Complementary Course for BA ENGLISH / BA ECONOMICS / BA ...

HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II

1

HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THEPRESENT): II

School of Distance Education

University of Calicut

CBCSS UG

(2019 Admission Onwards)

SEMESTER III/IV

Complementary Course for

BA ENGLISH / BA ECONOMICS / BA SOCIOLOGY

SDE

Rectangle

SDE

Typewritten text

19306


2

University of CalicutSchool of Distance Education

Study Material

B.A. HISTORY

SEMESTER III/IV


Prepared by:

Scrutinised by:Sri. Ashraf Koyilothan KandiyilChairman, Board of Studies - History (UG)

CBCSS (2019 Admission Onwards)

MODULES I, II &IIISri. Sunil Kumar G.,Assistant ProfessorN.S.S. College, Manjeri.

MODULE IVDr. N. Padmanabhan,Associate Professor & HeadPG Department of HistoryCAS College, Madayi P.O.,Payangadi RS-670358Kannur - Dt., Kerala.


3

CONTENTS

MODULE I GANDHIAN TOOLS FOR STRUGGLES

MODULE III CRITIQUE OF GANDHI

MODULE II GANDHIAN CONSTRUCTIVE PROGRAMMES

MODULE IV INDIA: THE REPUBLIC


4

MODULE I

GANDHIAN TOOLS FOR STRUGGLES

The role of Mahatma Gandhi in Indian Freedom Struggle is considered the mostsignificantas he single-handedly spearheaded the movement for Indian independence. Thepeaceful and non-violent techniques of Mahatma Gandhi formed the basis of freedomstruggle against theBritish yoke. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was born on 2ndOctober 1869. After he cameback to India from South Africa, where he worked as abarrister, Gopal Krishna Gokhale,who led the Congress party, introduced MahatmaGandhi to the concerns in India and thestruggle of the people. The Indian independencemovement came to a head between the years1918 and 1922.A series of non-violencecampaigns of Civil Disobedience Movementwerelaunched by the Indian NationalCongress under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi.The fo-

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869-1948), herein after Gandhiji, was undoubtedlythe most authentic and celebrated representative of the wisdom and culture of India in our times. His countrymen address him, with respect, as the Mahatma. For many,among the greatest, Gandhiji was the great. He was a social reformer, an economist, a political philosopher and a seeker of truth. We consider him as a 'yugapurusha', one who inaugurated a new era. The contribution of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi to the Indian national movement was un-paralleled. He made the Indian National Congress a peoples' Congress and the national movement a massmovement. He made people fearless and bold and taught them the non-violent method for fighting against injustice. He had a passion for individual liberty which was closely bound with his understanding of truth and self-realization. His search for truth led him to make deep forays within his own inner self as inspired him to probe into the natural and social world around him,particularly the tradition which he considered hisown. Gandhi’s philosophy was a profound engagement with modernity and its pitfalls. Against the evils of wanton industrialization, materialism and selfish pursuits, Gandhi suggested, in , turn, swadeshi, primacy of the self and trusteeship;against the institution of state, as the force personified, and the prevalent notion of democracy where only heads are counted, he-favored a swaraj type of democracy where everything springs from the free individual and where decisions are made bottom-up with the locus of power below. He proposed a minimal slate, vested only with coordinative powers, that supports decentralization with the autonomous individual as its base of support. A spiritual perspective infuses Gandhiji's whole approach to life. This political understanding and practices, suggestions on the economy, social mobilization and practical life have their basis in immorality and ethics. Pursuit of Truth is his mantra and non-violence was integral to it.Among Gandhiji's notable writings, mention may be made of An Autobiography: The Story,of' My , Ex- periments with Truth; The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi; Panchayati Raj; Sarvodayaan- dHind Swaraj. He edited Young India which he later renamed as Harijan which remained his mouthpiece. Gandhi was also influenced by many: Tolstoy (Gospels in Brief; What to Do, The Kingdoms of God is Within You), Ruskin (Unto This Last), Thoreau (Civil Disobedience), Swami Vivekananda, Gokhale and Tilak, just to mention a few. He was familiar with the teachings of the major religions of the world. He was excep tionally well-read and eventranslated such works as Plato's Republic into Gujarati. He maintained extensive correspondence with some of the mostoutstanding figures of his time.


5

cus was to weaken the Britishgovernment through non cooperation. The protests weremainly against abolition of salttax, land revenue, reducing military expenses etc.

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was ‘a man of millennium’ who imparts the lessonof truth, Non-violence and peace. The philosophy and ideology is relevant still today. Thephilosophy of Gandhiwas based on truth, sacrifice, non-violence selfless service andcooperation. In modern times,nonviolent methods of action have been a powerful tool forsocial protest. According to Gandhione should be brave and not a coward. He shouldpresent his views, suggestions and thoughtswithout being violent. One should fight a warwith the weapons of truth and non violence. Gandhisaid that ‘There is no god higher thantruth’. According to Gandhi’s thoughts nonviolence isultimate solution of every kind ofproblem in the world. Gandhi was single person whofought against the British with theweapons of truth and Non-violence by persuading countrymento walk on the path of non-violence. Gandhi leading a decades-long nonviolent struggle againstBritish rule in India,which eventually helped India, wins its independence in 1947. By theefforts of GandhiIndia became independent. Gandhi initiated non violence activities likeQuit Indiamovement and non-operation movement. Gandhi could never have done what hedidalone, but with his ability to identify a seed here, a seed there and nurture it, he was able tocre-ate a forest of human change. He understood that it was not enough to be a leader, butto createleaders. In quite simple and clear words, Gandhism consists of the ideas, whichMahatma Gandhiput forth before human world. Along with that, to the maximumpossible extent, MahatmaGandhi treated his individual life in accordance with theseideas. Clearly; Gandhism is amixture of Gandhi’s concepts and practices. The basicground ship of Gandhism happens tobe non-violence. Thenon-violence is the mostancient eternal value. This non-violence is theground of ancient-most civilization andculture of India. Mahatma Gandhi said on this veryaccount while making his conceptsand practices based on non-violence: ‘I have nothingnew to teach you’ Truth and non-violence are as old as hill. As we know, non-violence andtruth are two sides of the samecoin. After knowing Gandhism, it is imperative for us to knowclearly the concept of non-violence also as it accords the ground for Gandhism. Gandhi’s impor-tance in the politicalworld scenario is twofold. First, he retrieved non-violence as a powerful politi-cal tool andsecondly manifestation of a higher spiritual goal, culmination in world peace. For Gan-dhi,means were as important as the end and there could be only one means-that of non-violence. As a situation opposite to violence is non-violence, we can firmly state, total-nonviolence consists in not hurting some other one’s intellect, speech or action perownthought, utterance or deeds and not to deprive some one of his life. Mahatma Gandhi fullya-grees with above-mentioned derivation of non-violence. He himself has said, Non-violenceis not a concrete thing as it has generally been enunciated. Undoubtedly, it is apart ofnon-violence to abstain from hurting some living being, but it is only an iotapertaining toits identity. The principle of nonviolence is shattered by every evil thought,false utterance, hateor wishing something bad unto someone. It is also shattered perpossession of necessaryworldly things. In this chain Mahatma Gandhi clarified in anedition of Young India: ‘To hurtsomeone, to think of some evil unto someone or to snatchone’s life under anger or selfishness, isviolence. In contrast, purest non-violence involvesa tendency and presuming towards spiritualor physical benefit unto every one withoutselfishness and with pure thought after cool andclear deliberations’. The ultimateyardstick of violence or non-violence is the spirit behindthe action. There are manyexamples of their use like resistance, non-violent resistance,and civil revolution.Mahatma Gandhi had to struggle in his whole life, but he never disap-pointed, he continuedhis innate faith in non-violence and his belief in the methods of Satya-graha.Thesignificance of Satyagraha was soon accepted worldwide. Martin Luther King adopted


6

themethods of Satyagraha in his fight against the racial discrimination of the Americanau-thorities in 1950. Gandhism is very much contextual today on this accord. Itissignificant.We should grasp importance of Gandhism while analyzing it. Presently a bigportion of theworld happens to be under Democratic system of Government.Theoretically, this systemstands out to be the best up to now. This is a truth. It is thebestbecause people are connected with itdirectly or indirectly at every level. Not only this, itis this very system, which provides maxi-mum opportunities of public progress anddevelopment. People can themselves decide in thissystem the mode of their welfare.However, even though being theoretically the best system ofgovernment, if we peruse thedemocratic nations, we first of all find that there is non-equal devel-opment of the citizens.We subsequently find that these nations are more or less victimized by re-gionalism. Theyhave problem relating to language. They are under clutches of terror-ism andcommunalism. There is also the problem of negation of human rights in these na-tions.There are other vivid problems akin to mention above and peace is far away so longasthese problems exist. All citizens must have equal development and they should have-communal harmony towards making all citizens collective and unified partners inprogress.But, in reality, it is not so. It is essential that the nations ofdemocratic system ofgovernment shouldbe free from above-mentioned problems, must be capable of ensuringequal development of their allcitizens and the citizens concerned must march forward onpath of progress in unified way alongwith rendering contribution to world peace. Gandhidemonstrated to a world, weary with warsand continuing destruction that adherence toTruth and Non-violence is not meant for indi-viduals alone but can be applied in globalaffairs too. Gandhi’s vision for the country and hisdreams for the community as a wholestill hold good for India. He got the community to ab-sorb and reflect true values ofhumanity and to participate in tasks that would promote thegreater good. These issues arestill relevant to what free India is and represents. The maincause of worry today isintolerance and hatred leading to violence and it is here the valuesof Gandhi need to beadhered to with more passion.

Satyagraha and Ahimsa

Truth or Satya, for Gandhiji, is God himself. He therefore changed the statement,"God isTruth", later in his life into, "Truth is God" and suggested that it was one of thefundamental dis-coveries of his life's experiments. It is Truth, lze says, that exists; whatdoes not exist is un-truth. The life of man, for Gandhiji, is amarc11 of his pursuit in searchof Truth or God. Accord-ing to Gandhiji, truth is what the inner self experiences at anypoint of time; it 'is an answerto one's conscience; it is what responds to one's moral self.He was convinced that knowledgealone" leads a person to the truth while ignorance takesone away from the truth. Satyagrahameans urge for Satya, or truth. Satyagraha is notmerely the insistence on truth; it is, infact, holding on to truth through ways which aremoral and non-violent; it is notthe impositionof one's will over others, but it is appealingto the reasoning of the opponent; it is not coercion but ispersuasion. Gandhiji highlightsseveral attributes of satyagraha. It is a moral weapon and doesnot entertain ill-feelingtowards theadversary; it is a non-violent device and calls upon its user tolove his enemy;it does not weaken the opponent but strengthens him morally; it is a weapon of thebraveand is constructive in its approach. For Gandhiji, a Satyagrahi is always truthful, morallyim-bued, non-violent and a person without any malice; he is one who is devoted to theserviceof all. Truth, he firmly believed, can be attained only through non-violence whichwas not negative,meaning absence of violence, but was positively definedby him as love.Resort to nonviolence isrecourse to love. In its positive sense, non-violence means lovefor others; in its negativesense, it seeks no injury to others, both in words as well asdeeds. Gandhiji talked of non-


7

violence of different people.There is the non-violence ofthe brave: one has the force but hedoes not use it as a principle; there is the non-violenceof the weak: one does not have faith innon-violence, but he uses it for attaining hisobjectives; there is the nonviolence of the coward:it is not non-violence, but impotency,more harmful than violence. For Gandhiji, violence wasa better option than cowardice.

Through non-violence one appeal to the truth that nestles in people and makes the latterre-alize it in themselves, come around, and join hands in the common march to truth alongwith thosewhom they earlier considered as their adversaries. Given the enmeshing ofmeans andends, Gandhiji, often saw Love, Truth, God and Non-violence asinterchangeable terms.Truth or God or Self-realization being man's ultimate goal in life,this goal can be attained onlythrough non-violence or ahimsa.

Champaran

Champaran in the Tirhut division of North Bihar had been seething with agrariandiscontentfor some time. European planters had established indigo farms and factories inChamparan at thebeginning of the 19th century. By 1916-17, a large part of Champaranwas held by three proprie-tors, the Bettiah, Ram Nagar and Madhuban estates. Bettiah wasthe largest estate consisting of overone andhalf thousand villages. Most of these villageswere not managed by landlords but wereleased to thikadars or temporary tenure holders,of whom the most influential group was Europeanindigo planters. The basic issue of thetrouble was the system of indirect cultivation whereby peas-ants leased land from planters,binding themselves to grow indigo each year on specified land inreturn for an advance atthe beginning of the cultivation season. Indigo was cultivated underthe system calledTinkathia by which atenant had to cultivate indigo at three-twentieths ofhis holdings,which generally constituted the best portion of the land although some slight modifi-cationwere made in Tinkatiya system in 1908 it did not bring any material change in the-degrading conditions of the tenants. Planters always forced them to sell their crop forafixed and usually uneconomic price. At this time the demand of Indian indigo in the worldmarketwas declining due to the increasing production of synthetic indigo in Germany.Mostplantersat Champaran realised that indigo cultivation was no longer a payingproposition. The plant-ers tried to save their own position by facing the tenants to bear theburden of their losses. They of-fered to release the tenants from growing indigo (which wasa basic condition in their agreementwith planters) if the latter paid compensation ordamages. Apart from this, the planters heavilyinflated the rents and imposed many illegallevies on the tenants. Gandhi took no interest inthe case of indigo cultivators ofChamparan when this question was discussed at the Lucknowsession of the Congress in1916 on the ground that he knew nothing about the matter. ButRaj Kumar Shukul apeasant from Champaran, after strenuous efforts prevailed uponGandhi to visitChamparan. Gandhi arrived in Bihar and started making investigations in person.When hereached Motihari, the headquarters of the district of Champaran, he was servedwith anorder to quit Champaran as he was regarded a danger to the publicpeace. Gandhi decidedtodisobey the order 'out of a sense of public responsibility. He was immediately arrested andtried inthe district court. But the Bihar government ordered the Commissioner and DistrictMagistrate toabandon proceedings and grant to Gandhi the facilities forinvestigation.Gandhi waswarned not to stir up trouble, but he was free to continue hisSchool of Distance Education-IndianNationalMovementGandhianPhase (1917-1947)Page10investigations into the cultivator’sgrievances. The Government appointed ChamparanAgrarian Committee with Gandhi as oneof its members. The committee unanimouslyrecommended the abolition ofTinkathiasystem


8

and many illegal exactions under whichthe tenants groaned. The enhanced rents were re-duced, and as for the illegal recoveries,the committee recommended 25% refund. The majorrecommendations of the Committeewere included in the Champaran Agrarian Act of 1917 Inthis agitation, the chiefsupporters of Gandhi came from the educated middle class. For instance,Rajendra Prasad,Gorakh Prasad, Kirpalani and some other educated persons from the cities worke-das hisclose associates. LocalMahjanstraders and villageMukhtars(attorneys) also helpedhim.But i t was the peasantry which gave him the real massive support. And heapproachedthem in a most simple and unassuming manner. In the countryside, he oftenwalked on footor travelled in a bullock cart. He came where ordinary people lived andtalked in the lan-guage they understood.

Ahmadabad Mill Strike

Gandhi organised the third campaign in Ahmedabad where he intervened in adispute be-tween the mill owners and workers. Ahmedabad was becoming the leadingindustrial town inGujarat. But the mill owners often faced scarcity of labour and they hadto pay high wages toattract enough mill hands. In 1917 plague outbreak made labourshortage more acute be-cause itdrove many workers away from Ahmedabad to thecountryside. To dissuade theworkers from leaving the town, the mill owners decided topay 'Plague Bonus' which wassometimes as high as 75% of the normal wages of theworkers. After the epidemic was over,themill owners decided to discontinue the PlagueBonus. But the workers opposed the employersmove and argued that it was helping themto offset the war time rise in the cost of living. Themill owners were prepared to give20% increase but the workers weredemanding a 50%raise in the wages in view of theprice hike. Gandhi was kept informed about the working con-ditions in Ahmedabad millsby one of theMahatma Gandhi’ssecretaries of the Gujarat Sabha. Gan-dhi knew AmbalalSarabhai, a mill owner, as the latter had financially helped Gan-dhi'sAshram.Moreover,Ambalal's sister. Anasuya Sarabhai had reverence for Gandhi. Gandhidiscussed theworkers problems with Ambalal Sarabhai and decided to intervene in the dis-pute. Bothworkers and mill owners agreed to refer the issue to a board of arbitration con-sisting ofthree representatives of the employers and three of the workers with the British Collec-toras Chairman. Gandhi was included in the board as representing the workers. But, suddenlythemill owners decided to withdraw from the board on the ground that Gandhi had no realauthority ormandate from the workers, and that there was no guarantee that workerswould accept thearbitration award. They declared the lockout of the Mills from22February 1918.

In such a situation, Gandhi decided to study the whole situation in detail. He wentthrough a mass ofdata concerning the financial state of the mills and compared their wagerates with those of Bom-bay-Finally he came to the conclusion that the workers shoulddemand35%'insteadof50%increase in their wages. Gandhi began the Satyagrahamovement against the mill own-ers. The workers were asked to take a pledge stating thatthey would not resume workwithout35%increase and that they would remain lawabiding during the lockout. Gandhi, as-sisted by Anasuya Sarabhai organised daily massmeetings of workers, in which he deliveredlectures and issued a series of leaflets on thesituation. The mill owners ended the lockout on 12March and announced that they wouldtakeback the workers who were willing to ac-cept208increases. On the other hand,Gandhi announced on 15 March that he would under-take a fast until a settlement wasreached. Gandhi's object was to rally he workers whowere thinking of joining the millsdespite their pledge. The fast created tremendous excite-ment in Ahmedabad and the millowners were compelled to negotiate. A settlement was reached


9

on 18 March. According tothis agreement, the workers on their first day would re-ceive35%raise, in keeping withtheir pledge. On the second day, they would get20%increase, of-fered by the mill owners.From the third day until the date of an award by an arbitrator, theywould split thedifference and receive27'12% increases. Finally the arbitrator's award went infavorofthe' workers and35%raise was given to them.

Kheda

Gandhi's second intervention was for the peasants of Kheda in Gujarat where hismethod ofSatyagraha came under a severe test. 6ost of Kheda was a fertile tract and thecrop of food grains,tobacco and cotton produced here had a convenient and sizeablemarket in Ahmedabad. Therewere many rich peasant proprietors called Patidars or fromthe Kunbi caste. Besides, a largenumber of small peasants and landless labourers alsolived in this region.

In 1917 excessive rain considerably damaged theKharifcrop in Kheda. Thiscoincided with anincrease in the price of kerosine, iron, cloth and salt because of whichthe cost of living for thepeasantry went up. In view of the poor harvest, the peasantsdemanded the remission of landrevenue. The 'revenue code' provided for a total remissionif the crops were less than twentyfive per cent of the normal production. Two Bombaybarristers, V.J. Pate1 and G.K. Parakhmade the enquiries and reached the conclusion thata major portion of the crop was damaged.But the government did not agree with theirfindings. After enquiry into the state of the crop inKheda the Collector decided that therewas no justification for the remission of land revenue. Theofficial contention was that theagitation was not a spontaneous expression of the peasant dis-content but was started by'outsiders' or members of the Home Rule League and Gujarat Sabha ofwhich Gandhi wasthe president at that time. The truth was that initiative for the agitation againstpayment ofrevenue came neither from Gandhi nor from the other Ahmedabad politicians; itwasraised by local village leaders like Mohanlal Pandya of Kapadvanjtalukain Kheda.

Gandhi maintained that the officials had over-valued thecrops and the cultivatorswere enti-tled to a suspension of revenue as a legal right and not as a concession by grace.After a lot of hesi-tation he decided to launch a Satyagraha movement on 22 March 1918.He inaugurated the Satya-graha at a meeting in Nadiad, and urged the peasants not to paytheir land revenue. He toured vil-lages and gave moral support to the peasants in refusingto pay revenue, and to expel their fearof the government authority Gandhi was alsoassisted in this struggle by Indulal Ya-jnik.Vallabhbhai Pate and Anasuya Sarabhai. TheSatyagraha reached at its peak by 21 Aprilwhen 2,337 peasants pledged not to payrevenue. Most of the Patidars took part in thisSatyagraha. Some poorer peasants werecoerced by the government into paying the revenue.Moreover, a goodRabicrop hadweakened the case for remission. Gandhi began to realise thatpeasantry was on the vergeof exhaustion. He decided to call off the agitation when thegovernment issuedinstructions that land revenue should be recoveredfrom only those who hadthe capacityto pay and no pressure should be exerted on the genuinely poor peasants. Thisagitationdid not have a uniform effect on the area. Only 70 villages out of 559 in Khedawereactually involved in it and it was called offafter a token concession. But this agita-tioncertainly helped Gandhi in broadening his social base in the rural Gujarat

Rowlatt Act


10

During the years 1917 and 1918 Gandhi took little interest in all lndia issues. He protestedagainstinternment of Annie Besant, and also demanded the release of Ali brothers(Mahomed Aliand Shaukat Ali) who were actively associated with the Khilafat issue.They were politicalleaders of the time; Gandhi did not take active interest in the Reformproposals. But it was the Brit-ish decision to pass 'Rowlatt Act' which forced him to plunge into national politics in a forcefulmanner

In 1917 the Government oflndia had appointed a committee under thechairmanship ofJustice Sydney Rowlatt to investigate “revolutionary crime" in thecountry and to recommendlegislation for its suppression. After a review of the situation,the Rowlatt committee proposed aseriesof change in the machinery of law to enable the3ritish government to deal effectively with therevolutionary activities. In the light of theserecommendations the Government of India draftedtwobills and presented them to theImperial Legislative Council on 6 February 1919. The gov-ernment maintained that thebills were 'temporary measures' which aimed at preventing 'sedi-tious crimes'. The newbills attempted to make war-time restrictions permanent. They pro-vided trial of offencesby a special court consisting of three high court judges. There was no pro-vision of appealagainst the decision of this court which could meetin cameraand take into consid-erationevidence not admissible under the Indian Evidence Act. The bill also proposed togiveauthority tothe governmentto search a place and arrest a person without a war-rant.Detention without a trial for maximum period of two years was also provided in the billsThebills were regarded by nationalist leaders as an effort to conciliate a section of officialand non-official white opinion which had resented Montagu's Reform proposals.

Hartal

There was widespread condemnation of the bills in the whole country. Gandhi alsolaunched hiscampaign against the bills. He said that the proposed powers were out of allproportion to thedanger, particularly when the Viceroy possessed emergency powers oflegislation by ordi-nance. He also stated that they were instruments of distrust andrepression,' nullifying theproposed reforms. Moreover, he opposed not just the content ofthe bills, but also the manner inwhich they were foisted in the country without regard topublic opinion. He formed a SatyagrahaSabha on 24thFebruary 1919 in Bombay toprotest against the Rowlatt Bills. Its memberssigned a pledge to proclaim theirdetermination "to refuse civilly to obey these laws (i.e., theRowlatt Bills) and such otherlaws as a committee hitherto appointed may think fit and we (mem-bers) further affirm thatin this struggle we will faithfully follow truth and refrain from violence tolife, person orproperty." While launching the Satyagraha agitation against the Rowlatt bills Gandhisaid:"It is my firm belief that we shall obtain salvation only through suffering and notbyreforms dropping on us from the English–they use brute force, we soul force."

Despite strong opposition in the whole country the government remained firm. TheCouncil passedone of the bills, though all the non-official members voted against it. TheViceroy gave assent tothe bill on March 2 1, 1919. A group of liberals like Sir D.E.Wacha, Surendranath Baner-jee, T.B. Sapru and Srinivas Sastri opposed Gandhi's move ofstarting Satyagraha. Their reasonfor opposing the Satyagraha was that it would hamperthe Reforms. Some of them also feltthat the ordinarycitizen would find it difficult tocivilly disobey the Act. Annie Besant alsocondemned the Satyagraha on the grounds thatthere was nothing in the Act to resist civilly, and thatto break laws at the dictate of otherswas ' exceedingly dangerous. But theyounger and radicalelements of Annie Besant'sHome Rule League supported Gandhi: They formed the main


11

cadre of Satyagrahamovement in different parts of the country. In organizing this Satya-graha, Gandhi wasalso assisted by certain Pan-Islamic Leaders,particularlyAbdul BariofFirangi Ulemagroup at Lucknow, and some radical members of the Muslim League. M.A.Jinnah alsoopposed the Rowlatt Bill vehemently and warned the Government of the dan-gerousconsequences if the government persisted in clamping on the people of India the "lawless-law". Gandhi inaugurated his Satyagraha by calling upon the countrymen to observe a dayof'har-tal'when business should be suspended and people should fast and pray as a protestagainst theRowlatt Act. The date for the'hartal'was fixed for 30th March but it waschanged to April6th. The success of hartal varied considerably between regions andbetween towns and thecountryside. In Delhi a hartal was observed on 30th March and tenpeople were killed in policefiring. Almost in all major towns of the country, the hartalwas observed on the 6th Apriland the people responded enthusiastically. Gandhidescribed the hartaI a 'magnificent success.Gandhi intensified the agitation on 7th Aprilby advising the satyagrahis to disobey the lawsdealing with prohibited literature and theregistration of newspapers. These particular laws were se-lected because disobedience waspossible for an individual without leading to violence. Four booksincluding Hind Swarajof Gandhi, which wereprohibited by Bombay Government in 1910 werechosen for saleas an action of defiance against the government.

Gandhi left Bombay on the 8th to promote the Satyagraha agitation in Delhi andPunjab.But, as his entry in Punjab was considered dangerous by the government, soGandhi wasremoved from the train in which he was travelling at Palwal near Delhi andwas takenback to Bombay. The news of Gandhi's arrest precipitated the crisis. Thesituation becametense in Bombay and violence broke out in Ahmedabad and Virangam.In Ahmedabad the gov-ernment enforced martial law.

The Punjab region as a whole and Amritsar, in particular, witnessed the worstscenes ofviolence. In Amritsar, the news of Gandhi's arrest coincided with the arrest oftwo localleaders Dr. Kitchlew and Dr. Satyapal on loth April. This led to mob violenceand govern-ment buildings were set on fire, five Englishmen were murdered, and a woman,assaulted. Thecivil authority lost its control of the city. On 13th April, General Dyerordered his troopsto fire on a peaceful unarmed crowd assembled at Jallianwala Bagh.Most of the people werenot aware of the ban on meetings, and they were shot without theslightest warning by GeneralDyer who later on said that it was no longer a question ofmerely dispersing the crowd, butone of 'producing a moral effect.

TheJallianwala Bagh

TheJallianwala Baghmassacre, also known as theAmritsarmassacre, was a seminalevent inthe British rule of India. On13 April 1919, a crowd ofnonviolentprotesters,along with Bai-shakhi pilgrims, had gathered in the Jallianwala Bagh garden inAmrit-sar,Punjabtoprotest against the arrest of three Freedom Fighters,Dr. Satyapal,Dr.SaifuddinKitchlewandMahatma Gandhi, despite acurfewwhich had been recentlydeclared.On the ordersofBrigadier-General Reginald Dyer, the army fired on the crowdfor ten minutes, directing theirbullets largely towards the few open gates through whichpeople were trying to run out.The figures released by the British government were 370dead and 1200 wounded. Othersources place the number dead at well over 1000. This"brutality stunned the entire na-tion",resulting in a "wrenching loss of faith" of the generalpublic in the intentions of Britain.The


12

ineffective inquiry and the initial accolades forDyerby the House of Lords fuelled wide-spread anger, leading to theNon-cooperationMovementof 1920–22.

On Sunday, 13 April 1919, Dyer was convinced of a major insurrection and he banned allmeetings,however this notice was not widely disseminated. That was the day of Baisakhi,the main Sikhfestival, and many villagers had gathered in the Bagh. On hearing that ameeting had as-sembled at Jallianwala Bagh, Dyer went with fiftyGurkhariflemen to araised bank and or-dered them to shoot at the crowd. Dyer continued the firing for aboutten minutes, until theammunition supply was almost exhausted; Dyer stated that 1,650rounds had been fired, anumber which seems to have been derived by counting emptycartridge cases picked up bythe troops.OfficialBritish Indiansources gave a figure of379 identified dead,with approximately1,100 wounded. The casualty number estimatedby the Indian National Congress was more than1,500, with approximately 1,000 dead.Dyer was initially lauded by conservative forces in theempire, but in July 1920 he wascensured and forced to retire by the House of Commons.He be-came a celebrated hero inBritain among most of the people connected to theBritish Raj, for exam-ple, the House ofLords,but unpopular in the House of Commons, which voted against Dyertwice.Themassacre caused a re-evaluation of the army's role, in which the new policy be-came"minimum force", and the army was retrained and developed suitable tactics forcrowdcontrol.Some historians consider the episode as a decisive step towards the end of Britishrulein India, although others believe that greater self-government was inevitable as aresult ofIndia's involvement inWorld War I.

Montague-Chelmsford Reforms, 1919

TheMontagu–Chelmsford Reformsor more briefly known as Mont-Ford Reformswere reformsintroduced by theBritish Government in Indiato introduce self-governinginstitutions graduallyto India. The reforms take their name fromEdwin Samuel Montagu,theSecretary of State forIndiaduring the latter parts of World War I andLordChelmsford, Viceroy of India be-tween 1916 and 1921. The reforms were outlined in theMontagu-Chelmsford Report preparedin 1918 and formed the basis of the Government ofIndia Act 1919. Indian nationalists consid-ered that the reforms did not go far enoughwhile British conservatives were critical of them.

In late 1917, Montagu went to India to meet up with Lord Chelmsford, the Viceroy ofIn-dia, to meet with leaders of Indian community to discuss the introduction of limited self-government to India and protecting therights of minority communities. The Report wentbeforeCabinet on 24 May and 7 June 1918 and was embodied in theGovernment of IndiaAct of 1919.These reforms represented the maximum concessions the British wereprepared to make atthat time. The franchise was extended, and increased authority wasgiven to central andprovincial legislative councils, but the viceroy remained responsibleonly to London.

The changes at the provincial level were significant, as the provincial legislative councilscon-taineda considerable majority of elected members. In a system called "dyarchy," thenation-building departments of government–agriculture, education, public works, and thelike–wereplacedunder ministers who were individually responsible to the legislature.The departments thatmade up the "steel frame" of British rule–finance, revenue, andhome affairs–were retainedby executive councillors who were nominated by theGovernor. They were often, but notalways, British and who were responsible to thegovernor.


13

In 1921 another change recommended by the report was carried out when elected local-councils were set up in rural areas, and during the 1920s urban municipal corporationsweremade more democratic and "Indianized.

The main provisions were the following:

1.The secretary of state would control affairs relating to Government of India

2.The Central Legislature would comprise two chambers-The Council ofState and the In-dianLegislative Assembly

3.The Central Legislature was empowered to enact laws on any matter forwhole of India.

4.The Governor General was given powers to summon, prorogue, dissolve theChambers, and topromulgate Ordinances.

5.The number of Indians in Viceroy's Executive Council would be three out ofeight members.

6.Establishment of unicameral Provincial Legislative councils.

7.Dyarchy in the Provinces-

1.Reserved subjects like Finance, Law and Order,army,police etc.

2.Transferred subjects like Public Health, Education,agriculture,localself government etc.Therewould henceforth be direct election and an extension of Communal franchise.

Non-Co-operation Movement.

The Gandhi Era in the Indian Freedom Struggle tookplace with the Non Cooperation-Movement. This movement was led by Mahatma Gandhi and the Indian NationalCongress.This was the first-ever series of nationwide movement of nonviolent resistance.The movementtook place from September 1920 until February 1922.In the fight againstinjustice, Gandhi`sweapons were non-cooperation and peaceful resistance. But after themassacre and relatedviolence, Gandhi focused his mind upon obtaining complete self-government. This soon trans-formed into Swaraj or complete political independence. Thus,under the leadership of MahatmaGandhi, the Congress Party was re-organized with a newconstitution, with the aim of Swaraj. Ma-hatma Gandhi further extended his non-violencepolicy to include the Swadeshi Policy, whichmeant the rejection of foreign-made goods.Mahatma Gandhi addressed all the Indians to wearKhadi (homespun cloth) instead ofBritish-made textiles. He strongly appealed to all Indiansto spend some time spinningkhadi for supporting the independence movement of India.This was a policy to includewomen in the movement, as this was not considered a re-spectable activity. Moreover;Gandhi also urged to boycott the British educational insti-tutions, to resign fromgovernment jobs, and to leave British titles. Nobel laureate RabindranathTagore resignedthe title knight from the British soon after the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre as a pro-test. Whenthe movement reached great success, it ended unexpectedly after the violent clashinChauri Chaura, Uttar Pradesh. Following this, Mahatma Gandhi was also arrested andsen-tenced to 6 years imprisonment. Indian National Congress was divided into twosegments.


14

Furthermore, support among the Hindu and Muslim people was also breakingdown. How-ever; Mahatma Gandhi only served around 2 years and was released.

Non-Cooperation was a movement of passive resistance against British rule, whichwas initiated byMahatma Gandhi. To resist the dominance of the British Government andadvance the Indian na-tionalist cause, the non-cooperation movement was a non-violentmovement that prevailed na-tionwide by Indian National Congress under the leadership ofMahatma Gandhi. This movementtook place from September 1920 to February 1922 andinitiated Gandhi era in the Independ-ence Movement of India. The Rowlatt Act,Jaliwanwala Bagh massacre and Martial Lawin Punjab caused the native people not totrust the British Government anymore. The Montagu-Chelmesford Report with its diarchycould satisfy a few only. Until then Gandhi believed the justiceand fair-play of the BritishGovernment, but after this incidences he felt that Non-cooperationwith the Governmentin a non-violent way must be started. In the meantime the Muslims in Indiaalso revoltedagainst the harsh terms of the Treaty of Severs between Allies and Turkey and theystartedKhilafat movement. Gandhi also decided to stand beside them. Gandhiji`s idea of winning-over Muslim support also helped in Non-Cooperation Movement of India. Gandhi hadgivena notice to the Viceroy in his letter of 22nd Junein which he had affirmed the rightrecognized `fromtime immemorial of the subject to refuse to assist a ruler who misrules`.After the notice had ex-pired the Non-Cooperation movement was launched formally on1st August of 1920. At theCalcutta Session onSeptember, 1920 the program of themovement was stated. The programsof Non-cooperation involved the surrender of titlesand offices and resignation from the nomi-nated posts in the government body. It includednot attending Government duties, Durbars and otherfunctions, withdrawing children fromgovernment schools and colleges and establishment of na-tional schools and colleges. Thepeople of India were instructed to boycott the British courtsand establish the privatejudicial courts. The Indians should use Swadeshi cloth and boycott theforeign clothes andother things. Gandhiji strictly advised the Non-Cooperators to observetruth and non-violence. The decision taken in Calcutta Session was supported in the Nagpur Ses-sion ofthe Congress on December; 1920.The decision was also taken for the betterment oftheparty organization. Any adult man or woman could take Congress membership for 4 annasassubscription. This adoption of new rules gave a new energy to the Non-Cooperationmovement and from January of1921 the movement gained a new momentum.Gandhialong with Ali Brothers went to a nationwide tour during which he addressed the Indiansinhundreds of meetings. In the first month of the movement, about nine thousand studentsleftschools and colleges andjoined the national institutions. During this period abouteight hun-dred national institutions were established all over the country. The educationalboycott was mostsuccessful in Bengal under the leadership of Chitta Ranjan Das andSubhas Chandra Bose.InPunjab also the educational boycott was extensive under theleadership of Lala Lajpat Rai. Theother active areas were Bombay, Bihar, Orissa, Assam,Uttar Pradesh. The movement also af-fected Madras. The boycott of law courts by thelawyers was not as successful as the edu-cational boycott was. The leading lawyers like,Motilal Nehru, CR Das, Mr Jayakar, V Patel,Asaf Ali Khan, S Kitchlew and many othersgave up their lucrative practices and many followedtheir path inspired by their sacrifice.Bengal again led in this matter and Andhra, UP, Karnataka andPunjab followed the state.However the most successful item of the Non-Cooperation was theboycott of foreignclothes. It took such an extensive form that value of import of the foreignclothes reducedfrom hundred and two crores in 1920-21 to fifty-seven crores in 1921-22. Althoughsomeof the veteran political leaders like the Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin ChandraPal,Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Annie Besant opposed Gandhiji`s plan but the younger generationsup-ported him fully. Muslim leaders like Maulana Azad, Mukhtar Ahmed Ansari, HakimAjmal Khan,


15

Abbas Tyabji, Maulana Mohammad Ali and Maulana Shaukat Ali alsosupported him. In themonth of July 1921, the Government had to face a new challenge.Mohammad Ali andotherleaders believed that it was `religiously unlawful for theMuslims to continue in the Britisharmy` and they were arrested for their view. Gandhiand other Congress leaders supportedMuhammad Ali and issued a manifesto. The nextdramatic event was visit of Prince of Waleson 17th November, 1921. The day on whichPrince boarded on Bombay Port the day was observedas a `Hartal Divas` all over India.The Prince was greeted with empty streets and closed shopswherever he went. The Non-Cooperators gainedmore and more energy at their success andbecame more aggressive.The congress volunteer corps turned into a powerful parallel police.They used to march information and dressed in uniform. Congress had already granted per-mission to theProvincial Congress Committees to sanction total disobedience including non-payment oftaxes. The Non-Co operational movement had other effects also which are not very di-rect.In UP it became difficult to distinguish between a Non-Co operational meeting andapeasant meeting. In Malabar and Kerala the Muslim tenants roused against their landlords.In As-sam the labors of tea-plantation went with strike. In Punjab the Akali Movement wasconsidered asa part of Non-Cooperation movement. The Non-Cooperation movementparticularlystrength-ened in Bengal. The movement was not only seen in Kolkata but italso agitated the ruralBengal and an elemental awakening was observed. The movementreached a climax after theGurkha assault on coolies on the river port of Chandpur (20-21st May).The whole EasternBengal was under the lash of the movement under theleadership of JM Sengupta. Theother example was the Anti-Union Board agitation inMidnapur led by BirendranathSashmal. As the Non-Cooperation movement proceededthe woman of India, especially fromBengal wanted to take active part in the protestmovement. The women nationalists were as-sembled under the Mahila Karma Samaj or theLadies organization Board of the Pradesh Con-gress Committee of Bengal. The lady members of that organizationarranged meeting andcircularized the spirit of Non-Cooperation. Women volunteers were enlisted to take part inthe movement.The ladiesfrom many respected families led them.CR Das`s wife BasantiDevi and sister UrmilaDevi, JM Sengupta`s wife Nellie Sengupta, Mohini Devi, Labanya PrabhaChanda playedsignificant role in this movement.Picketing of foreign wine and cloth shops and sell-ing ofKhaddar in the streets were the point of attention of this movement. The Govern-mentproclaimed Sections 108 and 144 of the code of criminal procedure at various centers ofagita-tion. The Congress Volunteer Corpse was declared illegal. By December 1921 Morethan thirtythousand people were arrested from all over the India. Except Gandhiji, most ofthe prominent lead-ers were inside jail. In mid-December Malaviya initiated a negotiation,which was futile. Theconditions were like that it offered sacrifice of Khilafat leaders,which Gandhiji could neveraccept. At that time Gandhiji was also under a pressure fromthe higher leaders of Congress tostart the mass civil disobedience. Gandhiji gave anultimatum to the Government but theBritish Government paid no attention to it. Inresponse, Gandhiji initiated a civil disobedi-ence movement in Bardoli Taluqa of Suratdistrict of Gujrat. Unfortunately at this time thetragedy of Chauri Chaura occurred thatchange the course of the movement, where a mob ofthree thousand people killed twenty-five policemen and one nspector. Gandhi was in support ofcomplete nonviolence and thisincident was too much for him to bear. He ordered to suspendthe movement at once.Thus, on February 12th, 1922 the Non-Cooperation movement totallystopped. There werelimitations in achievements of Non-Cooperation Movement as it appar-ently failed toachieveits object of securing the Khilafat and changing the misdeeds of Pun-jab. TheSwaraj could not be achieved in a year as it was promised. The retreat of theFebruary1922 was only temporary. The movement slowed down gradually. The part of Battlewasover butthe war continued


16

Khilafat Movement

During the First World War, Turkey joined the central powers against Britain. Thesympa-thy of Indian Muslims, who regarded the Sultan of Turkey as their spiritual leaderor Khalifa, wasnaturally with Turkey. After the war with defeat of Turkey, the Alliedpowers removed theKhalifa from power in Turkey which aggrieved the Indian Muslimsagainst the British Gov-ernment. Hence the Muslims started the Khilafat movement inIndia for the resumption ofKhalifa's position. A Khilafat Committee was formed undertheleadership of Mahammad Ali,Shaukat Ali, Maulana Azad and Hasrat Mohini toorganise a country-wide agitation. The mainobject of Khilafat Movement was to force theBritish Government to change its attitude towardsTurkey and to restore the Sultan.October17, 1919 was observed as Khilafat Day, when the Hin-dus along with Muslims infasting observed hartal on that day. An All India Khilafat Conferencewas held at Delhi onNovember 23, 1919 with Gandhi as its president. The Conference resolved towithdraw allcooperation from the Government, if the Khalifat demands were not met. Con-gressleaders, like Lokamanya Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi, viewed the Khalifat Movement as anop-portunity to bring about Hindu-Muslim unity against British. A joint Hindu-Muslimdeputation met the Viceroy on the Khalifat issue, but it failed to yield any result.Thecentral Khalifat Committee met at Allahabad from 1st to 3rd June, 1920 which wasat-tended by a number of congress leaders. In this meeting a programme of Non-Cooperationtowards the Government was declared. It was to include boycott of titles, canoffered by the Gov-ernment, boycott of civil services, army and police and non-payment oftaxes to the Government.Gandhi insisted that unless the Punjab and Khilafat wrongs wereundone, there was to be non-cooperation with the Government.

Civil Disobedience Movement

Civil Disobedience Movement, launched under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi, in1930,was one of the most significant phases of Indian freedom struggle.The SimonCommission,which was formed in November 1927 by the British Government to chartand conclude aConstitution for India, included members of the British Parliament only.As a result, theCommission was boycotted by every section of the Indian social andpolitical platforms asan `All-White Commission`. The opposition to the SimonCommission in Bengal wasnoteworthy. In disapproval against the Commission, a `Hartal`or Strike was observed on 3rd ofFebruary, 1928 in various parts of the region.Widespread demonstrations were held in Kol-kata on 19th of February, 1928, the day ofSimon`s arrival to the city. Further, on 1st ofMarch, 1928, meetings were heldsimultaneously in all 32 wards of the city, spurring peo-ple to restore the movement forboycott of British goods. Mahatma Gandhi was arrested on5th of May, 1930, just daysbefore his projected raid on the Dharasana Salt Works. The DandiMarch and the resultantDharasana Satyagraha drew worldwide attention to the Civil Disobe-dience Movementthrough widespread newspaper coverage. It continued for almost a year,ending with therelease of Mahatma Gandhi from jail and after the discussions at the SecondRound TableConference with Viceroy Lord Irwin. The crusade had a significant effect onchangingBritish attitudestoward Indian independence and caused huge numbers of Indianstoaggressively join the fight for the first time. The Salt March to Dandi and the flogging ofhun-dreds of non-violent protesters in Dharasana, marked the efficient use of civildisobedienceasa method for fighting social and political injustice. On 8th of April 1929,members of theHindustan Socialist Republican Association attacked the assemblychamber of the Imperial Leg-islative Council in Delhi. In response, Lord Irwin published aPublic Safety Bill. Moreover, on


17

31st of October, Lord Irwin announced that the naturalconstitutional progress of India wasthe attainment of Dominion Status. The CongressParty indicated its willingness to cooperatein formulating a Dominion constitution. InNovember, measures were accepted in such a waythat Congress rejected the declaration.On 23rd of December, Lord Irwin met with MahatmaGandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, SardarVallabhbhai Patel, Mohammad Ali Jinnah and Tej BahadurSapru in New Delhi. Erwinhowever, could not arrive at an agreement for framing a consti-tution under DominionStatus. At the ensuing 1930 annual meeting of the Congress Partyheld at Lahore, theCongress declared itself for independence rather than Dominion Statusand authorized acampaign ofCivil Disobedience. Gandhi`s Civil Disobedience Movementcame out as amarch to Dandi, in objection to the tax on salt. Gandhi reached Dandi onApril 6th, andexplicitly violated the salt law. On 18th of April, around one hundred revo-lutionariesattackedpolice and railway armories at Chittagong. Mahatma Gandhi condemned theraid,which had made a deep impression throughout India. On 5th of May, the Government ofIndiahad Gandhi arrested and lodged at Yervada Jail near Pune. Following the arrest ofMahatmaGandhi, the British faced the full programme of Civil Disobedience ascomposed ofIndian raids on salt depots, refusal to pay taxes in chosen areas, spirits andavoidance ofbusiness with all British firms, disobedience of forest laws and boycott offoreign cloth. On30th of June, the Government of India outlawed the All-India CongressCommittee and the Con-gress Working Committee. Further, on 23rd of July, Lord Irwinfacilitated visits to MahatmaGandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru by two Indian Liberals, Sir TejBahadur Sapru and Mukund RamraoJayakar, for the purpose of finding ways to end civildisobedience movement. On 25th of Janu-ary 1931, Lord Irwin authorized Gandhi`srelease from prison and withdrew prohibition ofillegality against the Congress WorkingCommittee. Between February to March, 1931, Lord Ir-win and Gandhi met in a series oftalks seeking settlement of the issues originating from thecivil disobedience movement.In the agreement reached on 5th of March, Gandhiagreed to discontinue CivilDisobedience as it embraced defiance of the law, non-payment of land revenue,publication of news-sheets, termination of its boycott of British goodsand the restraint ofaggressive picketing. The Government of India agreed to cancel ordinances op-posing themovement, to release Indian prisoners, return fines and property.

Dandi March.

Mahatma Gandhi returned to the forefront again in 1928. On March 12, 1930 Gan-dhilaunched a new Satyagraha against the tax on salt. He started the historic Dandi March, bywalk-ing from Ahmedabad to Dandi, to break the law that had deprived the poor of hisright tomake his own salt. Gandhi broke the Salt law at the sea beach at Dandi. Thismovementstimulated the entire nation and it came to be known as Civil DisobedienceMovement.On8th May, 1933, he started a 21-day fast of self-purification in order to helpthe Harijan movement.

Salt satyagraha

TheSaltSatyagraha, also known asThe Dandi March, began on 12 March 1930 and wasan impor-tant part of theIndian independence movement. It was adirect actioncampaignoftaxresis-tanceandnonviolent protestagainst the British salt monopoly incolonial India,and triggered thewider Civil DisobedienceMovement. This was the most significantorganised challenge to Brit-ish authority since theNon-cooperation movementof 1920–22,and directly followed thePurnaSwarajdeclaration of independence by theIndianNational Congresson 26 January1930.Mohandas Karamchand Gandhiled the Dandimarch from his base,Sabarmati Ashram-


18

nearAhmedabad, to the coastal village of Dandi,located at a small town calledNavsari, in the stateofGujarat. As he continued on this 24-day, 240-mile (390km) march toDandito produce saltwithout paying the tax, growingnumbers of Indians joined him along the way. When Gan-dhi broke the salt laws at 6:30am on 6 April 1930, it sparked large scale acts ofcivil dis-obedienceagainst theBritishRajsalt lawsby millions of Indians.The campaign had a significanteffect on changingworld and British attitude towards Indian independenceand caused largenumbers ofIndians to join the fight for the first time.After collecting salt at Dandi, Gandhi contin-ued southward along the coast, producing saltand addressing meetings on the way. The CongressParty planned to stage a satyagraha atthe Dharasana Salt Works, 25 miles south of Dandi. How-ever, Gandhi was arrested on themidnight of 4–5 May 1930, just days beforethe planned action atDharasana. The DandiMarch and the ensuingDharasana Satyagrahadrew worldwide attentionto theIndianindependence movementthrough extensive newspaper and newsreel coverage.Thesatyagrahaagainst the salt tax continued for almost a year, ending with Gandhi's release-from jail and negotiations withViceroyLord Irwinat the SecondRoundTableConfer-ence.Over 80,000 Indians were jailed as a result of the Salt Satyagraha.However,it failed to resultin major concessions from the British.

The Salt Satyagraha campaign was based upon Gandhi's principles of nonviolent protest-calledsatyagraha, which he loosely translated as "truth-force."Literally, it is formed from the San-skritwordssatya, "truth", andagraha, "force". In early1930 the Indian NationalCongress chosesatyagraha as their main tactic for winning Indian independence fromBritish rule and ap-pointed Gandhi to organise the campaign. Gandhi chose the 1882British Salt Act as the firsttarget of satyagraha. The Salt March to Dandi, and the beatingby British police of hundreds ofnonviolent protesters in Dharasana, which receivedworldwide news coverage, demonstratedthe effective use of civil disobedience as atechnique for fighting social and political injus-tice.The satyagraha teachings of Gandhiand the March to Dandi had a significant influenceon American activistsMartin LutherKing, Jr.James Bevel, and others duringthe movementforcivil rights for blacks andother minority groups in the 1960s.

Poona Pact

ThePoona Pactrefers to an agreement betweenDr. Babasaheb AmbedkarandMahatmaGan-dhisigned on 24 September 1932 atYerwada Central JailinPune. Itwas signed byPt MadanMohan Malviya and some Hindu leaders and Dr BR Ambedkar and some Dalitleaders to breakthe fast unto death undertaken by Gandhi in Yarwada jail to annulMacdonald Award giv-ing separate electorate to Dalits for electing members of statelegislative assemblies in BritishIndiaThere shall be seats reserved for the Depressed Classes out of general electorate. Seats intheProvincial Legislatures.Election to these seats shall be by joint electorates subject, however,to the followingprocedure–All members of the Depressed Classes registered in the generalelectoral roll of aconstituency will form an electoral college which will elect a panel offour candidatesbelonging to the Depressed Classes for each of such reserved seats by themethod of thesingle vote and four persons getting the highest number of votes in such primaryelectionsshall be the candidates for election by the general electorate. The representation oftheDepressed Classes in the Central Legislature shall likewisebe on the principle of join-telectorates and reserved seats by the method of primary election in the manner provided-for in clause above for their representation in the provincial legislatures.

Central Legislature.


19

In the Central Legislature 18 per cent ofthe seats allotted to the general electorate forBrit-ish India in the said legislature shall be reserved for the Depressed Classes.5. The system of pri-mary election to a panel of candidates for election to the Central andProvincial Legislatures asherein-before mentioned shall come to an end after the first tenyears, unless terminated soonerby mutual agreement under the provision of clause 6below.

The system of representation of Depressed Classes by reserved seats in the Provincial andCentralLegislatures as provided for in clauses (1) and (4) shall continue until determinedotherwise by mu-tual agreement between the communities concerned in this settlement.The Franchise for the Cen-tral and Provincial Legislatures of the Depressed Classes shallbe asindicated, in theLothianCommitteeReport.

There shall be no disabilities attached to any one on the ground of his being a member ofthe De-pressed Classes in regard to any election to local bodies or appointment to thepublic ser-vices. Every endeavor shall be made to secure a fair representation of theDepressed Classesin these respects, subject to such educational qualifications as may belaid down for appointment tothe Public Services.

In every province out of the educational grant an adequate sum shall be ear-marked for-providing educationalfacilities to the members of Depressed Classes.

Quit India–Do or Die

Mahatma Gandhi again became active in the political arena after the outburst ofWorld WarII in 1939. On August 8, 1942 Gandhi gave the call for Quit India Movementor Bharat ChhodoAndolan. Soon after the arrest of Gandhi, disorders broke outimmediately throughout thecountry and many violent demonstrations took place. QuitIndia became the most powerfulmovement in the freedom struggle. Thousands offreedom fighters were killed or injured by po-lice gunfire, and hundreds of thousands werearrested. He called on all Congressmen and Indians tomaintain discipline via non violenceand Karo Ya Maro (Do or Die) in order to achieve ulti-mate freedom. On 9th of August,1942, Mahatma Gandhi andthe entire Congress WorkingCommittee were arrested inMumbai. In view of his deteriorating health, he was releasedfrom the jail in May 1944because the British did not want him to die in prison and en-rage the nation. The cruelrestraint of the Quit India movement brought order to India by theend of 1943 althoughthe movement had modest success in its aim. After the British gaveclear signs oftransferring power to the Indians, Gandhi called off the fight and all theprisoners werereleased

TheQuit India Movementor theAugustMovement, was acivildisobediencemovement launched in-Indiaon 8 August 1942 byMohandas KaramchandGandhi. TheAll-India Congress Commit-teeproclaimed a mass protest demanding whatGandhi called "an orderly British withdrawal"from India. It was for the determined,which appears in his call toDo or Die, issued on 8August at theGowaliar TankMaidanin Mumbai in 1942 The British were preparedto act. Almost theentireINCleadership, and not just at the national level, was imprisonedwithout trialwithin hours afterGandhi's speech. Most spent the rest of the war in prison andout ofcontact with the masses. The British had the support of theViceroy's Council(which hadamajority of Indians), of the Muslims, theCommunist Party, the princely states, theIndianimperialPolicetheBritish Indian armyand theIndian Civil Service. Many Indianbusinessmen were


20

profiting from heavywartime spending and did not support Quit India.Many students paid moreattention toSubhas Chandra Bose, who was in exile andsupporting the Axis. The onlyoutside support came from the Americans, asPresidentFranklin D. RooseveltpressuredPrime MinisterWinston Churchillto give in toIndian demands. The Quit India campaign was effec-tively crushed.

The British refused to grant immediate independence, saying it could happen only afterthewar ends. Sporadic small-scale violence took place around the country but the Britisharrested tensof thousands ofleaders, keeping them imprisoned until 1945. In terms ofimmediate objec-tives Quit India failed because of heavy-handed suppression, weakcoordination and the lackof a clear-cut programme of action. However, the Britishgovernment realized that Indiawasungovernable in the long run, and the question forpost-war became how to exit gracefullyand peacefully

Factors contributing to the movement

The Congress had to decide its course of action in the wake of:

The failure of the Cripps Mission;

The arrival of Japanese armies on Indian borders;

The rising prices and shortages in food supplies, and the different opinions within theCon-gress

In 1939, with the outbreak of war between Germany and Britain, India was announced tobe a partyto the war for being a constituent component of the British Empire. Followingthis declaration, theCongress Working Committee at its meeting on 10 October 1939,passed a resolution con-demning the aggressive activities of the Germans. At the same timethe resolution also statedthatIndia could not associate herself with war unless it wasconsulted first. Responding tothis declaration, the Viceroy issued a statement on 17October wherein he claimed that Britainis waging a war driven by the motif to strengthenpeace in the world. Healso stated that afterthe war, the government would initiatemodifications in the Act of 1935, in accordance to thedesires of the Indians.

Gandhi's reaction to this statement was; "the old policy of divide and rule is to continue.TheCongress has askedfor bread and it has got stone." According to the instructionsissued byHigh Command, the Congress ministers were directed to resign immediately.Congress min-isters from eight provinces resigned following the instructions. Theresignation of theministerswas an occasion of great joy and rejoicing for leader of theMuslim League,Mohammad Ali Jinnah. He called the day of 22 December 1939 'The Dayof Deliverance'. Gandhiurged Jinnah against the celebration of this day, however, it wasfutile. At the MuslimLeague La-hore Session held in March 1940, Jinnah declared in hispresidential address that the Muslims ofthe country wanted a separate homeland,Pakistan

In the meanwhile, crucial political events took place in England. Chamberlain wassucceededby Churchill as the Prime Minister and the Conservatives, who assumed powerin England, did nothave a sympathetic stance towards the claims made by the Congress.In order to pacify the Indi-


21

ans in the circumstance of worsening war situation, theConservatives were forced to con-cede some of the demands made by the Indians. On 8August, the Viceroy issued a statementthat has come to be referred as the "August Offer".However, the Congress rejected the offer fol-lowed by the Muslim League.

In the context ofwidespread dissatisfaction that prevailed over the rejection of thedemandsmade by the Congress, Gandhi at the meeting of the Congress WorkingCommittee inWardha revealed his plan to launch Individual Civil Disobedience. Onceagain, the weaponof satyagraha found popular acceptance as the best means to wage acrusade against the Brit-ish. It was widely used as a mark of protest against the unwaveringstance assumed by the British.Vinoba Bhave, a follower of Gandhi, was selected by himto initiate the movement. Anti warspeeches ricocheted in all corners of the country, withthe satyagrahis earnestly appealing to thepeople of the nation not to support theGovernment in its war endeavors. The consequenceof this satyagrahi campaign was thearrest of almostfourteen thousand satyagrahis. On 3 Decem-ber 1941, the Viceroy orderedthe acquittal of all the satyagrahis. In Europe the war situation be-came more critical withthe Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the Congress realized the necessityfor appraisingtheir program. Subsequently, the movement was withdrawn

The Cripps' Mission and its failure also played an important role in Gandhi's call for TheQuit IndiaMovement. In order to end the deadlock, the British government on 22 March1942, sent Sir Staf-fordCripps to talk terms with the Indian political parties and securetheir support in Britain'swar efforts. A Draft Declaration of the British Government waspresented, which included termslike establishment of Dominion, establishment of aConstituent Assembly and right of theProvinces to make separate constitutions. Thesewould be, however, granted after the cessa-tion of the Second World War. According tothe Congress this Declaration only offered India apromise that was to be fulfilled in theSchool of Distance EducationIndianNationalMovementGan-dhianPhase (1917-1947)Page27future. Commenting on this Gandhi said; "It is a post datedcheque on a crashing bank."Other factors that contributed were the threat of Japanese invasion ofIndia and realizationof the national leaders of the incapacity of the British to defend India.

The Congressgave the call for ousting British but it did not give any concrete lineof action to beadopted by the people. The Government had been making preparations tocrush the Movement.On the morning of 9 August all prominent Congress leadersincluding Gandhi were arrested.The news of leaders' arrest shook the people and theycame to streets protesting against it.K.G. Mashruwala, who had taken over as editor ofHarijanpublished his personal opinion asto the shape the protest should take: In myopinion lootingor burning of offices, bank, grana-ries etc., is not permissible. Dislocationof traffic communications is permissible in a non-violent manner-without endangeringlife. The organisation of strikes is best.... Cutting wires, re-moving rails, destroying smallbridges, cannot be objected to in a struggle like this provided ampleprecaution are takento safeguard life. Mashruwala maintained that "Gandhiji and the Congress havenot lost allhope of goodwill being re-established between the British and the Indian nations,and soprovided the effort is strong enough to demonstrate the nations will, self-restraintwillnever go against us". Before his arrest on 9 August 1942 Gandhi had given the followingmes-sage to the country: Everyone is free to go the fullest length underAhimsato completedeadlock bystrikes and other non-violent means. Satyagrahis must go out to die not tolive. They mustseek and face death. It is only when individuals go out to die that thenation will survive,KarengeYaMarenge (do or die). But while giving this call Gandhihad once again stressedon non-violence: Let every non-violent soldier of freedom writeout the slogan 'do or die' on a


22

piece of paper or cloth and stick it on his clothes, so that incase he died in the course of offering,Satyagraha, he might be distinguished by that signfrom other elements who do not subscribe tonon-violence. The news of his arrest alongwith other Congress leaders led to unprecedentedpopular outbursts in different parts ofthe country. There werehartals,demonstrations and proces-sions in cities and towns. TheCongress leadership gave the call, but it was the people wholaunched the Movement.Since all the recognized leaders-central, provincial or local-had beenarrested, the youngand more militant cadres-particularly students with socialist leanings took overas leadersat local levels in their areas. In the initial stages, the Movement was based on non-violentlines. It was the repressive policy of the government which provoked the peopletoviolence. The Gandhian message of non-violent struggle was pushed into the backgroundandpeople devised their own methods of struggle. These included: attacks on governmentbuildings,police stations and post offices, attacks on railway stations, and sabotaging raillines, cutting off thetelegraph wires, telephones and electric power lines, disrupting roadtraffic by destroying bridges,and workers going on strike, etc. Most of these attacks wereto check the movement of the mili-tary and the police, which were being used by thegovernment to crush the Movement. Inmany areas, the government lost all control and thepeople established Swaraj. We cite a fewsuch cases: In Maharashtra, a parallelgovernment was established in Satara which continuedtofunction for a long time. In Bengal, Tamluk Jatiya Sarkar functioned for a long timeinMidnapore district. This national government had various departments like Law andOrder,Health, Education, Agriculture, etc., along with a postal system of its own andarbitrationcourts. People established Swaraj in Talacher in Orissa.

The suppression of the movement

One of the achievements of the movement was to keep the Congress party unitedthroughall the trials and tribulations that followed. The British, already alarmed bytheadvance ofthe Japanese army to the India-Burma border, responded by imprisoningGandhi. All themembers of the Party's Working Committee (national leadership) wereimprisoned as well.Due to the arrest of major leaders, a young and till then relativelyunknownAruna AsafAlipresided over the AICC session on 9 August and hoisted theflag; later the Congressparty was banned. These actions only created sympathy for thecause among thepopulation.Despite lack of direct leadership, large protests anddemonstrations were held all overthe country. Workers remained absentenmasseandstrikes were called. Not all demonstrationswere peaceful, at some places bombs exploded,government buildings were set on fire, elec-tricity was cut and transport andcommunication lines were severed.

The British swiftly responded with mass detentions. Over 100,000 arrests were made,massfines were levied and demonstrators were subjected to public flogging.[15]Hundredsof civilianswere killed in violence many shot by the police army. Many national leaderswent undergroundand continued their struggle by broadcasting messages overclandestineradiostations, dis-tributing pamphlets and establishing parallel governments.The British sense of crisis was strongenough that a battleship was specifically set aside totake Gandhi and the Congress leaders out ofIndia, possibly toSouth AfricaorYemenbutultimately did not take that step out of fear of intensify-ing the revolt.

The Congress leadership was cut off from therest of the world for over threeyears.Gandhi's wifeKasturbai Gandhiand his personal secretaryMahadev Desaidied in monthsandGandhi's health was failing, despite this Gandhi went on a 21-day fast and maintainedhis resolve


23

to continuous resistance. Although the British released Gandhi on account ofhis health in1944, Gandhi kept up the resistance, demanding the release of the Congressleadership.

By early 1944, India was mostly peaceful again, while the Congress leadership was stillin-carcerated. A sense that the movement had failed depressed many nationalists, whileJinnahand the Muslim League, as well as Congress opponents likethe Communistssought to gainpolitical mileage, criticizing Gandhi and the Congress Party

*****

MODULE II

GANDHIAN CONSTRUCTIVE PROGRAMMES

Mahatma Gandhi was the modern emancipator of caste system of Hindu society. In hiswritings in‘Young India’and ‘Harijan’ stressed on the problems of untouchability and itsremoval from itsroots. To him, Bhagavad-Gita has never taught that a Chandal was in anyinferior than a Brahmin.According to Mahatma Gandhi, the Hindu scripture likeUpanishad, Bhagavat Gita, Smritis andother writings were not consistent with truth andNon-violence or other fundamental and universalprinciple of ethics. We are all the songsof same God. To him, there was only one Varna in India i.e.the Shudras. He desired thatall the Hindus voluntarily call themselves Shudras. Gandhi called them(untouchables) as‘Harijans’ which literally meaning is son of the God. For the upliftment ofHarijans hefounded the “Harijan Sevak Sangh”. To abolish the disparities between caste Hindusanduntouchables was its main function. The Sangh is truly based on welfare of the societyGandhiexperienced social discrimination for the first time when he was in South Africawhere heengaged himself against the discriminatory attitude of the South AfricanGovernment againstIndians. The problems were akin to that of untouchability as migrantswere treated as inferior tothe local population which enjoyed numerous basic rightslegally not available to Indians. Itwas then that Gandhi realized the extent of the impactof social discrimination on the under-privileged sections of the society includinguntouchables.

He thought it was necessary to reconstruct the life of the nation. This was only pos-siblethrough alleviating the social status of untouchables. He always considered untouchabilityas acruel and inhuman institution. It violated human dignity.

He did not believe that the imperial ambitions of Britain were alone responsible forourslavery but it was the negligence of our national duty which was primarily responsible forit. Ashe always thought untouchability an evil in Hinduism, he had no hesitation inHinduismitself Removal of untouchability was the responsibility of the caste-Hindustowards Hinduism.

Gandhi called upon the Harijans to magnify their own faults so that they looked as big asmountainsand they make regular attempts to overcome them. He said to untouchables,“Never believe


24

that since others have the same faults we need not mind our own. Nomatter what othersdo, it is your dharma to overcome the feelings which you find inyourselves.” In the processof regeneration of the nation, Gandhi waged an incessant war.He said, “If we are children ofthe same God how can there be any rank among us.”

According to him, there was only one Varna, in India, the Sudras. He desired that all theHindusvoluntarily call themselves Sudras.

He criticized those who would claim superiority over fellowmen. He thought there was nosuchthing as inherited superiority. He was happy and felt satisfied to call himselfascavenger, aspinner, a weaver, and a laborer. He was troubled to see the appalling plightof untouchables indifferent regions of the country. Its eradication greatly agitated hismind and he devisedways and means from time to time, through his speeches andwritings.

Gandhi called Harijans as men of God and felt that all the religions of the world considerGod pre-eminently as the Friend of the Friendless, Help of the Helpless, and Protector ofthe Weak. He ques-tioned that in India who could be mare friendless, helpless, or weakerthan the 40 million ormore Hindus of India who were classified as “untouchables.”Therefore, if there were peo-ple who could be fitly described as men of God, they weresurely these helpless, friendless,and despised people.

He said that if India became free with untouchability intact, the untouchables wouldbecomeworse under that Swaraj than they were before the freedom for the simple reasonthat the weaknessand failings would then be buttressed up by the accession of power.

Mahatma Gandhi used newspapers including Harijan and Young India to propagate hisanti-untouchability views. In his writings he stressed the problem of untouchability and itsremoval fromits roots. He felt that Hinduism, in reality, did not permit untouchability

The Bhagavad Gita never taught that an untouchable was in any way inferior to aBrah-man. A Brahman was no more a Brahman, once he became insolvent and consideredhimself, asuperior being. Gandhi felt that untouchability would not be removed bytheforce of evenlaw. It could only be removed, when the majority of Hindus felt that it was acrime against God andman and were ashamed of it.

The aid of law had to be invoked when it came in the way of reform, i.e., opening ofatemple. He described the social position of untouchables as follows: “Socially they arele-pers. Economically they are worse than slaves. Religiously they are denied entrance to-places we miscall ‘houses of God'”.

Gandhiji never stopped fighting against untouchability. Heconsidered it a blot onHinduism.He said that a religion that established the worship of the cow could not in allprobability counte-nance or warrants a cruel and inhuman boycott of human beings.Hindus would never deservefreedom, nor get it if they allowed their noble religion to bedisgraced by the retention of the taint ofuntouchability.

He found Harijan Sevak Sangh in 1932. G.D. Birla was its president and Thakkar Bapa itsSecre-tary. He always preached among the Harijans, the importance of cleanliness,abstention from


25

carrion-eating and intoxicating drinks and drugs, requirement of takingeducation themselvesand giving it to their children, also abstention from eating theleavings from caste Hindus’plates.

Gandhi, therefore, was concerned with the issues of Dalits no less than any otherleader.His heart went out to them and he worked very hard and sincerely for their uplift-ment.The fact that he had many other tasks on hand did not stop him from taking up their causeandhe devoted considerable timeand energy to bring an end to untouchability.

Anti Caste Movements

Untouchability

Brown explains that: His [Gandhi‘s] primary social concern at the time was the problemof un-touchability, the rejection of a whole group of the poorest and most menial in societyas a result ofHindu ideas of hierarchy, and purity and pollution. Now, as he traveledwidely, he saw inharsh practice the power of this social division, and the poverty anddegradation it caused.

Gandhi wanted to remove untouchability as he sawit as an evil imposed by man, not byany divineauthority. The word ―untouchable of course, refers to the aspect of Hinduismknown as―pollutionǁ. Coming into physical contact with untouchables, who numberedbetween 40 and60 million individuals in 1940,polluted a Hindu of a higher rank.

There were others working for the abolition of untouchability, among them theun-touchable leader Bhim Rao Ambedkar, who wanted reform. Where Gandhi differedfrom theother abolitionists was the method used to reach thisgoal. For Gandhi, religionwas at the coreof the untouchability problem. It was Hinduism that had createduntouchability, it was theHindus that had acted upon these divisions within society, and itwas therefore the Hindus thathad to remove the taint onHinduism. To provide theuntouchables with a more positiveconnotation, Gandhi gave the group a new name,namelyHarijanmeaning ―Children of God, inan attempt to make caste Hindus see thatthey were all equal under God.

Apart from giving the untouchables a new name, Gandhi also published severaltexts inwhich he gave his interpretation of Hinduism and untouchability. According toGandhi‘s in-terpretation of the religious books, he or she had to fill at least one of threecriteria used toclassify untouchables; 1) the person had to be born as an untouchable dueto a mixed caste heri-tage, 2) the person had to be guilty of either working with impureelements such as refuse,blood, excrements or death or not being a vegetarian, 3) a personwho was in a polluted state.63Gandhi‘s belief was that the first criterion did not apply toIndians in the 1930s, since there was noevidence of untouchables ever having been directresults of mixed marriages between higherand lower castes. As to the second and thirdcriteria, Gandhi believed that untouchables–who by this definition could be anyone incontact with impure elements regardless of caste–could perform purifying rituals to ridthemselves of internal impurity and become vegetari-ans. A bath and a change of clotheswould suffice for external impurities. ―Untouchabilityby birth cannot exist today inconnection with a class. In connection with individuals, it ispractically impossible ofdetection. According to Gandhi‘s interpretation, no person who fol-lowed the rules ofcleanliness in Hinduism was an ―untouchable.


26

Accordingly, temples should not be closed to a section of society, but open to everyone who fol-lowed the Hindu religious guidelines. Gandhi wanted to abolishuntouchability, but in-stead of insisting on abolishing the caste system in whichuntouchability was createdand practiced, Gandhi wanted to incorporate untouchables inthe servant orShudracaste. Un-touchables themselves would have to be uplifted by cleancaste-Hindus, who would have a changeof heart when Gandhi enlightened them about thewrongs they had committed.68 This was not all,however; Gandhi wanted the caste systemtoonlyconsist of theShudracaste. His reason for sug-gesting this was that ―Whilst wecan all serve and hence be called Shudras, we do not all posseslearning nor do we possessdivine knowledge. Therefore it would be untruthful to regard ourselvesas Brahmins. Thisview was contrary to centuries of practice and shows that Gandhi usedrhetoric thatcontained familiar terms but, especially in the case ofvarna, had an inherentdifferentmeaning. Although Gandhi gained support for the eradication of untouchabilitythroughhis campaign, he faced opposition to his interpretations and focus on religion–evenamong his own active participants

Untouchability Prohibition

The work of removal of untouchability is not merely a social or economic reform whoseextentcan be measured by so much social amenities or economic relief provided in somuch time.Its goal is to touch the hearts of the millions of Hindus who honestly believe inthe present-day un-touchability as a God-made institution, as old as the human race itself.–Mohandas K. Gandhi.

When Mahatma Gandhi started his travelling campaign against untouchability inNovember1933 he had, together with his organisation theHarijan Sevak Sangh,alreadymade people in largeparts of the subcontinent aware through the temple-entry campaignof the activity mobilised onbehalf of untouchables. During the temple-entry campaignGandhi had spent most of thetime in gaol, fromwhere he mobilised and instructed hisfollowers and the literate publicthrough his newspaperHarijan. The travelling campaignagainst untouchability, however, wasremarkably different. In addition to spreading hisideas through the newspaper Gandhi andasmall entourage visited cities and villages indifferent parts of India. Over a period of ninemonths, from November 1933 to August1934, his group gained supporters and initiated re-form through direct contact with thepopulous.

The most important issue in the travelling campaign was, as in the campaign for temple-entry,―the uplifting of untouchables. As explained in the previous chapter, Gandhi didnot onlywant to remove untouchability but include these castes in theShudraor servantvarna. At the same-time, he wanted thevarnasystem to be a system of equals under Godwith no high or no low.Theultimate goal of the campaign, therefore, was to riduntouchables of obstacles standing in theirway of becoming equals.

Gandhi‘s intention with the travellingcampaign was also to incorporate India bothterritoriallyand socially. This was accomplished in two ways: first, personally travellingaround Indiawould create closer ties to his followers in the places he visited–and inaddition create op-portunities to gather more followers. Second, collecting funds foruntouchables both locallyand nationally could create a feeling of community by having acommon cause.

The efforts in the travelling campaign against untouchability were divided into two main-branches:first, there was Gandhi and his entourage who travelled around India in theattempt


27

to remove untouchability. Second, there were supporters in theHarijan SevakSanghand othergroups of volunteers who travelled to villages around India independentfrom Gandhi and histravelling route–but dependent on instructions given through theorganisation and theHari-jan.Gandhi‘s travelling campaign against untouchability, acampaign that was mainly carriedout in villages around India, it is important to discernGandhi‘s views on rural India, specifi-cally village life. As to the actual campaign, Gandhispoke of common concerns and acted uponthem. In contrast to the structure of the chapteron the temple-entry campaign, I find it neces-sary to divide the campaign into themesaccording to the main concerns. This will be donein an effort to make the campaignexplicable and also to avoid repetitiveness as Gandhi hada tendency to talk of the sameconcerns wherever he went in India.

When the travelling campaign against untouchability began, temple-entry was one of themost dis-cussed topics of Gandhi‘s vision for Indian society. As the campaign progressed,however, temple-entry lost ground to other areas of concern such askhadi,educationalreform and, not theleastto the earthquake in Bihar in January of 1934. In the beginningof the campaign emphasis wasput on opening temples in the places Gandhi visited. Thisis known from statements such as―A fine temple near Wardha was thrown open toHarijans, performed the opening [inRaipur near Delhi] with God as witness. TheHarijans had cheerfully come in large num-bers, and ―Gandhiji then declared open toHarijans two temples [in Mudunuru in Central In-dia].

It is difficult to discern whether these temple-openings were results only of pressure fromGandhi‘sappearance or if they were inspired by Gandhi‘s appeal on behalf ofuntouchables–thereby being part of the group of participants who believed in andfollowed Gandhi‘s in-structions. During the campaign, however, Gandhireceivedcomplaints from both his support-ers and others. They stated that in some cases there wasmassive pressure from the localHarijanSevak Sanghto open temples. Defending himselffrom the accusations, Gandhi insisted that ―Iwill not be guilty of being party to theopening of a single temple under coercion. But Ido want temples to be opened wherepublic opinion is absolutely and clearly ripe for the open-ing of those temples.

Stating that he only wanted temples to be opened where the opinion was ripemay havein-spired participants to force the time to be right. Gandhi claimed that there was littleopposi-tion to untouchables‘entry to temples in the travelling campaign. As the campaigncontinued,Gandhi also stated that protests against temple-entry were receding in numbercompared to the pro-tests in the previous temple-entry campaign.

Gandhi expressed in the beginning of the campaign that his experience whiletravelling wasthat ―wherever I have gone and opened temples to Harijans, I have doneso in the presence ofthousands of caste Hindus and with their consent: the thousands ofcaste Hindus who weremost concerned about the temple said, W̳e want the temples to beopened.‘ Gandhi therefore in-sisted that ordinary caste-Hindus were ready to recognizeuntouchables as equals, helped bythe campaign and his efforts. His statements togetherwith the information provided showsthat there were a large number of people who–ifthey did not actively participate–were in-terested in Gandhi and his initiatives in thecampaign. The example also shows that Gandhi hadan interest in reproducing successfulinteractions with Indians. Propagating the success of ini-tiatives in the campaign wouldhave a positive effect as it could inspire more Indians to partici-pate.


28

Having limited respect–it would seem–for diversity in Hindu worship, Gandhi treatedtemples asthough they were uniform. Upon entering the state of Mysore, Gandhi and hisfollowers visitedSirsi, where local temples had been opened to the untouchables. Incontrast to other places inIndia, Gandhi did justnotwant temple-entry in Sirsi and insteaddemanded change. In the form ofworship, Gandhi‘s criterion for temple-entry was thateveryone should adhere to the rules ofspiritual cleanliness, including becoming vegetarianand avoiding impure elements. In Sirsi,however, temple-worship included animalsacrifice. This meant that untouchables would beinvolved in the slaughter of animals,which was unacceptable to Gandhi. Instead of sacrific-ing animals, Gandhi‘s speechconcluded that ―One can please God only by self-sacrifice andself-denial. He therefore,hoped that the trustees of the temple would take a strong line andput an end to the evilpractice in question. Gandhi wanted the temples to followthe sameprinciples and notdeviate from what he believed to be true religion. This could be an at-tempt to unifyHindus through participation in worship in the ideal temple.

Gandhi met with opposition during the campaign. In connection with temple-entry,this op-position was often posed bysanatanistor orthodox Hindus. The ways in whichthey opposedhim varied, but often it was by demonstrating or physically trying to hinderGandhi from reachinghis destination. In Deoli in the Central Provinces, Gandhi and hisentourage were in proces-sion to open a temple for the untouchables, but as they drewclose,sanatanistsblocked theentry so that no one could enter. In addition they warnedGandhi that he should stop the cam-paign, even though it had only just begun, because thecampaign would create dissension in Hindusociety.

The clash between Gandhi and his reformers andsanatanistswas much discussed both inmeetingsheld by Gandhi and in letters between Gandhi,sanatanistsand troubledreformers. A letter fromBengal in February of 1934 described the situation as a strain inthe campaign against untouch-ability–and also a hindrance in actually helpinguntouchables. The letter described thesituation as being threefold, which is also theimpression of thereader ofMahatma GandhiComplete Works: On the one hand there wasGandhi and his reformers wanting temple-entryand making it a priority equal or evensuperior to improving the economic and educationalsituation of unotuchables, all done inan attempt toreform Hinduism. On the other hand, therewere thesanatanistsand otherorthodox Hindus who did everything in their power to preventthe destruction ofHinduism by prohibiting untouchables from entering temples. In themiddle wereuntouchables, not beingallowed into temples.

Even thoughsanataniststried to hinder the temple-entry, they were not necessarily againstthe bet-terment of untouchables. While in Karur on his way to Orissa, Gandhi was told thatsanataniststheredid want to help untouchables and had made several initiatives with localuntouchables. As local-sanatanistspresented it, their problem was not with untouchablesthemselves but with their en-tering the temples. In fact, there were those who calledthemselves liberalsanatanistswhowanted the temple-entry issue to be dropped so thatresources could be gathered for promotingthe ―material, moral, educational and spiritualwelfare of Harijans in consonance with the traditionof Hindu religion, so that the Harijansmay become the equals ofsavarnasin every respect andthere will not be any curse ofuntouchability, if they are treated as our kith and kin.

The solution of separate temples was proposed from both reformers andsanatanistsin theend ofFebruary in 1934. Accepting separate temples can be seen as a shift in tactics forGandhi:as I showed in the chapter on the temple-entry movement, Gandhi had refusedbuilding


29

separate facilities for untouchables due to his conviction that separation wouldnotlead toacceptance or equality. The compromise shows that Gandhi stubborn, butwilling to compro-mise when mobilising for the travelling campaign.

Gandhi‘s logic was that untouchables would then be able to enter temples withoutoffend-ingsanatanists,andsanatanistswould have their own temples and be secure in thethought that un-touchables could not defile their place of worship. If Gandhi was right andthe majority of caste-Hindus were for untouchables’ temple-entry, the result would be thatonly a minority of templeswould be reserved forsanatanistsand therefore a majority oftemples would be open to untouch-ables. In addition, the solution would result in astrengthened focus on the other issues onthe campaign where opposition was not asstrong as withtemple-entry. Having separate tem-ples was in accordance with Gandhi‘soverall goal of mobilizing Indian society. Even thoughuntouchables would gain access totemples, separate temples would decrease opposition andthereby increase the number ofsupporters in the campaign.

Another issue that appeared during the emphasis on temple-entry was the desire of manyuntouch-ables not to enter temples, but to better their own situation economically. Gandhiwrote an articleinThe Hinduwhere he juxtaposed temple-entry with economic uplift.There he wrote of theprotests he had received from bothsanatanistsand untouchablesconcerning the focus on tem-ple-entry. ―Some of the Harijans say, we do not wanttemple-entry; do not build temples,but use all you receive foreconomic uplift. ‘Somesanatanists say, Give up the temple-entryquestion altogether. You are hurting our feelingsby forcing Harijans into temples. Gandhi‘s re-ply was that even though there wasdisagreement on the temple-entry issue, the protesterswere now a minority and wouldhave to comply with the majority.

As mentioned in the introduction, India in the early 1930s was facing severe economicalproblemsdue to the Depression and a lack of rainfall. Economic uplift, therefore, mayhave seemedlike a more immediate need than religious initiatives such as temple-entry.As it turned out,the information available shows a tendency towards focusing more oneconomical and edu-cational reform as the campaign continued. This was particularly thecase after the earthquakein Bihar in January of 1934, which affected thousand of Indiansand made the need for economicuplift paramount.

Untouchables

Economic reform in the villages in the form ofkhadiwas one of the aspects of thecampaignwhere untouchables could help themselves advance economically, according toGandhi. In Februaryof 1934 Gandhi gave instructions on how to implement the spinningand use ofkhadi.First, theknowledge of spinning had to be spread to the villages by theSanghand other reform work-ers.Second, thekhadisurplus should be sold in their ownand neighbouring villages so thatthe profit of the sale could go wholly to the spinners. Sending cloth to other regions re-quired both extra cost and time, which would only hurtthe profit of the spinners and thereforethe poor who needed the profits the most.

According to Gandhi, one example of the introduction of the spinning wheel andkhadicanbe found in the Central Provenance, namely Anantpur. A village of approximatelynine hun-dred, the inhabitants was only occupied four months of the year and had hardlyany sup-plementary occupation. In a time-span of four years, four reform workers taughtthe villag-


30

ers how to spin and weave, selling the surplus of their labour to neighbouringvillages andat the same time making their village self-sufficient. The spinning ofkhadialso bettered thelives of the villagers in other aspects: the reform workers refused to teachvillagers who drank al-cohol. As a consequence the alcohol consumption in the villagewent down considerably asspinning became more popular. The cottage industry alsospread to seventeen neighbouringvillages making the spinning ofkhadia local successSpreading the concept ofkhadiand print-ing successful results does not mean thatreforming thevillage economy was an easy task.Gandhi was aware of the fact thatsuccess could in many cases be only temporary. In theearly 1920s Gandhi had startedschools for the spinning ofkhadiin Bihar. While Gandhi and hissupporters were in Biharthe school was a success, but when they departed and the campaignfaded the schoolclosed down. In the travelling campaign against untouchability, therefore,attemptswere made to establishkhadias a cottage industry in the village and make it a permanent-feature.The reformers had to create a bond between the different people who worked intheprocess of creating cloth made of hand-spun cotton.At the same time the reformershad topersuade thekhadi-workers to cooperate when selling the cloth in the area and not attempt for a lar-ger profit in the cities–all in an attempt to make the village or cluster ofvillages self-sufficient.

Even though khadi was first and foremost meant for untouchables and other poor inIndianvillages, it was theSanghand reform workersconnected to Gandhi–who wasthemselves notuntouchables–who spread the knowledge of spinning and taught theuntouchables.Althoughkhadihelped many untouchables and made them part of thecampaign, it was not ini-tiated by untouchables but by caste-Hindus.

One of the major grievances that Gandhi faced was the fact that untouchables did not-themselves have leading positions in theHarijan Sevak Sangh.As discussed in the chapteron thetemple-entry campaign, Gandhi believed that caste-Hindus had to haveleadingpositions intheSanghas repentance for their sin of observing untouchability. Hisinterpretation, however,was not understood by untouchables, something which can beseen in the travelling cam-paign. In Rajahmundry, close to Madras, Gandhi met adeputation of untouchables who be-lieved that theSanghboth should consist of and bemanaged by them. After hearing the or-ganization’s goal of caste-Hindu repentance, thedeputation asked that an advisory committeebe appointed to assist theSangh. Then, at least, untouchables could help the campaigndirectly. Gandhi supported sendingsuggestions and supporting the organization, but he ar-gued that an advisory board couldcreate favoritism and even sectionalism among the un-touchables and create suggestionsbased on sectional needs.

Although Gandhi did not want the goals of theSanghto be compromised by untouchablegroups, hedid have a solution: ―What you have to do is to enable and help them todischarge theirobligations; that is to say, you can tell themhow they can discharge theirobligation, you can tellthem what in your opinion will satisfy the great body of Harijans.He did not want the untouchablesto participate in the organization, but rather to inspire it.To Gandhi it did not make any sensethatuntouchables should have leading positions in the Sangh.After all, it was not the untouch-ables that had to repent. Comparing the caste-Hindus to debtors and untouchables to creditors,Gandhi insisted that it was not thecreditors that owed anything. It was the debtors that hadto initiate a down payment andthe creditors‘responsibility to overlook the transactions.Based on his discussion inRajahmundy, Gandhi later in the campaign proposed that instead ofhaving one advisorycommittee to theSangh,an alternative would be that every local and re-gional branch ofthe organization should have an advisory committee consisting of untouch-


31

ables only.Gandhi‘s plan was that the committee would have to be independent from the organiza-tionbut at the same timecooperate with them. Its function was to suggest direction to the local-Sangh–although Gandhi did not instruct theSanghto follow the suggestions–and also toawaken thelocal untouchables to the fact that they were equal to caste-Hindus and had theright to the sameprivileges as them.

Connecting the example of Rajahmundy to the argument of Gandhi‘s ability to mobilize,it is pos-sible to view Gandhi‘s compromise as a way of creating more supporters and atthe sametime subdue opposition. Untouchablesdid not have any real power in theSanghbut they could, ac-cording to this example, participate in the campaign under the directionof Gandhi. Tactically, con-necting untouchables to his organization could hinder increasedopposition against Gandhi or the-campaign.

Another complaint among untouchables was based on the fact that Gandhi and reform-workers were building separate wells and schools for them and at the same time speakingof un-touchables being equal to caste-Hindus. The argument was that havingseparate wellsand schoolswould separate untouchables from caste-Hindus even more than earlier oreven enhance thedifferences between them. Gandhi, on the other hand, had witnesseduntouchables in differentparts of India with no schools and drinking water from the samecontainer as dogs and cattle. Gan-dhi viewed separate wells and schools as an intermediateon the way to equality: ―It is not tokeep you segregated that the schools are beingopened and wells are being dug for you. Allthis is being donebecause I cannot bear tosee you get no water at all. Separate wells andschools were therefore necessary, inGandhi‘s view, because it could take time before caste-Hindus would reform and acceptuntouchables as equals.

As with the suggestion of separatetemples, separate wells and schools would logically notbe asprovocative as uniting untouchables with caste Hindus in these facilities. Theinitiative couldalso result in greater support for Gandhi and the campaign due to the factthat the solution didnotprovoke as many people as the alternative and new facilities werebeing built. During the campaignGandhi faced critiques from untouchables that they didnot want his help or follow what theycalled the ―Gandhian creed, meaning thecampaign with Gandhi‘s initiatives in the villagescombined with his religious views. Aninvestigation had been done by a Mr. Acharya in Bom-bay where he had found out thatninety-five per cent of the untouchables asked were not inagreement with the campaign.Even though the scope of the investigation is not known, it didshow that untouchablescould be skeptical to the campaign. As to the ―Gandhian creed, Gandhihimself did notbelieve that untouchables were against the goals of the campaign because his goalswereunivesally beneficial to all untouchables:

I am engaged in giving Harijans clean water. I am engaged in giving themfacilities foreducation. I am engaged in finding accommodation for them in publiccaravanserais wherethey cannot get it. I amengaged in weaning them from drink andcarrion. Do they not like allthese? I am engaged in teaching them the elementary rules ofhygiene. Do they not want it? Iam engaged in telling them what the fundamentals ofHinduism are and in having public tem-plesthrown open to them.

Even though Gandhi did not believe that untouchables were against the campaign–whichhe basedon the fact he perceived untouchables as overjoyed by the improvements whileon tour–the


32

emphasis was on caste-Hindus to reform, not onthe untouchables toapprove. Approval wouldcome naturally when the caste-Hindus had changed at heart.

The information provided shows that although Gandhi emphasized the participation ofcasteHindus in the leadership of his organization in the campaign,he did adapt somewhatto demandsof untouchables when offering them advisory positions to theSangh.Theinformation alsoshows that there were skeptics among untouchables who did not wantGandhi‘s help.Whether this was because Gandhi wanted to help themtogether with caste-Hindus or that Gandhiused traditional Hindu rhetoric as basis for his initiative is notcompletely clear. What isclear, however, is that there was opposition to Gandhi and hiscampaign, namely oppositionbased on objections as to whyonly caste-Hindus were toinitiate reform in villages and whyreligion had to be at the core of the campaign

The Temple-Entry Campaign

Temple-entry is a spiritual act, transforming the whole society by one single act ofadmis-sion. It will electrify intoa new life the whole of the Harijan population, and it willpurify Hinduismas no single act that I can think of can do–Mohandas K. Gandhi inJanuary 1933.

When the period for this thesis began in the autumn of 1932, Mohandas Gandhi was in-gaol for civildisobedience against the colonial power. There he planned and propagated afast untildeath with the intent of opening a temple in Guruvayur in Kerala foruntouchables. Thisfast was abandoned for a new fast in 1933 which, in contrast to hisplanned fastin 1932,was extended to regard all temples in India and thereby made anational campaign foruntouchables. Both Indian and international press coveredGandhi‘s fasting period and,as we shall see, he wrote a large number of articles andletters both about his reasons for fast-ing and the goals by undertaking it.

Gandhi made it clear early in 1933 that untouchables‘access to temples was the key forun-touchability in India as a whole to be eradicated: if untouchability became obsolete,Gandhiwas convincedthat other problems within the Indian society, includingeconomical, politi-cal and social problems, would solve themselves. For Gandhi, the fastwas a small sacrifice thatprovided a shift in focus in India from civil disobedience topromoting the situation of theuntouchables, though first and foremost in a religiouscontext. The civil disobedience cam-paigns of the 1920s and early 1930s had gathered thecountry‘s population around a commonpolitical centre, namely Gandhi and the IndianNational Congress,in an attempt to extraditeitself from the colonial power. Thecampaigns of 1932 to 1934, however, focused on society it-self and created both unity andopposition within.

Gandhi’s interpretation of religion

Religion played a significant role in Gandhi‘s campaigns. His first Indian campaign was indefenseof Indian Muslims in theKhilafat-movement and his subsequent campaigns in theearly 1920s and1930s all had elements connected to the Hindu religion: Gandhi usedfasting as a means to getattention for acause. He believed fasting to be a way of showingcourage or to suffer pain withoutretaliation. Gandhi became an ascetic, which he thoughtwould enhance both bodily and spiritualpower. As part of being an ascetic, Gandhipromoted and encouraged the ideaof renuncia-


33

tion,a life in celibacy and self-restraintconnected to Hindu revival movements and social reformmovements.

Gandhi believed that it was paramount to address the issues within his own religionHindu-ism and repair them as he viewed his religionas one of several branches of religionthat intercon-nected in India. His definition of being a Hindus was ―one who believes inGod, immortality andtransmigration of the soul,karmaandmoksha, who tries to practicetruth and non-violence and actsaccording tovarnasharma, the division of society intodistinct groups with their own roles. Hethereby had a specific notion of what a Hindu wasand what his duties were.

Rudolph and Rudolph add that Gandhi used traditional ideals and transformed them for-modernpurposes. Gandhi became connected to thebhakti-tradition, a tradition familiar toIndiansbased on a devotional teacher communicating through familiar symbols and locallan-guages.Bhaktiwas known as a path to religious experience and salvation and thedevotee as-sociated with the lower castes. The anthropologist C. J. Fuller adds that theascetic re-nouncer enjoys a special position in Hindu society as the exemplar of a supremereligious ideal. Or-dinary householders typically ―treat him as a spiritual preeminent andmay seek his assistance intheir own religious life or even in other, more worldlymanners.‖46 The well-regarded andpowerful denouncer is treated as a man in a highposition, ranking higher than Brahminswho can be both in a powerful position and bewealthy.

According to the historian Shahid Amin in his article ―Gandhi as Mahatma the parts ofrural In-dia Gandhi visited in the early 1920s (the Gorakhpur region in what is now UttarPradesh in par-ticular) were more affected by his religiosity thanhis politics: the peoplewere more interestedin receiving Gandhi‘sdarshanor blessings and thought of him as asaint first, not a politician or asocial worker. Supported by this and the well-known factthat Gandhi had an ever-increasingnumber of followers, we can deduct that Gandhi wasimportant as a religious figure (as well as apolitician and social worker) in Indian society,which must have been a decisive factor in his mobi-lization.

Politicians in the Indian National Congress, including leading personalities as JawaharlalNehru,commented on Gandhi‘s use of religion in a political context. The historian HaroldCoward ex-plains that Nehru characterized Gandhi as essentially a man of religion.Furthermore, Gandhireferred to himself as a Hindu at thevery depths of his being. ButGandhi‘s conception ofreligion as well as his Hinduism ―had nothing to do with anydogma or custom or ritual.

The temple

When Gandhi spoke of Hindu worship he usually spoke of temples. Gandhi believed thatthe templewas in the core of everyday life for millions of Hindus, whether they be casteHindus or untouch-ables. His vision therefore was of equal access to temples in asystemwith no high and nolow. The caste Hindus would see that they had treated theuntouchables badly by excludingthem and welcome them into a common religious arena;the temple. Gandhi first mentioned theidea of temple-entry in 1921. It was to be theconcrete representation of the abstract ideaof abolishing untouchability. Gandhi‘s goalwas equality among Hindus, which would, inturn, take India one step closer toswaraj.


34

School of Distance EducationIndianNationalMovementGandhianPhase (1917-1947)Page42Oneway of achieving equality was taking steps that would enable untouchables tobecomeequals. Gandhi did not believe that India was ready for a temple-entry effort in1921, how-ever, and appealed to people that they should instead focus on opening wellsuntil the timewas right.

In the travelling campaign it was not an option (although it was suggested by severalsup-porters) to build separate temples for untouchables and caste-Hindus since this, inGandhi‘sview, would not create religious equality or acceptance. What was acceptable,however, wasrestricted access inside the temple and restricted hours in which theuntouchables couldenter. Interestingly, the compromise of separate temples foruntouchables was not as easilydismissed in the travelling campaign against untouchabilityone year later.

In addition to viewing the temple as the centre for acceptance for Hindus, Gandhi alsow-rote an article inThe Hinduof what a perfect temple was. The perfect temple would beone wherethe priest was a devoted man of God who had the least of needs and personalities. His sole con-cern would be the welfare of his people. The temple would have to beaccessible to theuntouchables and other poor in clean surroundings and without discrimination. Aroundthe temple there would be a school, a dispensary, a library and aguesthouse–all under theadministration of the temple.

Temple-entry

With the new year of 1933, Gandhi and his associates widened the scope of the campaign.Therewere now two goals for the campaign: the first was to open as many temples aspossible toUntouchables, and the second was convincing untouchables to conform to thecommon requisitesof temple-entry. Access to all temples was self-explanatory in that itwas a logical continua-tion of the campaign for opening the Guruvayur-temple, but therewas one thing that has to betaken into consideration before continuing withthe campaign:temples were not uniform.

The temple in Guruvayur was a public temple, open to caste-Hindus in the community.Aprivatetemple, on the other hand, was built by one person or group and therefore theownerscould select who could and could notenter the temple. No potential law couldaffect the pri-vate temples. If the owner wanted untouchables to enter the temple, not lawcould prevent him. Ifthe owner did not want them to enter, a law could not force him todo so. With the public temples, alaw positive to temple-entry would have to be followed.But since there was no such law, tak-ing a referendum or convincing caste-Hindus thatuntouchables had equal right to enter templescould change the environ, but could not getuntouchables into other temples. As a consequence,the temple-entry campaign wasmainly focused on opening private temples all over India.

As to the second goal of having untouchables conform to the religious rules of thetemples,Gandhi and his followers were in favour of the untouchables being accepted intotemples on thepre-existing conditions. Since, as we have seen earlier, Gandhi believedthat there was no suchthing as untouchability by birth, every Hindu could rid himself ofimpurity. Purity could beachieved by not consuming beef or carrion, to take dailyabsolutions and to wear cleanclothes. Gandhi proclaimed that untouchables should acceptthe views of caste-Hindus and con-vince them of the right to temple-entry throughconformity and adaptation.


35

If you are polluted bymy presence or by my touch, I am quite prepared to consent toaseparate period being reserved for you to offer worship by yourselves and give you the-same credit for sincerity that I claim for myself. You are as much entitled to worship in-the temple asI think I am. Therefore you offer worship in your time, and I shall offerwor-ship, along with the reformers, during the period reserved for us, and since by traditionyou havebeen taught to think that the efficacy of the idol is diminished by my enteringtheportals of the tem-ple gate, though I do not believe in it myself, let the priest perform thepurification ceremony.

Gandhi and his followers, the main component being theHarijan Sevak Sanghwith itsprovin-cial branches, therefore propagated cleanliness, sending reformers–including alarge number ofstudents–to different towns and villages. This meant that the focus wasno longer only on thetemples, but on how the lives of the untouchables would have tochange in order to gain ac-cess to them.

InJanuary of 1933, Gandhi was still in goal where he gathered information on theprogressof the temple-entry campaign. Reports from supporters all over India wereflowing in tellingof open temples and the purification of untouchables. By the end ofJanuary, Gandhi esti-mated that no less than five hundred temples had been opened up tountouchables. Politically, therewas a new bill presented to the legislative assembly of theMadras Presidency called the MadrasBill. It contained several of Gandhi‘s suggestions,such as organizing a referendum in everytemple the untouchables wanted to enter,thereby letting the majority decide. Untouchabilityfrom birth was also to be abolished,giving untouchables the same rights in the use of pub-lic facilities like wells,roads andschools. The fact that temples were closed to untouchables wasdescribed in the draft textas a ―social disability imposed by customǁ that had to be removedby Hindu leaderswhere the opinion was ripe

The passing of the Madras Bill was of suchimportance to Gandhi that in early Februaryhe pro-claimed that in addition to the two goals of the temple-entry movement, the billwould beadded as a third goal. Gandhi believed that ―if the Bills are not passed, it isobvious thatthe central part of thereform will be hung up almost indefinitely. Meetingswere to be heldall over the country urging the Government of India to provide allfacilities in their power forthe consideration of the Bill and appealing to the members ofthe House not to obstruct it. Theirappeal should be that the Bill did not interfere withanybody‘s private faith and that itwould be liberating because it would provide Hinduconscience with ―complete freedom ofaction regarding untouchability. The Madras Billwas regarded as a modification of Dr. Sub-baroyan‘s bill, but they both suffered the samefate. Though it did not become a law, it proved thatGandhi and his followers believed alaw would help them and that there was political sympathy forthe religious temple-entrymovement

The newspaper rHarijanhad had an essential role in publishing articles in favour of theopen-ing of the temple in Guruvayur in addition to spreading Gandhi‘s views. With thenew na-tional temple-entry movement,Harijanwas given an even larger role as Gandhi‘smouthpiece. Inaddition to the English, Hindi and Gujarati versions of the paper,arrangements were madeto publish the newspaper in Bengali, Marathi and Tamil–thereby not only covering larger ar-eas of the country geographically, but also larger partsof the literate population. But there wasone hiccough: although the newspaper waspublished in larger areas, the newspaper had prob-lems being spread in the south of India.The reformers in northern India, therefore, could get moreinformation on the campaign inother corners of the subcontinent


36

Another attempt to make the removal of untouchability known was made by Gandhi in-April, namely the proclamation of Harijan Day. Harijan Day was supposed to be a daywithgreater dedication, prayer and intensivework for the cause–arranged once everymonth orevery six weeks. In places where work for the untouchables was not possible,the day shouldbe spent collecting money for the untouchable cause.

The day was topped by Gandhi announcing a twenty one-day fast on behalf ofuntouchables, believ-ing that the campaign alone was not going to remove untouchability. It will not be eradicated bymoney, external organization and even political power forHarijans, though all these three are nec-essary.

Khadi

Economic reform in the villages

In the decade before the travelling campaign, Gandhi had promoted his view thatkhadiorIndianhand-spun and hand-woven cotton would solve many problems in villages. First,khadiwasIndian cotton and not imported as other kinds of cotton and it was thereforeavailable to alarger part of the Indian society. Second, spinning cloth and distributing itwould provide asecond income that was needed in villages, where wages were low andvillagers could bewithout work for up to one third of the year. Third,khadiwouldeliminate the need for cot-ton mills and foreign goods in the villages. Fourth, wearingkhadiwould mean that there wouldnot be large differences in clothing among villagers. Ifeveryone in addition kept to the rules of reli-gious cleanliness, there would be no outwarddifference between an untouchable and someoneof a higher caste. In 1934 Gandhiexclaimed that his view ofkhadihad not changed since he hadfirst tried toimplement thespinning ofkhadiin 1919. On the contrary, he was even more dedi-cated to promotingkhadiand claimed that ―khadi is the only solution for the deep and deepeningdistress ofthe untouchables.Khadihas been said by, among others, Brown to be Gandhi‘s attemptatan economic reform in India. Brown explains that in contrast to other leading figuressuchas Ambedkar, Gandhi wanted to avoid the organisation of labour and class struggleas seen inEurope. He wanted to solve the problems in India with solutions originating onthe subcontinent.

Khadiwas one of these solutions along with temple-entry for untouchables. The mainreasonfor Gandhi‘s emphasis on spinning was that it was universally applicable in all ofIndia. This part ofhis rhetoric could therefore appeal to more Indians than could temple-entry, for instance. In addi-tion to the positive aspects ofkhadisuch as its availability anduniversal applicability together withthe prospect of having an additional income, thespinning ofkhadilessened the gap between richand poor in some areas. Gandhi believedthat the spinningkhadiprivately could give a smallprofit to a family or a village, butworking in mills provided only limited earnings for alimited number of workers. Theprofit in the cotton industry lay only in the hands of ahandful of people, making themmuch richer off the labours of others. The spinning ofk-hadiwas completely different,creating only differences when it came to how much cotton afamily or village couldproduceand sell.

Even thoughkhadiwas one way of improving a family or a village economically, thehis-torian Lisa Travedi explains that the cloth was not cheaper than mill-spun cloth ingeneral,because of the volume mills could produce in a shorter time. How could theaverage personafford to buykhadiwhen it was more expensive than other clothes?Travedi‘s impression is


37

that Gandhi and his followers never really faced this criticism butrather focused on how to teachpoor villagers how to spin their own clothes. In Gandhi‘sview, since the profit ofkhadiwent to thepoor, as opposed to mill cloth profit,khadiwasworth the expense.

Brown reveals that many Congress politicians had a vision for India that differed from thatof Gan-dhi‘s. They wanted for India to ―hold its own as a modern, industrializednation.The thought wasthat other countries exploited countries that were not industrialized. Indiatherefore had to developindustry in order to be independent and self-sufficient. Thepriority in Gandhi‘s economicvision was, according to Brown, the creation of a non-violent society. Such a society couldonly exist with a rural economy because it eschewed exploitation–and exploitation led to violence.Becoming industrialized to Gandhi meantthat the country moved away from traditional valuesand opened up to exploitation anddependence. Although the economic vision for India dif-fered between Gandhi and othercongress politicians, the common goal was that both sideswanted an economically strongand independent India.

Even though khadi was one way of improving a family or a village economically, the historian LisaTravedi explains that the cloth was not cheaper than mill-spun cloth I general, because of the vol-ume mills could produce in a shorter time. How could the average person afford to buykhadi-when it was more expensive than other clothes?Travedi‘s impression is that Gandhi and hisfollowers never really faced this criticism butrather focused on how to teach poor villagers how tospin their own clothes. In Gandhi‘sview, since the profit ofkhadiwent to the poor, as opposed tomill cloth profit,khadiwasworth the expense.Brown reveals that many Congress politicians had avision for India that differed from thatof Gandhi‘s. They wanted for India to ―hold its own as amodern, industrializednation.The thought was that other countries exploited countries that were notindustrialized. Indiatherefore had to develop industry in order to be independent and self-sufficient. Thepriority in Gandhi‘s economic vision was, according to Brown, the creationof a non-violent society. Such a society could only exist with a rural economy because it es-chewedexploitation–and exploitation led to violence. Becoming industrialized to Gandhi meantthatthe country moved away from traditional values and opened up to exploitation anddepend-ence. Although the economic vision for India differed between Gandhi and othercongresspoliticians, the common goal was that both sides wanted an economically strongand independentIndia.Viewing the spinning ofkhadiin connection to one of Gandhi‘s overall goals of the-campaign, namely mobilization of Indian society, it is possible to see why emphasis wasput onk-hadi.Firstly, it was an Indian product in a time when large parts of thesubcontinent wereunder foreign control by the colonial power. Secondly,khadiprovidedan additional opportunity toan income or means to make one’s own clothes. Finally,khadicould be applied in all of Indiaand was therefore a common denominator that couldhelp Indians connect beyond local commu-nities.Khadicould be related to Indiansindependent of religious or social differences, and there-fore had the potential of increasingthe number of Gandhi‘s supporters.

In 1934, Gandhi‘s focus was on the internal issues of the Indian society, which ex-plainswhykhadiacquired an even greater role than previously. Efforts to implement spinnin-gand the use ofkhadiwere on a grander scale than earlier. Also, as a result of Gan-dhi‘spopularity and his many supporters, more Indians had access to information onkhadithanin thecampaigns of the 1920s.

Village India


38

Gandhi is well known for his opposition to values he believed were brought into India bythe colo-nial power. He was strictly opposed to increasing urbanisation and emphasis onmaterialgoods, and believed that traditional Indian society consisted of self-supportingvillages, acondition preferable and natural in India.211 Brown explains that Gandhibelieved that vil-lages were the essence of the Indian way of life representing equality andpeaceful neighborliness,an equilibrium disturbed by the spread of the Western influence. This belief, says Brown, is presentin much of his social and political programme.

In 1910, Gandhi wrote inHind Swarajthat The Indian village has for centuries remained abulwarkagainst political disorder, and the home of the simple domestic and social virtues.No wonder, there-fore, that philosophers and historians have always dwelt lovingly on thisancient institution whichis the natural social unit and the best type of rural life: self-contained, industrious, peace-loving, conservative in the best sense of the word.

Idealizing the village as a social unit was not unique in India or the rest of theworld.Gandhi was inspired by utopians such as Leo Tolstoy and JohnRuskin and was con-vincedthat they, like him, believed that the lives of the lowest in society or the workers of the soil-were the lives worth living. During the civil disobedience campaigns of the 1920s, Gandhitrans-lated Ruskin to Gujarati and distributed the work in meetings. As a result, bothGan-dhi‘sHind Swarajand Ruskin‘s books were banned by the colonial regime. Gandhicontinuedspreading his view of village life and emphasized village reform in thetravelling campaignagainst untouchability. Thatdid not mean that Gandhi‘s reform wasexclusive to villages alone.

Gandhi differentiated between villages and towns or cities in his campaigning. While thecampaignin the cities was to concentrate on supplying funds for untouchables bycollecting moneyandsubscriptions to theHarijanthrough meetings and house to housecanvassing, campaigning inthe villages was more difficult. Gandhi‘s ultimate goal wasfor every Indian to be equal andshare every service in the villages such as temples, wells,schoolsand clothes. Gandhi‘s supportersreported, however, that working in the villageswas difficult because they were outnumbered byresisting caste Hindus. A compromise hehad not accepted in the campaign for temple-entrywas therefore made: there would beroom for the creation of separate temples, wells and schoolsfor the untouchables. Gandhisaw the compromise as one step towards equality and his ulti-mate goal. It gave, inGandhi‘s opinion, his organization and reform workers an advantage as itwould be easierto compromise first and change the hearts of caste-Hindus later.

While Gandhi idealised village society, Coward explains that untouchables–withAmbedkar inthe lead–saw villages as places where the social strata ofvarnas werethriving: untouchableswere forced to live in separate quarters, often in the outskirts of avillage, so as not to pollutecaste Hindus. Untouchables had in addition restrictions onmovement, apparel, houses, occu-pation and the acquisition of land. Ambedkar insistedthat ―inthis traditional village struc-ture, the law is made by the Touchables and theUntouchables have no choice but to acceptit and obey. Untouchables have no rights orequality; they can only ask for mercy and becontent with what is offered. Gandhi’ssuggestion of preserving village society was unac-ceptable to Ambedkar and otherSchool of Distance EducationIndianNationalMovementGan-dhianPhase (1917-1947)Page50untouchables. In their view, untouchables would there remain thesubjects of tyranny andoppression. The village system would have to be reformed inorder to protectuntouchables fromabuse.


39

According to this, Ambedkar did not view Gandhi‘s initiatives in the villages as reformbutas prevention of reform. Ambedkar‘s solution was government control of the villages.First, un-touchables should be moved from the outskirts of a village and form a separatevillageaway from and independent of other castes. Second, the government shouldprovide land thatcould be cultivated by untouchables. This would enable untouchables toextract themselves from theclose-knit association to the caste Hindus in the same village.As Ambedkar explained, India is ad-mittedly a land of villages and so long as the villagesystem provides an easy method of markingout the Untouchable, the Untouchable has noescape from Untouchability. It is the village systemwhich perpetuates Untouchability andthe Untouchables therefore demand that it should bebroken and the Untouchables, whoare as a matter of fact socially separate should be madeseparately geographically andterritorially also, and be grouped into separate villages exclu-sively of Untouchables inwhich the distinction of the high and low and of Touchable and Un-touchable will find noplace.

One important aspect of Ambedkar‘s opposition to Gandhi‘s idealisation of rural Indiamustbe mentioned: Ambedkar believedthat villages were the place for traditional abuseof untouch-ables, but he did not discuss the treatment of untouchables in the larger cities onthe subcontinent.Coward asserts that the social division between touchable anduntouchable was rigid inthe modern towns as in the villages, and Pauline Kolendaprovides examples that strengthenhis claim. Kolenda explains that in the cities a caste orkin-community helped each other materi-ally and emotionally through proving housing,work and a social base. A caste thereby ex-cluded other castes of kin-communities andretained a pattern of social stratification. How-ever, Kolenda shows that there werechanges in urban areas in the 1970s, decades after the trav-elling campaign. There, rules ofpurity and impurity werenot as strong in public as in villages:―Hindu men are not muchconcerned with pollution from contact with lower-caste persons in city-streets, in buses ortrains, in office, factory or shop. Traditional customs, including rules ofpurity andpollution, may be followed in the home; but they are largely ignored at work.

Though Gandhi idealized the village, he too wanted reform. But, in contradiction toAmbed-kar, Gandhi wanted not to modernize the village but to reinstitute what he referredto as a―goldenageǁ, a concept he used as part of his rhetoric for explaining his idealIndian soci-ety. On several occasions Gandhi tried to explain his view of the period hecalledSatyaYuga(the age of truth) and what made it desirable. In 1919, he defined theage asthe timewhen ―men and women in India spontaneously and automatically spokeonly the truth. Womenin those days maintained their chastity. In those days even whenmen and women got to-gether, they did not have lustful thoughts in their minds. That ishow things were in theSatyaYugaor the Golden Age. In 1925 Gandhi claimed that in thegolden age there were no semi-starvedmillions in the country

iii) Educational reform in the villages

Gandhi‘s experience with education had begun long before the travellingcampaignagainst un-touchability. In South Africa he had started a school where the emphasis was onphysical labour ineducation. Gandhi‘s first attempt at educational reform in India came inChamparan in 1919.There, Gandhi and a handful of volunteers started schools in fiveneighboring villages. Theteacher was not only an educator but also a social worker: first,hygiene and sanitation had to betaught and implemented among the pupils. Second, thepupils were taught the alphabet andnumbers. During the day, the pupils consisted of thechildren in the village. At night, adults of


40

both sexes attended school and were taughtmedical aid in addition to hygiene and reading. Theteachers also visited different quartersof the villages and cleaned them together with the villagers.

Gandhi‘s efforts in Champaran were in 1919. In the campaign against untouchability15years later, however, with more experience and having seen more of the Indian-subcontinent, Gandhi had added curricula to a reform of village education. Subjects suchas history,geography and arithmetic should be taught in addition to handicrafts and thespinning of cot-ton cloth. Gandhi also had specific instructions as to what should be taughtin the different sub-jects. He wanted the education to become Indian. It was Gandhi‘simpression that educationin India was British, not Indian: school books were importedand not adapted to the needsof Indian children, and especially not untouchable Indianchildren. Teachers should thereforeadapt to the needsof the individual villages and be acaring parent for the pupils.

The reform of education in Indian villages in the campaign worked on all levels: Brit-ishbooks were to be substituted by tutoring based on the needs of villagers. This often meantthatthe vocabulary was that which was relevant to them, words they used on a daily basis.Arithmeticwas based on the daily need of the pupil, such as how to count earnings orhouses in thevillage, and the history was mostly current. The basic use of the subject wastaught first and thenexpanded. Local personalities and events were taught first, regionalsecond and then nationalhistory. Spinning and other physical labour was a means toteach pupils the advantages oflearning a trade, making their own clothes andalso thepossibility of an additional income.

Gandhi‘s attempt at educational reform in the travelling campaign against untouchabilityhad con-sequences in the aftermath of the campaign: upon his return to politics in 1937Gandhi‘sproposal for educational reform was put forward in seven provinces. Thedemand was firstand foremost for compulsory free education for all children,

emphasizing that all children were equal and therefore had equal rights. School were―tobe anintegral part of its social and economic environment, and learning a realisticparticipation inthe economic and cultural activities of the community. Manual labour wasto be central in the edu-cation, teaching children cooperation and self-realization. The ideawas that a blend of vocationandaptitude would create a greater sense of personal worthand dignity and in addition deepen rever-ence for cultural and moral values.

Anti Communal Programmes

Mahatma Gandhi devoted his entire life for propounding communal harmony.Hewished in‘India of his dream’, “I shall for an India, in which the poorest shall feel thatit is their country inwhose making they have an effective voice; an India in which thereshall be no high class andlow class of people; [and above all] an India in which allcommunities shall live in perfectharmony.”

Not only in India but also all over the world, scholars and subject-specialists havedefinedcommunalism in different manners.And, all these definitions, unfortunately,do not revealthe complete meaning or sense ofcommunalism in clear-cutterms.However, Richard C.Lambert, who has given the definition of communityaccording to the conditions prevailingin the country, provides us a correct pictureregarding the position of communalism in India.


41

According toRichard C. Lambert, “The word Community is used in India for theunequalsocial units. “It may be said that communalism is the negative aspect of thecommunity.Thatis to say, when the people of a particular community care only fortheir own narrowly con-cerned interests, through the means of their religious faiths, oldcustoms and conservative practices,disregarding the interests of whole society, then itmay be termed as communalism.

In general, following four main things can be found in a state of communalism:

Negativeness; Narrowness; Unfair means; and Disregard to the interests of society.

The unfair means that are adopted in a state of communalism, neglecting the interestsofsociety, instigation on the basis of religious sentiments is the mainamong them,which canbe observed clearly in communal violence that occurred during the last 57years in India

India has a history of communal riots.The problem of communalism, especiallyrelating to themodern age, and seeds of which were sown during the 19thcentury, is agift of colonial rulers to In-dia.In other words, the colonialists played the main role instarting communal tension in India inthe 19thCentury.Along with this, some peoplefrom a particular religious community were alsoinvolvedin this act, who keeping asidethe interests of entire Indian Society and filled withnarrow-minded thoughts, joinedhands with the colonialists.They were also in favour ofbargaining with thecolonialists for the benefit of their co-religionists.It was an easy task forthem.Indiais a country of diversities, a land of different religious communities and sects.In suchacountry, if the government protects the people of a particular community who areready tofulfil their own interests even by spreading communalism, what can bedifficult forthem?They can do so without any fear.

Towards the end of the 19thcentury, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, who was one of the greatpoliti-cal leaders of India at that time, started “Ganesh Pooja” and “Shivaji Mahotsav”in South-ern India, especially in Maharashtra and its nearby regions, with the aim ofcreating awak-ening among the masses.I hope, even today, nobody can believe thatwhile starting “GaneshPooja” or “Shivaji Mahotsav” programmes, he would havecontemplatedabout Hindu-Muslims,or there would be any thought in his mind in theinterest of Hindus–his co-religionists.He wasone who always thought and workedfor Indians, Indian nation and Indian nationalism.The pro-grammes related to “GaneshPooja” and “Shivaji Mahotsav” was not initiated to supportthe interests ofHindus.However, both “Ganesh” and “Shivaji” were associated with the emotionsof anumber of Hindus.

A procession connected with the above programme was passing through the streets ofMumbai in-the year 1893.When it reached near a place of prayer of another religiouscommunity, it was peltedwith stones.The quarrel ensued between those participatingin the procession and attackers, andfinally resulted in a communal riot.Similarly,anotherincident occurred in the coming year, i.e.in 1894 at Pune.Behind both theseincidents was the support of colonial rulers to the narrow-minded people involved inthe acts.


42

From here, started communalism, which was also evident on some occasions in theGan-dhian era of the national liberation movement of India?Mahatma Gandhi, as Ihave alreadysaid, was committed to communal harmony.He was of the firm beliefthat if the followers oftwo principal religious communities–Hindu and Muslim walkhand in hand, come forward to-gether to solve the problems, small or big, becomeidentical to nationalism, only then theprogress of the country will be possible in realsense and the cultural heritage of India will beprotected.

According to his firm belief, MahatmaGandhi entered in the “Yajna” of nationalfreedomalong with others, whether they were Sikhs or Buddhists, Parasis or Jains,Christians or Mus-lims, or his own co-religionists.He, as all know, acceptedahimsaasboth, means and goal.He madeit the basis for achieving freedom for India.In myopinion,ahimsaholds its due place in all reli-gious communities.I do not believe that itdoes not help the followers of any community toperform his or her duty.Rather Ibelieve that it isahimsaalone that assists to enable us tofulfil our duties in the bestpossible manner.

But it was unfortunate that many people could not become identical with the firm andtrue messageof Mahatma Gandhi pertaining to non-violence.Even then, he, time andagain, repeated his mes-sage ofahimsatill the last breath of his life; worked forcommunal harmony declaring it a valuesupplementary to non-violence.He, time andagain, conveyed suggestions for peace brigadeand for volunteers to work forharmony.These suggestions are more or less importanteven today for a country likeIndia.

The colonial state had promoted the communal ideology and patronised politics based onit as partof the divide-and-rule policy. Communal organisations and ideologues continuedtheir work un-derthe benign, if not benevolent, colonial umbrella. Their opponents, thesecular nationalists,had no such advantage. They had to carry on their ideological strugglein the face of the activehostility of the state. The colonial state, which used brutalrepression to suppress non-violent civil disobedience, often turned a blind eye tocommunal violence. The situationchanged with the intimations of independence. TheCongress could wield at least partial statepower at the Centre when it joined the InterimGovernment in September 1946 with JawaharlalNehru as its head

The call for ‘Direct Action’ by Jinnah and the Muslim League in August 1946 hadinaugu-rated a new stage in communal politics. The resultant ‘Great Calcutta Killings’placed a newchallenge beforethe Congress leadership. The Interim Government had notyet been formed in Au-gust, and by the time it was set up in September, the situation wasalready growing worse. Inearly October, violence erupted in Noakhali, a remote districtof East Bengal, witha majorityMuslim population. The Muslim League Government ledby Suhrawardy in Bengal failing to takestrong action, the situation deteriorated rapidly.

The Mahatma had, with unerring instinct, sensed that the battle for India’s soul would befoughtandwon not in the in the broad avenues of New Delhi but in the by-lanes andwindingpaths of Noakhali, Bihar, Calcutta, Delhi, and Punjab, that is, wherever thecommunal mon-ster surfaced, and that his place was there, as always, with his people. Theideals for which so manyhad sacrificed their all seemed to be slipping out of reach at thevery moment of victory. Strugglingto find an answer, Gandhiji embarked on what was tobe his most amazing, awe-inspiring heroicexperiment with India’s civilisational truth.


43

There are few tales more worth recounting than that of the Master at work on hisexperi-ment. Torn with doubt and wracked by despair that his methods of non-violence andlove ratherthan violence and hate had failed, he threw everything he had into the balance.“Do I representthisahimsain my person? If I do, then deceit and hatred that poison theatmosphere shoulddissolve.” Elsewhere he said: “It is to demonstrate the efficacy of thatway I have come here. IfNoakhali is lost, India is lost.” With hissmall band of devotedcomrades, he went into the villagesof Noakhali, not for a visit, not for a tour, not for anon-the-spot survey, as leaders are wont to do,but to stay as long as it was necessary. Hestayed fromNovember 6, 1946 till March 4, 1947,almostfour months,in this remotecorner of India. It is difficult even today to comprehend how themost revered leader of avast country in the throes of difficult negotiations, charting out itspath to independencefrom a colonial power, could spend sucha long time almost out ofreach of his ownmovement.

Gandhiji looked upon Noakhali as he had thought of Champaran and Bardoli, alabo-ratory, “an ideal situation for testing whetherahimsa(non-violence) could effectivelybe used by asmall number ofpeople against an almost sullen, if not hostile majority allround”.4 He spentthe first two weeks visiting the villages and towns in the affected areaand meeting large numbers ofpeople. He then settled down in a village named Srirampurand spent the next 43 days there. Hesoon sent off all his associates except two,Parasuram, his typist, and Nirmal Kumar Bose,his interpreter, thus depriving himself ofeven basic care and small comforts. As if this wasnot enough, he followed it up withapadayatrain which he did not sleep for more than onenight in any one village. Thesatyagrahi was trying, by his own suffering, to melt the heart of theopponent and win himover. He was also sharing, through the crucifixion of his flesh, the pain ofthe victims andexpressing the torture of his own soul. Thus, when broken glass and excreta werethrownin his path to dissuade him, his answer was to remove even his simple sandals andwalkbarefoot. ‘Ekla cholore’, Tagore’s apt song, was often on his lips as it seemed to-havebeen written for him.

His message to the terrorised Hindus was: Shed your fear. Go back to your homes. Tothewomen, who were afraid to wearsindurand bangles in public, as these were markersof their reli-gious status, he said, assert the right toyour culture. Since the focus of theoppression wason obliteration of religious symbols, the resistance too had to take theform of assertion.Forced conversions, forced marriages had been among the chief formsadopted by the communal-ists. Gandhiji repeatedly said that he had come not to offerconsolation but to give courage.He refused to accept the Hindu Mahasabha demand thatHindus live in separate areas. This wouldlead to ghettos, and defeat the whole purpose ofhis work. He was also not in favour ofcasesagainst perpetrators of violence beingdropped, as the guilty must accept punishment.

He was particularly disheartened at the role played by religious figures in the whole af-fair,encouraging the violence and the forced conversions and marriages. Asa believer, religionforhim represented the highest moral and ethical values, and its use to justify violence andforced con-versions and the like was abhorrent to him. He openly questioned the belief thatIslam sanctionedthis kind of inhuman behaviour.He appealed to the Muslims to provideassurances of security to en-able their Hindu neighbours to return to their homes.

Gandhiji’s satyagaraha in Noakhali provides a wealth of extremely valuable material forana-lyzing and learning secular practice at the grassroots, in the most hostile of situations.We also needto understand why, despite the brave and heroic deeds of Gandhiji and hisco-workers, success


44

was limited. Few Hindu refugees returned, the feeling of insecuritywas still there to a verygreat extent, Muslims were sullen, and their presence in the dailyprayer meetings conducted byGandhiji was reported to have fallen towards the latter partof his stay

One major reason for this perhaps was that the power of the state was ranged against himor atthebest of times neutral, and was certainly not on his side. Providing a sense ofsecurity toHindus when the state authorities including the police were guilty of connivingwith the perpetratorsof the carnage was an almost impossible task. For the Muslims, too,perhaps the cost of listening tothe voice of sanity and humanity was too high when it wasranged against the might of the state andof religion

In contrast, Nehru as head of the Interim Government and the provincial CongressGovern-ment which wasin power in Bihar were able to effectively control the large-scalecommunal vio-lence that broke out in October 1946.5 The situation in Bihar had started todeteriorate with thespread of the news regarding the Biharis killed in Calcutta in Augustand later on the Noakhalihappenings. The observance of Noakhali Day on October 25acted as a trigger and soon theconflagration enveloped the rural areas of three largedistricts: Patna, Gaya and Monghyr.Horrific news was received of entire villages ofMuslims being wiped out at the hands of bandsof Hindu peasants. Nehru got the news inCalcutta where he had gone to take stock of the situationin Noakhali. He instantly rushedto Bihar and backed to the hilt the provincial Congress Gov-ernment in its efforts tosuppress the violence and restore normalcy. From November 4 to9, 1946, JawaharlalNehru, Sardar Patel, Rajendra Prasad, Maulana Azad, Acharya Kripalani,Jaya ParakashNarayan, Anugraha Narain Singh and other Congress leaders toured the coun-tryside,holdingbig and small meetings, meeting people, giving succour to the victims, warn-ingthe perpetrators to give up their madness.

Nehru was unequivocal in his stand: ‘I will stand in the way of Hindu-Muslim ri-ots.Members of both the communities will have to treadover my dead body before they canstrikeat each other.” Nor did he hesitate when it came to the need to use force againstthoseindulging in violence, despite his strong faith in non-violence, and democracy andcivil liber-ties. The conviction that the danger posed by communalism, which he regardedas a form of fas-cism, was very grave, helped him overcome his instinctive reservationsabout the use of coer-cion.

He warned the people that “Machine guns, bombs and all the force of the government willbe putinmotion to stop bloodshed”. “Lawless-ness can never be tolerated....mob rulecannot be al-lowed.” “If required to control communal trouble thegovernment will not hesitate to employmighty military forces to suppress suchhooliganism.”

Congress workers were asked to “go round the villages and bring round everyone tosanity.I do not want to hear from Congress workers that they cannot control people. Ifthey cannotcontrol they must sacrifice their lives in the attempt.” Students were urged tosuspend their studiesand “go round the rural areas for bringing the people back to theirsenses and restoring peaceand sanity. Even if a few of you die in such an endeavor, it willbe worth it, and I shall personallycongratulate you for such acts of sacrifice.”1 Peasantswere asked “to take a pledge, with arms up-raised, not to indulge in any mis-behaviour”.


45

By November 8, Nehru was writing: “the chances of any major incident or any large scalemilitaryaction are now very little. This is due to many reasons—Gandhiji’sannouncement thathe might fast, the personal appeals and visits of a number of Congressleaders, the good workdone by some very earnest Congress workers in the cities andvillages, and finally, the fear ofthe military.”

The Biharexample demonstrates that the winning combination was when the power of thestate andthe ideological weapons were on the same side. Threats and actual use of forceagainst communalviolence created the space in which appeals to peace and amity couldbe heard. Forcestopped the people in their tracks and then they had the chance to pauseand think andgive an ear to those who were telling them that they were on the wrongpath.

In Noakhali, with the power of the state ranged against him, and the majority communityhostile,Gandhiji’s non-violence had to be equal to the task of first creating that civic andpolitical space inwhich a dialogue could begin. This was Gandhiji’s challenge. That iswhy he was so tortured.There were no easy answers

And yet, through non-violent heroism of an extraordinary kind, he and his band ofwarriorsdid succeed in carving out enough space to begin the process of dialogue. Theydemonstrated thepossibility of political action when none seemed possible.

Hindswaraj

Gandhiji's concept of Swaraj was not merely confined to freeing India from the Brit-ishyoke. Such freedom he desired but he said that he did not want to exchange 'king log forkingstork'. Swaraj is not transfer of political power to theIndians. Nor does it mean, as heemphasised,mere political self-determination. For him, there was no Swaraj in Europe;for him themovement of Swaraj involved primarily the process of releasing oneself fromall the bondages oneis prey to both internal and external. It involves a movement of self-purification too. It is not thereplacement of one type of authority by another. He felt, "thereal Swaraj will come not by the ac-quisition of authority by a few but by the acquisition ofthe capacity by all to resist authority whenabused". Swaraj, he used to say, is power of thepeople to determine their lot by their own effortsand shape their destiny the way they like.In other words, "Swaraj is to be attained by educat-ing the masses to a sense of theircapacity to regulate and control authority". Swaraj is usu-ally translated in English asIndependence'. Gandhiji, however, gave this term a muchdeeper meaning. 'The wordSwaraj is a sacred word, a Vedic word, meaning selfrule andself-restraint and notfreedomfrom all restraint which 'independence' often means". He saw swarajas freedomfor all plus self-control by all. It is related to the inner strength and capacity ofa peoplewhich enable them to understand and control their social world: "The outwardfreedomthat we shall attain will only be in exact proportion to the inward freedom towhich wemay have grown at a given moment. And if this is the correct view of freedom, ourchiefenergy must be concentrated upon achieving reform from within". Freedom from-withinmeans control over oneself, which, in turn, means a life based on understanding one's own-self. Gandhi perceived non-violence as the key to attain such freedom and self-control.Non-violence needs to be imbued in our thought, words and deeds. Once non-violence asLove takespossession of these dimensions of the person then a sense of duty prevails overthose of rights.We tend to do things for others without expecting returns thereon. "InSwaraj basedAhimsa, people need not know their rights, but itis necessary for them toknow their duties.


46

There, is no duty that does not create corresponding rights and thoserights alone are genuinerights, which flow from the performance of duty. Swaraj is thus abasic need of all. It recognises norace, religion, or community. "Nor is it the monopoly ofthe lettered persons Swaraj is to be forall, including the former but emphaticallyincluding the maimed, the blind, the starving,toiling millions. A stout hearted, honest,sane, literate man may well bethe first servant of thenation." Swaraj will necessarily beinclusive of the poor and the toiling masses. Therefore, he adds,"Let there be no mistakeas what Purna Swaraj means. .... It is full economic freedom for the toilingmillions. It isno unholy alliance with any interest for their exploitation. Any alliance mustmean theirdeliverance." (YoungIndia,16.4.193 1,p.77).In the same vein, Gandhiji made itverySchool of Distance EducationIndianNationalMovementGandhianPhase (1917-1947)Page59clear that India's Swaraj did not mean the rule of majority community. ie. Hindus.'Everycommunity would be at par with every other under the Swaraj constitution.'Swaraj,implying government based on the consent of the people is not a gift which comesfromabove, but it is something that comes from within. Democracy, therefore, is not theex-ercise of the voting power, holding public office, criticizing government; nor does itmeanequality, liberty or security, though important as they all are in a democratic polity.It is when thepeople are able to develop their inner freedom which is people's capacity toregulate and controltheir desires impulses in the light of reason that freedom rises fromthe individual andstrengthens him. His Swaraj had economic, social, political andinternational connotations.Economic Swaraj, as he saysstands for social justice,it promotes the good of all equally includingthe weakest, and is indispensable for decentlife." Social Swaraj centres on "an equalization ofstatus." Political Swaraj aims atenabling people to better their condition in every department oflife." In the internationalfield, swaraj emphasised on interdependence. "There is", he says, "Nolimit to extendingour services to our neighbours across state-made frontiers. God never madethosefrontiers."

Gandhi‘s vision for Indian society wasswaraj,meaning ―independence or ―self-rule. Incontrastto the political goal ofswarajwhich Congress politicians used as the term forindependencefrom the colonial power, Gandhi added thatswarajalso included solvingwhat he considered tobe the major problems within Indian society. In Gandhi‘s opinion,the key to achievingswarajlay infulfilling three conditions alone, namely the spinning-wheel, Hindu-Muslim unity and in theremoval of untouchability. In order to achieveSwarajIndians also had to undergo personalreform, a ―change of heart that wouldensure the abolition of untouchability. Gandhi‘s firstdiscussion ofswarajand itsconditions can be found in his only book of political theoryHindSwaraj, translated as―Indian self-rule,which was published in1909 when Gandhi lived inSouth Africa andlater banned by the colonial power.

One obvious objection toHind Swarajcan be that the text was written over two decadesbefore theperiod with which this thesis is concerned–two decadesfilled with a plethoraof initiatives andcampaigns against the colonial power where Gandhi‘s influence hadbegun as marginal in1909, but become highly consequential in 1932. But the explanationis that even though partsofHind Swarajmay only have beenrelevant in the immediatetemporal context of which itwas written, the conditions for the fulfillment ofswarajremained unchanged and paramount toGandhi. It is therefore essential to see how Gandhiused his vision ofHind Swarajin his campaignsbeforethe period with which this thesis isconcerned.

Hind Swarajwas written in the form of a discussion between an ―editor and a ―student.As thetext was concerned with Indian Independence in every form, discussions were onissues that


47

highlighted differences between India and the colonial power. Gandhi‘s goal ofdistinguishing thesedifferences was to show that India could evolve beyond the colonialpower: ―The tendency of theIndian civilization is to elevate the moral being, that of theWestern civilization is to propagate im-morality. The latter is godless, the former is basedon a belief in God.

Gandhi used examples from the colonial power and compared them to his vision for India.One ex-ample of this concerns the spinning and weaving ofkhadi, which was central in thetravelling cam-paign against untouchability. Gandhi was dissatisfied with an economybased on money andnot sustenance. The former he believed had been initiated wholly bythe colonial power. His con-cern was with the cotton industry: beforethe colonial powerhad entered, Indians hadusedkhadior Indian hand-spun cotton to make cloth. Thecolonial power foundkhadiinadequateand implemented the use of machine-spun cotton,which was distributed to cotton mills. Raw cottonwas then exported to England and laterimported back to India as a finished product so thatIndians were dependent on buying foreign cloth that hadoriginated in their homeland Gan-dhi‘s solution wasswadeshi,theuse of things from one‘s own land. First and foremost in theidea ofswadeshiwas thespinning ofkhadiin private homes as it could become a second in-come to poor Indiansand at the same time prevent the purchase of foreign cloth. This, inturn, would makeIndia less dependent on the colonial power and become one step closer toswaraj.

Gandhi usedkhadias a focal point in many of his campaigns. In 1919 Gandhi encouragedIndianwomen to spin, and several shops selling onlykhadicloth were opened in Bombay.The sameyear,Swadeshi Sabhawas started, an organisation with the goal ofimplement-ingswadeshion a national level. To achieve this, the production ofkhadihad tobe increased dramati-cally and the importance ofswadeshihad to be explained to Indians.

In 1920, the spinning ofkhadibecame part of a non-cooperation programme approved inthe IndianNational Congress. In both 1920 and 1921 Gandhi travelled around the countryto promote the non-cooperation campaign–much like in the travelling campaign againstuntouchability in 1933. Gan-dhi‘s power of mobilization was considerable, causing crowdsto gather wherever he visited. Gan-dhi and his supporters also established schools that wereto follow the principles ofswadeshiandteach spinning to the poor, but the initiatives wereonly temporary and the schools did not last.

Brown explains that althoughGandhi‘s attempts at non-cooperation did no considerableharmto the colonial power, his means of mobilizing Indians through propagatingkhadiaspart ofswade-shihelped gather more Indians around a common goal than previously: theparticipants were fromawider range of Indian society and Indian-made cloth increased inpopularity.17 Although Gandhidid not emphasize that it was untouchables in specific thatwere to benefit fromkhadiin the cam-paigns of the 1920s, he did believekhadito be aneconomical solution for poor in India. Itwas this conviction Gandhi carried with him tothe temple-entry campaign and the travellingcampaign against untouchability.

A second aspect ofHind Swarajthat was part of the mobilization in Gandhi‘s campaignwas-satyagrahaor ―truth force, often connected to nonviolence, but not synonymous toit. Gandhi be-lievedsatyagrahato be at the core of traditional Hindu values.

MODULE III

CRITIQUE OF GANDHI


48

Rabindranath Tagore

Rabindranath 'Tagore (1861-1941) was an outstanding literary figure of India who exertedconsid-erable influence on human thinking in the contemporary world. This influenceextended tothe political arena as well by his lucid elucidation of important concepts likenationalism, freedom,human rationality and his many differences with Mahatma Gnntlhi's(1869-1948) philosophy andstrategies. While Gandhi was a political and social activistand Tagore was a poet, there was re-markable consistency in the enunciation of their majorpolitical themes, which they developedand refined reflecting on major events of theirtime. Furthermore, in Tagore there was aquest of a poet for human perfection andcompleteness and not merely a pragmatic analysisof a particular problem or a situation,His expression was an eloquent appeal of his faithinthehuman spirit and the optimism bywhich the entire humankind could think of realizing free-dom, breaking all artificialbarriers, which had been built over the years. These barriers built onprejudices and hatredwere the stumbling blocks in the way of achieving the ultimate aim ofa beautiful andharmonious world for all paving the way for human perfection with flower-ing of humancreativity and with triumph of humanity and dignity. The modern Indianpoliticaltradition of assimilating the Western ideas with the Eastern ones, which beganwithRamMohan Roy, reached its culmination in Tagore.

Differences With Gandhi

The essence of Gandhi's entire political philosophy is in theHindSwaraj(1908) andTagore'sinSwadeshiSamaj(1904). Both of them had a great deal of respect andreverence for oneanother, though this mutual respect did not prohibit them fromexpressing basic disagreementsabout their respective perceptions of contemporary realityand the desired nature of the move-ments in the given Indian situation. A majorcontroversy erupted between them followingGandhi's return to India from South Africaand his meteoric rise in Indian politics collimating inthe non co-operationmovement andTagore's articulation of a philosophy of universalism andhis criticism of the cult ofnationalism during the First World War.

Tagore, regarded India's basic problem to be social and not political, though likeGandhi, hewas conscious of the acute differences and conflicts in the Indian society. Assuch society and notpolitics was his primary area of focus. He could perceive that thetriumph of science hadunited the whole country into one, which made possible forseeking a unity that wasnot politi-cal. This perception led him to conclude that India couldoffer a solution in this regard for she"never had a real sense of nationalism" . Regardingthe nationalist upsurge lie was convincedthat it would popularize the struggle forindependencebut would be unproductive in the overallcontext of its own development forthe quest of freedom would imperil its realization.

Tagore developed this argument after a careful scrutiny of the Gandhian leadershipand strategy.He derived the basic framework of this evaluation fro111 his earlierexperiences during thedays of agitation against Bengal partition of 1905. In thatmovement, initially Tagore tookan, active part popularizingRaksha Bandhanandnationalistic songs. It was immediately duringthe period after the publication ofSwadeshiSamajthat he passionately pleaded for the revitaliza-tion of the decaying villages andcreation of new awareness amongst the ordinary people.Though initially he was in theforefront of the movement, he becamedisillusioned since hecould very clearly see thatthere was no concern ;bout the need for mass awareness andthat the city-based middleclass were keen on protecting its own selfish interests. After


49

withdrawing from themovement he made serious attempts torebuild the village life withinthe Zamindarisystem, then prevailing system. This background is important for compre-hending hisbasic disagreements with Gandhi. Tagore's first written evidence aboutGandhi'spreferences and policies were in a letter written on 12thApril 1919 fromShantini-ketanadvising Gandhi to be cautious about the programme of non co-operation for in nowaydid it represent India's moral superiority. He took note of the important changes that camewiththe rise of Gandhi in Indianpolitics. He thought very highly of Gandhi's leadershipand could alsosee that the proposed non cooperation movement would engulf the wholecountry and would bemuch bigger than the anti-partition movement of Bengal. He couldalso grasp the important differ-ence between the present phase and the earlier ones. Earlierthe political leaders did not look be-yond the English educated people, whereas in contrast,Gandhi emerged as the spokesperson of mil-lions of poor illiterate Indians. He spoke theirlanguage and wore their dress. Though his pre-cepts were practical and not bookish theylacked logic and scientific reasoning. They did notcontain a philosophy for awakening thenation. Instead of following the path of truth, Gandhiattempted a shortcut by taking theeasy path. Subsequently he was perturbed by the factthat everyone talked in the samevoice and made the same gestures and characterized this devel-opment as symbolizing theworst manifestations of nationalism for it indicated a slavish mentalityand had nothing todo with the alien rule. What he resented most was the fact that the Gan-dhian directives,which included manual spinning of yarn and burning of foreign cloth, weremedieval innature. None of these stipulations were dissected critically and were accepted as dog-mas.The Gandhian directives were followed mechanically and not rationally. Moreovertheemphasis on simplicity would retard economic advancement for the narrow form of-swadeshi could only result in restrictive provincial attitude, isolationism and provokeun-necessary hostility in the rest of the world. Gandhi's plans would lead to India'sisolationpreventing western knowledge and advancements from reaching India.Disagreeing withGandhi, Tagore pointed out that it was not possible to estimate the exactmagnitude of idle timeamong the middle class and that peasants who constituted eightypercent of the Indian popula-tion without a meaningful occupation for six months in a year.He wondered whether it was desir-able to popularize the use of thespinning wheel. Insteadhe preferred constructive programmeslike co-operative agriculture for that wouldeliminate the malaise of small unproductiveholdings and fight poverty. He 'felt thatpopularizing a scientific concept like co-operativeagriculturewould be Important thanany political action. He thought it was wrong of Gandhi toinstruct Indian women to stopreading English and also opposed Gandhi's call for boycott ofgovernment schools.Though critical of the existing system he felt that in the absence of a betteralternative itwould only result in perpetuating ignorance, superstitions and backwardness. In1928Tagore criticized Gandhi's defense ofvarnashrarmaby auguring that the system wasinef-ficient as the occupation follows birth and not individual capacity. Hereditaryoccupa-tion was mechanical, repetitive, obstructed innovation and retarded humanfreedom, helamented that a truekshatriyawas conspicuous by its absence in India.Similarly he dismissedGandhi’s blame on untouchability as thecause of the Biharearthquake5thFebruary 1934, asunscientific, unreasonable and that it failed to explainthe fact as to why the poor and thelower castes suffered more than the privileged andupper castes. On 20thMay 1939 in a letter tothe Congressshe warned against the worshipof power within the Congress when some of Gan-dhi's followers compared Gandhi toMussolini and Hitler thus insulting Gandhi before theentire world, As a desiredalternative, Tagore pleaded for "universal humanity and gave acall for recognizing thevast dimensions of India in its world context" because "hence Forthany nation whichseeks isolation for itself must come into conflict with the time-spirit and


50

find no peace.From nowonwards the thinking of every nation will haveto be international.It is thestriving of the new age to develop in the mind this faculty of universality".

In response to these charges Gandhi replied that "Indian nationalism is notexclusive, noraggressive, nor destructive. It is health-giving, religious and thereforehumanitarian". He de-fended the use of the spinning wheel for that was the only way torealize the essential andliving one-ness of interest among India's myriads". Its purposewas to symbolize "sacrifice forthe whole nation". To the charges of narrow provincialismand dangers of his kind of nationalism hepointed out: "I hope I am as great a believer infree air as the great poet. I do not want myhouse to be walled in on all sides and mywindows to be stuffed. I want the cultures of all thelands to be blown about my house asfreely as possible. But I refuse to be blown off my feet byany". Furthermore, Gandhi didnot regard his patriotism to be exclusive; "it is calculated not only tohurt any other nationbut to benefit all in the true sense of the word. India's freedom asconceived by me cannever be a menace to the world" Tagore too shared the same attitudetoward culturaldiversity but was more cautious than Gandhi for his perception of the possible de-cay anddegeneration as he sawin the later developments at the time of the partition of Bengalin1905. RoIland characterized Tagore's revolt against Gandhi as ''the revolt of the free soul"(1976:64). C.F. Andrews expressed similar views about Tagore. Nehru wrote in 1961"Tagore’sarticleTheCallof Truthand Gandhi's reply in his weeklyYoung Indiawhich hecalled 'The GreatSentinel' made wonderful reading. They represent two aspects of thetruth, neither of whichcould be ignored". Tagore's role was that of a critical butsympathetic observer of the na-tionalist upsurge in India, which wanted to be based bothon reason and a concern for themasses, He criticized Gandhi whenever he felt that theMahatma was deviating from theseplanks. He not only criticized but also provided analternative perception to that of Gandhi.He acknowledges his greatness and lauded hisrole in fighting casteism, untouchability andcommunalism but was equally forthright inpointing out the limitations of the Gandhianschemes. For instance he criticizedMahatma's basic education scheme of 1937 popularlyknown as theWardhaScheme ontwo grounds. First, he questioned the desirability of the prece-dence of material utility overdevelopment of personality. Second, the scheme of a specialtype of education for therural poor would limit the choice of their vocation and that it isunfortunate that even inour ideal scheme education should be doled out in insufficient ra-tions to the poor". Heidentified the lack of basic education as the fundamental cause ofmany ofIndia's socialand economic afflictions and desired lively and enjoyable schools. Tagorehad the courageof conviction to point out the in-adequacies of Mahatma's vision. Since someof hiscriticisms are well founded, it is time to work out a synthesis with the experience of lastfivedecades particularly in the major areas of our shortcomings like rural reconstruction,education andprovide the requisite incentive for the rural poor to lead a decent anddignified life.

B. R Ambedkar

Babasaheb Ambedkar is one of the foremost thinkers of modern India. His thoughtis centrallyconcerned with issues of freedom, human equality, democracy and socio-political emancipa-tion. He is a unique thinker of the world who himself suffered muchhumiliation, povertyand social stigma, right from his childhood, yet he rose to greateducational and phiIoso-phica1 heights. He was a revolutionary social reformer whodemonstrated great faith in democ-racy and the moral basis of a society. He was one oftheprincipal critics of India's nationalmovement led by M.K. Gandhi. He built civic andpolitical institutions in India and criti-cized ideologies and institutions that degraded andenslaved people. He undertook several


51

major studies on the economy, social structuresand institutions, law and constitutionalism,history and religion with in a methodologicalvigor and reflexivity. He was the Chairman ofthe Drafting Committee of the IndianConstitution and defended its key provisions withscholarly precision and sustainedarguments without losing sight of the ideals it upheldwhile, at the same time; holdingfirmly to the ground. He embraced Buddhism, recasting itto respond to modern andsocially emancipator urges, with hundreds of thousands of hisfollowers and paved theway for its resurgence in Modern India.

Ambedkar wrote several books. Unlike his contemporaries, he had done alot of original re-searching on his texts. Apart from writing the Indian Constitution as theChairman of its DraftingCommittee and defending it in the marathon debates of theConstituent Assembly, he wroteseveral books that reflect systematic thinking. Apart fromhis doctoral dissertations onThe Prob-lemofthe Rupee (1923)andTheEvolution ofFinance in British India(1925)he wroteAnnihila-tionofCast,Thoughts on Pakistan(1940),What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Un-touchables (l945),Who were theSudras?(1946),The Untouchables: who were They. And why theybecame Untouchables?(1948) ,States and Minorities(1947),Thoughts on Linguistic states(1955)and hismagnum opusThe Buddha and his Dharma(1957) are the most important. Apartfromthem he wrote numerous articles, submitted learned memoranda, delivered lectures and-commented on the issues in the journals hepublished.

Ambedkar's thought has in any dimensions. There were very few issues that he leftun-touched. He formulated his opinion on many crucial questions that India wascon-fronting during his times. His versatility is reflected in his social and political thought,economicideas, law and constitutionalism

Ambedkar described himself as a 'progressive radical' and occasionally as a'progressive con-servative' depending upon the context of demarcation from liberals,Marxists and others as thecase might be. He was anardent votary of freedom. He saw itas a positive power and capacity,enabling people to make their choices without beingrestrained by economic processes andexploitation, social institutions and religiousorthodoxies and fears and prejudices. Hethoughtthat liberalism upheld a narrowconception of freedom which tolerated huge accumulationof resources in a few hands andthe deprivation and exploitation that it bred. He thought that liberal-ism is insensitive aboutsocial and political institutions which,while upholding formal equality,permitted massiveinequalities in the economic, social and cultural arenas. He argued thatliberal systemsconceal deep inequalities of minorities such as the conditions of the BlacksinU.S.A.andJews in Europe. He further argued that liberalism was often drawn to justifiedcolonialexploitation and the extensive injustices it sustained. Liberal stress on the individu-alignored community bonds and the necessity of the latter to sustain a reflective and creativeself.Further liberalism ignored the repression and the alienation of the self thatexploitativeand dominant structures bred. He found that liberalism has an inadequateunderstanding ofstate and the measures that state has to necessarily adopt to promote andfoster good life. He feltthat the principle of equality before law is truly a great advance ascompared to the in egalitarianorders that it attempted to supplant but it is not adequate.He advanced stronger notionssuch as equality of Consideration, quality of respect andequality of dignity, He was sensitiveto the notion of respect and the notion of communitywas central in his consideration. Ambedkaridentified certain crucial areas on which hewas in tune with Marxism. He argued that the taskof philosophyis to transform the world,as Marx suggested in his Theses on Feuerbach, and hesaw the central message of theBuddha as demanding the same, There is conflict between


52

classes and class-struggle iswrit large in social relations,heargued that a good society de-mands extensive publicownership of the means of production and equal opportunity to everyoneto develop his orher self to the fullest extent, he, however, rejected the inevitability of so-cialism withoutthe intervention of human agency concretely working towards it; theeconomicinterpretation of history which does not acknowledge the crucial role that politicalandideological institutions play and the conception of the withering away of the state, He-decried the strategy of violence as a means to seize power and called for resolute massac-tion to bring about-a good society. He underscored the transformative effect of strugglesin trans-forming those launching the struggles and the social relations against which theyare1aunched.He further argued that a desirable political order can be created only byacknowl-edging a moral domain which he saw eminently expressed in the Buddha'steachings.

He was very critical of the Brahmanical ideology which, he felt, has been thedominantideological expression inIndia. He argued that it reconstituted itself with all itsvehemence by de-feating the revolution set in motion by the Buddha. It subscribed to theprinciple of gradedinequality in organizing social institutions and relations; defended theprinciple of birth over theprinciple of worth; undermined reason and upheld rituals andpriest-craft. It reduced theshudra and the untouchable to perpetual drudgery andignominy. It defended inequality.And unequal distribution of resource and positions andsanctifiedsuch measures by appeal-to doc-trines such askarma-siddhanta.It upheld theprinciple of the superiority of mental labour overmanual labour. It had little sympathytowards the degraded and the marginalized. It left mil-lions of people in their degradedcondition, away from civilization, and defended their abovemineable condition. It hadlittle place for freedom and for re-evaluation of choices, it compart-mentalized society intoumpteen closed groups making them unable to close ranks, foster aspirit of communityand strive towards shared endeavours. It took away from associated lifeits joys andsorrows, emasculated struggles and strivings and deplored sensuousness and festivity.Heconstructed Brahmanism as totally lacking in any moral values and considerations base-don such values. Ambedkar was a bitter critic of Gandhi and Gandhism. He attackedGan-dhi's approach to the abolition of untouchability, an approach that denied its sanctionin the shas-tras and which called upon caste Hindus to voluntarily renounce it and makereparations forthe same. Ambedkar felt that rights and humanity cannot be left lo themercy and preju-dices of people who have developed a vested interest in underminingthem. He did not de-marcate the caste system and Varna system, as Gandhi did, but sawboth of them as uphold-ing the same principle of graded inequality. Even if untouchabilityis abolished through the Gan-dhian appeal to conscience, which Ambedkar did not thinkpossible, untouchables will continue tooccupy the lowest rung of society as a layer of theshudras. He saw Gandhi not merely caving in toHindu orthodoxy but reformulating suchorthodoxy afresh, Gandhi was dispensing moral plati-tudes to untouchables and trying tobuy them with kindness while letting others to promotetheirinterests, without hindrance.He rejected the appellation 'Harijan' that Gandhi had bestowed onuntouchables andpoured scorn an' it. Ambedkar rejected many central notions as pro-pounded by Gandhisuch as Swaraj, nonviolence, decentralization, Khadi,trusteeship andvegetarianism. Hesubscribed to a modern polity with modern economy. This-worldly concernswere centralto his agenda rather than other-worldly search. He felt that an uncritical ap-proach toPanchayat Raj will reinforce the dominant classes in the countryside handingoveradditional resources and legitimacy to then to exploit the social classes and groups belowthem.

Reason and Rights


53

Ambedkar saw the modern era as heralding a triumph of human reason frommyths,customs and religious superstitions. The world and man, he argued, canbeexplainedbyhuman reason and Endeavour. The supernatural powers need not be invoked for thepur-pose. In fact thesupernatural powers themselves reflect weak human capacities and anunderdevel-oped state of human development: He therefore saw the expression of humanreason in mani-fest in science and modern technology positively. If there are problems withregard to them thenthe same reason is capable of offering the necessary correctives.Further, he saw knowledge aseminently practical rather than speculative and esoteric. Hefelt that speculative knowledge di-vorced from active engagement with practice leads topriest-craft and speculation. Ambed-kar's attitude to religion remained ambivalent. Whilehe did not subscribe to a belief in apersonal God or revelation, he felt that religion, asmorality, provides an enduring founda-tion to societies and enables collective pursuit ofgood life. Such a religion elevates mo-tives, upholds altruism and concern for others,binding people in solidarity and concern. Itcares and supports and strives againstexploitation, injustice and wrong-doing.

He argued that freedom, equality and fraternity are essential conditions for goodlife and aregime of discrete rights need to be constructed on them as the foundation. Heunderstood rightsnot merely within the narrow confines of liberal individualism but asindividual and group-rights. Thedefense ofboth types of rights in the ConstituentAssembly debates. Further heargued forboth civil and political right. And social andeconomic rights. He did not seethem in opposition but as reinforcing one and other. Ifthere is a conflict between them,they have to be negotiated through civic and politicalforums He also subscribed to therights ofminorities and cultural groups to maintain theirdistinctive belief's and identities while at the sametime affording them proper conditionsto take their rightful place in public affairs. He defendedpreferential treatment accorded todisadvantaged communities not only for reasons of equalitybut also on grounds ofegalitarian social structures, and for the pursuit of a sane and good society

Subash Chandra Bose and His ‘Mission’

Subhas Chandra Bose was most dynamic leader of India`s struggle forindependence.He is more familiar with his name Netaji. His contribution towards India`sFreedom struggle wasof a revolutionary. Subhas Chandra Bose was born on 23rd Jan,1897 in Cuttack, Orissa,India. From his childhood he was a bright student and wasatopper in the matriculation ex-amination from the whole of Kolkata province. He graduatedfrom the Scottish Church Collegein Kolkata with a First Class degree in Philosophy.Influenced by the teachings of SwamiVivekananda, he was known for his patriotic zeal asa student. He went to England to fulfill hisparents` desire to appear in the Indian CivilServices. He stood fourth in order of merit. But heleft civil Service`s apprenticeship andjoined India`s freedom struggle. During his service with theIndian National Congress, hewas greatly influenced by Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Sri Aurobindo.He did not agree withGandhiji`s methods of achieving Independence through non-violence. He be-lieved that theonly way of achieving Independence was by shedding blood. He therefore re-turned toKolkata to work under Chittaranjan Das, the Bengali freedom fighter and co-founder ofthe Swaraj Party. He was imprisoned for his revolutionary activities on various occa-sions.In 1921, Bose organized a boycott of the celebrations to mark the visit of the PrinceofWales to India for which he was imprisoned for the first time. Bose was elected to the postofChief Executive Officer of the newly constituted Calcutta Corporation in April 1924.Thatsame year in October, Bose was arrested on suspicion of terrorism. At first, he waskept in AlipurJail and later he was exiled to Mandalay in Burma. Bose was once againarrested on Janu-


54

ary, 1930. After his release from jail on September 25, he was elected asthe Mayor of the City ofKolkata. Netaji was imprisoned eleven times by the British overa span of 20 years either in India orin Rangoon. During the mid 1930s he was exiled bythe British from India to Europe where hechampioned India`s cause and aspiration forself-rule before gatherings and conferences.Throughout his stay in Europe from 1933 to1936, he met several European leaders and thinkers.He travelled extensively in India andin Europe before stating his political opposition to Gan-dhi. Subhash Chandra Bosemarried Emilie Schenkl, an Austrian born national, who was hissecretary, in 1937 inGerman. Bose wrote many letters to Schenkl of which many have been pub-lished in thebook "Letters to Emilie Schenkl", edited by Sisir Kumar Bose and Sugata Bose.SubhasChandra Bose became the president of the Haripura Indian National Congress againstthewishes of Gandhiji in 1938. He was elected as the president for two consecutiveterms.Expressing his disagreement with Bose, Gandhi commented "Subhas` victory is myde-feat". Gandhi`s continued opposition led to Netaji`s resignation from the WorkingCommit-tee. He was left with no alternative but to form an independent party, the "AllIndia For-ward Bloc".

In his call to freedom, Subhas Chandra Bose encouraged full participation of theIndian Masses tostrive for independence. Bose initiated the concept of the "NationalPlanning Committee" in1938. His correspondence reveals that despite his clear dislike forBritish subjugation, he wasdeeply impressed by their methodical and systematic approachand their steadfastly disciplinarianoutlook towards life. The contrast between Gandhi andBose is captured with reasonable measure ina saying attributable to him ""If people slapyou once, slap them twice". Having failed to per-suade Gandhi for the mass civildisobedience to protest against Viceroy Lord Linlithgow`sdecision to declare war onIndia`s behalf without consulting the Congress leadership, he or-ganized mass protests inKolkata. The disobedience was calling for the `Holwell Monument`commemorating theBlack Hole of Kolkata. He was thrown in Jail and was released onlyafter a seven-dayhunger strike. Bose`s house in Kolkata was kept under surveillance by theBritish. Withtwo pending court cases; he felt that the British would not let him leave the countrybeforethe end of the war. This set the scene for Bose`s escape to Germany, via Afghanistan andtheSoviet Union. In Germany he instituted the Special Bureau for India under Adam vonTrott zu Solz,broadcasting on the German-sponsored Azad Hind Radio. Here he foundedthe "Free India Centre"in Berlin, and created the Indian Legion consisting of some 4500soldiers who were the Indian pris-oners of war. The soldiers had previously fought for theBritish in North Africa prior to their cap-ture by Axis forces.

Indian National Army

TheIndian National Armywas an armed force formed byIndian nationalistsin1942inSoutheast Asiaduring World War II. The aim of the army was to secure Indianinde-pendence withJapaneseassistance. Initially composedIndianprisoners ofwarcaptured byJapan in theMalayan campaignand atSingapore, it later drewvolunteers fromIndian expa-triatepopulation inMalayaandBurma. The INA was also atthe forefront of women's equality,and the formation of a women's regiment, theRani ofJhansi Regimentwas formed as an all-volunteer women's unit to fight the British Raj aswell as provide medical services to theINA. Initially formed in 1942 immediately afterthe fall of Singapore underMohan Singh, the-First INAcollapsed in December that yearbefore it was revived under the leadership of-Subhas Chandra Bosein 1943 andproclaimed the army of Bose'sArzi Hukumat-e-AzadHind(the Provisional Government ofFree India). This second INA fought along with theImpe-


55

rial Japanese Armyagainst theBritish andCommonwealthforces in the campaigns inBurma,ImphalandKohima, andlater, against the successfulBurma Campaignof theAllies. The endof the war saw a largenumber of the troops repatriated to India where some facedtrial for treaso-nand became agalvanizing point of theIndian Independence movement.

The legacy of the INA is controversial given its associations with Imperial Japan and theother Ax-ispowers, the course of Japanese occupations inBurma,Indonesiaand otherparts ofSoutheastAsia, as well asJapanese war crimesand the alleged complicity of thetroops of the INA in these.Howeverthe INA contributed to independence for India, asafter the war, the trials of capturedINA officers in India provoked massive public outcriesin support of their efforts to fight forIndian independence against the Raj, eventuallytriggering theBombay mutinyin the BritishIndian forces.These events are accepted byhistorians to have played a crucial role in hasteningthe end of British rule.

Japan and Southeast Asia were major refuges for Indiannationalists living in exile beforethestart of World War II. Japan hadsent intelligence missions, notablyunderMajorI-waichi Fujiwara, into South Asia even before the start of the war to garnersupport fromthe Malayan Sultans, overseas Chinese, the Burmese resistance and theIndian movement.These missions were successful in establishing contacts withIndiannationalistsin exile in-ThailandandMalaya, supporting the establishment andorganization of theIndian Independ-ence League(IIL).

On 15 February 1943, the Army itself was put under the command of Lt. Col. M.Z. Kiani.A policyforming body was formed with the Director of the Military Bureau, Lt. Col. Bhonsle, incharge and clearly placed under the authority of the IIL. Under Bhonsle servedLt. Col.ShahNawazKhanas Chief of General Staff, MajorP.K. Sahgalas MilitarySecretary, MajorHabib ur Rah-manas commandant of theOfficers' Training School andLt. Col.A.C. Chatterji(later Major A.D.Jahangir) as head of enlightenment and culture.On 4 July 1943, two days after reachingSinga-pore, Subhas Chandra Bose assumed theleadership of the IIL and the INA in a ceremony at Ca-thay Building. Bose's influence wasnotable. His appeal not only re-invigorated the fledgling INA,which previously consistedmainly of POWs, his appeals also touched a chord with the In-dian expatriates in SouthAsia as local civilians, without caste, creed and religion-ranging frombarristers, traders toplantation workers, includingKhudabadi Sindhi Swarankarworking as shopkeepers–hadno military experience joined the INA, doubled its troop strength.

An Officers’ Training School for INA officers, led byHabib ur Rahman, and the Azad-School for the civilian volunteers were set up to provide training to the recruits. A youthwing ofthe INA, composed of 45 Young Indians personally chosen by Bose andaffectionatelyknown as theTokyo Boys, were also sent to Japan's Imperial MilitaryAcademy to train asfighter pilots. Also, possibly the first time in Asia, and even the onlytime outside theSoviet Un-ion, awomen's regiment, theRani of Jhansiregimentwasraised as a combat force

Jawaharlal Nehru

Nehru's Nationalism and his role in the Freedom Movement are closely interrelated, sinceit wasthe nature of Nehru's Nationalist ideas that dictated his course of action in thefreedommovement of India. Nehru's Nationalism: Nehru's nationalism was not one ofmindless jin-goism. He was able to reach a common ground between an eruditeinternationalism


56

and a very keen understanding of the Indian condition. Nehru'snationalism was markedby a fiery pride in the heritage of the country. But he was willingto temper this pride with hisreadings and his rationalist views that he received from hisWestern education in the West.Jawaharlal Nehru's role in the freedom movement of Indiahas probably not received as much his-torical attention as it deserves. That is, ofcourse nosurprise, as Jawaharlal Nehru's astoundingsuccess as a statesman who ushered in a newera of international relations through the forma-tion of the NAM, and his stature as the firstprime minister of independent India often adumbratehis positionas a significant figure inthe freedom movement of India. With his charm,highly impressive educationalbackground, and selfless service to the nation, Nehru pre-sented the face of a new andactive India to thousands of Indians who looked up to him as a rolemodel and a guide.

Early Years of Nehru in the Freedom Movement of India:

Jawaharlal Nehru was born into politics. His father Motilal Nehru was a veteranCongress-man and committed to the cause of India's freedom for a very long time. Nehruspent much of hiseducational years in England studying first at Harrow and then atTrinity College, Cam-bridge. However, the freedom of India was always on his mind. Itwas therefore no surprisethat after his return from the British shores in 1912, the job of alawyer was the last of Nehru'spriorities. As a student he already felt himself closelyattached to the cause India's freedom,and had his sympathies with the Extremist leadersof Congress. After his return, he involvedhimself directly into the political scenario of thecountry. However, Nehru was still comparativelywithout a firm direction in these earlyyears, not sure which path was the right path that wouldlead towards India's freedom. Hisfather's moderate ideologies and elitist way of life disturbed him,as he thought him, likemany other Congressmen of his generation, to be much dissociatedfrom the groundrealities of the land and the lives of the common people of India. He also realizedthat thedirect application of Socialist measures would not suitIndia's socio-economic profile.Itwas at that time that he found a direction in the mode of civil resistance as preachedbyGandhi. Gandhi's success in Champaran and Ahmedabad renewed and established hisbe-lief in Satyagraha. He was not slow to adopt thecultural aspects of Satyagraha as well.He read theIndian scriptures of India, and dressed in home-spun clothes becoming astaunch Gandhian inall senses. Motilal and his entire family adopted the Gandhian way oflife. Nehru traveled acrossIndia, and waswarmly received by the masses. This filled himwith a renewed sense of self-confidence. It was time he decided to whole-heartedlycommit himself to the cause of Indianfreedom.

Jawaharlal Nehru and the Non-Cooperation Movement:

The first big involvement of Jawaharlal Nehru came at the onset of the non-cooperationmovement in 1920. Nehru joined in whole-heartedly in this Satyagraha based movementthatstormed India. Nehru was arrested on charges of anti-governmental activities andwasreleased a fewmonths later. In the rift formed within the Congress following the suddenclosure of the non-cooperation movement after the Chauri Chaura incident, Nehruremained loyal to Gandhi'scamp and denied to join the Swaraj Party formed by MotilalNehru and CR Das. After hisrelease, Nehru's fame as a dynamic Congress leader waswell-established. He soon became thePresident of the Allahabad Congress Committee in1923. However, towards the end of the dec-ade, Nehru grew increasingly impatient withthe pacifist nature of the senior Congressman.Along with Subhas Chandra Bose, Nehruwas intent on complete freedom and believed in


57

giving an ultimatum to the BritishGovernment to grant India dominion status. The senior leaderswere bent on a slower andmore patient approach. The Calcutta Congress of 1928 brought therift into the open.Jawaharlal openly decried the Nehru Commission framed by Motilal Nehru, andit neededthe intervention of Mahatma Gandhi to persuade Nehru to abandon his fiery stanceofmore direct action.

Nehru and the Civil Disobedience Movement:

The Lahore Congress of 1929 wasmonumental in the political career of Nehru as well asthe history of India's freedomstruggle. Nehru was elected the president of Congress for the firsttime at a young age offorty. He used the platform of the Lahore conference to declare thegoal of completefreedom or Purna Swaraj. The Civil Disobedience movement was formallylaunched afterthe Lahore Congress, and Nehru whole heartedly plunged himself in the non-violentprotests and picketing that took the nation by storm. Nehru was arrested again in1930,beginning the second and the longest phase of his prison stays. On his release, he formedtheSocialist party within the Congress and insisted on more stern and immediatemeasures torealize the goal of India's freedom.

Nehru and the last days of Indian Freedom Struggle:

The Government of India Act of 1935 called for nation-wide elections. Nehru campaignedvigor-ouslyfor Congress, although he himself did not contest directly in the elections.With Gan-dhi concentrating on the spiritual development of his followers and graduallydissociatinghimself from direct political action, the stature of Nehru within the Congressranks was now morethan ever. He became the Congress President in the consecutiveyears of 1936 and 1937.By1938, the rift in Congress was clear. With Bose and Gandhiforming the two feudingcamps, Nehru was once more faced with a political dilemma.However, he decided to sidewith Gandhi and hismethods. Bose resigned as the Congresspresident, and Nehru's status in theCongress reached a height previously unattained. Thisyear started a new phase in Nehru's ca-reer, especially after his denial to come to acompromise with the Muslim League.

Withthe clouds of World War II looming large in the horizon, Nehru's skill ininternationalrelations would be tested once more. Nehru did not support Bose's policy ofsiding with the Axisforces, and intended to extend support to the Allies. In the mean time,the Second Round Table con-ference failed and Gandhi launched the Quit India movementin 1942. Nehru was arrested and wasreleased only in 1945. By the time the World War IIwas over and the new Labor Government ofBritain seemed willing to grant India it’s longdeserved freedom. However, the British Governmentwanted to adopt a policy of waitingand watching the result of the general elections of 1945.Nehru was once again at thecenter of activities. He was arrested. His refusal to complywith Jinnah's claims madepartition inevitable, as Jinnah called for direct action. Althoughhis fight for Indianfreedom stood on the verge of success, Nehru knew his work was far fromover. He had tobuild a new India and had to guide the nascent economy towards success.

Congress socialists

In1934,after the suspension of the Civil Disobedience Movement, a section ofCon-gressmen decided to enter into the legislatures to work for the Congress cause withinthe govern-ment. Mahatma Gandhi endorsed the line of action, adopted by theseCongressmen


58

who were known as the Constitutionalists. At this stage some socialistswanted to form asocialist party within the Congress organization so as to prevent theerosion of the revolu-tionary character of the Congress by entry into the legislatures. TheSocialists within theCongress believed in Marxist the first All-India Congress Socialists'Conference was convened atPatna by Jaya Prakash Narayan on behalf of the BiharSocialist party in May 1934. The Con-ference was presided by AcharyaNarendra Dev. Inhis presidential speech, Narendra Devcriticized the new Swarajist section ofCongressmen who wanted to enter the legislaturesand thereby run counter to therevolutionary character of the Congress.He asked the socialists tocarry on their agitationfor the adoption of their programme by the Congress. The Conferencepassed a resolutionasking the Congress to adopt a programme that was socialist in action and ob-jective. Afterthis Conference the Congress Socialists worked hard to organisethe All-IndiaCongressSocialist party. As the Organizing Secretary, Jaya Prakash Narayan campaigned in-different parts of the country to organise the provincial wings of the party.

The first annual session of the All-India Congress Socialist party was heldinBombay in Oc-tober 1934 under the presidentship of Sampurnananda. It was attended bydelegates from thir-teen provinces. In this meeting the National Executive of the CongressSocialist party was consti-tuted with Jaya Prakash Narayan as the General Secretary.Socialists should carry on their "Endeav-our to influence the Nationalist Movement in thedirection of socialism." The Congress Socialistsfollowed three lines of activities for theattainment of the twin objectives of freedom and socialism:

1 Insidethe Congress they worked out anti-imperialist and nationalist programmes of theCongressas Congressmen,

2 Outside the Congress they mobilized the workers, peasants, students, intelligentsia,youthand women for the cause of socialism,

3 They also soughtto integrate the above two lines of activities.The Congress Socialists sought tomobilize the workers and peasants for their economicamelioration as well as the country's lib-eration from foreign rule

There was a mixed reaction among the Congressmen to the formation of theCongress So-cialist party. The conservative or Right Wing Congressmen criticized theCongress Socialists"loose talk" about the confiscation of property and class war.Mahatma Gandhi also rejectedtheir idea of class war. Gandhi did not believe in thenecessity of the abolition of princely or-der, zamindary and capitalism. He wanted to bringabout a change of heart in the princes,zamindars and capitalists so that instead ofconsidering themselves the owners of the states,zarnindaries andfactories they shouldbehave as the trustees for their subjects, tenants and work-ers. But the leftist Congressmenlike Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhas Chandra Bose welcomed theformation of the CongressSocialist Party, though neither Nehru nor Bose joined theparty. Inthe annual session ofthe Congress, held at Lucknow in April 1936, in his presidentialspeech Nehru espousedthe cause of socialism. He said: I see no way of ending the poverty, vastunemployment,degradation and subjection of the Indian peopleexcept through socialism. Thatinvolvesvast revolutionary changes in our political and social structure, ending vested interests in-the land and industry as well as the feudal autocratic Indian states system. Thatmeansend-ing private property except in arestricted sense and replacement of the present profitsystem by thehigher ideals of cooperative service. In 1936 Nehru inducted three CongressSocialists-NarendraDev, Jaya Prakash Narayan and Achyut Patwardhan into theCongress Working Committee, be-


59

sides another leftist, Subhas Chandra Bose. The Faizpursession of the Indian NationalCongress,heldtowards the close of 1936 under thepresidentship of Jawaharlal Nehru, adopted an agrarianprogramme, containing such itemsas reduction of revenue, abolition of feudal dues and lev-ies, introduction of cooperativefarming, living wage for the agrarian labourers and formationof peasant unions. In themeantime the Congress Labour Committee asked the Congressministries, formed in theprovinces in 1937, for adopting measures for safeguarding and promot-ing the interests ofworkers. The CongressSocialists played an important role in the Kisan (peas-ant)movement. Through the efforts ofProf. N.G. Ranga, Indulal Yagnik, and SwamiSahajan-and Saraswati the All-IndiaKisan Sabha was organised. The first All-India KisanCongress met atLucknow in 1936. The Kisanorganizationsdemanded the abolition ofzamindary, reduction of lantax, and collective affiliation to Congress. The CongressSocialists changed the CongressParty'spolicy from aloofness to closer involvement in theaffairs of princely states. The Congress socialistactivists also took part in the democraticmovements of the people in the princely state against theirautocratic rulers. And theyagitated forcivil rights and responsible government.

MODULE IV

INDIA: THE REPUBLIC

Indian Constitution

The Constitution of India is a unique constitution. It is the largest written liberal democratic consti-tution of the world. It provides for a mixture of federalism and Unitarianism, and flexibility andwith rigidity. Since its inauguration on 26th January 1950, the Constitution India has been success-fully guiding the path and progress of India.

The salient features of the Constitution of India.

(1) Written and Detailed Constitution:

The Constitution is a wholly written document which incorporates the constitutional law of India. Itwas fully debated and duly enacted by the Constitution Assembly of India. It took the Assembly 2years, 11 months and 18 days to write and enact the Constitution.

Indian Constitution is a very detailed constitution. It consists of 395 Articles divided into 22 Partswith 12 Schedules and 94 constitutional amendments. It is a constitution of both the Centre and


60

states of Indian Union It are indeed much bigger than the US Constitution which has only 7 Arti-cles and the French Constitution with its 89 Articles.

(2) Self-made and Enacted Constitution:

Indian Constitution is a constitution made by the people of India acting through their duly electedand representative body—the Constituent Assembly that was organised in December 1946. Its firstsession was held on 9th December, 1946. It passed the Objectives Resolution on 22 January, 1947.

Thereafter, it initiated the process of constitution-making in the right earnest and was in a positionto finally pass and adopt the constitution on 26th November, 1949. The constitution became fullyoperational with effect from 26th January 1950. We celebrate this day as our Republic Day. TheConstitution of India is thus a self-made and duly enacted constitution.

(3) Preamble of the Constitution:

The Preamble to the Constitution of India is a well drafted document which states the philosophyof the constitution. It declares India to be a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic and awelfare state committed to secure justice, liberty and equality for the people and for promoting fra-ternity, dignity the individual, and unity and integrity of the nation. The Preamble is the key to theconstitution. It states in nutshell the nature of Indian state and the objectives it is committed to se-cure for the people.

(4) India is a Democratic Socialist State:

Although, right from the beginning the Indian Constitution fully reflected the spirit of democraticsocialism, it was only in 1976 that the Preamble was amended to include the term ‘Socialism’. It isnow regarded as a prime feature of Indian state. India is committed to secure social, economic andpolitical justice for its entire people by ending all forms of exploitation and by securing equitabledistribution of income, resources and wealth. This is to be secured by peaceful, constitutional anddemocratic means.

(5) India is a Secular State:

India gives special status to no religion. There is no such thing as a state religion of India. Thismakes it different from theocratic states like the Islamic Republic of Pakistan or other Islamiccountries. Further, Indian secularism guarantees equal freedom to all religions. The Constitutiongrants the Right to Religious Freedom to all the citizens.

(6) India is a Democratic State:

The Constitution of India provides for a democratic system. The authority of the government restsupon the sovereignty of the people. The people enjoy equal political rights. On the basis of theserights, the people freely participate in the process of politics. They elect their government.

Free fair and regular elections are held for electing governments. For all its activities, the govern-ment of India is responsible before the people. The people can change their government through


61

elections. No government can remain in power which does not enjoy the confidence of the people.India is world’s largest working democracy.

(7) India is a Republic:

The Preamble declares India to be a Republic. India is not ruled by a monarch or a nominated headof state. India has an elected head of state (President of India) who wields power for a fixed term of5 years. After every 5 years, the people of India indirectly elect their President.

(8) India is a Union of States:

Article I of the Constitution declares, that “India that is Bharat is a Union of States.” The term ‘Un-ion of State’ shows two important facts:

(i) That Indian Union is not the result of voluntary agreement among sovereign states, and

(ii) that states of India do not enjoy the right to secede from the Union. Indian Union has now 28States and 7 Union Territories.

(9) Mixture of Federalism and Unitarianism:

While describing India as a Union of States, the Constitution provides for a federal structure with aunitary spirit. Scholars describe India as a ‘Quasi-Federation’ or as ‘a federation with a unitarybias, or even as ‘a Unitarian federation.’

Like a federation, the Constitution of India provides for:

(i) A division of powers between the centre and states,

(ii) A written, rigid and supreme constitution,

(iii) Independent judiciary with the power to decide centre-state disputes and

(iv) Dual administration i.e. central and state administrations. However, by providing a very strongcentre, a common constitution, single citizenship, emergency provisions, common election com-mission, common all India services etc. the Constitution clearly reflects its unitary spirit.

India is a federation with some Unitarian features. This mixture of federalism-Unitarianism hasbeen done keeping in view both the pluralistic nature of society and the presence of regional diver-sities, as well as due to the need for securing unity and integrity of the nation.

(10) Mixture of Rigidity and Flexibility:

The Constitution of India is rigid in parts. Some of its provisions can be amended in a difficult waywhile others can be amended very easily. In some cases, the Union Parliament can amend someparts of the Constitution by passing a simple law.


62

Article 368, of the Constitution provides for two special methods of amendment: (i) Most of theprovisions of the Constitution can be amended by the Union Parliament by passing an AmendmentBill by a majority of total membership and 2/3rd majority of members present and voting in each ofits two Houses.

(ii) For the amendment of some specified parts, a very rigid method has been provided.

Under it, first the Union Parliament passes the Amendment Bill by a majority of total membershipand 2/3rd majority of members present and voting in each house , and then it goes to the State Leg-islatures for ratification. The Amendment gets passed only when it is approved by not less than onehalf of the several states of the Union.

Thus, the Constitution of India is partly rigid and partly flexible.

(11) Fundamental Rights:

Under its Part IIIC Articles 12-35), the Constitution of India grants and guarantees FundamentalRights to its citizens. It is called the Indian Bill of Rights. Initially, 7 Fundamental Rights weregranted but after the deletion of the Right to Property from the list of Fundamental Rights (44thAmendment Act 1979) their number came down to six.

The Six Fundamental Rights are:

(i) Right to Equality:

It provides for Equality before Law, End of Discrimination, Equality of Opportunity,Abolition ofuntouchability and Abolition of Titles.

(ii) Right to Freedom:

It incorporates six fundamental freedoms -freedoms of speech and expression, freedom toform as-sociations, freedom to assemble peaceably without arms, freedom to move freely in India, freedomof residence in any part, and freedom of adopting any profession or trade or occupation. It ensurespersonal freedom and protection in respect of conviction for certain offences.

The Constitution lays down that the freedom of life and liberty cannot be limited or denied exceptin accordance with the procedure established by law. Now under Art 21A Right to Education forthe children between the ages of 6-14 years has been granted. Art. 22 guarantees protection againstarbitrary arrest and detention.

(iii) Right against Exploitation:

This Fundamental Right prohibits sale and purchase of human beings, forced labour (begaar) andemployment of children in hazardous jobs and factories.

(iv) Right to Freedom of Religion:


63

The grant of this right involves the freedom of conscience, religion and worship. Any person canfollow any religion. It gives to all religions freedom to establish and maintain their religious institu-tions. Mo person can be compelled to pay any tax for the propagation of any religion. The statecannot levy a tax for any religion and constitution prohibits the imparting of religious instructionsin schools and colleges.

(v) Cultural and Educational Rights:

Under this category the Constitution guarantees the rights of the minorities to maintain and developtheir languages and cultures. It also confers upon them the right to establish, maintain and adminis-ter their educational institutions.

(vi) Right to Constitutional Remedies (Art. 32):

This fundamental right is the soul of the entire Bill of Rights. It provides for the enforcement andprotection of Fundamental Rights by the courts. It empowers the Supreme Court and High Courtsto issue writs for the enforcement of these rights.

(12) National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and State Human Rights Commission and Pro-tection of Human Rights:

With a view to protect the human rights of all the people the Protection of Human Rights Act. 1993was passed by the Union Parliament. Under it the National Human Rights Commission was estab-lished. It is headed by a former Chief Justice of India. It acts as an independent commission with astatus of a civil court. It works for preventing the violations of human rights of the people.

Its cases of proved violations of human rights, the NHRC can order the grant of compensation tothe victims. Several State, Human Rights Commission are also working for the protection of Hu-man Rights. India is fully committed to protect the human rights of all the people of the world.

(13) Fundamental Duties of the Citizens:

In its Part IVA (Article 51 A) the Constitution describes the following Fundamental Duties of acitizen:

1. Respect for the Constitution, the national flag and the national anthem;

2. Cherish the noble ideals of the freedom struggle;

3. Uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India;

4. Defend the country and render national service when called;

5. Promote the common brotherhood of all the people of India and renounce any practice

derogatory to the dignity of women;

6. Preserve the rich heritage of the nation’s composite culture;


64

7. Project the natural environment and have compassion for living creatures;

8. Develop scientific temper, humanism and spirit of inquiry and reform;

9. Safeguard public property and abjure violence; and

10. Strive for excellence in all individual and collective activity.

11. Duty of the parents to send their children to schools for getting education.

The Fundamental Duties are, however, not enforceable by the courts.

(14) Directive Principles of State Policy:

Part IV of the Constitution dealing with the ‘Directive Principles of State Policy’ provides one ofthe most striking features of the Indian Constitution. The Directive Principles are instructions to thestate for securing socio-economic developmental objectives through its policies. These are to beimplemented by both the Union for the States. For example, Directive Principles direct the state toensure for the people adequate means of livelihood, fairer distribution of wealth, equal pay forequal work, protection of children, women, labour and youth, old age pension, social security, localself-government, protection of the interests of the weaker sections of society; promotion of cottageindustries, rural development, international ‘peace friendship and co-operation with other states etc.The aim of Part IV is to secure and strengthen socio-economic democracy in India.

(15) Bi-Cameral Union Parliament:

The Constitution provides for a Bicameral Legislature at the Union level and names it as the UnionParliament. Its two Houses are: The Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. The Lok Sabha is the lower,popular, directly elected house of the Parliament. It represents the people of India. Its maximumstrength stands fixed at 550. Presently Lok Sabha has 545 members. The people of each state electrepresentatives in proportion to their population. Orissa has 21 seats out of which some seats arereserved for the people belonging to SCs and STs. Members of the Lok Sabha are directly electedby the people of India. All men and women of 18 years or above of age whose names are registeredin the voters lists vote in elections for electing the members of Lok Sabha. Every voter of 25 yearsor above of age is eligible to contest elections to the Lok Sabha. The tenure of the Lok Sabha is 5years. But the President acting under the advice of Prime Minister can dissolve it earlier also.

The Rajya Sabha is the upper and, indirectly elected second House of Parliament. It represents thestates of the Indian union. Its maximum membership can be 250. Presently, the Rajya Sabha has245 members. Out of these 233 members are elected by all the State Legislative Assemblies and 12are nominated by the President from amongst eminent persons from the fields of Art, Science andLiterature. Rajya Sabha is a quasi-permanent house. Its 1/3rd members retire after every two years.Each member has tenure of six years. Orissa has 10 seats in the Rajya Sabha. Of the two houses, ofParliament, the Lok Sabha is a more powerful House. It alone has financial powers. The UnionCouncil of Ministers is collectively responsible before the Lok Sabha. However, the Rajya Sabha isneither as powerless as the British House of Lords and nor the Lok Sabha is as powerful as theBritish House of Commons.


65

(16) Parliamentary System:

The Constitution of India provides for a parliamentary system of government at the Centre as wellas in every state of the Union. The President of India is the constitutional head of state with nomi-nal powers. The Union Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister is the real executive.Ministers are essentially the members of the Union Parliament. For all its policies and decisions theCouncil of Ministers is collectively responsible before the Lok Sabha. The Lok Sabha can removethe Ministry by passing a vote of no-confidence. The Cabinet, in fact the Prime Minister has thepower to get the Lok Sabha dissolved by the President. On similar lines a parliamentary govern-ment is also at work in each state.

(17) Adult-Suffrage:

Another feature of the Constitution is that it provides for universal adult suffrage. All men andwomen enjoy an equal right to vote. Each adult man and woman above the age of 18 years has theright to vote. All registered voters get the opportunity to vote in elections.

(18) Single integrated State with Single Citizenship:

India is the single Independent and Sovereign integrated state. Presently it has 28 states and 7 Un-ion Territories. All citizens enjoy a common uniform citizenship. They are entitled to equal rightsand freedoms, and equal protection of the state.”

(19) Single Integrated Judiciary:

The Constitution provides for a single integrated judicial system common for the Union and thestates. The Supreme Court of India works at the apex level, High Courts at the state level and othercourts work under the High Courts. There are 21 State High Courts working in all parts of India.Orissa High Court has been in existence since 1948 and it is located at Cuttack. The Supreme Courtis the highest court of the land. It controls and runs the judicial administration of India.

(20) Independence of Judiciary:

The Indian Constitution makes judiciary truly independent. It is clear from the following facts:

(a) Judges are appointed by the President,

(b) Only persons with high legal qualifications and experience are appointed as judges,

(c) Judges of the Supreme Court cannot be removed from office except through an extremely diffi-cult process of implement.

(d) The salaries of the judges are very high,

(e) The Supreme Court has its own staff. Indian judiciary has an autonomous organisation andstatus. It works as an independent and powerful judiciary.

(21) Judicial Review:


66

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The Supreme Court acts as the guardian protectorand interpreter of the Constitution. It is also the guardian of the Fundamental Rights of the people.For this purpose, it exercises the power of judicial review. By it, the Supreme Court determines theconstitutional validity of all laws made by the legislatures. It can reject any law which is found tobe unconstitutional.

(22) Judicial Activism:

Currently, Indian judiciary has been becoming more and more active towards the performance ofits social obligations. Through Public Interest Litigation system (PIL) as well as through a moreactive exercise of its powers, the Indian judiciary has been now very actively trying to secure allpublic demands and needs due to them under the laws and policies of the state.

(23) Emergency Provisions:

The Constitution of India contains special provisions for dealing with emergencies. It recognisesthree types of possible emergencies:

(1) National Emergency (Article 352) an emergency resulting from war or external aggression orthreat of external aggressions against India or from armed rebellion within India or in any of itspart;

(2) Constitutional Emergency in a State (Article 356) an emergency resulting from the failure ofconstitutional machinery in any state; or some states and

(3) Financial Emergency (Article 360) an emergency resulting from a threat to financial stability ofIndia.

The President of India has been empowered to take appropriate steps for dealing with theseemer-gencies. During the period of an emergency, the powers of the President, actually of the PMand theUnion Council of Ministers Cabinet increase tremendously. President can take all stepsdeemed es-sential for meeting an emergency. These are called emergency powers of the President.

(24) Special Provisions relating to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes:

With a view to protect the interests of people belonging to Scheduled Castes and ScheduledTribes,the Constitution lays down certain special provisions. It provides for reservation of seats inthe leg-islatures for the people belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. President cannomi-nate in Lok Sabha not more than two members of the Anglo-Indian Community in case he isof theopinion that this community is not adequately represented in the House.

Reservation of some jobs for the people belonging to SCs, STs and OBCs has also been inopera-tion. The reservation system has been now extended upto the year 2020.Presently, a bill forgranting33% reservation of legislative seats for women is in the process of getting enacted intolaw. Reser-vation system is also in existence in the Panchayats and Municipal Councils.

(25) Provisions regarding Language:


67

The Constitution lays down special provisions for defining the Language of the Union,RegionalLanguages and Language of the Supreme Court and High Courts. It states that the officiallanguageof the Union shall be Hindi in Devnagri script. But along with this, it also provides forthe continu-ance of English language. A state legislature can adopt the language of the province asits officiallanguage.

English continues to be the language of the Supreme Court and the High Courts. TheConstitutiongives a directive to the Union to develop Hindi and popularise its use. In its EighthSchedule, theConstitution recognises 22 modern Indian Languages — Assamese, Bengali,Gujarati, Hindi, Kan-nada, Kashmiri, Malayalam, Marathi, Oriya, Punjabi, Nepali, Manipuri,Konkani, Sanskrit, Sindhi,Tamil, Telgu, Urdu, Bodo, Dogri, Maithli and Santhali.

(26) A Constitution Drawn from several Sources:

In formulating the Constitution of India, the founding fathers used several sources. Thevalues andideals of the national movement guided their path. The national movement influencedthem to adoptsecularism as the ideal. Some provisions of Government of India Act 1935 wereused by them andseveral features of foreign constitutions influenced them, and were adopted bythem.In adoptingparliamentary system and bicameralism, the British Constitution influencedthem. The US Constitu-tion influenced them in favour of republicanism, independence of judiciary,judicial review and billof rights. The progress of the (former) USSR after the 1917 SocialistRevolution influenced them toadopt socialism as a goal. Likewise, they were influenced by theconstitutions of Canada, Australia,Weimar Republic (Germany) and Ireland.With all these features, the Indian Constitution is a con-stitution best suited to the Indianenvironment. The Constitution has been helping India to organiseand run her government andadministration in an effective way both in times of peace and war. Thebasic structure of the Constitution i.e. its most fundamental features can be described as: Preamble,Fundamental Rights,

Directive Principles, Secularism, Federalism, Republicanism, Independence of Judiciary, Rule ofLaw, and Liberal Democracy.( K.K. Ghai)

The key person behind the Constitution of India was Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. He was a learned personhad good vision of future India.One of repeated criticism of the Indian constitution is that it is verylittle original and mostly borrowed from other constitutions. Even Dr. Ambedkar admitted in theConstituent Assembly that many elements were borrowed from foreign constitutions but they werenot “slavish imitations” but adoption of time-tested constitutional principles like the “Rule of Law”or “Equality before Law” to serve the interests of the people.

The Government of India Act, 1935

The Montague-Chelmsford Reforms of 1919 had brought a large scale discontentment among thepeople of India. The Non-Cooperation Movement launched by Gandhi had fanned the fire of thisdiscontentment.

In order to give some concession to Indians in the field of administration, the Government of IndiaAct, 1935 was designed on the basis of the recommendation of Simon Commission. It envisaged anadministrative set-up for India such as:


68

1. A Federal government would be established in India with the inclusion of the native States.

2. Diarchy introduced by the Act. Of 1919 should be abolished from the State and established inthe Centre.

3. The provinces would be given complete autonomy and the administrative subjects divided intothree lists i.e. Federal List that included the subjects assigned to the Central Government; the Pro-vincial List that consisted of all the subjects under the sole jurisdiction of the provinces and finally,the Concurrent List upon whose subjects both the Centre and Provinces would exercise their com-bined authority.

4. A Federal Court was established at the Centre.

Besides these main provisions, it also contained the provisions of the formation of the provinces ofSindh and Orissa, separate and communal electorate system with reduction of the qualification ofvoters; separation of Burma and Aden from India and so on. Accordingly, the Home Governmentin England was reformed. The Indian Council was abolished and a few advisers varying from 3 to6 were appointed to advise the Secretary of States in his policy formulation towards India. The Sec-retary was normally not expected to poke his nose in the Indian affairs which were to be carried onby Governors.

Further, a High Commission was to be appointed by the Viceroy of India for a period of five years.Coming to the Federal Government, the Viceroy remained its head. He exercised a wide range ofpower concerning administration, legislation and finance.

The Act had created provisions for Reserved Subjects which were looked after by Viceroy throughExecutive Councilors and transferred Subjects through the Indian ministers, not more than 10 innumber selected from the Legislature.

Thus, this system of Diarchy was fully introduced in the Centre. At the Centre the Federal Legisla-ture consisted of two Houses, the Council of States and Federal Assembly consisting of 260 and375 members respectively. The Council of States (Upper House) was permanent body whose one-third members retired every year.

In case of the Provincial Government, the Governor carried on the administration with the help of aCouncil of Ministers selected by him from among the members of the Provincial Legislature. Ofcourse, the composition of the Provincial Legislature was different in several Provinces.

The Legislatures of U.P., Bihar, Assam, Bengal, Madras and Bombay consisted of two Houses -the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council whereas in other provinces, it consisted ofone House i.e. Legislative Assembly. The members of these Houses varied from Province to Prov-ince.

The India Act of 1935 was sugar coated quinine as was apparent from the very beginning. Thoughit introduced Diarchy in the Centre and autonomy in the Province but the power of the elected ornominated members were limited. Further, it fanned the fire of communalism by retaining separatereserved electorates. In actual practice, this Act did not create scope for the self-experience of theIndian Legislators as they enjoyed only limited powers.


69

On the other hand, the India Act, 1935 had its merits too. It introduced Diarchy in the Centre andgranted provincial autonomy. It also created field for some practical experiences on the part of In-dian leaders. In the ensuing election of 1936-37, the All-India Congress gained majority in Madras,Bombay, Central Provinces, U.P., Bihar and Orissa. In Assam and north-western frontier, it be-came the largest single party.

Similarly, the Muslim League got absolute majority in Sindh. The legislators got experience informing ministry in these provinces. The most important fact regarding the achievement of the Actcan be stated that the political experience ingenerated in the minds of the Indian leaders went along way in making the people of India conscious for their political liberty which they achieved in1947.

Re-Organisation of Linguistic States

The reorganization of the states based on language, a major aspect of national consolidation andintegration, came to the fore almost immediately after independence. The boundaries of provincesin pre-1947 India had been drawn in a haphazard manner as the British conquest of India had pro-ceeded for nearly a hundred years. No heed was paid to linguistic or cultural cohesion so that mostof the provinces were multi-lingual and multi-cultural. The interspersed princely states had added afurther element of heterogeneity.

The case for linguistic states as administrative units was very strong. Language is closely related toculture and therefore to the customs of people. Besides, the massive spread of education andgrowth of mass literacy can only occur through the medium of the mother tongue. Nehru appointedin August 1953 the States Reorganization Commission (SRC), with Justice Fazl Ali, K.M. Panikkarand Hridaynath Kunzru as members, to examine ‘objectively and dispassionately’ the entire ques-tion of the reorganization of the states of the union. Throughout the two years of its work, theCommission was faced with meetings, demonstrations, agitations, and hunger strikes.

Different linguistic groups clashed with each other, verbally as well as sometimes physically. TheSRC submitted its report in October 1955. While laying down that due consideration should begiven to administrative and economic factors, it recognized for the most part the linguistic principleand recommended redrawing of state boundaries on that basis. The Commission, however, opposedthe splitting of Bombay and Punjab. Despite strong reaction to the report in many parts of the coun-try, the SRC's recommendations were accepted, though with certain modifications, and werequickly implemented.

The States Reorganization Act was passed by parliament in November 1956. It provided for four-teen states and six centrally administered territories. The Telengana area of Hyderabad state wastransferred to Andhra; merging the Malabar district of the old Madras Presidency with Travancore-Cochin created Kerala. Certain Kannada-speaking areas of the states of Bombay, Madras, Hydera-bad and Coorg were added to the Mysore state. Merging the states of Kutch and Saurashtra and theMarathi-speaking areas of Hyderabad with it enlarged Bombay state.

The strongest reaction against the SRC's report and the States Reorganization Act came from Ma-harashtra where widespread rioting broke out and eighty people were killed in Bombay city in po-lice firings in January 1956. The opposition parties supported by a wide spectrum of public opin-ion—students, farmers, workers, artists, and businesspersons—organized a powerful protest


70

movement. Under pressure, the government decided in June 1956 to divide the Bombay state intotwo linguistic states of Maharashtra and Gujarat with Bombay city forming a separate, centrallyadministered state. This move too was strongly opposed by the Maharashtrians.

Nehru now vacillated and, unhappy at having hurt the feelings of the people of Maharashtra, re-verted in July to the formation of bilingual, greater Bombay. This move was, however, opposed bythe people both of Maharashtra and Gujarat. The broad-based Samyukta Maharashtra Samiti andMaha Gujarat Janata Parishad led the movements in the two parts of the state. In Maharashtra, evena large section of Congressmen joined the demand for a unilingual Maharashtra with Bombay as itscapital; and C.D. Deshmukh, the Finance Minister in the Central Cabinet, resigned from his officeon this question. The Gujaratis felt that they would be a minority in the new state. They too wouldnot agree to give up Bombay city to Maharashtra. Violence and arson now spread to Ahmedabadand other parts of Gujarat. Sixteen persons were killed and 200 injured in police firings.

In view of the disagreement over Bombay city, the government stuck to its decision and passed theStates Reorganization Act in November 1956.

Consequences of linguistic division of states

Linguism in India gained momentum during freedom struggle. The freedom fighters felt that theBritish system of division of the country was not appropriate. The idea of division of India on thebasis of languages was considered as a better strategy. But the reorganisation of states on linguisticbasis has created serious problems.

The problems of linguistic division of states can be analysed as follows:

1. Regionalism:

Linguism has promoted local identity. It has created distinctiveness among people. The regionaldifferences have come in the way of national integration. Extreme sense of regionalism has resultedin parochialism and ethno centricism.

2. Exploitation of people by Politicians:

Language has evoked psychological and emotional feelings among people. Politicians are promot-ing the spread of only particular languages through monetary inducements. They exploit the senti-ments of people at the time of election.

3. Erosion of national feeling:

Linguistic loyalty has come in the way of national integration. People are much concerned aboutthe regional gains, than the interest of the nation. Thus, interstate boundary dispute, river disputehave become common. E.g.: Difference of opinion among people speaking Kannada and Marathiin Belgaum.

4. Emergence of regional Political Parties:


71

Linguism has resulted in the formation of regional political parties. At the present juncture theseregional parties are playing a crucial role in the formation of government at the centre and also atsome states. This has caused the Problem of political instability in the country. It has even in-creased the cost of election.

5. Demand for separate states:

Extreme sense of Linguism has caused linguistic conflicts. Such conflicts are quite often supportedby politicians. E.g.: Demand for a separate state by people of “north Karnataka” region.

6. Threat to sovereignty:

Linguism is posing a severe threat to the integrity of the country. On the basis of language peoplehave become more self centred without thinking of the progress of the country. In Some states theregional language is being used even for administrative purposes, which causes a major problem topeople who do not belong to that particular state.

Recommendations of Sarkaria Commission:

In 1983, Sarkaria Commission was constituted to look in to the language problem in India and sug-gest measures. The Commission was headed by R.S. Sarkaria. The Commission made the follow-ing recommendations:

1. Three language formula: It included the implementation of regional language, Hindi and Englishat the school level education.

2. English was to be retained as the official language.

3. Reorganisation of states into administrative units.

4. Ban on Political parties and other organisations trying to promote Linguism.

Management Perspective:

Language has influenced the practices of organisation to a great extent. It has given rise to the for-mation of various groups within the organisation. E.g.: BEL Kannada Sangha. It has united peopleworking in the organisation. At the same time undue importance to linguistic sentiments has re-sulted in Bias, prejudice about particular groups. Knowledge of regional language is considered asone of the pre-requisites of employment in the organisations.

Emergency

An emergency is a situation that poses an immediate risk to health, life, property, or environment.Most emergencies require urgent intervention to prevent a worsening of the situation, although insome situations, mitigation may not be possible and agencies may only be able to offer palliativecare for the aftermath.


72

While some emergencies are self-evident (such as a natural disaster that threatens many lives),many smaller incidents require that an observer (or affected party) decide whether it qualifies as anemergency. The precise definition of an emergency, the agencies involved and the procedures used,vary by jurisdiction, and this is usually set by the government, whose agencies (emergency ser-vices) are responsible for emergency planning and management.

Emergency in India

In India, "the Emergency" refers to a 21-month period in 1975–77 when Prime Minister IndiraGandhi unilaterally had an emergency declared across the country. Officially issued by PresidentFakhruddin Ali Ahmed under Article 352(1) of the Constitution for "internal disturbance", theEmergency was in effect from 25 June 1975 until its withdrawal on 21 March 1977.

On June 25, 1975 the then prime minister Indira Gandhi imposed Emergency in India citing gravethreat to her government and sovereignty of the country from both internal and external forces. In-dira Gandhi became the prime minister in January 1966 and then emerged victorious in the 1971Lok Sabha elections. Even after the split of Congress party she reigned supreme, completely deci-mating her rivals both within and outside the party.

The victory in the Bangladesh liberation war also gave her a big boost. However, things started go-ing wrong for her from early 1974. There was a failure of monsoon and unemployment rate hadtouched a high. Poverty was increasing. Industrial production was down and there was a massivelabour and students unrest across India. The socialist stalwart Jaya Prakash Narayan popularlyknown as 'JP' openly led a mass movement against her calling her corrupt and autocratic. The fire-brand trade union leader George Fernandes had successfully organised an all India Railways strikebringing the public transport and economy to a halt.

On the international scene, the Cold War was hoting up. In a CIA backed coup in Chile the leftleaning socialist President Salvador Allende was assassinated sending shockwaves across the ThirdWorld. Indira Gandhi got scared and believed that the internal unrest was the handiwork of Ameri-can spy agency CIA to unseat her and install a puppet government in India. When she thought thatthe things were really out of control, she imposed Emergency suspending civil liberties. The Emer-gency draft was hurriedly sent to the President of India Fakruddin Ali Ahmed who signed it imme-diately. Indira Gandhi's second son Sanjay Gandhi, who was just 29 years old then, took charge ofthe administration and started sending opposition leaders and workers to jails across India. The op-position movement against the Emergency was led by JP, George Fernandes, Morarji Desai, NanajiDeshmukh, Subramanian Swamy, AB Vajpayee, LK Advani, Ramakrishna Hegde, HD DeveGowda, M Karunanidhi, JB Patnaik, Jyoti Basu, Madhu Dandavate, Lalu Prasad Yadav, MulayamSingh Yadav, Sharad Yadav and many others. The opposition was brutally oppressed. RamnathGoenka, the only newspaper owner who stood up to Indira Gandhi, was harassed and he faced aseries of troubles at the hands of her government. However, Indira Gandhi shocked everybody bydeclaring Lok Sabha elections in January 1977 bringing an end to draconian Emergency. In the his-toric Lok Sabha election held in March 1977, Indira Gandhi-led Congress lost power. Both IndiraGandhi and her son Sanjay Gandhi were defeated in their respective Lok Sabha seats. MorarjiDesai succeeded her as the Prime Minister and led the Janata Party government till 1980. In the1980 Lok Sabha polls, Indira Gandhi returned to power and remained in power till her assassina-tion in 1984.


73

Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization

The economy of India had undergone significant policy shifts in the beginning of the 1990s. Thisnew model of economic reforms is commonly known as the LPG or Liberalisation, Privatisationand Globalisation model. The primary objective of this model was to make the economy of Indiathe fastest developing economy in the globe with capabilities that help it match up with the biggesteconomies of the world.

The chain of reforms that took place with regards to business, manufacturing, and financial ser-vices industries targeted at lifting the economy of the country to a more proficient level. Theseeconomic reforms had influenced the overall economic growth of the country in a significant man-ner.

Liberalisation

Liberalisation refers to the slackening of government regulations. The economic liberalisation inIndia denotes the continuing financial reforms which began since July 24, 1991.Liberalisation iscommonly known as free trade. It implies removal of restrictions and barriers to free trade. Indiahas taken many efforts for liberalisation which are as follows:

New economic policy, 1991.

Objectives of the new economic policy.

i. To achieve higher economic growth rate.

ii. To reduce inflation

iii. To rebuild foreign exchange reserves.

FEMA:

Foreign exchange Regulation Act 1973 was repealed and Foreign exchange Management Act waspassed. The enactment has incorporated clauses which have facilitated easy entry of MNCs.

i. Joint ventures with foreign companies. E.g.: TVS Suzuki.

ii. Reduction of import tariffs.

iii. Removal of export subsidies.

iv. Full convertibility of Rupee on current account.

v. Encouraging foreign direct investments.

The effect of liberalisation is that the companies of developing countries are facing a tough compe-tition from powerful corporations of developed countries. The local communities are exploited bymultinational companies on account of removal of regulations governing the activities of MNCs.


74

Privatisation

Privatisation refers to the participation of private entities in businesses and services and transfer ofownership from the public sector (or government) to the private sector as well. In the event ofglobalization privatisation has become an order of the day. Privatisation can be defined as thetransfer of ownership and control of public sector units to private individuals or companies. It hasbecome inevitable as a result of structural adjustment programmes imposed by IMF.

Objectives of Privatisation:

To strengthen the private sectors:

Government to concentrate on areas like education and infrastructure. In the event of globalizationthe government felt that increasing inefficiency on the part of public sectors would not help inachieving global standards. Hence a decision was taken to privatise the Public Sectors.

Causes of Inefficiency of Public Sectors:

i. Bureaucratic administration

ii. Out dated Technology

iii. Corruption

iv. Lack of accountability.

v. Domination of trade unions

vi. Political interference.

vii. Lack of proper marketing activities.

Privatisation has its own advantages and disadvantages Viz:

Advantages:

i. Efficiency

ii. Absence of political interference

iii. Quality service.

iv. Systematic marketing

v. Use of modern Technology

vi. Accountability


75

vii. Creation of competitive environment.

viii. Innovations

ix. Research and development

x. Optimum utilisation of resources

xi. Infra structure.

However, privatisation suffers from the following defects.

i. Exploitation of labour.

ii. Abuse of powers by executives.

iii. Unequal distribution of wealth and income.

iv. Lack of job security for employees.

Privatisation has become inevitable in the present scenario. But some control should be exercisedby the government over private sectors.

Globalization:

The term globalization can be used in different contexts. The general usages of the term Globaliza-tion can be as follows:

i. Interactions and interdependence among countries.

ii. Integration of world economy.

iii. De- territorisation.

By synthesising all the above views Globalization can be broadly defined as follows:

It refers to a process whereby there are social, cultural, technological exchanges across the border.The term Globalization was first coined in 1980s. But even before this there were interactionsamong nations. But in the modern days Globalization has touched all spheres of life such as econ-omy, education. Technology, cultural phenomenon, social aspects etc. The term “global village” isalso frequently used to highlight the significance of globalization. This term signifies that revolu-tion in electronic communication would unite the world. Undoubtedly, it can be accepted that glob-alization is not only the present trend but also future world order.

Effect of Globalization on India:

Globalization has its impact on India which is a developing country. The impact of globalizationcan be analysed as follows:


76

1. Access to Technology:

Globalization has drastically, improved the access to technology. Internet facility has enabled Indiato gain access to knowledge and services from around the world. Use of Mobile telephone hasrevolution used communication with other countries.

2. Growth of international trade:

Tariff barriers have been removed which has resulted in the growth of trade among nations. Globaltrade has been facilitated by GATT, WTO etc.

3. Increase in production:

Globalization has resulted in increase in the production of a variety of goods. MNCs have estab-lished manufacturing plants all over the world.

4. Employment opportunities:

Establishment of MNCs have resulted in the increase of employment opportunities.

5. Free flow of foreign capital:

Globalization has encouraged free flow of capital which has improved the economy of developingcountries to some extent. It has increased the capital formation.

Negative effect of globalization:

Globalization is not free from negative effects. They can be summed up as follows:

1. Inequalities within countries:

Globalisation has increased inequalities among the countries. Some of the policies of Globalization(liberalisation, WTO policies etc.) are more beneficial to developed countries. The countries whichhave adopted the free trade agenda have become highly successful. E.g.: China is a classic exampleof success of globalization. But a country like India is not able to overcome the problem.

2. Financial Instability:

As a consequence of globalization there is free flow of foreign capital poured into developingcountries. But the economy is subject to constant fluctuations.On account of variations in the flowof foreign capital.

3. Impact on workers:

Globalization has opened up employment opportunities. But there is no job security for employees.The nature of work has created new pressures on workers. Workers are not permitted to organisetrade unions.


77

4. Impact on farmers:

Indian farmers are facing a lot of threat from global markets. They are facing a serious competitionfrom powerful agricultural industries quite often cheaply produced agro products in developedcountries are being dumped into India.

5. Impact on Environment:

Globalization has led to 50% rise in the volume of world trade. Mass movement of goods acrossthe world has resulted in gas emission. Some of the projects financed by World Bank are poten-tially devastating to ecological balance. E.g.: Extensive import or export of meat.

6. Domination by MNCs:

MNCs are the driving force behind globalization. They are in a position to dictate powers. Multina-tional companies are emerging as growing corporate power. They are exploiting the cheap labourand natural resources of the host countries.

7. Threat to national sovereignty:

Globalizations results in shift of economic power from independent countries to international or-ganisations, like WTO United Nations etc. The sovereignty of the elected governments are natu-rally undermined, as the policies are formulated in favour of globalization. Thus globalization hasits own positive and negative consequences. According to Peter F Ducker Globalization for betteror worse has changed the way the world does business. It is unstoppable. Thus Globalization is in-evitable, but India should acquire global competitiveness in all fields.

LPG and the Economic Reform Policy of India

Following its freedom on August 15, 1947, the Republic of India stuck to socialistic economicstrategies. In the 1980s, Rajiv Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India, started a number of eco-nomic restructuring measures. In 1991, the country experienced a balance of payments dilemmafollowing the Gulf War and the downfall of the erstwhile Soviet Union. The country had to make adeposit of 47 tons of gold to the Bank of England and 20 tons to the Union Bank of Switzerland.This was necessary under a recovery pact with the IMF or International Monetary Fund. Further-more, the International Monetary Fund necessitated India to assume a sequence of systematic eco-nomic reorganisations. Consequently, the then Prime Minister of the country, P V Narasimha Raoinitiated ground-breaking economic reforms. However, the Committee formed by Narasimha Raodid not put into operation a number of reforms which the International Monetary Fund looked for.

Dr Manmohan Singh, the former Prime Minister of India, was then the Finance Minister of theGovernment of India. He assisted. Narasimha Rao and played a key role in implementing these re-form policies.

Narasimha Rao Committee's Recommendations

The recommendations of the Narasimha Rao Committee were as follows:


78

Bringing in the Security Regulations (Modified) and the SEBI Act of 1992 which rendered thelegitimate power to the Securities Exchange Board of India to record and control all the media-tors in the capital market.

Doing away with the Controller of Capital matters in 1992 that determined the rates and num-ber of stocks that companies were supposed to issue in the market.

Launching of the National Stock Exchange in 1994 in the form of a computerised share buyingand selling system which acted as a tool to influence the restructuring of the other stock ex-changes in the country. By the year 1996, the National Stock Exchange surfaced as the biggesstock exchange in India.

In 1992, the equity markets of the country were made available for investment through overseascorporate investors. The companies were allowed to raise funds from overseas markets throughissuance of GDRs or Global Depository Receipts.

Promoting FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) by means of raising the highest cap on the contri-bution of international capital in business ventures or partnerships to 51 per cent from 40 percent. In high priority industries, 100 per cent international equity was allowed.

Cutting down duties from a mean level of 85 per cent to 25 per cent, and withdrawing quantita-tive regulations. The rupee or the official Indian currency was turned into an exchangeable cur-rency on trading account.

Reorganisation of the methods for sanction of FDI in 35 sectors. The boundaries for interna-tional investment and involvement were demarcated.

The outcome of these reorganisations can be estimated by the fact that the overall amount of over-seas investment (comprising portfolio investment, FDI, and investment collected from overseasequity capital markets) rose to $5.3 billion in 1995-1996 in the country) from a microscopic US$132 million in 1991-1992. Narasimha Rao started industrial guideline changes with the productionzones. He did away with the License Raj, leaving just 18 sectors which required licensing. Controlon industries was moderated.

Highlights of the LPG Policy

Given below are the salient highlights of the Liberalisation, Privatisation and GlobalisationPolicyin India:

Foreign Technology Agreements

Foreign Investment

MRTP Act, 1969 (Amended)

Industrial Licensing

Deregulation

Beginning of privatisation

Opportunities for overseas trade

Steps to regulate inflation


79

Tax reforms

Abolition of License -Permit Raj

Narasimha Rao

Pamulaparti Venkata Narasimha Rao (popularly known as P.V.) (28 June 1921 – 23 December2004) was an Indian lawyer and politician who served as the Prime Minister of India (1991–1996).His ascendancy to the prime minister ship was politically significant in that he was the first holderof this office from non-Hindi-speaking south India. He led an important administration, overseeinga major economic transformation and several home incidents affecting national security of India.Rao who held the Industries was personally responsible for the dismantling of the Licence Raj asthis came under the purview of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. He is often referred to asthe "Father of Indian Economic Reforms". Future Prime ministers Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Man-mohan Singh continued the economic reform policies pioneered by Rao's government. Rao accel-erated the dismantling of the License Raj, reversing the socialist policies of Rajiv Gandhi's gov-ernment. He employed Dr.Manmohan Singh ashis Finance Minister to embark on historic eco-nomic transition. With Rao'smandate,Dr.Manmohan Singh launched India’s globalisation angle ofthe reforms that implementedthe International Monetary Fund (IMF) policies to rescue the almostbankrupt nation fromeconomic collapse. Rao was also referred to as Chanakya for his ability tosteer tough economicand political legislation through the parliament at a time when he headed aminority government.

According to Natwar Singh, "Unlike Nehru, his knowledge of Sanskrit was profound.Nehru had atemper, PV a temperament. His roots were deep in the spiritual and religious soil ofIndia. He didnot need to Discover India". 11th President of India APJ Abdul Kalam described Raoas a "patrioticstatesman who believed that the nation is bigger than the political system". Kalamacknowledgedthat Rao in fact asked him to get ready for nuclear tests in 1996 but it was notcarried out as gov-ernment at centre got changed due to 1996 general election and it was latercarried out by Vajpayeeled NDA government. In fact Rao briefed Vajpayee on nuclear plans.Rao's term as Prime Ministerwas an eventful one in India's history. Besides marking aparadigm shift from the industrialising,mixed economic model of Jawaharlal Nehru to a marketdriven one, his years as Prime Ministeralso saw the emergence of the Bharatiya JanataParty (BJP), a major right-wing party, as an alterna-tive to the Indian National Congress which hadbeen governing India for most of its post-independence history. Rao's term also saw the destructionof the Babri Mosque in Ayodhya in UttarPradesh when BJP's Kalyan Singh was CM whichtriggered one of the worst Hindu-Muslim riots inthe country since its independence. Rao died in2004 of a heart attack in New Delhi. He was cre-mated in Hyderabad. He was a versatilepersonality with interests in a variety of subjects (other thanpolitics) suchas literature and computer software (including computer programming). He spoke 17languages.

Manmohan Singh

Manmohan Singh was born in 26 September 1932 is an Indian economist who served as the PrimeMinister of India from 2004 to 2014. The first Sikh in office, Singh was the first prime ministersince Jawaharlal Nehru to be re-elected after completing a full five-year term. Born in Gah (now inPunjab, Pakistan), Singh's family migrated to India during its partition in 1947. After obtaining hisdoctorate in economics from Oxford, Singh worked for the United Nations in 1966–69. He subse-quently began his bureaucratic career when Lalit Narayan Mishra hired him as an advisor in the


80

Ministry of Foreign Trade. Over the 70s and 80s, Singh held several key posts in the Government,such as Chief Economic Advisor (1972–76), Reserve Bank governor (1982–85) and Commissionhead (1985–87).

In 1991, as India faced a severe economic crisis, newly elected Prime Minister P. V. NarasimhaRao surprisingly inducted the apolitical Singh into his cabinet as Finance Minister. Over the nextfew years, despite strong opposition, he as a Finance Minister carried out several structural reformsthat liberalised India's economy. Although these measures proved successful in averting the crisis,and enhanced Singh's reputation globally as a leading reform-minded economist, the incumbentCongress party fared poorly in the 1996 general election. Subsequently, Singh served as Leader ofthe Opposition in the Rajya Sabha (the upper house of India's Parliament) during the Atal BihariVajpayee government of 1998–2004.

In 2004, when the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) came to power, its chairpersonSonia Gandhi unexpectedly relinquished the premiership to Manmohan Singh. This Singh-led"UPA I" government executed several key legislations and projects, including the Rural HealthMission, Unique Identification Authority, Rural Employment Guarantee scheme and Right to In-formation Act. In 2008, opposition to a historic civil nuclear agreement with the United Statesnearly caused Singh's government to fall after Left parties withdrew their support. Although India'seconomy grew rapidly under UPA I, its security was threatened by several terrorist incidents (in-cluding the 2008 Mumbai attacks) and the continuing Maoist insurgency.

The 2009 general election saw the UPA return with an increased mandate, with Singh retaining theoffice of Prime Minister. Over the next few years, Singh's "UPA II" government faced a number ofcorruption charges—over the organisation of the Commonwealth Games, the 2G-spectrum alloca-tion and the allocation of coal blocks. After his term ended in 2014 he opted out from the race tothe office of the Prime Minister of India during 2014 Indian general election. Singh was never amember of Lok Sabha but continues to serve as a member of the Indian Parliament, representingthe state of Assam in the Rajya Sabha for the fifth consecutive term since 1991.

*****

Complementary Course for BA ENGLISH / BA ECONOMICS / BA ...

Documents

Transcript of Complementary Course for BA ENGLISH / BA ECONOMICS / BA ...