network.

Achyut Patwardhan, Aruna Asaf Ali, Lohiya, Sucheta Kriplani and Biju Patnaik were main

underground leaders. They saw their main role as keeping up the public morale by continuing

to provide an organization and line of command. These leaders comprised of all sections of

nationalists - CSP, Forward Bloc, Gandhi Ashramites, revolutionary terrorists. Capitalist class

actively supported the underground leaders. Students acted as workers and couriers. Villagers

refused to aid police by providing information. Train drivers etc. delivered bombs. 

2. Usha Mehta ran the Azad Radio from 'somewhere in India', bands of peasants used to organize

sabotage activities in night which came to be known as Karnataka Method, JP Narayan

organized a guerilla warfare around Indo - Nepal border, £ definition of 'underground' meant the

entire nation.

3. The underground leaders didn't direct the local level activities. Their role was mainly to provide

overall organization and guidance, arrange for material and funds. The actual activities were

decided and carried out by local level teams like blowing up bridges, disrupting railways,

telegraph, postal services etc. Naturally they failed to have much impact.

Quit India Movement Phase 3 - Gandhi's Fast (February 1943)

1. A twist came when Gandhiji commenced a 21 day fast in Feb 1943 in jail against the violence

of the government. Once again entire country came to life. But the government refused to

oblige and even issued statements wanting Gandhiji's death. 

2. The fast achieved what it intended. The prestige of £ government reached rock bottom.

Gandhiji survived, £ government was seen as wanting him dead, even the Indian members of

Viceroy's executive council resigned. Masses had been stirred again.

Quit India Movement Phase 4 - Parallel Governments 1. The first one came up in Ballia in UP in August 1942 under Chittu Pande who called himself a

Gandhian. It lasted for a week.

2. In Tamluk in Bengal, another government came up which lasted till 1944. This was an area

where Gandhian constructive work had made considerable headway.

3. Satara witnessed longest lasting parallel government which began from middle of 1943. 

The QIM by promising immediate freedom from an oppressive colonial order had thus captured the imagination of a significant section of Indian population, notwithstanding their differing perceptions of freedom.(a) Bihar

1. The movement was the most powerful here and had immense participation from a wide section

of the peasantry. 

2. @ Patna, students took initiative to mobilize a mammoth rally and hoist the congress flag over

the assembly. Masses poured in and all the symbols of £ imperial authority were burnt down. 

3. @ Jamshedpur and Dalmianagar, peasants struck work in almost all the industrial units and in

both places they had the consent of the capitalists.

4. In the last week of August 1942, massive peasant revolts took place in almost each and every

village of Bihar. The pattern was similar - the students or the rumors of their arrival would

arrive, thousands of ordinary peasants would mobilize and all symbols of £ imperialism would

be attacked and any £ personnel found would be killed in public. Everywhere the local civilian

and police authorities vacated their posts without resistance - and their compliance cannot be

negated. Even zamindars and merchants supported the movement by extending support to the

peasants.

5. @ Barh, parallel government was formed by the lower caste Gops and Dusadhs who started

levying their own tax.  Azad Dastas were formed and carried out guerilla warfare with £ and this

included JP as well and they also indulged in looting exploitative zamindars.

(b) UP

1. In E UP @ Gazipur and Azamgarh, the arrival of BHU students galvanized the local peasantry

and they followed the usual pattern. 

2. @ Balia, students from BHU and Allahabad University arrived in a hijacked Azad Train and £

rule was ended. Jails were broken open and all political prisoners freed. Chittu Pande, a

follower of Gandhi, hereafter formed a parallel government and was proclaimed ziladhish. 

(c) Bengal

1. The movement was strongest @ Tamluk and Kanthi in Midnapore where the £ government had

followed a policy of denial and thus had caused immense hardship on the peasants. £

administration collapsed. Even when a cyclone and a tidal wave killed 15K the £ refused to

provide relief. @ Kanthi, Swaraj Panchayat was setup and in Tamluk Tamralipti Jaitya Sarkar was setup which continued to function till 1944. 

2. @ Dinajpur, the Santhal tribals participated in the movement in a large scale and fought for

Gandhi raj.

(d) Odisha

1. The movement found heavy support with the peasantry as they had already been mobilized by

the congress and its CSP activists. The pattern was familiar - strikes would begin with the

students in the cities who would then spread out into the countryside where the entire

peasantry would mobilize and destroy all symbols of £ imperialism.

2. In the princely states of Nilgiri and Dhankanal the tribals and dalits were mobilized by the praja

mandals and they violated the forest laws. @ Talcher, the praja mandal leaders ended the rule

of the local raja and £ and established a chasi mulia raj where food, shelter and clothes would

be provided to everyone. The demonstrators here were gunned down by air force planes.

3. @ Malkangiri and Nawrangpur, Laxman Naiko assembled the tribals and the peasants and led

attacks on the liquor and the opium shops and proudly declared that £ raj had been replaced by

Gandhi Raj and that the tribals were no longer required to pay the forest dues.

(e) Maharastra

1. @ Satara a parallel government of non brahmans emerged which continued until 1946. It had

an elaborate organizational structure and had volunteer crops called Seba Dal and village units

called Tufan Dals. Nana Patil was an important leader of the movement. It even defied

Gandhi's call for surrender in 1944.

(f) Gujarat

1. Here it was strongest in Kheda, Surat, Broach and the state of Baroda. Here again one saw the

complicity of the industrialist class in the movement.

(g) S India

1. In TN, rightists like Rajgopalachari as well as dravidian leaders like Periyar opposed the

movement (he saw it as a north Indian movement) and so participation remained weak. 

(h) Communal Organizations

1. ML had given a call for the boycott of this movement so muslims too stayed away from it.

Similarly Ambedkar too opposed the movement and in fact joined the Viceroy's executive

council as a labor member (and this is why lost his face in the next elections) but dalits poured

into the movement in large numbers. Hindu Mahasabha too boycotted the movement but many

of its leaders defied the official orders and actively participated in the movement. RSS too didn't

support the movement. Communists were commies after all.

Significance - The leadership had passed on to the ricksha pullers, ekka drivers and other such people whose political knowledge extended only this far - that £ were their enemies. 

1. It had the widest social base. Princely states participated. Peasants from lowest to highest

strata participated. Even zamindars supported or remained neutral. Raja of Darbanga one of

the biggest zamindars asked his men to help the peasants who had been arrested.

2. Total concentration of attack against £ and absence of attacks on zamindars even in Bihar and

UP where the movement was strongest and in the areas where parallel governments stayed for

long times.

3. Government officials supported the QIM. This broke the back of the £ and made them realize

the futility of the attempt to rule India.

4. Even though Muslim participation in QIM was low, absence of communal riots helped.

5. It upped the stakes on the table. Now negotiations with £ could only happen on the mode of

their departure from India.

Debate: Was QIM a spontaneous outburst or planned rebellion?(a) Spontaneous Outburst

1. The element of spontaneity was definitely larger than the earlier ones. The leadership in QIM

had no time to chalk out any broad programme.

(b) Planned Rebellion (Gandhi had always meant everything to everyone)1. Even though the element of spontaneity was larger, but this was the very strategy of Gandhian

movements. The leadership merely chalked out a broad programme and local level committees

and people decided what to do exactly given their conditions. Even in CDM (the most organized

one) people had the complete freedom to do what they wanted - break salt law, non payment of

rent, non payment of chowkidari tax, forest law satyagrahs, picketing liquor shops etc. 

2. Before the movement Gandhi himself emphasized that everyone must henceforth consider

himself as a 'free' man or woman and chose his own course of action should the leaders be

arrested.

3. Even though the leadership had no time to chalk out the broad programme but the factors

behind the QIM, its aims and objectives, the philosophy of QIM were in consonance with the

factors, aims and objectives and the philosophy of what the INM had developed over the

decades.

4. Congress had been preparing for this movement during the passive phase from 1934 and

actively from 1940s. Limited satyagrahs were there and propaganda spread. Congress

organization was being prepared. Last 2 decades of mass politicization efforts also prepared

them and there is every evidence to show that they were growing more and more radical under

the aegis of congress.

Debate: How does the use of violence reconcile with the non-violence of Gandhi? 

1. Gandhi's main objection to violence was that it impeded the ability of people to participate in

mass movements. But QIM showed they were ready for it. £ had lost their legitimacy by then

and stakes were too high for Gandhi to call it off.

2. "I do not ask from you my own non violence. You can decide what you can do in this struggle".

"I trust the whole of India today to launch a non violent struggle. But even if people deviated

from this path of non violence, I shall not swerve, I shall not flinch". "Do or die". People accepted the challenge and interpreted it in their own way.

Left MovementFactors Responsible  

1. The rise of youth following the anti-Simon agitations. Youth were a fertile ground for radical

ideas.

2. The rise of REM activities.

3. Changing character of INM --> from being an elitist movement to mass movement.

Impact

1. It was accepted that freedom couldn't be restricted to political sense. But it had to mean socio-

economic freedom as well.

2. They helped in drawing in peasants and workers into politics and INM.

3. They even threw up tall leaders and succeeded in commanding influence on central leadership.

JLN had leftist leanings.

4. Their impact can be seen in the Karachi Resolution on Fundamental Rights and Economic

Policy in 1931, election manifesto of Congress in 1936 and Planning Committee in 1938.

5. Movements in many princely states were led by communists since the repression there was

brutal and there was no space for peaceful political agitations.

Reasons for Failure

1. It fought right wing on wrong issues - not on the questions of ideology but methods and tactics.

They accused Congress of being pro-imperialist! What a joke! They advocated violence again

which found little takers.

2. They failed to see the Indian reality. They asserted that Congress was a bourgeoisie party,

Gandhian tactics of negotiating with £ was a 'compromise with imperialism' and any step

towards constitutional process as a 'step towards abandoning struggle'. It saw all efforts to

guide the national movement in a disciplined form as an effort by bourgeoisie to not to let it turn

radical and slip 'out of their safe hands'. 

3. They failed to work unitedly and pose a common left front.

Left Within Congress  

Congress Socialist Party1. After the suspension of CDM, many INC leaders grew disillusioned and in jail they turned to

radical ideas like socialism. So in 1934, they setup the Congress Socialist Party under the

leadership of JP Narayan, Narendra Dev, Achyut Patwardhan, Ashok Mehta and Minoo

Masani.

2. They agreed on 4 basic propositions - (a) The primary struggle in India was freedom struggle

and socialism is not possible without nationalism. (b) CSP should work within the Congress

otherwise it would be suicidal. (c) CSP must give Congress a socialist direction. This

transformation has to be a process and not an event. (d) CSP to achieve this must organize

workers and peasants and raise their demands.

3. The goal of transformation of Congress was seen in transformation of leadership as well.

Initially it meant replacing the leadership @ top. But it was soon found unrealistic to displace

Gandhiji. So CSP worked to evolve composite leadership @ all levels. It was to throw up

alternate left leaders from the bottom to the top. Matters came to head in 1939 and 1940

sessions, but CSP shied away from splitting the Congress.

JLN1. It was accepted that freedom couldn't be restricted to political sense. But it had to mean socio-

economic freedom as well.

2. He influenced a whole generation of leaders and gave them socialist orientation.

3. He criticized Gandhiji for refusing to accept conflict of classes, preaching harmony between

exploiter and exploited and for his trusteeship theory. He also criticized Gandhian theory of

STS and believed struggle was perpetual until victory was achieved.

4. He welcomed the efforts of WPPs to radicalize Congress and in the Meerut conspiracy case,

he defended the communist leaders.

5. After 1934 when CDM was withdrawn, there were 2 factions in Congress. One for entering

legislatures and other for doing constructive work. JLN had a third view where he advocated

continuation of struggle. He wanted to continue mobilizing peasants and workers into their

unions and draw them towards Congress. Constitutionalism to him was going back to pre-

Gandhian era of compromise. 

6. Congress was apathetic to states' movements. But this policy changed when in 1936 Nehru

himself attended the session of All India States' Peoples' Conference and called for a mass

movement. In 1938 @ Haripura congress decided to support the states' people.

SC Bose vs rightists, 1939 Tripuri crisis1. He said presidential elections should be fought on the basis of ideology (leftist vs rightist in this

case) whereas the rightists said Congress president was merely a constitutional head. Real

work was done by AICC and working committee. So no question of ideology based presidential

elections.

2. He unleashed a propaganda against Sardar Patel and other rightists and accused them of

working on a compromise with the government on question of sharing power. With such grave

accusations, naturally the senior leaders couldn't have worked with SC Bose and a split was

imminent.

3. He had a difference with Gandhian thought. While Gandhiji thought that Congress organization

was weak and people were not ready for another mass movement, SC Bose thought that

people were ready and the weakness of the organization could be overcome during the

movement. But he recognized that he needed Gandhi to launch any mass movement so he

wanted him to work on his commands. This was naturally unacceptable to the Gandhi camp.

4. He believed that if the main leadership doesn't agree, Congress should be split and people will

support the radicals. But CSP and CPI didn't agree with him as they knew splitting Congress

was not feasible.

Bose After Congress1. He toured the country to try to fuel an agitation but failed. He came back to calcutta and tried to

forge a pact with ML and to launch a CDM over the Black Hole tragedy monument. But he

failed and was arrested. Next he fled. Rest is history.

CPI

1. MN Roy and 7 others setup CPI @ Tashkent in 1920. Independently many communist groups

developed in India and in 1925, they setup CPI @ Kanpur.

2. Initially it asked its members to enroll themselves in INC, form a strong left base in all INC arms

and to eventually give INC itself a left leaning. By 1927, communist elements grew stronger and

various communist groups began to organize themselves in Workers' and Peasants' Parties

(WPP) and began to function as the left wing of Congress. Their influence began to grow and

by 1928, they had a sizable following. JLN welcomed WPPs' efforts to radicalize Congress.

3. In 1928, they split with INC - why? Because in 1927 Koumintang had turned against Chinese

communists and Comintern feared it will happen in India as well. So they asked CPI to break

relations with Congress and expose its bourgeoisie and imperialist face behind the Gandhian

mask.

4. After the split of 1928, £ isolated the communists and launched the Meerut conspiracy case in

1929. Here again the defense of communists was taken up by many nationalist leaders like

JLN and Gandhiji himself visited the communist leaders in jail. CPI went into oblivion and in

1934 it was banned.

5. In 1935, Comintern changed its earlier position on national alliances and advocated alliances

with anti-fascist forces including bourgeoisie led national movements since it now faced the

fascist threat. CPI began to participate again till 1942 when USSR allied with £. In this phase,

its main aim was again to transform INC into a leftist party.

Other Left Parties   

1. In 1930, MN Roy came to India and found a strong group of Royists.

2. Forward Bloc was founded in 1939 by SC Bose.

3. HSRA, RSP, Trotskyists also functioned in 1930s.

Working Class Movements

Phase 1 (- till 1905)1. With the growth of industries in India from 1850s, the class of workers also grew. There were

some initial strikes but they were mostly sporadic, local, immediate etc. In 1870s, some

philanthropic elements tried to organize workers but they were not linked to INM. In 1878,

Sorabji Shapoorji Bengali tried to introduce a bill in Bombay Legislative Council to limit work

hours. Sasipad Banerji, a Brahmo Samaj worker, setup a Workingmen's Club in 1870 and

brought out a monthly journal called Bharat Shramjivi. In Bombay, Narayan Lokhande brought

out a journal called Din Bandhu in 1880 and started Bombay Mill Association in 1890.

2. The mainstream INM stayed away from worker grievances because of its middle class and

elitist character. Moreover, working class was not so strong by then. However, when it came to

workers employed by €, they took workers' side. On the other hand they opposed the Factory

Acts. 

Indian working class maintained a cultural dual self of a peasant and an industrial worker and remained divided along the religious and the caste lines.

1. Despite migrating to the cities for better work, Indian workers retained close connections with

their villages. In many cases the family remained behind, migration was seasonal only, money

was sent etc. and thus they could never ignore the cultural factors which were important to

them in the village. Thus religion and caste remained the source of identity and a working class

consciousness was visibly absent.

2. Indian society was dominated by religion and casteism in almost all areas of social discourse.

Thus even the residential mohallas of the workers had spatial segregation along the caste and

communal lines. At work also various departments in an industry were manned exclusively by

workers belonging to a particular caste and religion. Often the higher castes got better jobs

while the lower castes got bad ones and at lower pay. 

3. These caste and religious divisions kept the workers divided horizontally and often the

employers took advantage of this division. Often one group was used to break the strike of the

other group apparently on communal lines. Thus in Madras the Adi-Dravids became the strike

breakers of the caste hindu and muslim strikes. But it must be noted that compared to the later

they were economically much vulnerable and were totally dependent on wages for survival.

Thus such occasions came as opportunities to them and the motivation was economic and not

communal. 

4. In many cases many of the 'communal riots' of the workers were only communal from surface.

Caste and religion being natural rally points in the contemporary Indian society, naturally the

religious gatherings in mosques and religious slogans were used to rally support. But the

causes were ultimately non communal.

Phase 2 (1905-1919)1. The extremists belonged to lower middle classes. So the leanings of INM towards workers

increased. This was evident in Swadesi as well where workers participated and struck in large

numbers. Swadesi led to growing politicization of workers and integration with INM. Their

demands were increasingly linked to national cause.

2. In 1899, there was a railway signalmen strike which received full support from Tilak's

newspapers. However, the support seen in case of € employed workers was still missing to

large extent in case of Indian employed workers. 

3. The increasing connection with INM was also evident when workers struck work against the

repression of extremist leaders. But still all-India level organizations were missing.

4. After the arrival of Gandhi and Russian Revolution, there were some efforts to rally workers and

many journals were brought out.

 Phase 3 (1919-1928)1. The distinguishing feature was emergence of all-India workers' associations like AITUC in 1920

and integration of workers in INM on a significant scale. The nationalist leaders like CR Das,

Lala Lajpat Rai began to openly condemn capitalism and associate themselves with workers'

associations. The workers' associations began to openly call upon them to join INM.

2. Gandhiji himself fought for the cause of Ahemdabad workers and gave the concept of

trusteeship claiming the real owners were workers and management was mere trustee and was

required to act in good faith of workers. It also began to push forward workers' rights and

demands in the INM stream. Workers' significance grew and now it was realized that swaraj

would mean swaraj for workers as well.

3. CPI was founded @ Kanpur in 1925. Initially it asked its members to enroll themselves in INC,

form a strong left base in all INC arms and to eventually give INC itself a left leaning.  By 1927,

communist elements grew stronger and various communist groups began to organize

themselves in Workers' and Peasants' Parties (WPP) and began to function as the left wing of

Congress. Their influence began to grow and by 1928, they had a sizable following. 

4. JLN also played a vital role in spreading socialistic ideas and made it clear that freedom will not

be restricted to political sense. It would mean socio-economic freedom as well. 

5. The socialist leanings of the swarajists also came out in open during the debates on Public

Safety Bill meant to try he communists. They criticized capitalism. 

6. Anti-Simon agitations and REM propelled youth leaders to the forefront of INM who were

susceptible to radical socialist ideas.

 Phase 4 (1928-47)

1. The £ were getting alarmed at rise of communists and integration with INM. So they began to

work on a two-pronged policy. One was suppression of extremists through the Meerut

Conspiracy Case of 1928 and other was to wean away the moderates in the labor movement

by appointing a commission for labor reforms.

2. The communists broke away from INC in 1928 and also from INM and didn't support it. This led

to a plummeting popularity and the workers got away from Communists. The membership of

their union fell from 54,000 to 800 in 1 year. They were also thrown out of AITUC.

3. The workers continued to participate in the INM despite the communist opposition. This was

because their thinking about the colonial masters was also based on their bad experience as

peasants back in the villages. Thus they had no sympathy with the £ sympathizers. In CDM, the

work of Sholapur workers is well known.

4. After the withdrawal of CDM, young Congress leaders were disillusioned and decided to found

CSP in 1934. They agreed that - (a) nationalism was the primary struggle in India and was a

pre-requisite for socialism. (b) Congress was the sole party capable of carrying out nationalistic

cause. (c) CSP should work inside the Congress to give it a left leaning including in the

leadership. (d) CSP should organize peasants and workers to do so. In 1935, Communists also

joined Congress and together they formed a strong left bloc inside Congress. 

5. However there was a lull in workers activities from 1932-36 only to reemerge in 1937 due to

formation of INC governments and subsequent civil liberties. 

6. When WW2 broke out, they were anti-war. But subsequently they supported £ as USSR was

with £ and decided not to participate in Quit India Movement. They again lost popularity as

workers joined QIM.

7. After the war, the workers continued to play an important role. They showed support in INA

trials, Bombay mutiny etc. by striking.  

For GS MainsAns 6 (a) • Singh Sabha - In the late 19th century. - Aim: revival of Sikh Guru’s teachings, Campaign to increase literacy and promotion of Gurumukhi script. - Reaction to the proselytizing activation of Christian Missionaries. Ans 6 (b) • Daman-i-koh - Forested area of Rajmahal hills - Present Sahebganj (Jharkhand) - Santhal revolt. Ans (c) • Saliadaran Ayyapan - Follower of Sri Narayan Guru. 

- Social reformer. - Respected for his selfless social work. - His slogan - “Jati Venda, Matham Venda. Daivam Venda” 

Constitution development process

GoI Act, 1858Features

1. Centre-State relations:  It laid down a unitary as well as rigidly centralized administration. There

were presidencies ruled by Governors (and councils)  who were appointed by crown and

provinces ruled by Lt. Governors (and councils)  appointed by GG, the provinces and

presidencies were mere agent of centre. They had to function under their express control and

superintendence.

2. London - Calcutta relations:  Now the administration would be run by the secretary of state who

would be advised by the council of India  consisting of 15 members nominated by the crown (7

of them would be selected from the now superseded Court of Directors). The GG would now be

answerable only to the secretary of state.

3. There was no separation of powers. All power - civil and military, executive and legislative were

with GGinC who were responsible only to SoS. 

4. The entire machinery was bureaucratic, totally unconcerned with public opinion. Continuity was

maintained in civil services and the same recruitment examination (of 1853) was carried on. 

Indian Councils Act, 1861 

Features

1. Council Composition:  Earlier the GGinC included only official members. Now it would include

some non-official members as well. This was not a representative body as all its members were

nominated.

2. Council Powers:  This was not a deliberative body as well since it could consider only those

issues placed before it by GG and could not criticize. The effective legislative powers remained

with GG since (a) his consent was necessary before placing certain issues before the council,

(b) he could veto, (c) he could pass ordinances which would have same force as council's acts.

3. Provincial Councils:  Provincial councils were setup as law making powers were given back to

the provinces. No central / provincial jurisdiction was defined and to introduce any bill in

provincial councils, GG's assent was required.

Indian Councils Act / Lord Cross' Act, 1892 Moderates' Demands / Background

1. They wanted abolition of the India Council which prevented the SoS from initiating liberal

policies in India. They also wanted to broaden the Indian participation in the central and the

provincial legislative councils by having 50% members elected not by the general public, but by

local bodies, chambers of commerce, universities etc. They wanted 2 Indian members in the

GG's executive council and 1 such member in each of the provincial council. 

2. The budget should be referred to the legislature which should have the right to discuss it,

amend it and vote on it. They also wanted the right to appeal directly to the £ parliament

against the GoI.

Features 

1. Central council composition:  Non-official members were to be nominated by Bengal Chamber

of Commerce and provincial councils. There would be no election but selection by the governor

from amongst the recommended candidates by such bodies.

2. Central council powers:  It could now discuss budget and address questions to the executive.

But supplementary questions were not allowed, could not vote on the budget, nor move any

resolutions or demand a vote on any resolution brought by the government.

3. Provincial council composition:  Non-official members were to be nominated by certain local

bodies like municipalities, universities, district boards. There would be no election but selection

by the governor from amongst the recommended candidates by such bodies.

4. Provincial council powers:  It could now discuss budget and address questions to the Executive.

But supplementary questions were not allowed.

Indian Councils Act, 1909The 2nd half of 19th century, particularly the period after the suppression of the 1857 revolt was the high noon of £ imperialism in India.

1. In this period their despotism grew and they were not prepared to give any kind self

governance to Indians. And they could confidently back this by their racist claims. And above all

still manage to come out as the champion of masses.The intensity of Swadesi and the spread of extremism had forced upon the administration some new thoughts on © reforms, while revolutionary terrorism reinforced this process.

1. The Cambridge school explains this shift in £ policy (of not giving any concessions for self

government) in terms of its weak imperialism - nationalism model. £ shared power because the

empire was essentially weak and it could not have survived without the cooperation of the

natives. So there was a gradual Indianization of the civil services and entry of Indians in politics

(first through local self government and now councils). The 1909 (and later) devolution of power

was merely an act to rope in more collaborators at the bottom. 

2. Another hypothesis is that of a fiscal crisis so that roping in Indians would ensure more support

for £ in extracting higher revenue. 

3. However the most important reason was the growth of nationalism which both of the above

theories neglect. Although partition was a settled fact, there was a growing realization in £ that

India can't be ruled with an iron fist. Some concessions are necessary. Moreover the carrots of

these reforms will split the moderates and the extremists and thus weaken the INM. It was also

decided to strengthen the post 1857 alliance with the conservative elements in the Indian

society. 

Devolution of power in the 1909 reforms was the only way to preserve the essentials of the £ empire.1. Mention the 3 prong strategy to divide the INM here. The emergence of radicals meant that

pacification of moderates was the only workable strategy to keep the radicals in check.

Features

1. Central Council Composition:  Elected non-official members were introduced but official majority

was retained. 

2. Central Council Powers:  They could now influence administration policies by moving

resolutions on budget and other issues of public importance except armed forces, foreign

affairs and native states. 

3. Provincial Council Composition:  Elected non-official members were introduced so that the

official majority was gone but many of the non officials were to be nominated by the

government. 

4. Elections were introduced but under various constraints. Details of seat allocation and electoral

qualifications were left to be decided by the local governments which left enough space for

bureaucratic manipulation. Special provision was made for the additional representation of

conservative classes and Muslims. Moreover the electorate was to be based on high property

qualifications. And finally the GoI was given the power to disallow any candidate from

contesting on any grounds.

Reactions - The reforms satisfied none.

1. It was rejected by Congress. It had no element of Swaraj, legislatures were weak and non-

official elected consisted of only a minority. The GG and Governors enjoyed veto power.

2. Elections were indirect and universal adult suffrage was not there. Principal of separate

electorates.

Impact

1. Communalism:  The principle of separate electorates fueled it. Subsequently these electorates

were extended to Sikhs (1919), Dalits (1932), Laborers (1935).

GoI Act, 1919Background

1. Lucknow pact, HRM and then the August Declaration. The moderates were being sidelined by

the radicals and thus the demands of the moderates had to be conceded to save them (which

was in £ interests) and to create divisions in the INM.

Lucknow Pact of 19161. It was essentially a Moderates' draft. It demanded constitutional reforms like expansion of

popular elements in central and provincial legislatures, inclusion of Indians into the Viceroy's

and Provincial Governors' executive council. The executive councils would have at least half

the members as Indians who would be elected by the corresponding legislature. Once elected

they can't be removed by the legislature.

2. Congress accepted communal electorates and fixed proportion of Muslims in central and

provincial legislatures.

3. Congress agreed to it reluctantly to bring Muslims in the INM fold. But after the 1919 reforms

when it realized that it could have the power without the support of Muslims, it went back on the

pact.

Features

1. 3 of the 8 members of GG's executive council will be Indians, but appointed ones.

2. Centre-State Relations:  Subjects of administration were divided into central and provincial.

Even the sources of revenue were divided into central and provincial so that the provinces

could run their administration based on the revenue they generated. Thus the budgets for

provinces also came into place. But this was not federalism, rather act of benevolence. The

centre could still legislate on any subject.

3. Dyarchy in Provinces:  It sought to introduce element of responsible government without

impairing Governor's powers. So subjects were divided into 2 - reserved and transferred.

Reserved were kept only for governor (with his executive council) and transferred for governor

on the advice of CoM.  

4. Composition of Central Council:  Now it was made bicameral. Non-official majority in the lower

house was raised to 70% and in the upper house too they had a majority. The electorates were

arranged on communal basis.

5. Powers of Central Councils:  GG still had overriding power by (a) veto, (b) his consent needed

for introduction of certain bills, (c) he could make ordinances which had same power as acts. 

6. Composition of Provincial Councils:  Nonofficial majority was raised to 70% of total strength.

Electorates were communal.

7. Powers of Provincial Councils:  They could now move resolutions on Budget and levy taxes. But

a provincial bill could become an act only when it received the consent of GG as well. His

consent needed to introduce some bills.

Shortcomings

1. Centre-State Relations:  Administration still remained rigidly centralized. The GG who decided

whether a subject belonged to centre or state, not courts. GG's consent needed for introduction

and passage of some bills. Less important subjects in state list. Centre could still legislate on

any subject.

2. Dyarchy:  Governor had all financial powers. He also controlled the bureaucracy. Less important

subjects and conflicts in subjects. The governor was not bound by advice of CoM even on

transfered subjects. CoM were not collectively responsible to the council, but individually to the

governor. 

3. All the key administrative departments including finance were kept on the “reserved’ side. 

4. The actual division of subjects was haphazard and illogical. The ministers had no full control over

the factories, mines, water, power etc. 

5. Then again, the ministers had to depend completely on the Finance Department which was

supervised by a member of the Governor’s Executive Council. No progressive measure could be put

through without his consent. 

6. The extensive authority of the Governor to ignore the advice of his ministers and to act in his

discretion in case he considered it necessary, ostensibly in the interest of minorities, the depressed

classes, public services or for maintaining peace and tranquillity in the province, virtually made the

ministers powerless even in relation to ‘transferred’ subjects. 

7. The main instruments of administration, namely, the Indian Civil Service and Indian Police, were

under the control of the Governor and were responsible to him and not to the ministers. Thus, an

ICS officer in the rank of Secretary or the Commissioner, being backed by the Governor, could

practically veto a decision of the minister, which resulted in considerable diminution in the authority

of the latter.

 

8. Narrow franchise. Property qualifications restricted it to 12.5% of the adult population. In

addition to muslims, sikhs were given communal electorate as well while the depressed classes

were given nominated seats in legislatures at all level.

GoI Act, 1935Factors Responsible

The Act was thus to corrode the support base of the congress.1. The government had curbed CDM by using force. But it knew force can work only for so long.

So it decided to divide the INM by drawing the moderates out with the lure of reforms. This

would accentuate the differences between left and right wings as left would be opposed to

constitutional process. Once separated, left could be crushed. The right wing once in power

would be cutoff from the masses and lose popularity.

2. Gandhiji had been persuaded by the £ to participate in the 2nd RTC on the basis of 3 promises

- federation, responsible government, reservations and safeguards.

3. Provincial autonomy would weaken the central leadership and create strong provincial leaders.

Thus Congress organization would be weakened @ all-India level. 

4. In rural India the voting rights were given to the rich and the middle peasants who were staunch

supporters of the congress. 

Features

The Act consciously chose federal structure because it would act primarily to protect £ interests rather than hand over the control in the vital areas / The Act only proposed to protect £ interests in

India by sharing power with the loyalist elements / If any change happened at all, the apex of the system moved from London to Delhi.

1. Centre-state relations:  It prescribed a federation with provinces and such native states who

were willing to join as units. But each province and native state was free to chose whether to

join the federation or remain separate. States representatives were to be nominated by the

rulers who would constitute a solid conservative and £ loyal 40% in the upper house. The

federation would come into existence only if > 50% of the princely states formally acceded to it

by signing the Instruments of Accession which would override their previous treaties with the £.

But it established a federation and gave provinces autonomy in their sphere of legislation. The

3 lists were created. There were also emergency provisions. They were no longer delegates of

the centre. Governor now derived his powers from the crown and not GG.

2. Provincial government:  The governor was now required to act on the advice of CoM who were

responsible to the council. But this was balanced by giving wide powers to the governors on

summoning legislatures, giving assent to bills, administering tribal regions, safeguarding

minority rights, privileges of civil servants and £ business interests. And finally they could take

over and run the administration of a province indefinitely. 

3. Central government:  It introduced dyarchy @ centre. On reserved subjects which included

internal security, foreign affairs, defence etc., GG acted solely in his discretion. On the

transfered subjects, he was to act in accordance with the advice of CoM who were responsible

to the legislature. But even here, the GG could act in contrary to the advice tendered by the

CoM if it affected his 'special responsibilities'. In practice, even the CoM was never appointed. 

4. London - Delhi relations:  There was to be a transfer of financial control from London to Delhi in

response to the long standing demand of the GoI for fiscal autonomy.

5. Powers of councils:  GG (and governor in provinces) could veto, suspend proceedings /

discussion on a bill, needed to give assent for introduction of bill. 

6. Electorate:  The electorate was enlarged to 30 mm but high property qualifications meant only

10% could vote. In rural India, thus, the voting rights were given to the rich and the middle

peasants who were staunch supporters of the congress. + communal electorates to everybody.

The GoI Act 1935 could hardly satisfy anybody.1. The ML opposed it because it was afraid of Hindu domination and feared that the proposed

federal structure would be very unitary. All the representatives of £ India to the central

legislature were to be elected by the provincial assemblies (without any provision for

proportional representation) and this would go against the muslims who were minorities in all

but 4 provinces. So although they didn't oppose the federation in public they preferred to allow

more autonomy to the provincial governments.

2. The congress didn't like the proposed federation because ~33 - 40% seats would be filled in by

the princes.

States on Federation

1. Their main objection to federation was that the Act still left the question of paramountcy

unsettled. Despite the lapse of all treaties with the crown, £ were not willing to give away their

paramountcy over the princes. And thus as the paramount power £ still retained the right to

interfere in their internal matters and to even overthrow them if necessary. So for the princes

there was nothing to be gained in joining the federation.

2. The 1825 Butler Committee too didn't provide any solution to the paramountcy issue. The only

concession it gave to the states was that paramountcy would not be transferred without their

consent to any democratically elected government in £ India but there was no dilution of £

paramountcy.

3. The princes supported the idea of federation in the Nehru report of 1928 hoping to get rid of the

£ paramountcy problem. Thus in this federation they would be able to secure their autonomy as

well as break free of £. Thus the Chamber of Princes endorsed it and federation became a ©

demand of the princes. But in the GoI Act 1935 £ made it clear that their paramountcy will not

lapse despite the princes joining the federation. So joining the federation became meaningless.

4. Their second fear was that the democratic government at the center would have little sympathy

for their autocratic causes and thus would encourage democratic forces in their territories as

well.

Provincial Administration1. The Regulating Act of 1773 and Pitt's India Act of 1784 put restrictions on the provinces with

respect to making wars, forming alliances etc. and subordinated them to the Bengal province.

2. Still the provincial governments used to enjoy great deal of autonomy in administrative matters

till 1833 when their power to pass laws was taken away and their expenses put to greater

control.

3. But the centralized system failed to be effective in India and expenses began to run high. So a

decision was taken to decentralize.

4. In 1870, Lord Mayo decided to give a fixed sum to the provincial governments for

administration of certain services like police, jail etc. The provincial governments could spend

it as they wished.

5. In 1877, Lord Lytton enlarged it by transferring to provinces certain heads of expenditure and to

meet the needs, provinces were given a fixed share of revenue from certain sources like

excise, income tax.

6. In 1882, under Lord Ripon sources were divided into 3 - reserved for provinces, reserved for

centre and sharing between provinces and centre.

Local Bodies1. With changing times, there was a need to improve civic amenities. But finances were tight and

taxes already high. So government realized that if it made locals to pay more for benefit in their

own areas, they won't mind. They also believed associating Indians with administration in some

capacity would help diffuse the tension.

2. Between 1864 to 1868 local bodies were formed but they consisted of nominated members

only and chaired by the DM. Thus they were not local self government.

3. In 1882, Lord Ripon issued a circular saying local bodies will consist of a majority of non-

officials who would be elected wherever feasible. A non-official could also become the

chairman of the body. But the franchise was limited to a few only.

Labor Acts1. The pressure of £ manufacturers was instrumental since they didn't want Indians to

manufacture cheaply! (Height of blind criticism)

2. First Indian Factory Act was passed in 1881 under Lord Ripon and dealt with child labor.

Second Act was passed in 1891 and dealt with women and child labor. But they didn't apply to

the € plantations.

3. The condition of plantation workers remained miserable and government acts gave protection

to the planter only. The workers once contracted couldn't go away or refuse to work. He could

be arrested.

4. Only in 20th century were better labor laws passed.  

Simon CommissionBackground

1. The provisions of GoI Act, 1919 mandated creation of a commission 10 years hence to review

the working of the Act. But the conservatives were about to lose the polls, hence wanted to

complete this important assignment before the polls as a part of poll gimmicks.

Reactions

1. It triggered a wave of mass protests and charged up the political climate in India. Gave a new

lease of life to Indian nationalism. The main point of opposition was that there was no Indian in

the Commission.

2. New Protest Methods:  In Lucknow, Khalik-uj-Jama coined the term "Simon Go Back". He also

flew black kites near the venue Simon was holding his meeting. Black flags were shown. The

Bombay workers had a clash with the capitalists who went to welcome Simon.

Report

1. It suggested the replacement of dyarchy with full responsible government in the provinces with

the provision of some emergency powers in the hands of the governors. 

2. It recommended autonomy for the provinces as far as practicable and visualized a federation at the

Centre, comprising both British India and the Indian States. 

3. It didn't suggest any change in the central government.

Nehru ReportDelhi Proposals by ML

1. Reservations of one-third seats in central legislature.

2. In Punjab and Bengal, Muslim majority should be guaranteed via proportional representation

and in communities where Muslims were in minority, existing system of reservations should be

continued.

3. Sind be made a separate province.

4. NWFP be treated as a full fledged province.

Provisions

1. It demanded dominion status on the lines of Australia and Canada.

2. It rejected the principle of separate electorates. Seats would be reserved for religious minorities only in centre and in provinces in proportion to their population.

3. India should be a federation on the basis of linguistic provinces and provincial autonomy. Sind

be made a separate province from Bombay and NWFP be a full fledged province. 

4. It provided for universal adult suffrage, secular state, freedom to form unions.

Reactions

1. Congress:  It accepted the report and decided to give 1 year to government to implement the

report failing which a mass civil disobedience movement will be launched and goal of INC will

be 'complete independence'.

2. Youth Section:  They were dissatisfied because it compromised with the goal of complete

independence and merely asked for dominion status. Under their pressure in 1928, it was

decided to give government 1 year to implement this report else congress would adopt

complete independence as a goal and launch a mass CDM.

3. ML:  It rejected it because there was no provision for reservation in majority provinces and also

one-third reservations for Muslims in Central Legislature. Jinnah went on to propose Calcutta

Amendments and then his 14 points which were a reiteration of his unfulfilled Delhi Proposals +

'residuary powers be vested with provinces'.

4. HM and Sikh League:  Rejected the proposals on Sind, Punjab, Bengal and NWFP.

Round Table ConferencesCommunal Awards, 1932

1. It awarded to each minority a specific number of seats in legislatures to be elected on the basis

of communal electorates. It also declared Dalits to be a minority community and extended the

communal electorates to them.

2. Gandhiji opposed the communal electorates for Dalits and demanded that increased number of

seats be reserved for them but they should be elected by everyone. 

Elections of 1937

Gandhiji's Strategy towards Elections

1. After the withdrawal of CDM 3 rival factions arose in Congress. One favored elections, other

constructive work, third led by left favored continuation of mobilization of peasants and workers

into their respective unions and their affiliation with Congress.

2. Gandhiji conceded to the demand of liberals. Allowed them to participate in the elections and

also shielded them from accusations of being lesser patriots. He said that though

constitutionalism can't give India freedom, Congressmen who can't offer satyagraha may not sit

idle and choose to express their patriotic energies in the councils provided they don't get

sucked into it.

3. At the same time, he also conciliated left by backing Nehru for Congress presidentship and

stressing that CDM withdrawal doesn't mean compromise. 

4. But he sensed that he was getting out of sync with changing thought in Congress. He

disagreed with participating in elections, he disagreed with left, people had no faith in his

constructive work program. So he quit Congress in 1934.

Congress Debate on participating in the elections

Left1. It believed participating in elections would mean going back to pre-1919 era and abandoning

the revolutionary unconstitutional path.

2. Accepting ministries would mean accepting responsibility without power since the colonial

nature of the state remained same.

Pro-Office1. Constitutional process was only a short term tactics. Idea is to expose the hollowness.

2. It is just a part of STS strategy of Gandhi. Ministries could be used to promote constructive

work.

Impact

While fighting the Raj, the Congress itself was becoming the Raj.1. Formation of ministries changed the entire psychological mood in the country. It was seen as a

victory.

2. Civil Liberties & INM:  It led to increase in civil liberties and hence increase in youth, worker and

peasant movements.

3. Zamindari System:  Congress couldn't have overthrown the zamindari system because - (a) The

ministries didn't have enough powers to do so. The sanctity of administration was guaranteed

by GG and governors who were not under the control of ministry. The ministries also didn't

have enough financial resources to do so. (b) The multi-class nature of the INM also didn't

permit it to please one class at the expense of another. Many small landlords were also

Congress supporters. (c) For any bill to be passed, support of both houses was necessary. But

the upper house was elected on a very narrow franchise and represented reactionary elements.

So anti-zamindari bills could never be passed. But it worked to reduce rent, debt burden, illegal

practices. It also restored the lands confiscated during the no rent campaign under CDM.

4. Workers' Relations:  The basic approach was to promote workers' interests while protecting

industrial peace. Political arbitration in the workers' matters was increased. Industrial Disputes

Act 1938 was passed which provided for a Court of Industrial Arbitration. No strike or lockout

can happen within 4 months of submission of matter to the court.

5. Dalits:  Temple entry laws were passed. No government institution was to recognize any

practice of untouchability. Efforts were made to increase their participation in education and

police and administration.

6. Congress Organization:  Serious differences emerged. Right wing in power became susceptible.

They began to use state machinery to suppress left wing and nationalist movements. Congress

was weakening. There were cases where Congress leaders outside power were arrested for

leading protests.

7. GoI Act:  It led to the failure of intentions behind GoI Act. There was no split in Congress and

INM remained as strong as ever. On the other hand, the morale of the bureaucracy was

lowered.

8. Princely States:  It led to greater sense of urgency for responsible governments in states and

integration of states' movements with INM because people in states had their expectations fired

up.

August OfferBackground

1. The Congress ministries resigned when the £ government made India a party to the war

without consulting its people. £ government was happy to see them resign as now trouble

would be less. 

2. But the war began to turn against £ and they realized the importance of Indian help. To re

conciliate, August offer was announced in August, 1940.

Provisions

1. GG's executive council to be immediately expanded to include more Indians.

2. A War Advisory Council to be setup to help the government in managing war needs.

3. A constitution making body will be setup after the end of the war. Subject to the fulfillment of

certain conditions like treaties with native states, minority rights' protection, defense of India,

position of all India services, the constitution making process will be entrusted primarily to

Indians.

Reactions

1. Congress:  It rejected the offer because - (a) Congress wanted complete Independence

immediately. £ only promised it after the war (that too subject to all the above conditions) and

only the expansion of GG's executive council for the time being. This was nowhere close to

complete independence. (b) Emphasis on giving full weight to minority opinion was criticized by

the Congress as it complicated the scenario and any solution would never emerge. It amounted

to giving veto power to ML and HM.

Cripps MissionBackground

1. After Battle of £ was over in 1940 end, £ reverted back to the policy of suppressing nationalists

and not paying attention to their demands. But again by 1942, £ was reeling. US had joined and

was putting pressure on £ to win support of India.

2. He discussed all the issues with Indian leadership but failing to find a common point, released

his pre-planned document in April 1942.

Provisions

1. During war time, the GG's executive council will be completely Indianized (except war

department and that GG will continue to have a veto though) and will work as an interim

government.

2. An elected constituent assembly comprising solely of Indians would be setup after the war to

frame Indian constitution. Such an assembly would be drawn from provincial legislatures and

will have proportional representation. Steps will also be taken for the participation of native

states in the constitution making process.

3. £ will accept any constitution prepared by the constituent assembly subject to the fulfillment of

the condition that each province will have the right to accept or reject the draft constitution. If a

province does so, it can enter into a separate arrangement with £ in its sovereign right.

Comparison with August Offer

1. Constitution Drafting Process:  August Offer was less clear on the details of the constitution

making body. It merely said such a body will be setup and the process will be run primarily by

Indians. Cripps mission was clear that such a body shall be elected by provincial legislatures,

will have proportionate representation, representatives from native states and will comprise

solely of Indians. 

2. Integrity of the Country:  August Offer made no attempt to divide the country. Cripps Mission

deliberately left such a possibility open by insisting that each province shall have the right to

reject the constitution. 

Reactions

1. Congress:  Rejected it because (a) Congress wanted even war department for Indians and GG

not to have any veto power. GG should only work according to the advice tendered by the

executive council. (b) It was against the right given to the provinces to accept / reject the

constitution. (c) It demanded that representatives of the native states should be elected, not

nominated. 

2. Muslim League:  Rejected it because (a) It didn't provide for setting up of 2 constituent

assemblies for India and Pakistan. (b) There were no express provisions for the safeguard of

minority interests.

3. Hindu Mahasabha:  Rejected it because (a) It opposed the continuation of separate electorates

for the provincial elections. (b) It was also against the independence given to the provinces to

reject the constitution.

4. Sikhs:  Opposed it because of the provision of independence of provinces.

5. Dalits:  Opposed it because no protection for dalits.

Wavell Plan, 1945Pre-Wavell Diplomacy

CR Formula1. In 1944 when it became clear Allied would win, Indian nationalists decided to put pressure on £.

But at that time there was a deadlock between Congress and ML. So in order to resolve this

deadlock, C Rajgopalachari proposed this plan which was also endorsed by Gandhiji.

2. Congress and ML should work together to pressurize £ for independence. The issue of partition

could be decided after the independence.

3. Even in the situation where a separate state was created, cooperation would be retained in

matters like currency, communications, defence and foreign affairs. 

4. Talks were held between Gandhi and Jinnah over the plan but failed as Jinnah insisted that the

issue of partition be settled first.

Desai-Liaqat Ali Talks1. Both (Bhula Bhai Desai and Liaqat Ali) were members of central legislative assembly and

personal friends. To break the deadlock between Congress and ML, both agreed that Congress

and ML will share equal number of positions in the interim government and will work together

for independence.

2. When such an understanding became public, Jinnah publicly repudiated these talks and ML

refused to follow it.

Wavell Plan & Shimla Conference

1. It came in the middle of 1945 when the war in Europe had ended. He declared that £ would still

abide by the promises made in the Cripps Plan and came up with his own plan. 

2. According to his plan, Viceroy's executive council will be converted into interim government

immediately. Members to such interim government will be 50% caste Hindus and 50% Muslims.

Simultaneously a constituent assembly will be elected on the basis of proportional

representation to draft a constitution. The interim government will function till the constitution is

drafted. To build a consensus for his plan, he called a conference in Shimla.

3. Shimla conference failed. Jinnah demanded that all the Muslim members of the interim

government should be the nominees of Muslims (Note this is not very different from the Desai-

Liaqat talks which Jinnah rejected! But the context here was so different.). Congress naturally

couldn't have accepted it because it would have meant giving up its secular credentials and

becoming a Hindu only party. It failed because Jinnah was allowed to effectively veto all the

proceedings. 

Impact of Wavell Plan & Shimla Conference

1. ML was allowed to veto the proceedings. Its prestige and claim to be a representative of all

Muslims sky-rocketed. £ government virtually accepted that ML was the sole representative of

Muslims.

2. It led to strengthening of partition movement because ML used this enhance prestige to press

for more radical demands and on this credibility it won the elections held in 1945.

Cabinet Mission (June, 1946) Background

1. It came as £ increasingly realized that it was impossible to hold India any more. There was the

cold war effect, pressure exerted by Indian nationalists, the growing nationalism in bureaucracy

and military etc. By now their strategy had changed.

2. Earlier they were stroking communalism in the hope to divide the nationalists and delay

freedom. But now they realized that freedom was inevitable. Cold war politics dictated that the

new entity should remain a friend to £. But how would it be possible if 2 mutually hostile entities

are created. One would necessarily gravitate towards Soviet Union and it will get a foothold in S

Asia. So Cabinet Mission rejected the idea of Pakistan. To this extent Atlee had declared that

minority will not be allowed to veto any progress by majority.

Provisions

1. Viceroy's executive council will become the interim government and all members except the

viceroy and commander-in-chief will be Indians.

2. An attempt was made to strike a balance between aspirations of Congress and ML. Provinces

should be free to form groups (sub-federation) with Executives and Legislatures, and each group

could determine the provincial subjects to be taken in common. A 3 tier federal structure was

proposed - union, groups, provinces for both £ India and princely states. Congress was

appeased by rejecting the demand of Pakistan. ML was appeased by creating 3 grouping of

provinces. Hindu majority provinces of UP, Bihar, Odisha, Central Provinces, Bombay, Madras

were to be in Group A. Muslim majority provinces of Punjab, Sind, NWFP would be in Group B.

Bengal and Assam would be in Group C. After the first general elections a province could come

out of a group. After 10 years a province could call for a reconsideration of grouping or the

union constitution.  

3. High degree of provincial autonomy was adopted. The new central government will have

powers over only communication, defence and foreign affairs with the right to raise revenue for

the discharge of these functions. All the residual powers will lie with the provinces. 

4. The constituent assembly was to be elected to draft the © for whole of India, on a proportional

basis by provincial legislative assemblies. The guiding principal should be that 1 man in

constituent assembly should represent roughly 1 mm men.

Reactions

1. Congress:  It accepted only the provisions regarding constituent assembly while rejecting the

ML interpretation of groupings. ML asserted groupings were mandatory while Congress asked

the government to clarify that the groupings were optional i.e. the provinces should be ale to

come out of a grouping before the 1st general elections itself.  (Congress was strong in NWFP

and Assam and was hoping these provinces will not join their respective groupings). Congress

claimed that the Mission Plan was against Pakistan, ML's veto was gone and there would be

only one constituent assembly. JLN declared that the congress had agreed to nothing else

apart from the participation in the constituent assembly and that the group system would

probably collapse as Assam and NWFP may not want to join it. When the £ clarified that ML's

interpretation of the groupings was correct, Congress rejected the plan and refused to join the

government.

2. ML:  It accepted the plan initially and was ready to join the government. It maintained that the

groupings were a sanction for Pakistan. However, it wanted the right to consider the union

constitution now and not after 10 years. But when Congress refused to join the government, ML

pressurized the £ to go ahead with the interim government formation without the Congress. £

made it clear that any government was not possible without Congress. So ML withdrew its

support and decided to press for Pakistan. The events which followed made partition inevitable.

Post-Cabinet Mission Diplomacy

Breakdown Plan (September 1946) 1. To pressurize the Congress to accept the Cabinet Mission, £ threatened to remove

administrative and military machinery from parts of India gradually. Sovereignty would be

decided by the concerned province / native state on their own. £ would withdraw to the

Pakistani provinces leaving Congress to deal with the rest of India.

2. So Congress had to join the interim government which was formed on 2 September 1946. ML

had not, however, joined it yet.

ML Diplomacy

1. Once the £ refused to overlook the Congress, ML decided to militantly press ahead for the

demand of Pakistan. On 29 July 1946, it announced, "Lekar rahenge Pakistan." It announced

that it will observe 10 August 1946 as the Direct Action Day and would force Congress and £ to

agree to Pakistan even if force had to be resorted to.

2. Massive communal riots broke out all over the country. It appeared that India was going down

the road of a civil war. Congress and £ now were compelled to agree to the possibility of

partition. 

3. ML joined the interim government in October 1946 without giving up on direct action to wreck

its functioning and to prove any governance of India was not possible without the cooperation

of ML. It wanted to make sure state machinery was not used against ML.  When £ announced

that it will only accept a constitution which was drafted by the consent of all major communities,

ML promptly resigned from the interim government as well as constituent assembly in

December 1946.

February Declaration & Mountbatten Plan 

Background

1. £ had increasingly realized the inevitability of partition. Their aim was to contain Soviet Union

and hence establish friendly relations with both nations. For this, instead of identifying

communal elements and then to eliminate them, they followed a policy of friendly negotiations

with both. They sought to win both parties by saying that if the constituent assembly was not

representative of both communities, power would be transfered to 2 states. Congress thought

even if ML withdrew constituent assemblies will still have Muslims. So it agreed. ML withdrew.

2. On 20 February 1947, £ prime minister Atlee announced that £ would quit India in any case by

30 June 1948. He sent Mountbatten to oversee the transfer of process. The declaration came

in the hope that it would shock the parties and pressurize them to move towards a solution out

of the deadlock.

3. Immediately upon arrival Mountbatten held large number of discussions with Indian leaders. On

3 June 1947, Atlee announced Mountbatten Plan. Also by now Pakistan's creation had become

a necessity.

He realized on his very arrival that it was virtually impossible to hand over the power to a united India.

1. He proposed Plan Balkan in April which was to partition Punjab and Bengal and to hand over

the power to each province or sub province which would have the freedom to join either

constituent assembly based on the right to self determination. Demission of power to provinces

and sub provinces in the absence of a strong center would have definitely led to balkanization

of India.

2. Jinnah rejected it too for he was not willing to accept a plan which gave him a truncated

Pakistan.

Provisions

1. 2 dominion status states of India and Pakistan were to be created. Hindu majority provinces

that had already accepted the constituent assembly had no choice but the muslim dominated

provinces had the freedom to join either constituent assembly.

2. Native states would have complete freedom to decide their own destiny.

3. Separate boundary commission would be setup to decide the boundary between India and

Pakistan. Punjab and Bengal would be partitioned as well. ML's position was granted in the

sense Pakistan was created and Congress' in the sense such a Pakistan was kept as small as

possible.

The fatal defect in this scheme was that neither Jinnah nor ML had ever defined the rights of non Muslims in Pakistan.Reactions

1. Congress:  It accepted partition and dominion status as it believed power should be grabbed as

soon as possible so that the communal situation in the country could be met with a firm hand.

Hence the early transfer of power on 15 August 1947 instead of 30 June 1948.

Constitution Development process