NATIONAL MOVEMENT IN INDIA
SUBJECT CODE : 18BPA66S
PREPARED BY : Dr.R.Anitha Guest lecturer
DEPARTMENT : PG and Research Department Of Public Administration
CONTACT NO : 9003500812
E Mail ID : [email protected]
Material prepared according to textbook and reference books given in the syllabus.
SYLLABUS Gandhi-Irwin Pact
The British Indian government unconditionally released Gandhi and all other members of the working committee of Indian National Congress on 25th January 1931. The Congress working committee authorised Mahatma Gandhi to initiate the discussion with Lord Irwin. After the completion of this discussion, an agreement was signed between the Viceroy Lord Irwin representing the British Indian government and Gandhi, representing Indian National Congress and Indian people in Delhi on 14th February 1931. The Gandhi-Irwin Pact or Delhi pact placed Indian National Congress on equal footing with the British Indian government.
Background of Gandhi-Irwin Pact
The Second Round Table Conference was to be held in 1931 in London. In 1930, the Salt Satyagraha was conducted and India and Gandhi received worldwide attention. The British government in India was criticised for its unjust treatment of Indians. Gandhi and many other leaders were imprisoned along with thousands of Indians. Lord Irwin wanted the issue to come to an end. So, Gandhi was released from prison in January 1931. The then Congress President Sardar Vallabhai Patel authorised Gandhi to hold talks with Lord Irwin. Accordingly, Gandhi met Irwin and held negotiations. It was for the first time that the two were meeting as ‘equals’.
Features of Gandhi-Irwin Pact
The Indian National Congress (INC) agreed to take part in the Round Table Conference. The INC would stop the civil disobedience movement. Withdrawal of all ordinances that curbed the activities of the Congress. Withdrawal of all prosecutions except those involving violent crimes. Release of those who were arrested for taking part in the civil disobedience movement. Removal of the salt tax.
Result of Gandhi Irwin Pact
The INC participated in the Second Round Table Conference which was held in 1931 during September – December. The government agreed to withdraw all ordinances. It agreed to release all political prisoners to save those involved in violence. It agreed to allow peaceful picketing of liquor and foreign cloth shops. It agreed to revoke the ban on the INC. It agreed to restore the confiscated properties of the Satyagrahis.
Page 1 of 17 It agreed to permit the collection of salt by people near the sea coasts. It agreed to forego fines not yet collected. It agreed to the lenient treatment of all government servants who had resigned from service in the wake of the civil disobedience movement.
Gandhi – Irwin Pact – Demands of Gandhi not agreed to by Irwin:
A public inquiry into police excesses during its suppression of the movement. Commuting the death sentences of Bhagat Singh and his associates to life sentences.
Second Round Table Conference
The Second Round Table Conference was held in London in December 1931. The Congress had agreed to attend the second round table conference under the Delhi pact and hence Mahatma Gandhi attended the second round table conference in London. The Second Round table conference was held in a less conductive environment due to various reasons. These reasons were:
The labour government of Britain was now replaced by a national coalition government headed by Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald who headed a conservative-dominated cabinet. The secretary of state Samuel Hoare was weak and reactionary. Viceroy Lord Irwin was now replaced by Lord Willingdon. The right wing led by Churchill in Britain was strongly against negotiating with Congress on equal basis. The right wing demanded a strong government in India instead of negotiation with Congress on equal basis. There was a strong reaction against his statement of calling Gandhi a naked seditious Fakir . The period between 1928 to 1931 saw a large number of revolutionary activities in which several Europeans were killed. The majority of delegates in the second round table conference were conservative, loyalist, reactionary and communal men who were pro British. They were used by the British government to show that the Congress did not represent all the Indians which was aimed to neutralize the efforts of Gandhi. The representatives of princely states also not enthusiastic about and all India Federation after the possibility of formation of Congress government receded after the suspension of first civil disobedience movement.
Representatives in the Second Round Table Conference in London
Page 2 of 17 Indian National Congress- Mahatma Gandhi, Rangaswamy Iyengar, Madan Mohan Malviya. Muslims- Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Aga Khan , Mohammed Iqbal etc Hindus - MR Jayakar etc Depressed classes- Dr BR Ambedkar Indian women- Sarojini Naidu Indian princely states - Maharajas, Princess and the Diwans. British delegates belonging to different political parties of Britain and the Prime Minister, James Ramsay MacDonald. The liberals justice party, Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo Indians, representatives of Burma, Sindh, industry, labour, Parsis, landlords were represented in the Second Round Table Conference.
Mahatma Gandhi put forward the following demands
Immediate formation of a responsible government with full powers both at the centre and provinces. Mahatma Gandhi iterated the need of partnership between India and Britain as two equal nations. Mahatma Gandhi claimed that Indian National Congress alone represented the political India. The untouchables and depressed classes where Hindus and should not be treated as a minority. There should be no provision of separate electorates for Muslims. The Second Round Table Conference got into a deadlock on the question of separate electorates demanded by Muslims, depressed classes, Christians and Anglo Indians. All these were demanded under minorities pact which was strongly opposed by Gandhi and he made all the constitutional progress conditional on the solving of the issue of separate electorates.
Outcome of Second Round Table Conference in London
The Second Round Table Conference in London ended on 11th December 1931 and Gandhi returned to India on December 28 1931 without any achievement. The coming of coalition government in Britain had changed the atmosphere of the second round table conference in London. The Second Round Table Conference had increased the gap between Indian National Congress and other minorities. All other minorities (including depressed classes ) except the sikhs demanded separate electorates. Prime Minister MacDonald announced two Muslim majority provinces North West frontier province and Sindh. Announcement of Indian consultative committee, and 3 expert committee on finance, franchise and States. The possibility of unilateral Communal award by the British, if Indians failed to agree on the issue.
Page 3 of 17 Civil Disobedience Movement: Second Phase (1932-34):
On 4 January 1932, Mahatma Gandhi was arrested after the Congress Party had decided to resume a civil disobedience movement in the wake of emergency measures imposed by the British government in the form of a series of Viceroy’s ordinances.
Background
The Second Round Table Conference had taken place in September – December 1931 at London. The conference was not a success since there were differences within the Indian camp and no serious outcome was obtained. While the INC claimed to represent all Indians, other parties objected to this claim. There were also great differences between Gandhi and B R Ambedkar on the issue of separate minority electorates. A resolution was obtained in this matter through the Poona Pact. The conference was concluded on 1 December 1931 and Gandhi then informed the British that the phase of negotiations was done with. In India, trouble started brewing in the form of various declarations by regional congress committees of starting satyagraha and protests against the government. The government, in turn, started issuing many regressive measures especially in the Northwest Frontier Province, Bengal and the United Provinces. Jawaharlal Nehru was ordered by the District Magistrate of Allahabad not to leave the city. He naturally did not comply with the order and left the city to Bombay in order to meet Gandhi who was due to arrive there from London. Nehru was promptly arrested before he reached Bombay and sent to Nani prison. He was tried and sentenced to 2 years rigorous imprisonment. Gandhi arrived in India and informed the government that peace could be restored only if all the regressive civil martial law-like provisions were removed. He was arrested on 4 January. Within 5 – 6 days, all national leaders were behind bars. The INC was declared illegal. The INC had planned the second phase of the civil disobedience movement in the first week of January. The plan was a hastily-drawn one with no real intent. The plan was to boycott foreign clothes, picket liquor shops and disobey laws that were considered immoral. The congress workers were also asked to non-violently raid buildings that belonged to the party but were now confiscated and occupied by the government, and to raise the national flag there. They were also asked to observe fasts on the 4th of every month as this was the day the movement officially began when Gandhi was detained. However, there were minor communal riots in May in Bombay where Muslim shopkeepers were asked not to cooperate with the Congress by the Muslim League leaders.
Page 4 of 17 The government crushed the movement ruthlessly and swiftly. The Red Shirts in the North- western Frontier Province were humiliated. In the absence of leaders and in the face of ruthless suppression by the authorities, the movement faded. In May 1933, the movement was suspended and in May 1934, it was withdrawn.
Communal Award and Poona Pact
The Communal Award and Poona Pact had occurred in 1932. The Prime Minister of Britain Ramsay MacDonald, announced the Communal Award in August 1932 to pursue the British policy of divide and rule. The Communal Award recognised the depressed classes as minorities and provided them separate electorates. Earlier the British had already given separate electorates to Muslims, Christians and Sikhs.
Response of Indian National Congress
Congress was against the system of separate electorates but it was not in favour of changing the Communal Award without taking the minorities in confidence. So, the leaders of Congress were against the Communal Award and strongly disagree with it but the Congress decided neither to accept the Communal Award not to reject it. The Nationalist leaders opposed the British move to separate the depressed classes from the rest of the population of Hindus by providing them separate electorates.
Response of Mahatma Gandhi
For Mahatma Gandhi, the Communal Award was an attack on the unity of India and was against the Indian nationalism. He believed that separate electorates were harmful to both Hinduism and for the depressed classes as it provided no answer to the social problems faced by the members of depressed classes. Gandhi knew that once the depressed classes were treated as separate political identity, the issue of abolition of untouchability would get undermined and the separate electorates would keep the depressed classes to remain untouchables in perpetuity. Gandhi said that what was required was not the protection of so-called political interests of untouchables but the root and branch eradication of untouchability from India. In 1932, B.R. Ambedkar negotiated the Poona Pact with Mahatma Gandhi. The background to the Poona Pact was the Communal Award of August 1932 which provided a separate electorate for depressed classes.
Page 5 of 17 The pact signifies a solution derived by amalgamating two different ideologies (Ambedkar: Political Approach and Gandhi: Social Approach), striving to achieve a common goal for upliftment of one of most vulnerable sections of the Indian society.
Background of the Poona Pact
On August 16, 1932, the British Prime Minister, Ramsay MacDonald, announced the Communal Award which provided for separate electorates for the ‘Depressed Classes’, the Muslims, the Europeans, the Sikhs, the Anglo-Indians and the Indian-based Christians. The Award of 1932 was built on the notion of separate electorates that the British government had already put in place through the Morley-Minto Reforms (1909) and the Montagu- Chelmsford Reforms (1919). Under a separate electorates system, each community was allocated a number of seats in the legislatures and only members from these communities would be eligible to vote to elect a representative of the same community to legislative assemblies. Mahatma Gandhi was bitterly opposed to the communal award, as the award in continuum of constant efforts of the British imperialists to divide Indian people into a number of special- interest groups and to weaken the national movement. Initially, Ambedkar was in favour of the award, as according to him political solutions like separate electorate would work for upliftment of depressed classes. However, after the series of negotiations both Gandhiji and Ambedkar agreed to a solution called Poona Pact and thereby withdrawing separate electorate for depressed classes.
Significance of Poona Pact
Representation Of Depressed Classes: In a settlement negotiated with Mahatma Gandhi, Ambedkar agreed for depressed class candidates to be elected by a joint electorate. Also, nearly twice as many seats (147) were reserved for the depressed classes in the legislature than what had been allotted under the Communal Award. In addition, the Poona Pact assured a fair representation of the depressed classes in the public services while earmarking a portion of the educational grant for their uplift. The Poona Pact was an emphatic acceptance by upper-class Hindus that the depressed classes constituted the most discriminated sections of Indian society. It was also conceded that something concrete had to be done to give depressed classes a political voice. The pact made the entire country morally responsible for the uplift of the depressed classes. As the concessions agreed to in the Poona Pact were precursors to the world’s largest affirmative programme (reservation in legislature, public services and educational institutions) launched much later in independent India. Most of all the pact made the depressed classes a formidable political force for the first time in Indian history. Note:
Page 6 of 17 Madan Mohan Malaviya signed it on behalf of Gandhi. Instead of the 80 seats given by the British, the depressed classes got 147 seats. The Communal Award was based on the findings of the Indian Franchise Committee, called the Lothian Committee.
Gandhi And Ambedkar: Difference in Approach
Both the leaders were critical of ills pertaining to the caste system and committed to the upliftment of depressed classes. However, both differ in the approach. Ambedkar was in favour of annihilation of the caste system as it was beyond reforms. Gandhi did not support the abolition of the caste system or Varnashrama order. He was in favour of bringing behavioural change in the society regarding the ills of the caste system. According to Ambedkar, the caste question is a political issue and wanted a political solution for upliftment of depressed classes. Ambedkar insisted that a political democracy was meaningless if the so-called depressed classes were not equal participants in it. According to Gandhi caste issue is a social one. He wanted to reform it by changing the hearts and minds of people. Ambedkar preferred a rights-based approach while Gandhi’s approach was through faith and spirituality. That's why Ambedkar's referred depressed classes as dalits (to give them a political identity), on the other hand Gandhi called depressed classes as Harijan (to sensitize upper caste for plight of depressed classes by invoking spirituality).
Conclusion
The Poona Pact has changed the Indian Political history and the destiny of millions of Dalits across the country. However, social stigma attached to the caste system still remains in the Indian society. Therefore, in order to establish an egalitarian society in true sense, Gandhian Philosophy and Ambedkar’s notion of Social Democracy is much more relevant than ever before.
Third Round Table Conference (November 1932– December 1932)
The third Round Table Conference took place between 17 November 1932 and 24 December 1932.
Page 7 of 17 Participants of the Third Round table conference
Only 46 delegates in total took part in this conference. The INC and the Labour Party decided not to attend it. (The INC wasn’t invited). Indian princely states were represented by princes and divans. British Indians were represented by the Aga Khan (Muslims), Depressed classes women, Europeans, Anglo-Indians and labour groups.
Outcome
Not much was achieved in this conference also. The recommendations of this conference were published in a White Paper in 1933 and later discussed in the British Parliament. The recommendations were analysed and the Government of India Act of 1935 was passed on its basis.
TWO-NATION THEORY
The Lahore Resolution
From 22 to 24 March 1940, the All India Muslim League held its annual session at the Minto Park, Lahore. This session proved to be historic. On the first day of the session Muhammad Ah Jinnali narrated the events of some preceding months. In an extempore speech, he presented his own – solution to the Muslim problem. He said that the problem of India was not of an inter-communal nature, but manifestly an international one and must be treated as such. To him, the differences between Hindus and Muslims were so great and so sharp that their union under one Central Government was full of serious risks. They belonged to two separate and distinct nations and therefore, the only chance open was to allow them to have separate states. In the words of Jinnah: ‘Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs and literature. They neither inter-marry nor inter-dine anti, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations that dre based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their concepts on life and of lite are different. It is quite clear that the Hindus and the Muslims derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other, and likewise, their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations tinder a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing tsconten an
Page 8 of 17 final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up forthe government of such a state’. He further son nation according to any definition o nation. We wish our people to develop to the fullest spiritual, cultural, economic, social and political life in a way that we think best and m consonance with our own ideals and according Jinnah, the Chief Minister of Bengal, A. K. Fazl-ul- Haq, moved the historic resolution, which has since come to be known as the Lahore Resolution are the Pakistan Resolution.
Two-Nation Theory: Origin of the Concept
This theory held that there were two nations-one belonging to the Hindus and one two the Muslims-living in the territory of India. Sir Syed Ahmad khan was the first exponent of the Two- Nation Theory in the modern era. He belived that India was a continent and not a country, and that among the vast polpulation of different races and different creeds, Hindus and Muslims were the two major components. Events such as the Urdu-Hindi controversy (1867), the partition of Bengal (1905), and the Hindu revivalism set the Hindus and the Muslims further apart. However, the annulment of the partition of Bengal in 1911 by the British Government brought the Congress and the Muslim League on one platform. Starting with the constitutional cooperation in the Lucknow Pact (1916), they launched the Non-cooperation and Khilfat movements to press upon the British government the demand for constitutional reforms in India in the pos-World War I era.
Reaction to the Two-Nation Theory
The politicisation of the Muslim community came about as a consequence of three developments: Various efforts towards Islamic reform and revival during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The impact of Hindu-based nationalism. The democratisation of the government of British India. While the antecedents of Muslim nationalism in India go back to theearly Islamic conquests of India, organizationally it stems from the demands presented by the Simla deputation to Lord Minto, the Governor-General of India, in October 1906. proposing separate electorates for the Indian Muslims. The principal reason behind this demand was the maintenance of a separate identity of the Muslim nationhood. In the same year, the founding of the All India Muslim League, a separate political organization for Muslims, highlighted the fact that the Muslims of India had lost trust in the Hindu-dominated Indian National Congress. Besides being a Hindu-dominated body, the Congress leaders, in order to win support at the grass roots for their political movement, used Hindu religious symbols and slogans, thereby arousing Muslim suspicions regarding the secular character of the Congress. After the collapse of the Khilafat Movement, Hindu- Muslim antagonism revived once again. The Muslim League rejected the proposals forwarded by the Nehru Report and they chose a separate path tor themselves. The idea of a separate homeland for the Muslims ot Northern India as proposed by Allama Iqbal in his famous Allaha a Address showed that the creation of
Page 9 of 17 two separate states or the Muslims and Hindus was the only solution. The idea was reiterated during the Sindh provincial meeting of the League, und finally adopted as the official League position in the Lahore Declaration of 23 March 1940. Thus, these historical, cultural, religious and social differences between the Hindus and the Muslims accelerated the pace of political developments, finally leading to the division of British India into two separate, independent states—Pakistan and India—on 14 and 15 August 1947, respectively.
Socialism and communism
What is socialism?
There are several different types of socialism. But, in the west, the best guide to socialism is through the prism of democratic socialist parties. For example, the UK Labour Party won the 1945 General election and implemented several socialist policies, which included
Higher-income tax on high-earners Creation of National health care system – free at the point of use Nationalisation of key industries, such as coal, electricity and gas. Creation of welfare state with minimum income guarantee for the unemployed. Labour market reforms, such as greater protection for trade unions. Expansion of free education Socialism emphasises equality of opportunity, using the state to redistribute income from the highest earners to others. But, it does not insist on equality, only aiming for equality of opportunity. Democratic socialism combines both public sector intervention with private sector enterprise. Traditionally socialist parties may want to nationalise key public sector industries (which are natural monopolies), but private firms are free to operate in the free market. Rather than control individual firms, the state implements rules to avoid the exploitation of workers and consumers. Socialism allows private property and private ownership, but it may place a certain tax on wealth and inheritance to redistribute opportunity and wealth.
What is Communism?
Communist economic and political theory was developed by Karl Marx. He developed the concept of a ‘Dictatorship of the Proletariat’ arguing that the working class should rule in the interests of the people, and ignore democratic norms.
Page 10 of 17 Marx also advocated for a revolution to overthrow capitalism and create a new economy where industry was owned and managed by the government rather than private individuals. In practice, the Soviet Union did achieve a new kind of economy through the 1917 revolution. Lenin and then Stalin also cracked down on individual liberty and removed all forms of democracy. An overriding aspect of the Communist society was the lack of individual liberty and freedom. In the Communist Soviet Union, the state became all-powerful in managing the economy, setting targets, deciding what to produce and how to produce. It left very little if any role for the price mechanism and free markets.
Socialism in India
Socialism in India is a political movement founded early in the 20th century, as a part of the broader Indian independence movement against the colonial British Raj. The movement grew quickly in popularity as it espoused the causes of India's farmers and labourers against the zamindars, princely class and landed gentry. Socialism shaped the principal economic and social policies of the Indian government but mostly followed Dirigism[1][2] after independence until the early 1990s, when India moved towards a more market-based economy. However, it remains a potent influence on Indian politics, with many national and regional political parties espousing democratic socialism.
Small socialist revolutionary groups arose in India in the aftermath of the Russian Revolution. The Communist Party of India was established in 1921, but socialism as an ideology gained a nationwide appeal after it was endorsed by leaders such as Jawaharlal Nehru. Socialists were amongst the first to call for outright Indian independence from Britain. Under Nehru, the Indian National Congress, India's largest political party, adopted socialism as an ideology for socio- economic policies in 1936. Socialists and communists also engineered the Tebhaga movement of farmers in Bengal against the landed gentry. However, mainstream Indian socialism connected itself with Gandhism and adopted peaceful struggle instead of class warfare.[citation needed]
The Government of India Act, 1935
The Government of India Act, 1935 was piloted in the House of Commons by the Secretary of State for India, Sir Samuel Hoare.
The Government of India Act, 1935 was a result of the following:
Page 11 of 17 Simon Commission Report Nehru Report Round Table Conference White Paper Report of the Joint Select Committee Lothian Report over Franchise
Features of the Government of India Act, 1935
All India Federation
While under previous Governments of India Acts, the Government of India was unitary, the Government of India Act, 1935 prescribed a federation, taking provinces and princely states as units. Although, it was optional for Indian states to join the Federation. Hence it never came into being. But, provinces were now no longer delegates of Central Government but were autonomous units of administration. To this extent, Government of India assumed the role of a federal government through Indian states did not come into the field to complete the scheme of federation.
Provincial Autonomy
The Government of India Act, 1935 proposed provinces as autonomous units of administration. The autonomy provided to the provinces meant two things. First, the Provincial Governments were wholly, responsible to the provincial legislatures and secondly, provinces, were free from outside control and interference in a large number of matters. It ended dyarchy at the provinces introduced in the Government of India Act, 1919. The executive authority was to be exercised by a Governor on behalf of Crown and was required to act with advice of Ministers responsible to legislature. However, the autonomy at provinces was limited as certain discretionary powers remained with the Governors appointed by the British government and the British authorities also retained a right to suspend the responsible government.
Dyarchy at Centre
Under the Government of India Act, 1935, the Governor-General had two functions: Administration of defence, external affairs, tribal area in his discretion with the help of 'counsellors' who were not responsible to legislature. Other subject matters- on advice of 'Council of Ministers' who were responsible to legislature.
The Legislature
Under the Government of India Act, 1935, the Central Legislature was bicameral, consisting of Federal Assembly and Council of States.
Page 12 of 17 The Council of States was to be upper house and a permanent body with one third of its membership retiring every 3rd year. It was to be composed of 260 members of which 156 were to be representatives of British India while, 101 of the Indian states. The Federal Assembly was the lower house with a tenure of five years. It was to be made of 375 members, out of which 250 were to be representatives of British India and not more than 125 members from the princely states. While the seats reserved for princely states were to be filled by nominated members, the provinces were given different numbers of seats. Election to the Federal assembly was to be indirect. The term of the assembly was five years but it could be dissolved earlier also. Also, in six of the Provinces, the Legislature was bicameral.
Distribution of Legislative powers between Centre and the Provinces
Federal List- External Affairs, Currency and coinage, Naval, Military, Air-Force, Census.
Provincial List- Police, Provincial Public Service, Education, etc.
Concurrent List- Criminal Law and procedure, Civil Procedure, Marriage and Divorce, Arbitration, etc.
Defence and external affairs would remain outside the control of federal legislature, Viceroy would retain special control over these subjects.
Indian Council of Secretary of State abolished
The Government of India Act, 1935 abolished the Indian Council of Secretary of State,established by the Government of India Act of 1858.
Federal Bank was established
The Government of India act, 1935 provided for the establishment of a Federal Bank to control the currency and credit of the country.
Federal Court was established
The Government of India Act, 1935 provided for the establishment of a Federal Court which would interpret the Act and adjudicate disputes relating to the federal matters. The Act provided for a Federal Court which would consist of one Chief Justice and not more than six judges. The Federal Court was given exclusive original jurisdiction to decide disputes between the Centre and constituent Units. The provision was made for filing of appeals from High Courts to the Federal Court and from Federal Court to the Privy Council. The Federal Court also had jurisdiction to grant Special Leave to Appeal and for such appeals a certificate of the High Court was essential.
Federal Railway Authority was established
Page 13 of 17 The Government of India Act, 1935 established a Federal Railway Authority, which was vested with the control of the railways. It was to be a seven member body. The authority was created to ensure freedom from the control of ministers and councillors. The idea was to assure the British stakeholder, that their investment in railways is safe.
Reorganisation of Provinces
The Government of India Act, 1935 . reorganised the following provinces- Sindh was separated from the Bombay province. Bihar and Orissa were established as separate provinces.
Burma and Aden separated
The Government of India Act, 1935 separated Burma from India. It also detached Aden from India and established it as a separate colony.
Emergency powers to Governor-General
In case of emergency, the Governor-General under Section 102 of the Government of India Act,1935 could issue a Proclamation of Emergency and empower the Federal Legislature to make laws on Provincial subjects. He could also issue directions to the Governors to act in a manner that the peace and order of the country was not endangered.
Idea of collective responsibility introduced
Under the Government of India Act, 1935 , the Ministry was collectively responsible to the Federal Legislature.
No Dominion status
Dominion status which was promised by the Simon Commission in the year 1929, was not conferred by the Government of India Act, 1935.
Franchise to one-sixth of adults only
The Government of India Act, 1935 extended the franchise to one-sixth of the adults.
Strategy of British Government at that time
They hoped that reforms would revive the political standing of the Liberals and other moderates who believed in the constitutional path. They hoped that Congressmen would be weaned away from mass political action and guided towards constitutional politics. They hoped that reforms could be used to promote dissensions and a split within the demoralised Congress ranks on the basis of constitutional vs non constitutionalist and Right vs Left.
Page 14 of 17 Conclusion
The Act of 1935 was condemned by nearly all sections of Indian opinion and was unanimously rejected by the Congress. The Indian National Congress demanded instead, the convening of a constituent assembly elected on the basis of adult franchise to frame a constitution for an independent India. The significance of Government of India Act, 1935 can be best summed up in the words of the then Viceroy Lord Linlithgow himself: " After all we framed the constitution....of 1935 because we thought it the best way... to hold India to the Empire." The Government of India Act 1935, however, had introduced several features which later formed the nucleus of our Constitution.
Second World War (1939-1945): Causes and Consequences
The first world war itself sowed the seeds for Second World War, primarily because of the humiliating Treaty of Versailles. We shall see the causes and consequences of the Second World War (WWII) in this post.
The Two Groups: Allies vs Axis Powers
Causes of Second World War(1939-1945)
(1) Humiliation by the Treaty of Versailles
War indemnity. The provision for disarming Germany. Saar coal mine to France for 15 years. Polish corridor was given to Poland. City of Danzing was made free.
(2) Growth of Fascism and Nazism
Mussolini (Italy) and Hitler (Germany) strongly glorified war and violence. While West was fighting communism, Germany and Italy started massive militarization.
(3) Rise of Japan
Imperialism. Rome-Berlin-Tokyo axis (1936).
(4) Neglect of minority interests
Page 15 of 17 New countries like Poland, Czechoslovakia and Austria were formed after the First World War. While drawing boundaries the interests of minority groups in each of these countries were neglected.
(5) Military Alliance
Allies – Britain, France, USA, USSR and China vs Axis Powers – Germany, Italy and Japan Leaders – Churchill (Britain), Roosevelt (USA), Stalin (USSR)
(6) Germany’s attack on Czechoslovakia
In-spite of the Munich Pact between Germany and Britain (1938), Germany re-attacked and sized Czechoslovakia.
(7) Immediate Cause : Germany’s invasion of Poland (1st September 1939)
Germany annexed Polished corridor and Danzig city. The sudden attack on Poland is known as Blitzkrieg (lightning war). Brtiain and France declared war on Germany.
Course of the War
Second World War - Pearl Harbour Attack
World War II officially began on September 1, 1939. Germany conquered – Poland, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Holland and France. Battle of Britain – Germany vs Britain (air battle; German Air force =Luftwaffe). Battle of Stalingrad – Germany vs USSR. (Operation of Barbaressa (1941 = Attack on Yugoslavia and Greece; Russia countered attack on Moscow with Scorched Earth Policy). Atlantic Charter (August 1941) – Between Churchil (UK) and Roosevelt (USA). Pearl Harbor Attack (7th December 1941) – Japan on USA. Italy vs UK in Africa (1942) – Ethiopia, Kenya, Sudan, British Somaliland, Eritrea. France was conquered by Germany in 1940, but British and American troops liberated France in 1944. Atom bomb – Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Consequences of Second World War
End of colonialism and imperialism. End of dictatorship in Germany and Italy. Germany was divided into West Germany and East Germany. West Germany was controlled by Britain, France and USA. East Germany by USSR. (Read more about the re-union of Germany in 1989 when you check our post about the fall of the Berlin wall).
Page 16 of 17 Strengthening of nationalist movements in Africa and Asia. (From Britain – India, Myanmar, Egypt, Sri Lanka; From America – Philippines; From France – Indo-China; From Dutch – Indonesia) 5 crore deaths (2.2 crore soldiers and 2.8 crore civilians) Economics problems – Unemployment, low growth etc. Emergence of two power blocks – USA and USSR. This resulted in cold war. Emergence of third world Countries. UNO was set up in 1945
Page 17 of 17