sign in sign up
<<
Home , Fazl Ali, Mohanlal Pandya, Mukhtar Ahmed Ansari, Nellie Sengupta, Special Bureau for India

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

HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II SEMESTER III/IV

Complementary Course for

BA ENGLISH / BA ECONOMICS / BA SOCIOLOGY

CBCSS UG (2019 Admission Onwards)

School of Distance Education University of Calicut

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

University of Calicut School of Distance Education

Study Material

B.A. HISTORY

SEMESTER III/IV

CBCSS (2019 Admission Onwards)

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

Prepared by:

MODULES I, II &III Sri. Sunil Kumar G., Assistant Professor N.S.S. College, Manjeri. MODULE IV Dr. N. Padmanabhan, Associate Professor & Head PG Department of History CAS College, Madayi P.O., Payangadi RS-670358 Kannur - Dt., Kerala.

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

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

CONTENTS

MODULE I GANDHIAN TOOLS FOR STRUGGLES

MODULE II GANDHIAN CONSTRUCTIVE PROGRAMMES

MODULE III CRITIQUE OF

MODULE IV : THE REPUBLIC

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

MODULE I

GANDHIAN TOOLS FOR STRUGGLES

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 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 withinhis own inner self as inspired him to probe into the natural and social world around him,particularly the tradition which he considered his own. 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 trus- teeship;against the institution of state, as the force personified, and the prevalent notion of democracy where only heads are counted, he-favored a type of democracy where every- thing 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.AmongGandhiji's notable writings, mention may be made of An Autobiography: The Story,of' My , Ex- periments with Truth; The Collected Works of ; Panchayati Raj; Sarvodayaan- dHind Swaraj. He edited 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 (), Thoreau (), Swami Vivekananda, Gokhale and Tilak, just to mention afew. 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 most outstanding figures of his time. The role of Mahatma Gandhi in Indian Freedom Struggle is considered the mostsignificant as he single-handedly spearheaded the movement for Indian independence. Thepeaceful and non- violent techniques of Mahatma Gandhi formed the basis of freedomstruggle against the British yoke. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was born on 2ndOctober 1869. After he came back to India from South Africa, where he worked as abarrister, , who led the Congress party, introduced MahatmaGandhi to the concerns in India and the struggle of the people. The Indian independencemovement came to a head between the years 1918 and 1922.A series of non-violencecampaigns of Civil Disobedience Movementwere launched by the Indian NationalCongress under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi.The fo-

4 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II cus was to weaken the Britishgovernment through non cooperation. The protests were mainly 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 Gandhi was 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 Gandhi one should be brave and not a coward. He shouldpresent his views, suggestions and thoughts without being violent. One should fight a warwith the weapons of truth and non violence. Gandhi said that ‘There is no god higher thantruth’. According to Gandhi’s thoughts is ultimate solution of every kind ofproblem in the world. Gandhi was single person who fought against the British with theweapons of truth and Non-violence by persuading countrymen to walk on the path of non-violence. Gandhi leading a decades-long nonviolent struggle against British rule in India,which eventually helped India, wins its independence in 1947. By the efforts of GandhiIndia became independent. Gandhi initiated non violence activities like Quit Indiamovement and non-operation movement. Gandhi could never have done what he didalone, 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 create leaders. In quite simple and clear words, consists of the ideas, whichMahatma Gandhi put forth before human world. Along with that, to the maximumpossible extent, Mahatma Gandhi treated his individual life in accordance with theseideas. Clearly; Gandhism is a mixture of Gandhi’s concepts and practices. The basicground ship of Gandhism happens to be non-violence. Thenon-violence is the mostancient eternal value. This non-violence is the ground of ancient-most civilization andculture of India. Mahatma Gandhi said on this very account while making his conceptsand practices based on non-violence: ‘I have nothing new to teach you’ Truth and non-violence are as old as hill. As we know, non-violence and truth are two sides of the samecoin. After knowing Gandhism, it is imperative for us to know clearly 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 per ownthought, 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-violence is not a concrete thing as it has generally been enunciated. Undoubtedly, it is apart of non-violence to abstain from hurting some living being, but it is only an iotapertaining to its identity. The principle of nonviolence is shattered by every evil thought,false utterance, hate or wishing something bad unto someone. It is also shattered perpossession of necessary worldly things. In this chain Mahatma Gandhi clarified in anedition of Young India: ‘To hurt someone, to think of some evil unto someone or to snatchone’s life under anger or selfishness, is violence. In contrast, purest non-violence involvesa tendency and presuming towards spiritual or physical benefit unto every one withoutselfishness and with pure thought after cool and clear deliberations’. The ultimateyardstick of violence or non-violence is the spirit behind the 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 was soon accepted worldwide. Martin Luther King adopted

5 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 the world happens to be under Democratic system of Government.Theoretically, this system stands out to be the best up to now. This is a truth. It is thebestbecause people are connected with it directly 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 this system the mode of their welfare.However, even though being theoretically the best system of government, 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 long asthese 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 should be free from above-mentioned problems, must be capable of ensuringequal development of their all citizens and the citizens concerned must march forward onpath of progress in unified way along with rendering contribution to world peace. Gandhidemonstrated to a world, weary with wars and 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 his dreams 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 the greater good. These issues arestill relevant to what free India is and represents. The main cause of worry today isintolerance and hatred leading to violence and it is here the values of Gandhi need to beadhered to with more passion.

Satyagraha and

Truth or Satya, for Gandhiji, is God himself. He therefore changed the statement,"God is Truth", 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 answer to one's conscience; it is what responds to one's moral self.He was convinced that knowledge alone" leads a person to the truth while ignorance takesone away from the truth. Satyagraha means urge for Satya, or truth. Satyagraha is notmerely the insistence on truth; it is, in fact, holding on to truth through ways which aremoral and non-violent; it is notthe imposition of one's will over others, but it is appealingto the reasoning of the opponent; it is not coercion but is persuasion. Gandhiji highlightsseveral attributes of satyagraha. It is a moral weapon and does not entertain ill-feelingtowards theadversary; it is a non-violent device and calls upon its user to love his enemy;it does not weaken the opponent but strengthens him morally; it is a weapon of the braveand 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 theservice of 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 is recourse to love. In its positive sense, non-violence means lovefor others; in its negative sense, it seeks no injury to others, both in words as well asdeeds. Gandhiji talked of non-

6 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II violence of different people.There is the non-violence ofthe brave: one has the force but he does not use it as a principle; there is the non-violenceof the weak: one does not have faith in non-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 was a 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 those whom they earlier considered as their adversaries. Given the enmeshing ofmeans and ends, 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 only through non-violence or ahimsa.

Champaran

Champaran in the Tirhut division of North had been seething with agrariandiscontent for some time. European planters had established indigo farms and factories inChamparan at the beginning 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 over one andhalf thousand villages. Most of these villageswere not managed by landlords but were leased to thikadars or temporary tenure holders,of whom the most influential group was European indigo 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 in return for an advance atthe beginning of the cultivation season. Indigo was cultivated under the system calledTinkathia by which atenant had to cultivate indigo at three-twentieths of his 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 for afixed and usually uneconomic price. At this time the demand of Indian indigo in the worldmarket was declining due to the increasing production of synthetic indigo in Germany.Mostplanters at 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 agreement with planters) if the latter paid compensation ordamages. Apart from this, the planters heavily inflated the rents and imposed many illegallevies on the tenants. Gandhi took no interest in the case of indigo cultivators ofChamparan when this question was discussed at the Lucknow session of the Congress in1916 on the ground that he knew nothing about the matter. But Raj Kumar Shukul apeasant from Champaran, after strenuous efforts prevailed upon Gandhi to visitChamparan. Gandhi arrived in Bihar and started making investigations in person. When hereached Motihari, the headquarters of the district of Champaran, he was served with anorder to quit Champaran as he was regarded a danger to the publicpeace. Gandhi decided todisobey the order 'out of a sense of public responsibility. He was immediately arrested andtried in the district court. But the Bihar government ordered the Commissioner and DistrictMagistrate to abandon proceedings and grant to Gandhi the facilities forinvestigation.Gandhi was warned not to stir up trouble, but he was free to continue hisSchool of Distance Education- IndianNationalMovementGandhianPhase (1917-1947)Page10investigations into the cultivator’s grievances. The Government appointed ChamparanAgrarian Committee with Gandhi as one of its members. The committee unanimouslyrecommended the abolition ofTinkathiasystem

7 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 major recommendations of the Committeewere included in the Champaran Agrarian Act of 1917 In this agitation, the chiefsupporters of Gandhi came from the educated middle class. For instance, ,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 heapproached them in a most simple and unassuming manner. In the countryside, he oftenwalked on foot or 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 in . But the mill owners often faced scarcity of labour and they hadto pay high wages to attract enough mill hands. In 1917 plague outbreak made labourshortage more acute be- cause itdrove many workers away from Ahmedabad to thecountryside. To dissuade the workers from leaving the town, the mill owners decided topay 'Plague Bonus' which was sometimes 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 employers move and argued that it was helping themto offset the war time rise in the cost of living. The mill 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. Gandhi discussed 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, suddenlythe mill owners decided to withdraw from the board on the ground that Gandhi had no realauthority or mandate from the workers, and that there was no guarantee that workerswould accept the arbitration 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 of data 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%'instead of50%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 work without35%increase and that they would remain lawabiding during the lockout. Gandhi, as- sisted by Anasuya Sarabhai organised daily massmeetings of workers, in which he delivered lectures and issued a series of leaflets on thesituation. The mill owners ended the lockout on 12 March 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 who were 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

8 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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, they would split thedifference and receive27'12% increases. Finally the arbitrator's award went infavor ofthe' workers and35%raise was given to them.

Kheda

Gandhi's second intervention was for the peasants of Kheda in Gujarat where hismethod of Satyagraha 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. There were many rich peasant proprietors called Patidars or fromthe Kunbi caste. Besides, a large number of small peasants and landless labourers alsolived in this region.

In 1917 excessive rain considerably damaged theKharifcrop in Kheda. Thiscoincided with an increase in the price of kerosine, iron, cloth and salt because of whichthe cost of living for the peasantry went up. In view of the poor harvest, the peasantsdemanded the remission of land revenue. The 'revenue code' provided for a total remissionif the crops were less than twenty five per cent of the normal production. Two Bombaybarristers, V.J. Pate1 and G.K. Parakh made 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 in Kheda the Collector decided that therewas no justification for the remission of land revenue. The official 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 of which Gandhi wasthe president at that time. The truth was that initiative for the agitation against payment ofrevenue came neither from Gandhi nor from the other Ahmedabad politicians; it wasraised 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 fear of 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 April when 2,337 peasants pledged not to payrevenue. Most of the Patidars took part in this Satyagraha. Some poorer peasants werecoerced by the government into paying the revenue. Moreover, a goodRabicrop hadweakened the case for remission. Gandhi began to realise that peasantry was on the vergeof exhaustion. He decided to call off the agitation when the government issuedinstructions that land revenue should be recoveredfrom only those who had the capacityto pay and no pressure should be exerted on the genuinely poor peasants. This agitationdid not have a uniform effect on the area. Only 70 villages out of 559 in Kheda wereactually 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

9 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II During the years 1917 and 1918 Gandhi took little interest in all lndia issues. He protestedagainst internment of , and also demanded the release of Ali brothers(Mahomed Ali and Shaukat Ali) who were actively associated with the Khilafat issue.They were political leaders 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 forceful manner

In 1917 the Government oflndia had appointed a committee under thechairmanship of Justice Sydney Rowlatt to investigate “revolutionary crime" in thecountry and to recommend legislation for its suppression. After a review of the situation,the Rowlatt committee proposed a seriesof change in the machinery of law to enable the3ritish government to deal effectively with the revolutionary activities. In the light of theserecommendations the Government of India draftedtwo bills 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 to giveauthority 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 billsThe bills 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 his campaign against the bills. He said that the proposed powers were out of allproportion to the danger, particularly when the Viceroy possessed emergency powers oflegislation by ordi- nance. He also stated that they were instruments of distrust andrepression,' nullifying the proposed reforms. Moreover, he opposed not just the content ofthe bills, but also the manner in which they were foisted in the country without regard topublic opinion. He formed a Satyagraha Sabha on 24thFebruary 1919 in Bombay toprotest against the Rowlatt Bills. Its members signed a pledge to proclaim theirdetermination "to refuse civilly to obey these laws (i.e., the Rowlatt 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 to life, person orproperty." While launching the Satyagraha agitation against the Rowlatt bills Gandhi said:"It is my firm belief that we shall obtain salvation only through suffering and not byreforms 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 passed one of the bills, though all the non-official members voted against it. TheViceroy gave assent to the 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 reason for opposing the Satyagraha was that it would hamperthe Reforms. Some of them also felt that the ordinarycitizen would find it difficult tocivilly disobey the Act. Annie Besant also condemned the Satyagraha on the grounds thatthere was nothing in the Act to resist civilly, and that to break laws at the dictate of otherswas ' exceedingly dangerous. But theyounger and radical elements of Annie Besant'sHome Rule League supported Gandhi: They formed the main

10 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II cadre of Satyagrahamovement in different parts of the country. In organizing this Satya- graha, Gandhi wasalso assisted by certain Pan-Islamic Leaders,particularlyAbdul Bariof Firangi 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 the Rowlatt Act. The date for the'hartal'was fixed for 30th March but it waschanged to April 6th. The success of hartal varied considerably between regions andbetween towns and the countryside. In a hartal was observed on 30th March and tenpeople were killed in police firing. Almost in all major towns of the country, the hartalwas observed on the 6th April and the people responded enthusiastically. Gandhidescribed the hartaI a 'magnificent success. Gandhi intensified the agitation on 7th Aprilby advising the satyagrahis to disobey the laws dealing with prohibited literature and theregistration of newspapers. These particular laws were se- lected because disobedience waspossible for an individual without leading to violence. Four books including Hind Swarajof Gandhi, which wereprohibited by Bombay Government in 1910 were chosen 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 was removed from the train in which he was travelling at Palwal near Delhi andwas taken back to Bombay. The news of Gandhi's arrest precipitated the crisis. Thesituation became tense 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 of violence. In Amritsar, the news of Gandhi's arrest coincided with the arrest oftwo local leaders 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. The civil authority lost its control of the city. On 13th April, General Dyerordered his troops to fire on a peaceful unarmed crowd assembled at Jallianwala Bagh.Most of the people were not aware of the ban on meetings, and they were shot without theslightest warning by General Dyer who later on said that it was no longer a question ofmerely dispersing the crowd, but one of 'producing a moral effect.

TheJallianwala Bagh

TheJallianwala Baghmassacre, also known as theAmritsarmassacre, was a seminalevent in the 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.Saifuddin KitchlewandMahatma Gandhi, despite acurfewwhich had been recentlydeclared.On the orders ofBrigadier-General Reginald Dyer, the army fired on the crowdfor ten minutes, directing their bullets 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. Other sources 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

11 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 Sikh festival, 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 the ammunition supply was almost exhausted; Dyer stated that 1,650rounds had been fired, a number which seems to have been derived by counting emptycartridge cases picked up by the troops.OfficialBritish Indiansources gave a figure of379 identified dead,with approximately 1,100 wounded. The casualty number estimatedby the Indian National Congress was more than 1,500, with approximately 1,000 dead.Dyer was initially lauded by conservative forces in the empire, 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 Dyer twice.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 for crowdcontrol.Some historians consider the episode as a decisive step towards the end of Britishrule in India, although others believe that greater self-government was inevitable as aresult of India's involvement inWorld War I.

Montague-Chelmsford Reforms, 1919

TheMontagu–Chelmsford Reformsor more briefly known as Mont-Ford Reformswere reforms introduced by theBritish Government in Indiato introduce self-governinginstitutions gradually to India. The reforms take their name fromEdwin Samuel Montagu,theSecretary of State for Indiaduring the latter parts of World War I andLordChelmsford, Viceroy of India be- tween 1916 and 1921. The reforms were outlined in theMontagu-Chelmsford Report prepared in 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 wentbefore Cabinet 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 at that time. The franchise was extended, and increased authority wasgiven to central and provincial legislative councils, but the viceroy remained responsibleonly to .

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–wereplaced under ministers who were individually responsible to the legislature.The departments that made up the "steel frame" of British rule–finance, revenue, andhome affairs–were retained by executive councillors who were nominated by theGovernor. They were often, but not always, British and who were responsible to thegovernor.

12 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 corporationswere made 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 to promulgate 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.There would 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 .The movement took place from September 1920 until February 1922.In the fight againstinjustice, Gandhi`s weapons were non-cooperation and peaceful resistance. But after themassacre and related violence, Gandhi focused his mind upon obtaining complete self-government. This soon trans- formed into Swaraj or complete political independence. Thus,under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi, 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, which meant the rejection of foreign-made goods.Mahatma Gandhi addressed all the Indians to wear (homespun cloth) instead ofBritish-made textiles. He strongly appealed to all Indians to 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 Rabindranath Tagore 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 clash inChauri Chaura, . Following this, Mahatma Gandhi was also arrested andsen- tenced to 6 years imprisonment. Indian National Congress was divided into twosegments.

13 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 by Mahatma 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 movement took 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 Law in 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 justice and fair-play of the BritishGovernment, but after this incidences he felt that Non-cooperation with the Governmentin a non-violent way must be started. In the meantime the Muslims in India also revoltedagainst the harsh terms of the Treaty of Severs between Allies and Turkey and they startedKhilafat 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 hadgiven a notice to the Viceroy in his letter of 22nd Junein which he had affirmed the rightrecognized `from time 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 the Calcutta Session onSeptember, 1920 the program of themovement was stated. The programs of 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 other functions, withdrawing children fromgovernment schools and colleges and establishment of na- tional schools and colleges. Thepeople of India were instructed to boycott the British courts and establish the privatejudicial courts. The Indians should use Swadeshi cloth and boycott the foreign clothes andother things. Gandhiji strictly advised the Non-Cooperators to observe truth 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 of theparty organization. Any adult man or woman could take Congress membership for 4 annasas subscription. 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 Indiansin hundreds of meetings. In the first month of the movement, about nine thousand studentsleft schools and colleges andjoined the national institutions. During this period abouteight hun- dred national institutions were established all over the country. The educationalboycott was most successful in Bengal under the leadership of Chitta Ranjan Das andSubhas Chandra Bose.In Punjab also the educational boycott was extensive under theleadership of . The other 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,, CR Das, Mr Jayakar, V Patel, Khan, S Kitchlew and many othersgave up their lucrative practices and many followed their path inspired by their sacrifice.Bengal again led in this matter and Andhra, UP, Karnataka and Punjab followed the state.However the most successful item of the Non-Cooperation was the boycott of foreignclothes. It took such an extensive form that value of import of the foreign clothes reducedfrom hundred and two crores in 1920-21 to fifty-seven crores in 1921-22. Although someof the veteran political leaders like the Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal,Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Annie Besant opposed Gandhiji`s plan but the younger generationsup- ported him fully. Muslim leaders like Maulana Azad, , HakimAjmal Khan,

14 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II , Maulana Mohammad Ali and Maulana Shaukat Ali alsosupported him. In the month of July 1921, the Government had to face a new challenge.Mohammad Ali andother leaders believed that it was `religiously unlawful for theMuslims to continue in the British army` and they were arrested for their view. Gandhiand other Congress leaders supported Muhammad Ali and issued a manifesto. The nextdramatic event was visit of Prince of Wales on 17th November, 1921. The day on whichPrince boarded on Bombay Port the day was observed as a `Hartal Divas` all over India.The Prince was greeted with empty streets and closed shops wherever he went. The Non-Cooperators gainedmore and more energy at their success and became 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 and apeasant 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 as a part of Non-Cooperation movement. The Non-Cooperation movementparticularlystrength- ened in Bengal. The movement was not only seen in but italso agitated the rural Bengal and an elemental awakening was observed. The movementreached a climax after the Gurkha assault on coolies on the river port of Chandpur (20-21st May).The whole Eastern Bengal was under the lash of the movement under theleadership of JM Sengupta. The other example was the Anti-Union Board agitation inMidnapur led by Birendranath Sashmal. As the Non-Cooperation movement proceededthe woman of India, especially from Bengal 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 and circularized the spirit of Non-Cooperation. Women volunteers were enlisted to take part in the movement.The ladiesfrom many respected families led them.CR Das`s wife and sister UrmilaDevi, JM Sengupta`s wife , Mohini Devi, Labanya Prabha Chanda 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 thirty thousand 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. The conditions were like that it offered sacrifice of Khilafat leaders,which Gandhiji could never accept. At that time Gandhiji was also under a pressure fromthe higher leaders of Congress to start the mass civil disobedience. Gandhiji gave anultimatum to the Government but the British 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 the tragedy of Chauri Chaura occurred thatchange the course of the movement, where a mob of three thousand people killed twenty-five policemen and one nspector. Gandhi was in support of complete nonviolence and thisincident was too much for him to bear. He ordered to suspend the movement at once.Thus, on February 12th, 1922 the Non-Cooperation movement totally stopped. 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 the February1922 was only temporary. The movement slowed down gradually. The part of Battle wasover butthe war continued

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

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, was naturally with Turkey. After the war with defeat of Turkey, the Alliedpowers removed the Khalifa from power in Turkey which aggrieved the Indian Muslimsagainst the British Gov- ernment. Hence the Muslims started the Khilafat movement inIndia for the resumption of Khalifa's position. A Khilafat Committee was formed undertheleadership of Mahammad Ali, Shaukat Ali, Maulana Azad and Hasrat Mohini toorganise a country-wide agitation. The main object of Khilafat Movement was to force theBritish Government to change its attitude towards Turkey 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 Conference was held at Delhi onNovember 23, 1919 with Gandhi as its president. The Conference resolved to withdraw 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-Cooperation towards 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 a Constitution for India, included members of the British Parliament only.As a result, the Commission was boycotted by every section of the Indian social andpolitical platforms as an `All-White Commission`. The opposition to the SimonCommission in Bengal was noteworthy. In disapproval against the Commission, a `Hartal`or Strike was observed on 3rd of February, 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 of March, 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 on 5th of May, 1930, just daysbefore his projected raid on the Dharasana Salt Works. The Dandi March 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 Second Round TableConference with Viceroy Lord Irwin. The crusade had a significant effect on changingBritish attitudestoward Indian independence and caused huge numbers of Indians toaggressively join the fight for the first time. The to Dandi and the flogging ofhun- dreds of non-violent protesters in Dharasana, marked the efficient use of civildisobedience asa method for fighting social and political injustice. On 8th of April 1929,members of the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association attacked the assemblychamber of the Imperial Leg- islative Council in Delhi. In response, Lord Irwin published aPublic Safety Bill. Moreover, on

16 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 31st of October, Lord Irwin announced that the naturalconstitutional progress of India was the attainment of Dominion Status. The CongressParty indicated its willingness to cooperate in formulating a Dominion constitution. InNovember, measures were accepted in such a way that Congress rejected the declaration.On 23rd of December, Lord Irwin met with Mahatma Gandhi, , SardarVallabhbhai Patel, Mohammad Ali Jinnah and 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 Party held at Lahore, theCongress declared itself for independence rather than Dominion Status and authorized acampaign ofCivil Disobedience. Gandhi`s Civil Disobedience Movement came out as amarch to Dandi, in objection to the tax on salt. Gandhi reached Dandi on April 6th, andexplicitly violated the salt law. On 18th of April, around one hundred revo- lutionariesattackedpolice and railway armories at . Mahatma Gandhi condemned the raid,which had made a deep impression throughout India. On 5th of May, the Government ofIndia had Gandhi arrested and lodged at Yervada Jail near Pune. Following the arrest ofMahatma Gandhi, the British faced the full programme of Civil Disobedience ascomposed of Indian raids on salt depots, refusal to pay taxes in chosen areas, spirits andavoidance of business with all British firms, disobedience of forest laws and boycott offoreign cloth. On 30th 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 Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru by two Indian Liberals, Sir TejBahadur Sapru and Mukund Ramrao Jayakar, 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 of illegality 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 the civil disobedience movement.In the agreement reached on 5th of March, Gandhi agreed 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 goods and 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 to make his own salt. Gandhi broke the Salt law at the sea beach at Dandi. Thismovement stimulated the entire nation and it came to be known as Civil DisobedienceMovement.On 8th 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 the wider Civil DisobedienceMovement. This was the most significantorganised challenge to Brit- ish authority since theNon-cooperation movementof 1920–22,and directly followed thePurna Swarajdeclaration of independence by theIndianNational Congresson 26 January 1930.Mohandas Karamchand Gandhiled the Dandimarch from his base,-

17 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II nearAhmedabad, to the coastal village of Dandi,located at a small town calledNavsari, in the state ofGujarat. As he continued on this 24-day, 240-mile (390km) march toDandito produce salt without 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 significant effect on changingworld and British attitude towards Indian independenceand caused large numbers 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 Congress Party 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 at Dharasana. The DandiMarch and the ensuingDharasana Satyagrahadrew worldwide attention to 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 result in 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 chose satyagraha 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 first target of satyagraha. The Salt March to Dandi, and the beatingby British police of hundreds of nonviolent protesters in Dharasana, which receivedworldwide news coverage, demonstrated the 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 influence on American activistsMartin LutherKing, Jr., and others duringthe movementfor civil 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 Madan Mohan Malviya and some Hindu leaders and Dr BR Ambedkar and some Dalitleaders to break the 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 British IndiaThere shall be seats reserved for the Depressed Classes out of general electorate. Seats inthe Provincial Legislatures.Election to these seats shall be by joint electorates subject, however, to the followingprocedure–All members of the Depressed Classes registered in the general electoral roll of aconstituency will form an electoral college which will elect a panel of four candidatesbelonging to the Depressed Classes for each of such reserved seats by the method of thesingle vote and four persons getting the highest number of votes in such primary electionsshall be the candidates for election by the general electorate. The representation of theDepressed 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.

18 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 as herein-before mentioned shall come to an end after the first tenyears, unless terminated sooner by mutual agreement under the provision of clause 6below.

The system of representation of Depressed Classes by reserved seats in the Provincial andCentral Legislatures 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 theLothian CommitteeReport.

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 Classes in these respects, subject to such educational qualifications as may belaid down for appointment to the 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 War II in 1939. On August 8, 1942 Gandhi gave the call for Quit India Movementor Bharat Chhodo Andolan. Soon after the arrest of Gandhi, disorders broke outimmediately throughout the country and many violent demonstrations took place. QuitIndia became the most powerful movement 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 to maintain 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 Working Committee were arrested inMumbai. In view of his deteriorating health, he was released from the jail in May 1944because the British did not want him to die in prison and en- rage the nation. The cruelrestraint of the brought order to India by the end of 1943 althoughthe movement had modest success in its aim. After the British gave clear signs oftransferring power to the Indians, Gandhi called off the fight and all the prisoners 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 8 August at theGowaliar TankMaidanin Mumbai in 1942 The British were prepared to act. Almost theentireINCleadership, and not just at the national level, was imprisoned without trialwithin hours afterGandhi's speech. Most spent the rest of the war in prison and out ofcontact with the masses. The British had the support of theViceroy's Council(which had amajority of Indians), of the Muslims, theCommunist Party, the princely states, theIndianimperial PolicetheBritish Indian armyand theIndian Civil Service. Many Indianbusinessmen were

19 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II profiting from heavywartime spending and did not support Quit India.Many students paid more attention toSubhas Chandra Bose, who was in exile andsupporting the Axis. The only outside support came from the Americans, asPresidentFranklin D. Rooseveltpressured Prime 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 afterthe war ends. Sporadic small-scale violence took place around the country but the Britisharrested tens of thousands ofleaders, keeping them imprisoned until 1945. In terms ofimmediate objec- tives Quit India failed because of heavy-handed suppression, weakcoordination and the lack of a clear-cut programme of action. However, the Britishgovernment realized that India wasungovernable in the long run, and the question forpost-war became how to exit gracefully and 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 party to the war for being a constituent component of the British Empire. Followingthis declaration, the Congress 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 stated thatIndia could not associate herself with war unless it wasconsulted first. Responding to this declaration, the Viceroy issued a statement on 17October wherein he claimed that Britain is waging a war driven by the motif to strengthenpeace in the world. Healso stated that after the war, the government would initiatemodifications in the Act of 1935, in accordance to the desires of the Indians.

Gandhi's reaction to this statement was; "the old policy of divide and rule is to continue.The Congress has askedfor bread and it has got stone." According to the instructionsissued by High Command, the Congress ministers were directed to resign immediately.Congress min- isters from eight provinces resigned following the instructions. Theresignation of the ministerswas 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'. Gandhi urged 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 of the country wanted a separate homeland,Pakistan

In the meanwhile, crucial political events took place in England. Chamberlain wassucceeded by Churchill as the Prime Minister and the Conservatives, who assumed powerin England, did not have a sympathetic stance towards the claims made by the Congress.In order to pacify the Indi-

20 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 statement that 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 thedemands made by the Congress, Gandhi at the meeting of the Congress WorkingCommittee in Wardha revealed his plan to launch Individual Civil Disobedience. Onceagain, the weapon of 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. , a follower of Gandhi, was selected by himto initiate the movement. Anti war speeches ricocheted in all corners of the country, withthe satyagrahis earnestly appealing to the people of the nation not to support theGovernment in its war endeavors. The consequence of 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 necessity for appraisingtheir program. Subsequently, the movement was withdrawn

The Cripps' Mission and its failure also played an important role in Gandhi's call for TheQuit India Movement. 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's war efforts. A Draft Declaration of the British Government waspresented, which included terms like establishment of Dominion, establishment of aConstituent Assembly and right of the Provinces 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 a promise that was to be fulfilled in theSchool of Distance EducationIndianNationalMovementGan- dhianPhase (1917-1947)Page27future. Commenting on this Gandhi said; "It is a post dated cheque on a crashing bank."Other factors that contributed were the threat of Japanese invasion of India 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 be adopted 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 as to 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 ample precaution are takento safeguard life. Mashruwala maintained that "Gandhiji and the Congress have not 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-restraint willnever 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 by strikes and other non-violent means. Satyagrahis must go out to die not tolive. They must seek 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 stressed on non-violence: Let every non-violent soldier of freedom writeout the slogan 'do or die' on a

21 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 to non-violence. The news of his arrest alongwith other Congress leaders led to unprecedented popular 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 who launched the Movement.Since all the recognized leaders-central, provincial or local-had been arrested, the youngand more militant cadres-particularly students with socialist leanings took over as 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 people toviolence. The Gandhian message of non-violent struggle was pushed into the backgroundand people 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 the telegraph 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. In many areas, the government lost all control and thepeople established Swaraj. We cite a few such cases: In Maharashtra, a parallelgovernment was established in Satara which continued tofunction for a long time. In Bengal, Tamluk Jatiya Sarkar functioned for a long time inMidnapore district. This national government had various departments like Law andOrder, Health, Education, Agriculture, etc., along with a postal system of its own andarbitration courts. 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 unitedthrough all the trials and tribulations that followed. The British, already alarmed bytheadvance of the Japanese army to the India-Burma border, responded by imprisoningGandhi. All the members of the Party's Working Committee (national leadership) wereimprisoned as well. Due to the arrest of major leaders, a young and till then relativelyunknownAruna Asaf Alipresided over the AICC session on 9 August and hoisted theflag; later the Congress party was banned. These actions only created sympathy for thecause among thepopulation. Despite lack of direct leadership, large protests anddemonstrations were held all over the country. Workers remained absentenmasseandstrikes were called. Not all demonstrations were 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,mass fines were levied and demonstrators were subjected to public flogging.[15]Hundredsof civilians were killed in violence many shot by the police army. Many national leaderswent underground and continued their struggle by broadcasting messages overclandestineradiostations, dis- tributing pamphlets and establishing parallel governments.The British sense of crisis was strong enough that a battleship was specifically set aside totake Gandhi and the Congress leaders out of India, 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 three years.Gandhi's wifeKasturbai Gandhiand his personal secretaryMahadev Desaidied in monthsand Gandhi's health was failing, despite this Gandhi went on a 21-day fast and maintainedhis resolve

22 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II to continuous resistance. Although the British released Gandhi on account ofhis health in 1944, 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, whileJinnah and the Muslim League, as well as Congress opponents likethe Communistssought to gain political 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 its roots. 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 and other writings were not consistent with truth andNon-violence or other fundamental and universal principle 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 of Harijans hefounded the “”. To abolish the disparities between caste Hindus anduntouchables was its main function. The Sangh is truly based on welfare of the societyGandhi experienced social discrimination for the first time when he was in South Africawhere he engaged himself against the discriminatory attitude of the South AfricanGovernment against Indians. The problems were akin to that of untouchability as migrantswere treated as inferior to the local population which enjoyed numerous basic rightslegally not available to Indians. It was 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 a cruel and inhuman institution. It violated human dignity.

He did not believe that the imperial ambitions of Britain were alone responsible for ourslavery but it was the negligence of our national duty which was primarily responsible forit. As he always thought untouchability an evil in , he had no hesitation inHinduism itself 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 asmountains and they make regular attempts to overcome them. He said to untouchables,“Never believe

23 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II that since others have the same faults we need not mind our own. Nomatter what others do, it is your dharma to overcome the feelings which you find inyourselves.” In the process of regeneration of the nation, Gandhi waged an incessant war.He said, “If we are children of the 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 theHindus voluntarily call themselves Sudras.

He criticized those who would claim superiority over fellowmen. He thought there was nosuch thing as inherited superiority. He was happy and felt satisfied to call himselfascavenger, a spinner, a weaver, and a laborer. He was troubled to see the appalling plightof untouchables in different regions of the country. Its eradication greatly agitated hismind and he devised ways 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 or more 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 wouldbecome worse under that Swaraj than they were before the freedom for the simple reasonthat the weakness and 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 from its roots. He felt that Hinduism, in reality, did not permit untouchability

The 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, a superior being. Gandhi felt that untouchability would not be removed bytheforce of even law. It could only be removed, when the majority of Hindus felt that it was acrime against God and man and were ashamed of it.

The aid of law had to be invoked when it came in the way of reform, i.e., opening of atemple. 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 deserve freedom, nor get it if they allowed their noble religion to bedisgraced by the retention of the taint of untouchability.

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

24 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II carrion-eating and intoxicating drinks and drugs, requirement of takingeducation themselves and 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 other leader.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 causeand he 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 of Hindu ideas of hierarchy, and purity and pollution. Now, as he traveledwidely, he saw in harsh 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 divine authority. The word ―untouchable of course, refers to the aspect of Hinduismknown as ―pollutionǁ. Coming into physical contact with untouchables, who numberedbetween 40 and 60 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 the other abolitionists was the method used to reach thisgoal. For Gandhi, religionwas at the core of the untouchability problem. It was Hinduism that had createduntouchability, it was the Hindus that had acted upon these divisions within society, and itwas therefore the Hindus that had to remove the taint onHinduism. To provide theuntouchables with a more positive connotation, Gandhi gave the group a new name,namelyHarijanmeaning ―Children of God, in an attempt to make caste Hindus see thatthey were all equal under God.

Apart from giving the untouchables a new name, Gandhi also published severaltexts in which 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 to classify 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.63 Gandhi‘s belief was that the first criterion did not apply toIndians in the 1930s, since there was no evidence of untouchables ever having been directresults of mixed marriages between higher and 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. ―Untouchability by birth cannot exist today inconnection with a class. In connection with individuals, it is practically impossible ofdetection. According to Gandhi‘s interpretation, no person who fol- lowed the rules ofcleanliness in Hinduism was an ―untouchable.

25 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 created and practiced, Gandhi wanted to incorporate untouchables inthe servant orShudracaste. Un- touchables themselves would have to be uplifted by cleancaste-Hindus, who would have a change of 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 posses learning nor do we possessdivine knowledge. Therefore it would be untruthful to regard ourselves as Brahmins. Thisview was contrary to centuries of practice and shows that Gandhi used rhetoric thatcontained familiar terms but, especially in the case ofvarna, had an inherent differentmeaning. Although Gandhi gained support for the eradication of untouchability throughhis 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 whoseextent can 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 inNovember 1933 he had, together with his organisation theHarijan Sevak Sangh,alreadymade people in large parts of the subcontinent aware through the temple-entry campaignof the activity mobilised on behalf of untouchables. During the temple-entry campaignGandhi had spent most of the time in gaol, fromwhere he mobilised and instructed hisfollowers and the literate public through his newspaperHarijan. The travelling campaignagainst untouchability, however, was remarkably different. In addition to spreading hisideas through the newspaper Gandhi and asmall entourage visited cities and villages indifferent parts of India. Over a period of nine months, 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 only want 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.The ultimate goal of the campaign, therefore, was to riduntouchables of obstacles standing in their way of becoming equals.

Gandhi‘s intention with the travellingcampaign was also to incorporate India bothterritorially and socially. This was accomplished in two ways: first, personally travellingaround India would 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 locally and 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

26 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II to remove untouchability. Second, there were supporters in theHarijan SevakSanghand other groups of volunteers who travelled to villages around India independentfrom Gandhi and his travelling route–but dependent on instructions given through theorganisation and theHari- jan.Gandhi‘s travelling campaign against untouchability, acampaign that was mainly carried out 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 upon them. 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 done in an effort to make the campaignexplicable and also to avoid repetitiveness as Gandhi had a 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 the leastto the earthquake in Bihar in January of 1934. In the beginningof the campaign emphasis was put 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 [in Raipur 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‘s appearance 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 localHarijan Sevak Sanghto open temples. Defending himselffrom the accusations, Gandhi insisted that ―I will not be guilty of being party to theopening of a single temple under coercion. But I do 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 was that ―wherever I have gone and opened temples to Harijans, I have doneso in the presence of thousands of caste Hindus and with their consent: the thousands ofcaste Hindus who were most concerned about the temple said, We̳ want the temples to beopened.‘ Gandhi therefore in- sisted that ordinary caste-Hindus were ready to recognizeuntouchables as equals, helped by the campaign and his efforts. His statements togetherwith the information provided shows that 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 had an 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.

27 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II Having limited respect–it would seem–for diversity in Hindu worship, Gandhi treatedtemples as though they were uniform. Upon entering the state of Mysore, Gandhi and hisfollowers visited Sirsi, where local temples had been opened to the untouchables. Incontrast to other places in India, Gandhi did justnotwant temple-entry in Sirsi and insteaddemanded change. In the form of worship, Gandhi‘s criterion for temple-entry was thateveryone should adhere to the rules of spiritual cleanliness, including becoming vegetarianand avoiding impure elements. In Sirsi, however, temple-worship included animalsacrifice. This meant that untouchables would be involved 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 and self-denial. He therefore,hoped that the trustees of the temple would take a strong line and put an end to the evilpractice in question. Gandhi wanted the temples to followthe same principles 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 opposed him varied, but often it was by demonstrating or physically trying to hinderGandhi from reaching his 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 the entry 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 Hindu society.

The clash between Gandhi and his reformers andsanatanistswas much discussed both inmeetings held by Gandhi and in letters between Gandhi,sanatanistsand troubledreformers. A letter from Bengal 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 the situation as being threefold, which is also theimpression of thereader ofMahatma Gandhi Complete Works: On the one hand there wasGandhi and his reformers wanting temple-entry and making it a priority equal or evensuperior to improving the economic and educational situation of unotuchables, all done inan attempt toreform Hinduism. On the other hand, there were thesanatanistsand otherorthodox Hindus who did everything in their power to prevent the destruction ofHinduism by prohibiting untouchables from entering temples. In the middle 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 thatsanataniststhere did 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 liberalsanatanistswho wanted the temple-entry issue to be dropped so thatresources could be gathered for promoting the ―material, moral, educational and spiritualwelfare of Harijans in consonance with the tradition of Hindu religion, so that the Harijansmay become the equals ofsavarnasin every respect and there 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 of February 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

28 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II separate facilities for untouchables due to his conviction that separation wouldnotlead to acceptance 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 temples would 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 on the 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 though untouchables would gain access totemples, separate temples would decrease opposition and thereby 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 article inThe Hinduwhere he juxtaposed temple-entry with economic uplift.There he wrote of the protests 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-entry question 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 protesters were now a minority and wouldhave to comply with the majority.

As mentioned in the introduction, India in the early 1930s was facing severe economicalproblems due to the Depression and a lack of rainfall. Economic uplift, therefore, mayhave seemed like 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 earthquake in Bihar in January of 1934, which affected thousand of Indiansand made the need for economic uplift paramount.

Untouchables

Economic reform in the villages in the form ofkhadiwas one of the aspects of thecampaign where untouchables could help themselves advance economically, according toGandhi. In February of 1934 Gandhi gave instructions on how to implement the spinningand use ofkhadi.First, the knowledge 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 that the 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 therefore the poor who needed the profits the most.

According to Gandhi, one example of the introduction of the spinning wheel andkhadican be 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-

29 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II ers how to spin and weave, selling the surplus of their labour to neighbouringvillages and at the same time making their village self-sufficient. The spinning ofkhadialso bettered the lives 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 as spinning became more popular. The cottage industry alsospread to seventeen neighbouring villages 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 the early 1920s Gandhi had startedschools for the spinning ofkhadiin Bihar. While Gandhi and his supporters were in Biharthe school was a success, but when they departed and the campaign faded 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 inthe process of creating cloth made of hand-spun cotton.At the same time the reformershad to persuade 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 inIndian villages, it was theSanghand reform workersconnected to Gandhi–who wasthemselves not untouchables–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 the temple-entry campaign, Gandhi believed that caste-Hindus had to haveleadingpositions in theSanghas 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 committee be appointed to assist theSangh. Then, at least, untouchables could help the campaign directly. 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, he did have a solution: ―What you have to do is to enable and help them todischarge their obligations; that is to say, you can tell themhow they can discharge theirobligation, you can tell them what in your opinion will satisfy the great body of Harijans.He did not want the untouchables to participate in the organization, but rather to inspire it.To Gandhi it did not make any sense thatuntouchables 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 had to initiate a down payment andthe creditors‘responsibility to overlook the transactions. Based on his discussion inRajahmundy, Gandhi later in the campaign proposed that instead of having 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-

30 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 the local untouchables to the fact that they were equal to caste-Hindus and had theright to the same privileges 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 same time 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 schools would separate untouchables from caste-Hindus even more than earlier oreven enhance the differences between them. Gandhi, on the other hand, had witnesseduntouchables in different parts 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 to keep you segregated that the schools are beingopened and wells are being dug for you. All this is being donebecause I cannot bear tosee you get no water at all. Separate wells and schools 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 as provocative as uniting untouchables with caste Hindus in these facilities. Theinitiative could also result in greater support for Gandhi and the campaign due to the factthat the solution didnot provoke as many people as the alternative and new facilities werebeing built. During the campaign Gandhi faced critiques from untouchables that they didnot want his help or follow what they called the ―Gandhian creed, meaning thecampaign with Gandhi‘s initiatives in the villages combined 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 in agreement with the campaign.Even though the scope of the investigation is not known, it did show that untouchablescould be skeptical to the campaign. As to the ―Gandhian creed, Gandhi himself did notbelieve that untouchables were against the goals of the campaign because his goals wereunivesally beneficial to all untouchables:

I am engaged in giving Harijans clean water. I am engaged in giving themfacilities for education. I am engaged in finding accommodation for them in publiccaravanserais where they cannot get it. I amengaged in weaning them from drink andcarrion. Do they not like all these? I am engaged in teaching them the elementary rules ofhygiene. Do they not want it? I am 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 based on the fact he perceived untouchables as overjoyed by the improvements whileon tour–the

31 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II emphasis was on caste-Hindus to reform, not onthe untouchables toapprove. Approval would come naturally when the caste-Hindus had changed at heart.

The information provided shows that although Gandhi emphasized the participation ofcaste Hindus in the leadership of his organization in the campaign,he did adapt somewhatto demands of untouchables when offering them advisory positions to theSangh.Theinformation also shows 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 Gandhi used traditional Hindu rhetoric as basis for his initiative is notcompletely clear. What is clear, however, is that there was opposition to Gandhi and hiscampaign, namely opposition based on objections as to whyonly caste-Hindus were toinitiate reform in villages and why religion 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 Hinduism as 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 until death with the intent of opening a temple in Guruvayur in Kerala foruntouchables. This fast 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 for untouchables. Both Indian and international press coveredGandhi‘s 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,Gandhi was convincedthat other problems within the Indian society, includingeconomical, politi- cal and social problems, would solve themselves. For Gandhi, the fastwas a small sacrifice that provided a shift in focus in India from civil disobedience topromoting the situation of the untouchables, 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 common political centre, namely Gandhi and the IndianNational Congress,in an attempt to extradite itself 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 indefense of Indian Muslims in theKhilafat-movement and his subsequent campaigns in theearly 1920s and 1930s all had elements connected to the Hindu religion: Gandhi usedfasting as a means to get attention for acause. He believed fasting to be a way of showingcourage or to suffer pain without retaliation. Gandhi became an ascetic, which he thoughtwould enhance both bodily and spiritual power. As part of being an ascetic, Gandhipromoted and encouraged the ideaof renuncia-

32 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II tion,a life in celibacy and self-restraintconnected to Hindu revival movements and social reform movements.

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 and transmigration of the soul,karmaandmoksha, who tries to practicetruth and non-violence and acts according tovarnasharma, the division of society intodistinct groups with their own roles. He thereby 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 toIndians based 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 in their own religious life or even in other, more worldlymanners.‖46 The well-regarded and powerful denouncer is treated as a man in a highposition, ranking higher than Brahmins who 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 interested in receiving Gandhi‘sdarshanor blessings and thought of him as asaint first, not a politician or a social worker. Supported by this and the well-known factthat Gandhi had an ever-increasing number of followers, we can deduct that Gandhi wasimportant as a religious figure (as well as a politician 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, Gandhi referred to himself as a Hindu at thevery depths of his being. ButGandhi‘s conception of religion 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 temple was 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 no low. The caste Hindus would see that they had treated theuntouchables badly by excluding them and welcome them into a common religious arena;the temple. Gandhi first mentioned the idea of temple-entry in 1921. It was to be theconcrete representation of the abstract idea of abolishing untouchability. Gandhi‘s goalwas equality among Hindus, which would, in turn, take India one step closer toswaraj.

33 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II School of Distance EducationIndianNationalMovementGandhianPhase (1917-1947)Page42One way of achieving equality was taking steps that would enable untouchables tobecome equals. 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 time was 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‘s view, would not create religious equality or acceptance. What was acceptable,however, was restricted access inside the temple and restricted hours in which theuntouchables could enter. Interestingly, the compromise of separate temples foruntouchables was not as easily dismissed 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 where the 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 the untouchables and other poor in clean surroundings and without discrimination. Around the temple there would be a school, a dispensary, a library and aguesthouse–all under the administration of the temple.

Temple-entry

With the new year of 1933, Gandhi and his associates widened the scope of the campaign.There were now two goals for the campaign: the first was to open as many temples aspossible to Untouchables, and the second was convincing untouchables to conform to thecommon requisites of 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 be taken 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.Aprivate temple, on the other hand, was built by one person or group and therefore theowners could 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. If the owner did not want them to enter, a law could not force him todo so. With the public temples, a law 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 temples could 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 the pre-existing conditions. Since, as we have seen earlier, Gandhi believedthat there was no such thing as untouchability by birth, every Hindu could rid himself ofimpurity. Purity could be achieved by not consuming beef or carrion, to take dailyabsolutions and to wear clean clothes. Gandhi proclaimed that untouchables should acceptthe views of caste-Hindus and con- vince them of the right to temple-entry throughconformity and adaptation.

34 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II If you are polluted bymy presence or by my touch, I am quite prepared to consent to aseparate 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 have been 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 of students–to different towns and villages. This meant that the focus wasno longer only on the temples, 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 theprogress of the temple-entry campaign. Reports from supporters all over India wereflowing in telling of 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, there was a new bill presented to the legislative assembly of theMadras Presidency called the Madras Bill. It contained several of Gandhi‘s suggestions,such as organizing a referendum in every temple the untouchables wanted to enter,thereby letting the majority decide. Untouchability from 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 was described in the draft textas a ―social disability imposed by customǁ that had to be removed by 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 be added as a third goal. Gandhi believed that ―if the Bills are not passed, it isobvious that the central part of thereform will be hung up almost indefinitely. Meetingswere to be held all over the country urging the Government of India to provide allfacilities in their power for the consideration of the Bill and appealing to the members ofthe House not to obstruct it. Their appeal should be that the Bill did not interfere withanybody‘s private faith and that it would be liberating because it would provide Hinduconscience with ―complete freedom of action 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 that Gandhi and his followers believed alaw would help them and that there was political sympathy for the 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. In addition to the English, Hindi and Gujarati versions of the paper,arrangements were made to 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 was one 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 more information on the campaign inother corners of the subcontinent

35 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 daywith greater dedication, prayer and intensivework for the cause–arranged once everymonth or every six weeks. In places where work for the untouchables was not possible,the day should be 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 by money, 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 thatkhadiorIndian hand-spun and hand-woven cotton would solve many problems in villages. First,khadiwas Indian cotton and not imported as other kinds of cotton and it was thereforeavailable to a larger part of the Indian society. Second, spinning cloth and distributing itwould provide a second income that was needed in villages, where wages were low andvillagers could be without 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 would not 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 someone of a higher caste. In 1934 Gandhiexclaimed that his view ofkhadihad not changed since he had first 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 deepening distress ofthe untouchables.Khadihas been said by, among others, Brown to be Gandhi‘s attemptat an economic reform in India. Brown explains that in contrast to other leading figuressuch as Ambedkar, Gandhi wanted to avoid the organisation of labour and class struggleas seen in Europe. 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 mainreason for Gandhi‘s emphasis on spinning was that it was universally applicable in all ofIndia. This part of his 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 with the prospect of having an additional income, thespinning ofkhadilessened the gap between rich and poor in some areas. Gandhi believedthat the spinningkhadiprivately could give a small profit to a family or a village, butworking in mills provided only limited earnings for a limited number of workers. Theprofit in the cotton industry lay only in the hands of a handful 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 a family 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 person afford to buykhadiwhen it was more expensive than other clothes?Travedi‘s impression is

36 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II that Gandhi and his followers never really faced this criticism butrather focused on how to teach poor villagers how to spin their own clothes. In Gandhi‘sview, since the profit ofkhadiwent to the poor, 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 was that other countries exploited countries that were not industrialized. Indiatherefore had to develop industry in order to be independent and self-sufficient. Thepriority in Gandhi‘s economic vision was, according to Brown, the creation of a non-violent society. Such a society could only 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 values and opened up to exploitation anddependence. Although the economic vision for India dif- fered between Gandhi and othercongress politicians, the common goal was that both sides wanted an economically strongand independent India.

Even though khadi was one way of improving a family or a village economically, the historian Lisa Travedi 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 his followers never really faced this criticism butrather focused on how to teach poor villagers how to spin their own clothes. In Gandhi‘sview, since the profit ofkhadiwent to the poor, as opposed to mill cloth profit,khadiwasworth the expense.Brown reveals that many Congress politicians had a vision for India that differed from thatof Gandhi‘s. They wanted for India to ―hold its own as a modern, industrializednation.The thought was that other countries exploited countries that were not industrialized. Indiatherefore had to develop industry in order to be independent and self- sufficient. Thepriority in Gandhi‘s economic vision was, according to Brown, the creation of 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 meantthat the country moved away from traditional values and opened up to exploitation anddepend- ence. Although the economic vision for India differed between Gandhi and othercongress politicians, the common goal was that both sides wanted an economically strongand independent India.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 were under foreign control by the colonial power. Secondly,khadiprovidedan additional opportunity to an income or means to make one’s own clothes. Finally,khadicould be applied in all of India and 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 the campaigns of the 1920s.

Village India

37 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 onmaterial goods, and believed that traditional Indian society consisted of self-supportingvillages, a condition 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 present in much of his social and political programme.

In 1910, Gandhi wrote inHind Swarajthat The Indian village has for centuries remained abulwark against 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 which is 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 the world.Gandhi was inspired by utopians such as 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. Gandhicontinued spreading his view of village life and emphasized village reform in thetravelling campaign against untouchability. Thatdid not mean that Gandhi‘s reform wasexclusive to villages alone.

Gandhi differentiated between villages and towns or cities in his campaigning. While thecampaign in the cities was to concentrate on supplying funds for untouchables bycollecting moneyand subscriptions to theHarijanthrough meetings and house to housecanvassing, campaigning in the villages was more difficult. Gandhi‘s ultimate goal wasfor every Indian to be equal and share every service in the villages such as temples, wells,schoolsand clothes. Gandhi‘s supporters reported, however, that working in the villageswas difficult because they were outnumbered by resisting caste Hindus. A compromise hehad not accepted in the campaign for temple-entry was therefore made: there would beroom for the creation of separate temples, wells and schools for 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 it would be easierto compromise first and change the hearts of caste-Hindus later.

While Gandhi idealised village society, Coward explains that untouchables–withAmbedkar in the lead–saw villages as places where the social strata ofvarnas werethriving: untouchables were forced to live in separate quarters, often in the outskirts of avillage, so as not to pollute caste 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 accept it and obey. Untouchables have no rights orequality; they can only ask for mercy and be content 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 the subjects of tyranny andoppression. The village system would have to be reformed in order to protectuntouchables fromabuse.

38 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II According to this, Ambedkar did not view Gandhi‘s initiatives in the villages as reformbut as 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 separatevillage away from and independent of other castes. Second, the government shouldprovide land that could be cultivated by untouchables. This would enable untouchables toextract themselves from the close-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 marking out the Untouchable, the Untouchable has noescape from Untouchability. It is the village system which perpetuates Untouchability andthe Untouchables therefore demand that it should be broken and the Untouchables, whoare as a matter of fact socially separate should be made separately 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 Indiamust be 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 in the modern towns as in the villages, and Pauline Kolendaprovides examples that strengthen his 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 of purity 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 hecalledSatya Yuga(the age of truth) and what made it desirable. In 1919, he defined theage asthe time when ―men and women in India spontaneously and automatically spokeonly the truth. Women in 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 theSatya Yugaor the Golden Age. In 1925 Gandhi claimed that in thegolden age there were no semi-starved millions 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 in education. 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. The teacher was not only an educator but also a social worker: first,hygiene and sanitation had to be taught and implemented among the pupils. Second, thepupils were taught the alphabet and numbers. During the day, the pupils consisted of thechildren in the village. At night, adults of

39 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II both sexes attended school and were taughtmedical aid in addition to hygiene and reading. The teachers 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 untouchability 15years 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 education in India was British, not Indian: school books were importedand not adapted to the needs of Indian children, and especially not untouchable Indianchildren. Teachers should therefore adapt 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 meantthat the vocabulary was that which was relevant to them, words they used on a daily basis.Arithmetic was based on the daily need of the pupil, such as how to count earnings orhouses in the village, and the history was mostly current. The basic use of the subject wastaught first and then expanded. Local personalities and events were taught first, regionalsecond and then national history. Spinning and other physical labour was a means toteach pupils the advantages of learning 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‘s proposal for educational reform was put forward in seven provinces. Thedemand was first and foremost for compulsory free education for all children, emphasizing that all children were equal and therefore had equal rights. School were―tobe an integral part of its social and economic environment, and learning a realisticparticipation in the 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 vocationand aptitude 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 in whose making they have an effective voice; an India in which thereshall be no high class and low class of people; [and above all] an India in which allcommunities shall live in perfect harmony.”

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

40 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II According toRichard C. Lambert, “The word Community is used in India for theunequal social units. “It may be said that communalism is the negative aspect of thecommunity.That is 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 interestsof society, instigation on the basis of religious sentiments is the mainamong them,which can be 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 the modern 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 in the 19thCentury.Along with this, some peoplefrom a particular religious community were also involvedin this act, who keeping asidethe interests of entire Indian Society and filled with narrow-minded thoughts, joinedhands with the colonialists.They were also in favour of bargaining with thecolonialists for the benefit of their co-religionists.It was an easy task for them.Indiais a country of diversities, a land of different religious communities and sects.In sucha country, if the government protects the people of a particular community who areready to fulfil their own interests even by spreading communalism, what can bedifficult for them?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 “Ganesh Pooja” 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 was one who always thought and workedfor Indians, Indian nation and .The pro- grammes related to “GaneshPooja” and “Shivaji Mahotsav” was not initiated to support the interests ofHindus.However, both “Ganesh” and “Shivaji” were associated with the emotions of 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 pelted with stones.The quarrel ensued between those participatingin the procession and attackers, and finally 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.

41 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 already said, was committed to communal harmony.He was of the firm beliefthat if the followers of two 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 the progress of the country will be possible in realsense and the cultural heritage of India will be protected.

According to his firm belief, MahatmaGandhi entered in the “Yajna” of nationalfreedom along 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 made it 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 to perform his or her duty.Rather Ibelieve that it isahimsaalone that assists to enable us to fulfil our duties in the bestpossible manner.

But it was unfortunate that many people could not become identical with the firm andtrue message of 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 value supplementary to non-violence.He, time andagain, conveyed suggestions for peace brigade and for volunteers to work forharmony.These suggestions are more or less important even today for a country likeIndia.

The colonial state had promoted the communal ideology and patronised politics based onit as part of 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 active hostility of the state. The colonial state, which used brutalrepression to suppress non- violent civil disobedience, often turned a blind eye tocommunal violence. The situation changed with the intimations of independence. TheCongress could wield at least partial state power at the Centre when it joined the InterimGovernment in September 1946 with Jawaharlal Nehru 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 new challenge 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. In early October, violence erupted in Noakhali, a remote districtof East Bengal, witha majority Muslim population. The Muslim League Government ledby Suhrawardy in Bengal failing to take strong action, the situation deteriorated rapidly.

The Mahatma had, with unerring instinct, sensed that the battle for India’s soul would befought andwon not in the in the broad avenues of New Delhi but in the by-lanes andwinding paths 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 many had sacrificed their all seemed to be slipping out of reach at thevery moment of victory. Struggling to find an answer, Gandhiji embarked on what was tobe his most amazing, awe-inspiring heroic experiment with India’s civilisational truth.

42 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 rather than violence and hate had failed, he threw everything he had into the balance.“Do I represent thisahimsain my person? If I do, then deceit and hatred that poison theatmosphere should dissolve.” Elsewhere he said: “It is to demonstrate the efficacy of thatway I have come here. If Noakhali is lost, India is lost.” With hissmall band of devotedcomrades, he went into the villages of 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 the most revered leader of avast country in the throes of difficult negotiations, charting out its path to independencefrom a colonial power, could spend sucha long time almost out of reach 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 a small number ofpeople against an almost sullen, if not hostile majority allround”.4 He spent the first two weeks visiting the villages and towns in the affected areaand meeting large numbers of people. He then settled down in a village named Srirampurand spent the next 43 days there. He soon 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 was not enough, he followed it up withapadayatrain which he did not sleep for more than one night in any one village. Thesatyagrahi was trying, by his own suffering, to melt the heart of the opponent and win himover. He was also sharing, through the crucifixion of his flesh, the pain of the victims andexpressing the torture of his own soul. Thus, when broken glass and excreta were thrownin his path to dissuade him, his answer was to remove even his simple sandals and walkbarefoot. ‘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. Tothe women, 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 was on 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 would lead to ghettos, and defeat the whole purpose ofhis work. He was also not in favour ofcases against 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, religionfor him 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 sanctioned this 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 need to understand why, despite the brave and heroic deeds of Gandhiji and hisco-workers, success

43 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II was limited. Few Hindu refugees returned, the feeling of insecuritywas still there to a very great extent, Muslims were sullen, and their presence in the dailyprayer meetings conducted by Gandhiji 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 atthe best of times neutral, and was certainly not on his side. Providing a sense ofsecurity to Hindus when the state authorities including the police were guilty of connivingwith the perpetrators of the carnage was an almost impossible task. For the Muslims, too,perhaps the cost of listening to the voice of sanity and humanity was too high when it wasranged against the might of the state and of 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 the spread of the news regarding the Biharis killed in Calcutta in Augustand later on the Noakhali happenings. The observance of Noakhali Day on October 25acted as a trigger and soon the conflagration 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 bands of Hindu peasants. Nehru got the news inCalcutta where he had gone to take stock of the situation in 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 to 9, 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 canstrike at each other.” Nor did he hesitate when it came to the need to use force againstthose indulging 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 put inmotion 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 employ mighty 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 cannot control they must sacrifice their lives in the attempt.” Students were urged tosuspend their studies and “go round the rural areas for bringing the people back to theirsenses and restoring peace and sanity. Even if a few of you die in such an endeavor, it willbe worth it, and I shall personally congratulate you for such acts of sacrifice.”1 Peasantswere asked “to take a pledge, with arms up- raised, not to indulge in any mis-behaviour”.

44 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II By November 8, Nehru was writing: “the chances of any major incident or any large scalemilitary action are now very little. This is due to many reasons—Gandhiji’sannouncement that he might fast, the personal appeals and visits of a number of Congressleaders, the good work done by some very earnest Congress workers in the cities andvillages, and finally, the fear of the military.”

The Biharexample demonstrates that the winning combination was when the power of thestate and the ideological weapons were on the same side. Threats and actual use of forceagainst communal violence created the space in which appeals to peace and amity couldbe heard. Force stopped the people in their tracks and then they had the chance to pauseand think and give 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 in which 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 ofwarriors did succeed in carving out enough space to begin the process of dialogue. Theydemonstrated the possibility 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 forking stork'. 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 the movement of Swaraj involved primarily the process of releasing oneself fromall the bondages one is prey to both internal and external. It involves a movement of self-purification too. It is not the replacement 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 when abused". Swaraj, he used to say, is power of thepeople to determine their lot by their own efforts and 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 much deeper meaning. 'The wordSwaraj is a sacred word, a Vedic word, meaning selfrule and self-restraint and notfreedomfrom all restraint which 'independence' often means". He saw swaraj as freedomfor all plus self-control by all. It is related to the inner strength and capacity of a peoplewhich enable them to understand and control their social world: "The outward freedomthat we shall attain will only be in exact proportion to the inward freedom to which wemay have grown at a given moment. And if this is the correct view of freedom, our chiefenergy 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 takes possession 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 based Ahimsa, people need not know their rights, but itis necessary for them toknow their duties.

45 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II There, is no duty that does not create corresponding rights and thoserights alone are genuine rights, which flow from the performance of duty. Swaraj is thus abasic need of all. It recognises no race, religion, or community. "Nor is it the monopoly ofthe lettered persons Swaraj is to be for all, 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 the nation." Swaraj will necessarily beinclusive of the poor and the toiling masses. Therefore, he adds, "Let there be no mistakeas what means. .... It is full economic freedom for the toiling millions. It isno unholy alliance with any interest for their exploitation. Any alliance must mean theirdeliverance." (YoungIndia,16.4.193 1,p.77).In the same vein, Gandhiji made it verySchool 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 comes fromabove, 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 itmean equality, liberty or security, though important as they all are in a democratic polity.It is when the people are able to develop their inner freedom which is people's capacity toregulate and control their desires impulses in the light of reason that freedom rises fromthe individual and strengthens him. His Swaraj had economic, social, political andinternational connotations. Economic Swaraj, as he saysstands for social justice,it promotes the good of all equally including the weakest, and is indispensable for decentlife." Social Swaraj centres on "an equalization of status." Political Swaraj aims atenabling people to better their condition in every department of life." In the internationalfield, swaraj emphasised on interdependence. "There is", he says, "No limit to extendingour services to our neighbours across state-made frontiers. God never made thosefrontiers."

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

One obvious objection toHind Swarajcan be that the text was written over two decadesbefore the period with which this thesis is concerned–two decadesfilled with a plethoraof initiatives and campaigns against the colonial power where Gandhi‘s influence hadbegun as marginal in 1909, but become highly consequential in 1932. But the explanationis that even though parts ofHind Swarajmay only have beenrelevant in the immediatetemporal context of which it was written, the conditions for the fulfillment ofswarajremained unchanged and paramount to Gandhi. It is therefore essential to see how Gandhiused his vision ofHind Swarajin his campaigns beforethe period with which this thesis isconcerned.

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

46 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II highlighted differences between India and the colonial power. Gandhi‘s goal ofdistinguishing these differences was to show that India could evolve beyond the colonialpower: ―The tendency of the Indian 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 and not 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 had usedkhadior Indian hand-spun cotton to make cloth. Thecolonial power foundkhadiinadequate and implemented the use of machine-spun cotton,which was distributed to cotton mills. Raw cotton was then exported to England and laterimported back to India as a finished product so that Indians 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 the idea 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, in turn, 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 encouragedIndian women to spin, and several shops selling onlykhadicloth were opened in Bombay.The same year,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 Indian National 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 ofswadeshiand teach 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 considerableharm to the colonial power, his means of mobilizing Indians through propagatingkhadiaspart ofswade- shihelped gather more Indians around a common goal than previously: theparticipants were from awider range of Indian society and Indian-made cloth increased inpopularity.17 Although Gandhi did 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. It was this conviction Gandhi carried with him tothe temple-entry campaign and the travelling campaign 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

47 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 to the 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 and strategies. 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 developed and refined reflecting on major events of theirtime. Furthermore, in Tagore there was a quest of a poet for human perfection andcompleteness and not merely a pragmatic analysis of a particular problem or a situation,His expression was an eloquent appeal of his faithinthe human 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 on prejudices and hatredwere the stumbling blocks in the way of achieving the ultimate aim of a 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 Indian politicaltradition of assimilating the Western ideas with the Eastern ones, which began withRamMohan Roy, reached its culmination in Tagore.

Differences With Gandhi

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

Tagore, regarded India's basic problem to be social and not political, though likeGandhi, he was conscious of the acute differences and conflicts in the Indian society. Assuch society and not politics was his primary area of focus. He could perceive that thetriumph of science had united 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 convinced that it would popularize the struggle forindependencebut would be unproductive in the overall context 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 the days of agitation against Bengal partition of 1905. In thatmovement, initially Tagore took an, active part popularizingRaksha Bandhanandnationalistic songs. It was immediately during the 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 he could very clearly see thatthere was no concern ;bout the need for mass awareness and that the city-based middleclass were keen on protecting its own selfish interests. After

48 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II withdrawing from themovement he made serious attempts torebuild the village life within the Zamindarisystem, then prevailing system. This background is important for compre- hending hisbasic disagreements with Gandhi. Tagore's first written evidence about Gandhi'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 no waydid it represent India's moral superiority. He took note of the important changes that camewith the rise of Gandhi in Indianpolitics. He thought very highly of Gandhi's leadershipand could also see that the proposed non cooperation movement would engulf the wholecountry and would be much 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 not contain a philosophy for awakening thenation. Instead of following the path of truth, Gandhi attempted a shortcut by taking theeasy path. Subsequently he was perturbed by the fact that 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 mentality and 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, were medieval innature. None of these stipulations were dissected critically and were accepted as dog- mas.The Gandhian directives were followed mechanically and not rationally. Moreover theemphasis 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'sisolation preventing western knowledge and advancements from reaching India.Disagreeing with Gandhi, Tagore pointed out that it was not possible to estimate the exactmagnitude of idle time among 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 programmes like co-operative agriculture for that wouldeliminate the malaise of small unproductive holdings and fight poverty. He 'felt thatpopularizing a scientific concept like co-operative agriculturewould be Important thanany political action. He thought it was wrong of Gandhi to instruct Indian women to stopreading English and also opposed Gandhi's call for boycott of government schools.Though critical of the existing system he felt that in the absence of a better alternative itwould only result in perpetuating ignorance, superstitions and backwardness. In 1928Tagore 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, he lamented that a truekshatriyawas conspicuous by its absence in India.Similarly he dismissed Gandhi’s blame on untouchability as thecause of the Biharearthquake5thFebruary 1934, as unscientific, unreasonable and that it failed to explainthe fact as to why the poor and the lower castes suffered more than the privileged andupper castes. On 20thMay 1939 in a letter to the 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 the entire world, As a desiredalternative, Tagore pleaded for "universal humanity and gave a call for recognizing thevast dimensions of India in its world context" because "hence Forth any nation whichseeks isolation for itself must come into conflict with the time-spirit and

49 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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, nor aggressive, 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 and living one-ness of interest among India's myriads". Its purposewas to symbolize "sacrifice for the whole nation". To the charges of narrow provincialismand dangers of his kind of nationalism he pointed out: "I hope I am as great a believer infree air as the great poet. I do not want my house to be walled in on all sides and mywindows to be stuffed. I want the cultures of all the lands to be blown about my house asfreely as possible. But I refuse to be blown off my feet by any". Furthermore, Gandhi didnot regard his patriotism to be exclusive; "it is calculated not only to hurt any other nationbut to benefit all in the true sense of the word. India's freedom as conceived by me cannever be a menace to the world" Tagore too shared the same attitude toward 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 Bengal in1905. 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’s articleTheCallof Truthand Gandhi's reply in his weeklyYoung Indiawhich hecalled 'The Great Sentinel' made wonderful reading. They represent two aspects of thetruth, neither of which could 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 the masses, He criticized Gandhi whenever he felt that theMahatma was deviating from these planks. He not only criticized but also provided analternative perception to that of Gandhi. He acknowledges his greatness and lauded hisrole in fighting casteism, untouchability and communalism but was equally forthright inpointing out the limitations of the Gandhian schemes. For instance he criticizedMahatma's basic education scheme of 1937 popularly known as theWardhaScheme ontwo grounds. First, he questioned the desirability of the prece- dence of material utility overdevelopment of personality. Second, the scheme of a special type of education for therural poor would limit the choice of their vocation and that it is unfortunate 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 of many ofIndia's socialand economic afflictions and desired lively and enjoyable schools. Tagore had the courageof conviction to point out the in-adequacies of Mahatma's vision. Since some of hiscriticisms are well founded, it is time to work out a synthesis with the experience of lastfive decades particularly in the major areas of our shortcomings like rural reconstruction,education and provide 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 centrally concerned with issues of freedom, human equality, democracy and socio-political emancipa- tion. He is a unique thinker of the world who himself suffered muchhumiliation, poverty and 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 national movement 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

50 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II major studies on the economy, social structuresand institutions, law and constitutionalism, history and religion with in a methodologicalvigor and reflexivity. He was the Chairman of the Drafting Committee of the IndianConstitution and defended its key provisions with scholarly precision and sustainedarguments without losing sight of the ideals it upheld while, at the same time; holdingfirmly to the ground. He embraced Buddhism, recasting it to respond to modern andsocially emancipator urges, with hundreds of thousands of his followers 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 Drafting Committee and defending it in the marathon debates of theConstituent Assembly, he wrote several 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 they became Untouchables?(1948) ,States and Minorities(1947),Thoughts on Linguistic states(1955) and hismagnum opusThe Buddha and his Dharma(1957) are the most important. Apart fromthem 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,economic ideas, 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 the case 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 and exploitation, social institutions and religiousorthodoxies and fears and prejudices. He thoughtthat liberalism upheld a narrowconception of freedom which tolerated huge accumulation of 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 that liberal systemsconceal deep inequalities of minorities such as the conditions of the Blacks inU.S.A.andJews in Europe. He further argued that liberalism was often drawn to justified colonialexploitation 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 thatexploitative and dominant structures bred. He found that liberalism has an inadequateunderstanding of state and the measures that state has to necessarily adopt to promote andfoster good life. He felt that the principle of equality before law is truly a great advance ascompared to the in egalitarian orders that it attempted to supplant but it is not adequate.He advanced stronger notions such as equality of Consideration, quality of respect andequality of dignity, He was sensitive to the notion of respect and the notion of communitywas central in his consideration. Ambedkar identified certain crucial areas on which hewas in tune with Marxism. He argued that the task of philosophyis to transform the world,as Marx suggested in his Theses on Feuerbach, and he saw the central message of theBuddha as demanding the same, There is conflict between

51 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 everyone to 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; the economicinterpretation of history which does not acknowledge the crucial role that political andideological 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 theyare 1aunched.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 thedominant ideological 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 graded inequality in organizing social institutions and relations; defended theprinciple of birth over the principle of worth; undermined reason and upheld rituals andpriest-craft. It reduced the shudra 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 over manual 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 above mineable 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 a spirit of communityand strive towards shared endeavours. It took away from associated life its 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 for the 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 to occupy the lowest rung of society as a layer of theshudras. He saw Gandhi not merely caving in to Hindu orthodoxy but reformulating suchorthodoxy afresh, Gandhi was dispensing moral plati- tudes to untouchables and trying tobuy them with kindness while letting others to promotetheir interests, without hindrance.He rejected the appellation 'Harijan' that Gandhi had bestowed on untouchables andpoured scorn an' it. Ambedkar rejected many central notions as pro- pounded by Gandhisuch as Swaraj, nonviolence, decentralization, Khadi, and . Hesubscribed to a modern polity with modern economy. This-worldly concerns were 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 handing overadditional resources and legitimacy to then to exploit the social classes and groups belowthem.

Reason and Rights

52 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II Ambedkar saw the modern era as heralding a triumph of human reason from myths,customs and religious superstitions. The world and man, he argued, canbeexplained byhuman 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 then the same reason is capable of offering the necessary correctives.Further, he saw knowledge as eminently 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 a personal 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. It cares and supports and strives againstexploitation, injustice and wrong-doing.

He argued that freedom, equality and fraternity are essential conditions for goodlife and a regime of discrete rights need to be constructed on them as the foundation. Heunderstood rights not merely within the narrow confines of liberal individualism but asindividual and group- rights. Thedefense ofboth types of rights in the ConstituentAssembly debates. Further he argued forboth civil and political right. And social andeconomic rights. He did not see them 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 of minorities and cultural groups to maintain theirdistinctive belief's and identities while at the same time affording them proper conditionsto take their rightful place in public affairs. He defended preferential treatment accorded todisadvantaged communities not only for reasons of equality but 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 was of a revolutionary. 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 College in Kolkata with a First Class degree in Philosophy.Influenced by the teachings of Swami Vivekananda, he was known for his patriotic zeal asa student. He went to England to fulfill his parents` desire to appear in the Indian CivilServices. He stood fourth in order of merit. But he left civil Service`s apprenticeship andjoined India`s freedom struggle. During his service with the Indian 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 , 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 Prince ofWales to India for which he was imprisoned for the first time. Bose was elected to the postof Chief Executive Officer of the newly constituted Calcutta Corporation in April 1924.That same year in October, Bose was arrested on suspicion of terrorism. At first, he waskept in Alipur Jail and later he was exiled to Mandalay in Burma. Bose was once againarrested on Janu-

53 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II ary, 1930. After his release from jail on September 25, he was elected asthe Mayor of the City of Kolkata. Netaji was imprisoned eleven times by the British overa span of 20 years either in India or in Rangoon. During the mid 1930s he was exiled bythe British from India to Europe where he championed 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 his secretary, in 1937 inGerman. Bose wrote many letters to Schenkl of which many have been pub- lished in thebook "Letters to Emilie Schenkl", edited by and . SubhasChandra Bose became the president of the Haripura Indian National Congress against thewishes of Gandhiji in 1938. He was elected as the president for two consecutive terms.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 to strive for independence. Bose initiated the concept of the "NationalPlanning Committee" in 1938. His correspondence reveals that despite his clear dislike forBritish subjugation, he was deeply impressed by their methodical and systematic approachand their steadfastly disciplinarian outlook towards life. The contrast between Gandhi andBose is captured with reasonable measure in a 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`s decision 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 only after a seven-dayhunger strike. Bose`s house in Kolkata was kept under surveillance by the British. Withtwo pending court cases; he felt that the British would not let him leave the country beforethe end of the war. This set the scene for Bose`s escape to Germany, via Afghanistan andthe Soviet Union. In Germany he instituted the Special Bureau for India under Adam vonTrott zu Solz, broadcasting on the German-sponsored Radio. Here he foundedthe "Free India Centre" in Berlin, and created the 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 nationalistsin 1942inSoutheast Asiaduring World War II. The aim of the army was to secure Indianinde- pendence withJapaneseassistance. Initially composedIndianprisoners ofwarcaptured by Japan 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 the INA. 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-Azad Hind(the Provisional Government ofFree India). This second INA fought along with theImpe-

54 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II rial Japanese Armyagainst theBritish andCommonwealthforces in the campaigns in Burma,ImphalandKohima, andlater, against the successfulBurma Campaignof theAllies. The end of 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 ofSoutheast Asia, 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 captured INA officers in India provoked massive public outcriesin support of their efforts to fight for Indian independence against the Raj, eventuallytriggering theBombay mutinyin the British Indian forces.These events are accepted byhistorians to have played a crucial role in hastening the end of British rule.

Japan and Southeast Asia were major refuges for Indiannationalists living in exile beforethe start of World War II. Japan hadsent intelligence missions, notablyunderMajorI- waichi Fujiwara, into South Asia even before the start of the war to garnersupport from the 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 policy forming body was formed with the Director of the Military Bureau, Lt. Col. Bhonsle, in charge and clearly placed under the authority of the IIL. Under Bhonsle servedLt. Col.ShahNawaz Khanas 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 from barristers, traders toplantation workers, includingKhudabadi Sindhi Swarankarworking as shop keepers–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 of the INA, composed of 45 Young Indians personally chosen by Bose andaffectionately known as theTokyo Boys, were also sent to Japan's Imperial MilitaryAcademy to train as fighter 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 was the nature of Nehru's Nationalist ideas that dictated his course of action in thefreedom movement 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

55 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II and a very keen understanding of the Indian condition. Nehru'snationalism was marked by a fiery pride in the heritage of the country. But he was willingto temper this pride with his readings 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 astounding success 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 adumbrate his 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 role model 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 his educational 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 surprise that after his return from the British shores in 1912, the job of alawyer was the last of Nehru's priorities. 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 involved himself directly into the political scenario of thecountry. However, Nehru was still comparatively without a firm direction in these earlyyears, not sure which path was the right path that would lead 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 dissociated from the groundrealities of the land and the lives of the common people of India. He also realized that 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 preached byGandhi. 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 the Indian scriptures of India, and dressed in home-spun clothes becoming astaunch Gandhian in all senses. Motilal and his entire family adopted the Gandhian way oflife. Nehru traveled across India, 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 Indian freedom.

Jawaharlal Nehru and the Non-Cooperation Movement:

The first big involvement of Jawaharlal Nehru came at the onset of the non-cooperation movement in 1920. Nehru joined in whole-heartedly in this Satyagraha based movementthat stormed India. Nehru was arrested on charges of anti-governmental activities andwasreleased a few months later. In the rift formed within the Congress following the suddenclosure of the non- cooperation movement after the , Nehruremained loyal to Gandhi's camp and denied to join the Swaraj Party formed by MotilalNehru and CR Das. After his release, Nehru's fame as a dynamic Congress leader waswell-established. He soon became the President 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

56 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II giving an ultimatum to the BritishGovernment to grant India dominion status. The senior leaders were bent on a slower andmore patient approach. The Calcutta Congress of 1928 brought the rift into the open.Jawaharlal openly decried the Nehru Commission framed by Motilal Nehru, and it neededthe intervention of Mahatma Gandhi to persuade Nehru to abandon his fiery stance ofmore direct action.

Nehru and the Civil Disobedience Movement:

The Lahore Congress of 1929 wasmonumental in the political career of Nehru as well as the history of India's freedomstruggle. Nehru was elected the president of Congress for the first time at a young age offorty. He used the platform of the Lahore conference to declare the goal of completefreedom or Purna Swaraj. The Civil Disobedience movement was formally launched 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 in 1930,beginning the second and the longest phase of his prison stays. On his release, he formedthe Socialist party within the Congress and insisted on more stern and immediatemeasures to realize 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 graduallydissociating himself from direct political action, the stature of Nehru within the Congressranks was now more than ever. He became the Congress President in the consecutiveyears of 1936 and 1937.By 1938, the rift in Congress was clear. With Bose and Gandhiforming the two feuding camps, Nehru was once more faced with a political dilemma.However, he decided to side with Gandhi and hismethods. Bose resigned as the Congresspresident, and Nehru's status in the Congress 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 ininternational relations would be tested once more. Nehru did not support Bose's policy ofsiding with the Axis forces, 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 was released only in 1945. By the time the World War IIwas over and the new Labor Government of Britain seemed willing to grant India it’s longdeserved freedom. However, the British Government wanted 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 comply with Jinnah's claims madepartition inevitable, as Jinnah called for direct action. Although his fight for Indianfreedom stood on the verge of success, Nehru knew his work was far from over. 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

57 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II who were known as the Constitutionalists. At this stage some socialistswanted to form a socialist 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 the Congress believed in Marxist the first All-India Congress Socialists'Conference was convened at Patna 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 Dev criticized the new Swarajist section ofCongressmen who wanted to enter the legislatures and thereby run counter to therevolutionary character of the Congress.He asked the socialists to carry on their agitationfor the adoption of their programme by the Congress. The Conference passed 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-India CongressSocialist 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 Socialists followed 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 theCongress as Congressmen,

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

3 They also soughtto integrate the above two lines of activities.The Congress Socialists sought to mobilize 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 rejected their 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 the formation of the CongressSocialist Party, though neither Nehru nor Bose joined theparty. In the annual session ofthe Congress, held at Lucknow in April 1936, in his presidential speech Nehru espousedthe cause of socialism. He said: I see no way of ending the poverty, vast unemployment,degradation and subjection of the Indian peopleexcept through socialism. That involvesvast 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 the higher ideals of cooperative service. In 1936 Nehru inducted three CongressSocialists-Narendra Dev, Jaya Prakash Narayan and Achyut Patwardhan into theCongress Working Committee, be-

58 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II sides another leftist, Subhas Chandra Bose. The Faizpursession of the Indian NationalCongress, heldtowards the close of 1936 under thepresidentship of Jawaharlal Nehru, adopted an agrarian programme, containing such itemsas reduction of revenue, abolition of feudal dues and lev- ies, introduction of cooperativefarming, living wage for the agrarian labourers and formation of peasant unions. In themeantime the Congress Labour Committee asked the Congress ministries, 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 at Lucknow in 1936. The Kisanorganizationsdemanded the abolition ofzamindary, reduction of lan tax, and collective affiliation to Congress. The CongressSocialists changed the CongressParty's policy from aloofness to closer involvement in theaffairs of princely states. The Congress socialist activists also took part in the democraticmovements of the people in the princely state against their autocratic 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 and with 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. It was fully debated and duly enacted by the Constitution Assembly of India. It took the Assembly 2 years, 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 Parts with 12 Schedules and 94 constitutional amendments. It is a constitution of both the Centre and

59 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 elected and representative body—the Constituent Assembly that was organised in December 1946. Its first session 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 position to finally pass and adopt the constitution on 26th November, 1949. The constitution became fully operational with effect from 26th January 1950. We celebrate this day as our Republic Day. The Constitution 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 philosophy of the constitution. It declares India to be a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic and a welfare 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 the constitution. 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 democratic socialism, it was only in 1976 that the Preamble was amended to include the term ‘Socialism’. It is now regarded as a prime feature of Indian state. India is committed to secure social, economic and political justice for its entire people by ending all forms of exploitation and by securing equitable distribution of income, resources and wealth. This is to be secured by peaceful, constitutional and democratic 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. This makes it different from theocratic states like the Islamic Republic of Pakistan or other Islamic countries. Further, Indian secularism guarantees equal freedom to all religions. The Constitution grants 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 rests upon the sovereignty of the people. The people enjoy equal political rights. On the basis of these rights, 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

60 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 head of state. India has an elected head of state () who wields power for a fixed term of 5 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 28 States 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 a unitary spirit. Scholars describe India as a ‘Quasi-Federation’ or as ‘a federation with a unitary bias, 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 strong centre, 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 has been 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 way while others can be amended very easily. In some cases, the Union Parliament can amend some parts of the Constitution by passing a simple law.

61 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II Article 368, of the Constitution provides for two special methods of amendment: (i) Most of the provisions of the Constitution can be amended by the Union Parliament by passing an Amendment Bill by a majority of total membership and 2/3rd majority of members present and voting in each of its 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 membership and 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 one half 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 Fundamental Rights to its citizens. It is called the Indian Bill of Rights. Initially, 7 Fundamental Rights were granted but after the deletion of the Right to Property from the list of Fundamental Rights (44th Amendment 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 of untouchability 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, freedom of residence in any part, and freedom of adopting any profession or trade or occupation. It ensures personal 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 except in accordance with the procedure established by law. Now under Art 21A Right to Education for the children between the ages of 6-14 years has been granted. Art. 22 guarantees protection against arbitrary arrest and detention.

(iii) Right against Exploitation:

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

(iv) Right to Freedom of Religion:

62 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II The grant of this right involves the freedom of conscience, religion and worship. Any person can follow 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 state cannot levy a tax for any religion and constitution prohibits the imparting of religious instructions in schools and colleges.

(v) Cultural and Educational Rights:

Under this category the Constitution guarantees the rights of the minorities to maintain and develop their 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 and protection of Fundamental Rights by the courts. It empowers the Supreme Court and High Courts to 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. 1993 was 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 a status 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 to the 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 a citizen:

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;

63 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 of the most striking features of the Indian Constitution. The Directive Principles are instructions to the state for securing socio-economic developmental objectives through its policies. These are to be implemented by both the Union for the States. For example, Directive Principles direct the state to ensure for the people adequate means of livelihood, fairer distribution of wealth, equal pay for equal work, protection of children, women, labour and youth, old age pension, social security, local self-government, protection of the interests of the weaker sections of society; promotion of cottage industries, 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 Union Parliament. 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 maximum strength stands fixed at 550. Presently Lok Sabha has 545 members. The people of each state elect representatives in proportion to their population. Orissa has 21 seats out of which some seats are reserved for the people belonging to SCs and STs. Members of the Lok Sabha are directly elected by the people of India. All men and women of 18 years or above of age whose names are registered in the voters lists vote in elections for electing the members of Lok Sabha. Every voter of 25 years or above of age is eligible to contest elections to the Lok Sabha. The tenure of the Lok Sabha is 5 years. 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 the states of the Indian union. Its maximum membership can be 250. Presently, the Rajya Sabha has 245 members. Out of these 233 members are elected by all the State Legislative Assemblies and 12 are nominated by the President from amongst eminent persons from the fields of Art, Science and Literature. 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, of Parliament, the Lok Sabha is a more powerful House. It alone has financial powers. The Union Council of Ministers is collectively responsible before the Lok Sabha. However, the Rajya Sabha is neither as powerless as the British House of Lords and nor the Lok Sabha is as powerful as the British House of Commons.

64 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II (16) Parliamentary System:

The Constitution of India provides for a parliamentary system of government at the Centre as well as 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 the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible before the Lok Sabha. The Lok Sabha can remove the Ministry by passing a vote of no-confidence. The Cabinet, in fact the Prime Minister has the power 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 and women enjoy an equal right to vote. Each adult man and woman above the age of 18 years has the right 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 rights and 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 the states. The works at the apex level, High Courts at the state level and other courts 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 Court is 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 and status. It works as an independent and powerful judiciary.

(21) Judicial Review:

65 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The Supreme Court acts as the guardian protector and 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 the constitutional validity of all laws made by the legislatures. It can reject any law which is found to be unconstitutional.

(22) Judicial Activism:

Currently, Indian judiciary has been becoming more and more active towards the performance of its social obligations. Through Public Interest Litigation system (PIL) as well as through a more active exercise of its powers, the Indian judiciary has been now very actively trying to secure all public 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 recognises three types of possible emergencies:

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

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

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

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 the Union 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 the opinion 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 forgranting 33% 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:

66 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II The Constitution lays down special provisions for defining the Language of the Union,Regional Languages and Language of the Supreme Court and High Courts. It states that the officiallanguage of 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 official language.

English continues to be the language of the Supreme Court and the High Courts. TheConstitution gives a directive to the Union to develop Hindi and popularise its use. In its EighthSchedule, the Constitution 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 and ideals of the national movement guided their path. The national movement influencedthem to adopt secularism as the ideal. Some provisions of Government of India Act 1935 wereused by them and several features of foreign constitutions influenced them, and were adopted bythem.In adopting parliamentary system and bicameralism, the British Constitution influencedthem. The US Constitu- tion influenced them in favour of republicanism, independence of judiciary,judicial review and bill of rights. The progress of the (former) USSR after the 1917 SocialistRevolution influenced them to adopt 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 organise and run her government andadministration in an effective way both in times of peace and war. The basic 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 of Law, and Liberal Democracy.( K.K. Ghai)

The key person behind the Constitution of India was Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. He was a learned person had good vision of future India.One of repeated criticism of the Indian constitution is that it is very little original and mostly borrowed from other constitutions. Even Dr. Ambedkar admitted in the Constituent Assembly that many elements were borrowed from foreign constitutions but they were not “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 the people of India. The Non-Cooperation Movement launched by Gandhi had fanned the fire of this discontentment.

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

67 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 in the Centre.

3. The provinces would be given complete autonomy and the administrative subjects divided into three 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 of Sindh and Orissa, separate and communal electorate system with reduction of the qualification of voters; separation of Burma and Aden from India and so on. Accordingly, the Home Government in England was reformed. The Indian Council was abolished and a few advisers varying from 3 to 6 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 on by 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 of power concerning administration, legislation and finance.

The Act had created provisions for Reserved Subjects which were looked after by Viceroy through Executive Councilors and transferred Subjects through the Indian ministers, not more than 10 in number 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 and 375 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 a Council of Ministers selected by him from among the members of the Provincial Legislature. Of course, 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 of one 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. Though it introduced Diarchy in the Centre and autonomy in the Province but the power of the elected or nominated members were limited. Further, it fanned the fire of communalism by retaining separate reserved electorates. In actual practice, this Act did not create scope for the self-experience of the Indian Legislators as they enjoyed only limited powers.

68 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II On the other hand, the India Act, 1935 had its merits too. It introduced Diarchy in the Centre and granted 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 in forming ministry in these provinces. The most important fact regarding the achievement of the Act can be stated that the political experience ingenerated in the minds of the Indian leaders went a long way in making the people of India conscious for their political liberty which they achieved in 1947.

Re-Organisation of Linguistic States

The reorganization of the states based on language, a major aspect of national consolidation and integration, came to the fore almost immediately after independence. The boundaries of provinces in 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 most of the provinces were multi-lingual and multi-cultural. The interspersed princely states had added a further element of heterogeneity.

The case for linguistic states as administrative units was very strong. Language is closely related to culture and therefore to the customs of people. Besides, the massive spread of education and growth of mass literacy can only occur through the medium of the mother tongue. Nehru appointed in August 1953 the States Reorganization Commission (SRC), with Justice , K.M. Panikkar and 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, the Commission was faced with meetings, demonstrations, agitations, and hunger strikes.

Different linguistic groups clashed with each other, verbally as well as sometimes physically. The SRC submitted its report in October 1955. While laying down that due consideration should be given to administrative and economic factors, it recognized for the most part the linguistic principle and recommended redrawing of state boundaries on that basis. The Commission, however, opposed the 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 were quickly 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 state was transferred 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 the Marathi-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

69 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II movement. Under pressure, the government decided in June 1956 to divide the Bombay state into two linguistic states of Maharashtra and Gujarat with Bombay city forming a separate, centrally administered 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 by the people both of Maharashtra and Gujarat. The broad-based Samyukta Maharashtra Samiti and Maha Gujarat Janata Parishad led the movements in the two parts of the state. In Maharashtra, even a large section of Congressmen joined the demand for a unilingual Maharashtra with Bombay as its capital; and C.D. Deshmukh, the Finance Minister in the Central Cabinet, resigned from his office on this question. The Gujaratis felt that they would be a minority in the new state. They too would not agree to give up Bombay city to Maharashtra. Violence and arson now spread to Ahmedabad and 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 the States Reorganization Act in November 1956.

Consequences of linguistic division of states

Linguism in India gained momentum during freedom struggle. The freedom fighters felt that the British system of division of the country was not appropriate. The idea of division of India on the basis of languages was considered as a better strategy. But the reorganisation of states on linguistic basis 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 regional differences have come in the way of national integration. Extreme sense of regionalism has resulted in 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 about the regional gains, than the interest of the nation. Thus, interstate boundary dispute, river dispute have become common. E.g.: Difference of opinion among people speaking Kannada and Marathi in Belgaum.

4. Emergence of regional Political Parties:

70 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II Linguism has resulted in the formation of regional political parties. At the present juncture these regional parties are playing a crucial role in the formation of government at the centre and also at some 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 supported by 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 people have become more self centred without thinking of the progress of the country. In Some states the regional language is being used even for administrative purposes, which causes a major problem to people 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 English at 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 people working 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 as one 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 in some situations, mitigation may not be possible and agencies may only be able to offer palliative care for the aftermath.

71 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 an emergency. 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, "" refers to a 21-month period in 1975–77 when Prime Minister unilaterally had an emergency declared across the country. Officially issued by President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed under Article 352(1) of the Constitution for "internal disturbance", the Emergency 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 grave threat 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 1971 Lok 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 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 had touched a high. Poverty was increasing. Industrial production was down and there was a massive labour and students unrest across India. The socialist stalwart Jaya Prakash Narayan popularly known as 'JP' openly led a mass movement against her calling her corrupt and autocratic. The fire- brand trade union leader had successfully organised an all India Railways strike bringing 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 left leaning socialist President Salvador Allende was assassinated sending shockwaves across the Third World. 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 that the 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 of the 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, , , Subramanian Swamy, AB Vajpayee, LK Advani, Ramakrishna Hegde, HD Deve Gowda, M Karunanidhi, JB Patnaik, Jyoti Basu, Madhu Dandavate, Lalu Prasad Yadav, Mulayam Singh Yadav, Sharad Yadav and many others. The opposition was brutally oppressed. Ramnath Goenka, the only newspaper owner who stood up to Indira Gandhi, was harassed and he faced a series of troubles at the hands of her government. However, Indira Gandhi shocked everybody by declaring 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 Indira Gandhi and her son Sanjay Gandhi were defeated in their respective Lok Sabha seats. Morarji Desai succeeded her as the Prime Minister and led the Janata Party government till 1980. In the 1980 Lok Sabha polls, Indira Gandhi returned to power and remained in power till her assassina- tion in 1984.

72 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization

The economy of India had undergone significant policy shifts in the beginning of the 1990s. This new model of economic reforms is commonly known as the LPG or Liberalisation, Privatisation and Globalisation model. The primary objective of this model was to make the economy of India the fastest developing economy in the globe with capabilities that help it match up with the biggest economies 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. These economic 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 in India denotes the continuing financial reforms which began since July 24, 1991.Liberalisation is commonly known as free trade. It implies removal of restrictions and barriers to free trade. India has 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 was passed. 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 by multinational companies on account of removal of regulations governing the activities of MNCs.

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

Privatisation refers to the participation of private entities in businesses and services and transfer of ownership from the public sector (or government) to the private sector as well. In the event of globalization privatisation has become an order of the day. Privatisation can be defined as the transfer of ownership and control of public sector units to private individuals or companies. It has become 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 globalization the government felt that increasing inefficiency on the part of public sectors would not help in achieving 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

74 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 exercised by 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 interactions among 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” is also 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 globalization can be analysed as follows:

75 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 1. Access to Technology:

Globalization has drastically, improved the access to technology. Internet facility has enabled India to gain access to knowledge and services from around the world. Use of Mobile telephone has revolution 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. Global trade 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 developing countries 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 which have adopted the free trade agenda have become highly successful. E.g.: China is a classic example of 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 developing countries. But the economy is subject to constant fluctuations.On account of variations in the flow of 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 organise trade unions.

76 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 4. Impact on farmers:

Indian farmers are facing a lot of threat from global markets. They are facing a serious competition from powerful agricultural industries quite often cheaply produced agro products in developed countries 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 across the 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 labour and 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 has its own positive and negative consequences. According to Peter F Ducker Globalization for better or 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 economic strategies. In the 1980s, , the then Prime Minister of India, started a number of eco- nomic restructuring measures. In 1991, the country experienced a balance of payments dilemma following the Gulf War and the downfall of the erstwhile Soviet Union. The country had to make a deposit 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 Rao initiated ground-breaking economic reforms. However, the Committee formed by Narasimha Rao did not put into operation a number of reforms which the International Monetary Fund looked for.

Dr , the former Prime Minister of India, was then the Finance Minister of the Government 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:

77 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II  Bringing in the Security Regulations (Modified) and the SEBI Act of 1992 which rendered the legitimate 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 buying and 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 bigges stock exchange in India.  In 1992, the equity markets of the country were made available for investment through overseas corporate investors. The companies were allowed to raise funds from overseas markets through issuance 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 per cent. 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 overseas equity 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 production zones. He did away with the License Raj, leaving just 18 sectors which required licensing. Control on industries was moderated.

Highlights of the LPG Policy

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

 Foreign Technology Agreements  Foreign Investment  MRTP Act, 1969 (Amended)  Industrial Licensing  Deregulation  Beginning of privatisation  Opportunities for overseas trade  Steps to regulate inflation

78 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II  Tax reforms  Abolition of License -Permit Raj

Narasimha Rao

Pamulaparti Venkata Narasimha Rao (popularly known as P.V.) (28 June 1921 – 23 December 2004) 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 holder of this office from non-Hindi-speaking south India. He led an important administration, overseeing a 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 as this came under the purview of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. He is often referred to as the "Father of Indian Economic Reforms". Future Prime ministers and Man- 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 of the reforms that implementedthe International Monetary Fund (IMF) policies to rescue the almost bankrupt nation fromeconomic collapse. Rao was also referred to as Chanakya for his ability to steer tough economicand political legislation through the parliament at a time when he headed a minority government.

According to Natwar Singh, "Unlike Nehru, his knowledge of Sanskrit was profound.Nehru had a temper, PV a temperament. His roots were deep in the spiritual and religious soil ofIndia. He did not need to Discover India". 11th President of India APJ Abdul Kalam described Raoas a "patriotic statesman who believed that the nation is bigger than the political system". Kalamacknowledged that 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 Vajpayee led NDA government. In fact Rao briefed Vajpayee on nuclear plans.Rao's term as Prime Minister was 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 Minister also 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 Uttar Pradesh when BJP's Kalyan Singh was CM whichtriggered one of the worst Hindu-Muslim riots in the 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 than politics) suchas literature and computer software (including computer programming). He spoke 17 languages.

Manmohan Singh

Manmohan Singh was born in 26 September 1932 is an Indian economist who served as the Prime Minister of India from 2004 to 2014. The first Sikh in office, Singh was the first prime minister since Jawaharlal Nehru to be re-elected after completing a full five-year term. Born in Gah (now in Punjab, Pakistan), Singh's family migrated to India during its partition in 1947. After obtaining his doctorate 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

79 HIS4(3) C01 MODERN INDIAN HISTORY (1857 TO THE PRESENT): II 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 Commission head (1985–87).

In 1991, as India faced a severe economic crisis, newly elected Prime Minister P. V. Narasimha Rao surprisingly inducted the apolitical Singh into his cabinet as Finance Minister. Over the next few years, despite strong opposition, he as a Finance Minister carried out several structural reforms that 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 incumbent Congress party fared poorly in the 1996 general election. Subsequently, Singh served as Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha (the upper house of India's Parliament) during the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government of 1998–2004.

In 2004, when the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) came to power, its chairperson unexpectedly relinquished the premiership to Manmohan Singh. This Singh-led "UPA I" government executed several key legislations and projects, including the Rural Health Mission, 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 States nearly caused Singh's government to fall after Left parties withdrew their support. Although India's economy 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 the office of Prime Minister. Over the next few years, Singh's "UPA II" government faced a number of corruption 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 to the office of the Prime Minister of India during 2014 Indian general election. Singh was never a member of Lok Sabha but continues to serve as a member of the Indian Parliament, representing the state of Assam in the Rajya Sabha for the fifth consecutive term since 1991.

*****

80