Elaborate Notes
The Contributions and Critique of the Moderate Phase (1885-1905)
The initial phase of the Indian National Congress (INC) was dominated by leaders who came to be known as Moderates. Their political philosophy was rooted in liberalism and a belief in the British sense of justice and fair play. While their methods were later criticized as “political mendicancy,” their contributions laid the foundational groundwork for the Indian National Movement.
-
Project of Nation-Building and National Unity
- The primary goal declared in the first INC session in Bombay (1885) under the presidency of W.C. Bonnerjee was the “promotion of personal intimacy and friendship amongst all the more earnest workers in our country’s cause” and the “eradication of all possible race, creed, or provincial prejudices.”
- This was operationalized through a conscious strategy:
- Rotating Venues: INC sessions were held in different parts of the country annually (e.g., Bombay 1885, Calcutta 1886, Madras 1887, Allahabad 1888). This fostered a sense of a pan-Indian political body and helped spread nationalist ideas.
- Diverse Presidency: The President of a session was deliberately chosen from a region other than where the session was held. For instance, W.C. Bonnerjee (a Bengali) presided over the Bombay session, and Badruddin Tyabji (from Bombay) presided over the Madras session. This practice helped in building an all-India leadership and preventing the Congress from being seen as a regional entity.
- This process created inter-regional awareness and a network of leaders, transforming localized grievances into a shared national consciousness.
-
Secular Foundations
- The Moderates were staunchly secular and made deliberate efforts to ensure religious harmony within the nationalist framework.
- 1888 Allahabad Session Resolution: Under the presidency of George Yule, a resolution was passed stating that no subject would be discussed or resolution passed to which the Hindu or Muslim delegates as a body objected in unison. This was a direct measure to allay the fears of minorities and counter the propaganda by figures like Sir Syed Ahmed Khan that the Congress was a Hindu-dominated body.
- 1889 Minority Clause: The Congress proposed a clause for future council reforms demanding that minorities be given representation in legislative councils in proportion to their population. This was a progressive stance on minority rights.
- Focus on Political Questions (1886): Under the presidency of Dadabhai Naoroji in the Calcutta session, it was decided that the INC would only take up political questions that were common to all Indians, avoiding contentious social and religious issues that could create divisions.
-
Cultivation of Parliamentary Politics
- The proceedings of the INC sessions were conducted democratically, mirroring parliamentary procedures. Resolutions were moved, debated, and voted upon. This process trained a generation of Indian leaders in the art of modern political work, debate, and democratic functioning.
- As noted by historian Bipan Chandra in “India’s Struggle for Independence”, the early Congress acted as a “parliament in embryo,” preparing the ground for the future democratic polity of India.
-
Economic Critique of British Rule: The Drain Theory
- This was arguably the most significant contribution of the Moderates. They were the first to systematically and intellectually dismantle the British claim of benevolent rule by exposing its exploitative economic character.
- Key Proponents and Works:
- Dadabhai Naoroji: In his seminal work, “Poverty and Un-British Rule in India” (1901), he meticulously calculated the “drain of wealth.” He argued that the British rule was “un-British” because it violated the liberal principles it professed to uphold in Britain itself.
- R.C. Dutt: A former ICS officer, his book “The Economic History of India” (in two volumes, 1901 & 1903) provided a scholarly analysis of how British policies systematically de-industrialized India. He traced the destruction of Indian textile industries and the transformation of India into an agricultural hinterland.
- M.G. Ranade: Often called the “father of Indian economics,” he laid the intellectual groundwork for the economic critique through his essays and speeches, advocating for industrialization and state support for Indian industries.
- Core Argument of the Drain Theory:
- It demolished the “White Man’s Burden” ideology by proving that British rule was the primary cause of India’s poverty.
- It explained the modern colonial relationship: Britain’s Industrial Revolution (c. 1750-1850) was fueled by the resources of its colonies. India was forcibly transformed from a net exporter of finished goods (like textiles) to an exporter of raw materials (cotton, indigo) and an importer of British manufactured goods.
- The mechanism involved one-way free trade: British goods entered India with minimal or no import duties, while Indian goods faced prohibitively high tariffs in Britain. This misuse of political power destroyed India’s famed handicraft sector, leading to widespread unemployment and overburdening the agricultural sector.
- The advent of steamships and the railway network, built primarily with British capital, did not serve Indian interests but instead accelerated the speed and efficiency of this economic drain.
-
Components of the Economic Drain
- Pre-19th Century Drain:
- This was characterized by direct plunder. Examples include the misuse of dastaks (trade permits) by EIC officials for private trade, the “Plassey Plunder” after the Battle of Plassey (1757), and the extortionate land revenue collected after acquiring the Diwani of Bengal in 1765. This marked a historic reversal, changing the structure of trade from a net inflow of bullion into India to a net outflow.
- Post-19th Century Drain (Systematic Drain):
- Unilateral Free Trade: Absence of protective tariffs against British goods.
- Manipulation of Exchange Rate: The rupee-sterling exchange rate was often manipulated to benefit British importers and exporters at the expense of Indians.
- Home Charges: These were expenditures incurred in Britain by the Secretary of State for India, which were charged to Indian revenues. They included:
- Salaries, pensions, and training costs of British civil and military officials serving in India.
- Expenses of the India Office in London, including the salary of the Secretary of State and his council.
- Dividends to the shareholders of the East India Company (even after its rule ended).
- Costs of stores (stationery, steel for railways, etc.) purchased in Britain for use in India.
- Interest on loans raised by the Government of India in the London market, much of which was used to finance colonial wars and infrastructure that served British interests.
- Council Bills: This was a complex but crucial mechanism. The Secretary of State in London sold “Council Bills” to British importers who needed to pay for Indian goods. The importers paid in pounds sterling in London. These bills were then used in India to acquire rupees from the Indian treasury (funded by Indian taxes) to pay the Indian producers. The result was that India exported goods but the foreign exchange (pounds) never reached India; it was retained in London to pay for the Home Charges.
- Foreign Direct Investment (FDI): The profits made by British capitalists from investments in railways, plantations, and mines were repatriated to Britain. Furthermore, investments in sectors like railways came with a government-guaranteed interest rate, ensuring profits for British investors regardless of the project’s viability, with the Indian taxpayer bearing the risk.
- Pre-19th Century Drain:
The Debate on British Modernisation
-
The Case of Railways:
- British Argument: Railways were a gift of modernity, unifying the country, stimulating trade, and preventing famines.
- Nationalist Counter-Argument:
- Motive: Lord Dalhousie, who introduced railways in 1853, primarily saw them as a tool for rapid military deployment to control the vast territory.
- Economic Layout: The railway lines were not designed to connect Indian industrial centers but to link sources of raw materials in the hinterland to ports for export, and ports to interior markets for the sale of British goods. This reinforced India’s colonial economic structure.
- Financial Drain: The “guaranteed interest” system (often 5%) on British capital investment meant there was no incentive for economical construction. R.C. Dutt argued this led to wasteful expenditure, and the same capital could have been invested in irrigation, which would have directly benefited Indian agriculture. It turned FDI into a risk-free Fixed Deposit (FD) for British investors, where profits were private, but losses were socialized and borne by Indian taxpayers.
- Unintended Positives (Byproducts): Despite the colonial motives, railways did facilitate greater people-to-people contact, which inadvertently fostered a sense of national unity and were later used by Indian businesses.
-
The Case of Canals and Irrigation:
- British Argument: They developed modern irrigation infrastructure, a model for Asia, which modernized agriculture and ensured food security.
- Nationalist Counter-Argument:
- Selective Development: Major canals were primarily built in non-permanent settlement areas like Punjab and Western UP, where land revenue rates were not fixed and could be increased with rising productivity. In Permanent Settlement areas like Bengal, the state had little incentive to invest as it would not get a share of the increased produce.
- Exclusionary Access: Canal water was not free; high water rates meant that only wealthier peasants could afford it, exacerbating rural inequalities.
- Limited Impact: By 1947, public irrigation systems covered only about 25% of the total cultivated area. The persistence of devastating famines throughout British rule, including the Great Famines of the 1870s and the Bengal Famine of 1943, starkly contradicted the claim of achieving food security.
-
The Drain Percentage Debate:
- British Argument: Apologists like John Strachey argued that the drain constituted only a small fraction (around 2%) of India’s total export value in the early 20th century and was a fair price for good governance.
- Nationalist Counter-Argument (Naoroji): Dadabhai Naoroji powerfully argued that this 2% was not just any part of the income, but the potential economic surplus. This was the capital that, if invested within India, would have driven industrialization and economic growth. Its continuous drain was the fundamental reason for India’s capital starvation and underdevelopment. A modern estimate by economist Utsa Patnaik suggests the drain could be as high as $45 trillion at 2017 prices.
Indian Councils Act, 1892 (Lord Cross’s Act)
This Act was a direct, albeit reluctant, response to the persistent demands of the INC. It demonstrated both the limited success and the ultimate failure of the Moderates’ strategy of constitutional agitation.
-
Key Provisions:
- Expansion of Councils: The number of additional (non-official) members in the Imperial Legislative Council (ILC) was increased from 6-12 to 10-16. Provincial Legislative Councils (PLCs) were also expanded.
- Introduction of Indirect Election: For the first time, a principle of representation was introduced, though not explicitly using the word ‘election’. Some non-official members were to be nominated by the Viceroy/Governors based on the recommendations of bodies like provincial councils, district boards, municipalities, universities, and chambers of commerce. This was a convoluted selection process, not a direct or proper indirect election.
- Limited Powers:
- Budget: Members were allowed to discuss the annual budget for the first time, a key demand of the Congress. However, they could not vote on it or propose any amendments. The principle of “no taxation without representation” remained unfulfilled.
- Questions: Members could ask questions to the executive. However, they could not ask supplementary questions or discuss the answers, severely limiting any real accountability.
- Official Majority Retained: The Act ensured that officials remained in the majority in the councils, allowing the government to pass any legislation it wanted.
-
Assessment and Aftermath:
- The Moderates’ demands were largely unmet: no elected majority, no real powers over the budget, and no significant Indianization of the civil services.
- The Act’s failings led to disillusionment within the nationalist ranks. It proved that the British government was unwilling to concede any meaningful power.
- This failure was a crucial factor in the rise of a more assertive and radical faction within the Congress, the Extremists.
- Post-1892, the Moderates themselves radicalized their demand, moving from “council reforms” to “self-government” (Swaraj) on the lines of the self-governing colonies of Canada and Australia. This shift culminated in the official adoption of the goal of Swaraj at the 1906 Calcutta session, presided over by Dadabhai Naoroji.
The Rise of Extremism
The last decade of the 19th century and the early 20th century saw the emergence of a new school of nationalist thought, known as the Extremists or the Nationalists.
-
Reasons for the Rise:
- Failure of Moderate Methods: The meager results of two decades of Moderate agitation, exemplified by the 1892 Act, created a sense of frustration.
- Reactionary British Policies: The viceroyalty of Lord Curzon (1899-1905) was marked by intensely authoritarian measures like the Calcutta Corporation Act (1899), the Official Secrets Act (1904), the Indian Universities Act (1904), and the crowning folly, the Partition of Bengal (1905). These actions exposed the true nature of British rule and fueled radical sentiment.
- International Influences: The defeat of Italy by Ethiopia (1896) and, most significantly, the victory of Japan over Russia (1905) shattered the myth of European invincibility and inspired confidence among Indians.
- Progression of the INM: As captured by the idea that “Failures in INM led to a stronger INM,” the movement evolved through stages. The failure of pre-1857 revolts led to the 1857 revolt; its failure led to the constitutionalism of Moderates; their failure led to the rise of Extremists; and their eventual failure paved the way for the Gandhian mass movement.
-
Leaders and Ideology:
- The prominent leaders were the trio of Lal-Bal-Pal (Lala Lajpat Rai from Punjab, Bal Gangadhar Tilak from Maharashtra, Bipin Chandra Pal from Bengal) and Aurobindo Ghosh.
- Goal of Swaraj: While the Moderates had also adopted this goal by 1906, the Extremists’ conception was more radical.
- For Tilak, Swaraj meant self-rule within the British Empire.
- For leaders like Aurobindo Ghosh and B.C. Pal, Swaraj meant complete independence from foreign rule.
-
Methods of Struggle:
- Passive Resistance: This was their core methodology, encompassing both non-cooperation and civil disobedience.
- Non-Cooperation: Boycotting British goods and institutions like government schools, colleges, courts, and legislative councils. This was aimed at making the administration impossible and hurting British economic interests. It was complemented by the promotion of Swadeshi (indigenous) goods and national education.
- Civil Disobedience: The active but non-violent breaking of unjust laws.
- Mass Mobilization: Unlike the Moderates who relied on the educated elite, the Extremists believed in politics ‘by the masses’ and sought to mobilize the common people for the national cause.
- Self-Defence: They did not rule out the use of violence, but primarily as a defensive tactic in response to British repression, distinguishing them from the revolutionaries who advocated proactive violence.
- Passive Resistance: This was their core methodology, encompassing both non-cooperation and civil disobedience.
Prelims Pointers
- The first session of the INC was held in Bombay in 1885, with W.C. Bonnerjee as President.
- The resolution to not discuss any topic opposed by a majority of Hindu or Muslim members was passed in the 1888 Allahabad session.
- The author of “Poverty and Un-British Rule in India” is Dadabhai Naoroji.
- The author of “The Economic History of India” is R.C. Dutt.
- M.G. Ranade is considered the “father of Indian economics.”
- Home Charges were expenditures in Britain charged to Indian revenues, including salaries, pensions, and India Office expenses.
- Council Bills were a mechanism used by the Secretary of State for India to transfer wealth from India to Britain without the corresponding transfer of bullion or goods to India.
- Railways in India were introduced in 1853 during the tenure of Governor-General Lord Dalhousie.
- The Indian Councils Act of 1892 is also known as Lord Cross’s Act.
- The 1892 Act allowed for the discussion of the budget but not for voting on it.
- The 1892 Act did not permit the asking of supplementary questions in the legislative councils.
- The INC officially adopted the goal of ‘Swaraj’ (self-government) for the first time at its Calcutta session in 1906. The president was Dadabhai Naoroji.
- Key Extremist leaders are known as the trio Lal-Bal-Pal: Lala Lajpat Rai, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, and Bipin Chandra Pal. Aurobindo Ghosh was another prominent leader.
- The Partition of Bengal was carried out in 1905 by Lord Curzon.
Mains Insights
-
The Moderates: Architects of the Foundation, not the Superstructure
- Cause-Effect: The Moderates’ primary contribution was creating a national platform (INC) and a powerful economic critique (Drain Theory). This intellectual work provided the ideological ammunition for the later, more mass-based phases of the freedom struggle. Their failure to achieve significant constitutional reforms (cause) led directly to the rise of Extremism (effect), demonstrating an evolutionary process within the INM.
- Historiographical Debate: While older Cambridge School historians viewed them as a self-interested elite, modern nationalist historiography (e.g., Bipan Chandra) sees them as strategic patriots who understood the nascent stage of Indian nationalism and worked to nurture it. Their methods were not of “begging” but of educating the Indian public and exposing the true nature of colonialism.
-
The Drain Theory: A Moral and Political Weapon
- The significance of the Drain Theory transcends economics. It was a powerful moral argument that delegitimized British rule. By proving that British rule caused poverty, it shattered the myth of the ‘civilizing mission’ and transformed the nationalist struggle from a plea for more representation into a demand for economic justice and, eventually, self-rule. It provided a common grievance that could unite diverse sections of Indian society against a common exploiter.
-
Colonial Modernisation: Development of Underdevelopment?
- The debate over railways and canals is central to understanding the nature of colonialism.
- Perspective 1 (Imperialist): Britain brought modernity, infrastructure, and progress to a stagnant society.
- Perspective 2 (Nationalist/Marxist): The “modernisation” was not for India’s development but for more efficient colonial exploitation. Railways facilitated resource extraction, canals increased revenue, and the legal system protected British commercial interests. This created an “enclave” modernity that served the colonial power while simultaneously underdeveloping the rest of the Indian economy, a concept explained by scholars like Andre Gunder Frank. Therefore, it was not development, but the “development of underdevelopment.”
-
From Moderation to Extremism: A Paradigm Shift in Indian Nationalism
- Change in Goals: The shift from demanding “reforms within the empire” to “Swaraj” marks a significant radicalization.
- Change in Methods: The move from constitutional agitation, petitions, and prayers (‘3 Ps’) to passive resistance, boycott, and mass mobilization represented a fundamental change in political strategy.
- Change in Social Base: The Extremists sought to take nationalism out of the drawing rooms of the educated elite and to the masses, using religious and cultural symbols (e.g., Tilak’s Ganapati and Shivaji festivals) to build a wider base of support. This laid the groundwork for the Gandhian mass movements later.
Previous Year Questions
Prelims
-
Who of the following was/were economic critic/critics of colonialism in India? (UPSC CSE 2015)
- Dadabhai Naoroji
- G. Subramania Iyer
- R. C. Dutt
Select the correct answer using the code given below. (a) 1 only (b) 1 and 2 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (d) All three were prominent economic critics. Dadabhai Naoroji and R.C. Dutt are well-known for their works on the drain theory. G. Subramania Iyer, a founder of The Hindu, also wrote extensively on the economic exploitation of India by the British.
-
The ‘Swadeshi’ and ‘Boycott’ were adopted as methods of struggle for the first time during the (UPSC CSE 2016) (a) agitation against the Partition of Bengal (b) Home Rule Movement (c) Non-Cooperation Movement (d) visit of the Simon Commission to India
Answer: (a) The Swadeshi and Boycott movements began as a direct response to Lord Curzon’s decision to partition Bengal in 1905. These methods were central to the extremist-led agitation.
-
Consider the following statements: (UPSC CSE 2017)
- The first session of the Indian National Congress was held in Calcutta.
- The second session of the Indian National Congress was held under the presidentship of Dadabhai Naoroji.
- Both Indian National Congress and Muslim League held their sessions at Lucknow in 1916 and concluded the Lucknow Pact.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 3 only
Answer: (c) Statement 1 is incorrect; the first session was held in Bombay. Statement 2 is correct; the second session (1886) was in Calcutta with Dadabhai Naoroji as president. Statement 3 is also correct.
-
With reference to the period of colonial rule in India, “Home Charges” formed an important part of the drain of wealth from India. Which of the following funds constituted “Home Charges”? (UPSC CSE 2011 - Note: This is from over 5 years ago but highly relevant and illustrative)
- Funds used to support the India Office in London.
- Funds used to pay salaries and pensions of British personnel engaged in India.
- Funds used for waging wars outside India by the British.
Select the correct answer using the codes given below: (a) 1 only (b) 1 and 2 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (d) All three were major components of the Home Charges, which were a direct drain on Indian revenue for expenses incurred in Britain for imperial purposes.
-
What was the main reason for the split in the Indian National Congress at Surat in 1907? (UPSC CSE 2016) (a) Introduction of communalism into Indian politics by Lord Minto. (b) Extremists’ lack of faith in the capacity of the moderates to negotiate with the British Government. (c) Foundation of Muslim League. (d) Aurobindo Ghosh’s inability to be elected as the President of the Indian National Congress.
Answer: (b) The fundamental cause of the Surat Split was the growing ideological divide between the Moderates and Extremists regarding the pace and methods of the national movement. The Extremists had lost faith in the Moderates’ constitutional methods after years of limited success and wanted to adopt a more confrontational approach.
Mains
-
Why did the ‘Moderates’ fail to carry conviction with the nation about their proclaimed ideology and political goals by the end of the nineteenth century? (UPSC CSE 2017)
Answer Structure:
- Introduction: Briefly introduce the Moderates (1885-1905), their ideology of liberalism and constitutionalism, and their “prayer, petition, protest” methods.
- Reasons for Failure to Carry Conviction:
- Limited Success: The meagre outcome of their efforts, such as the Indian Councils Act of 1892, which was seen as a “magnificent failure,” created disillusionment.
- Narrow Social Base: Their movement was largely confined to the educated, urban elite and failed to penetrate the masses.
- Reactionary British Policies: The aggressive and imperialistic policies of Viceroys like Curzon exposed the futility of the Moderates’ belief in British justice.
- Emergence of a New Nationalist Ideology: The rise of Extremist leaders like Tilak, Pal, and Lala Lajpat Rai offered a more assertive, self-reliant, and appealing alternative of mass struggle.
- International Events: Victories of Japan over Russia and Ethiopia over Italy boosted national self-confidence and made the Moderates’ methods appear weak and timid.
- Conclusion: Conclude by stating that while their methods became outdated, their foundational contributions in creating a pan-Indian platform and providing a powerful economic critique remained crucial for the subsequent phases of the freedom struggle.
-
The economic policies of the British caused a severe drain of wealth from India. Elaborate on the main components and consequences of this economic drain. (Based on syllabus)
Answer Structure:
- Introduction: Define the “Drain of Wealth” as the unilateral transfer of resources from India to Britain for which India received no proportionate economic or material return. Credit its articulation to Dadabhai Naoroji, R.C. Dutt, and M.G. Ranade.
- Main Components of the Drain:
- Home Charges: Explain the various costs included (salaries, pensions, India Office, war expenses).
- Trade Imbalance: Detail the impact of one-way free trade, destroying Indian industries and making India a captive market.
- Profits from Foreign Investment: Mention the repatriation of profits from railways, plantations, etc., and the exploitative nature of “guaranteed returns.”
- Council Bills Mechanism: Clearly explain how this system siphoned off India’s export earnings.
- Consequences of the Drain:
- De-industrialization and Ruralization: Destruction of handicraft industries forced artisans into agriculture, increasing the pressure on land.
- Impoverishment of Peasantry: High land revenue demands to fund the drain and other colonial expenses led to rural indebtedness and poverty.
- Stagnation of Capital Formation: The drain of potential economic surplus prevented investment in modern industry and infrastructure that would benefit Indians.
- Increased Frequency of Famines: The overburdened agricultural sector and the export of food grains, even in times of scarcity, contributed to the severity of famines.
- Conclusion: Summarize by stating that the Drain Theory was the central pillar of the nationalist critique, exposing the exploitative core of colonialism and providing a powerful unifying cause for the freedom movement.
-
To what extent did the role of the Moderates prepare a base for the wider freedom movement? Critically examine. (UPSC CSE 2021)
Answer Structure:
- Introduction: Define the Moderate phase (1885-1905) and its leaders. State the question’s premise: to evaluate their role as foundational architects of the national movement.
- Role in Preparing the Base (Positive Contributions):
- Political Base: Created the first all-India political organization, the INC, which served as the primary vehicle for the movement.
- Ideological Base: Formulated the powerful economic critique of colonialism (Drain Theory), which became the bedrock of nationalist ideology.
- Democratic Base: Nurtured a culture of secularism, democracy, and civil liberties through the proceedings of the Congress.
- Administrative Base: Their demand for the Indianization of civil services and legislative council reforms created a long-term goal for Indian political aspiration.
- Critical Examination (Limitations):
- Limited Social Base: Their movement did not involve the masses, remaining largely an elite affair.
- Limited Methods: Their “3P” approach was seen as ineffective and failed to extract significant concessions, leading to their political obsolescence.
- Faith in British Rule: Their unwavering belief in British justice was ultimately proven naive by reactionary colonial policies.
- Conclusion: Conclude that despite their limitations and eventual eclipse by the Extremists, the Moderates played an indispensable role. They successfully created the political and ideological “scaffolding” upon which the later mass-based movements, led by the Extremists and Gandhi, could be built.
-
Trace the evolution of the Indian National Congress’s primary goal from its inception to 1906. How did the Indian Councils Act of 1892 influence this evolution? (Based on syllabus)
Answer Structure:
- Introduction: State that the INC’s goals evolved from seeking administrative reforms to demanding self-government in its first two decades.
- Initial Phase (1885-1892):
- Goal: Not independence, but to create a national consciousness and seek greater Indian participation in administration and governance through council reforms.
- Demands: Expansion of legislative councils, more non-official members, powers to discuss the budget, and Indianization of the ICS.
- The Indian Councils Act of 1892 as a Turning Point:
- Provisions: Briefly mention the limited expansion and powers (discussion of budget but no voting, indirect elections).
- Impact: The Act was a deep disappointment. It demonstrated the British unwillingness to concede real power. This failure discredited the Moderates’ methods in the eyes of many nationalists.
- Post-1892 Evolution:
- Radicalization of Demands: The failure led the Moderates themselves to adopt a more ambitious goal. Leaders like Gokhale and Naoroji began demanding “self-government” or “Swaraj” on the model of British colonies like Canada and Australia.
- Rise of Extremism: The Act’s failure was a key factor in the rise of Extremists who advocated for a more direct and assertive path to Swaraj, seeing it as a birthright.
- Culmination in 1906:
- 1906 Calcutta Session: Under the presidency of Dadabhai Naoroji, the INC officially declared its goal as “Swaraj or self-government” for India.
- Conclusion: The 1892 Act acted as a catalyst. By exposing the hollowness of British promises, it accelerated the ideological evolution of the INC from a body seeking minor reforms to one that officially demanded self-rule, paving the way for a more intense phase of the national movement.
-
The rise of Extremism was a reaction to the failures of Moderates as well as to the reactionary policies of the British. Discuss. (Based on syllabus)
Answer Structure:
- Introduction: Briefly define the transition from the Moderate to the Extremist phase in the early 20th century as a significant shift in the Indian National Movement.
- Factor 1: Reaction to the Failures of Moderates:
- Explain the Moderates’ “3P” methodology and its limited results.
- Cite the Indian Councils Act of 1892 as the prime example of their failure to secure substantial reforms.
- Discuss the frustration among younger nationalists with the slow, “mendicant” approach, leading them to seek more radical methods.
- Factor 2: Reaction to British Policies:
- Detail the authoritarian and repressive policies under Lord Curzon (1899-1905).
- Mention specific acts: Calcutta Corporation Act, Official Secrets Act, Indian Universities Act.
- Highlight the Partition of Bengal (1905) as the immediate and most powerful trigger. Explain how it was seen as a “divide and rule” policy and an attack on Indian nationalism. These policies convinced many that petitions were futile and a stronger response was needed.
- Other Contributing Factors (briefly):
- Growing self-confidence from international events (Japan’s victory over Russia).
- Spread of education and awareness of global nationalist movements.
- Conclusion: Conclude that the rise of Extremism was not a sudden event but a product of twin forces: the “push” from the disillusionment with Moderate politics and the powerful “pull” from the reaction against British administrative arrogance and repression. It marked a new, more assertive, and mass-oriented phase of Indian nationalism.