Topic: Background to the rise of Neo-Nationalism.

Question : Briefly discuss the background to the rise of Neo-Nationalism?

Answer:

The rise and the popularity of the Neo-nationalists have also, to be located against the rise of religious revivalism. One of the most peculiar trajectory taken by any movement was perhaps that taken by the social reform movements of the early nineteenth Century. These reform movements e.g. Arya Samaj of Swami Dayanad and those that perpetuated to the Village level, though started with the aim of countering colonial influences also fostered religious orthodoxy and increasingly demarcated the communties. One such movement was that of “Cow Protection” with the first Gaorakshini Sabha founded by Swami Dayanand in 1882. Initially, protection of cow was primarily aimed at the beef eating English and also to a degree at the muslims Part of their aim was to petition government to stop cow slaughter. Cow protection societies soon spranged up across UP, Bihar, etc. These efforts were furthered by the decree of High Court of NWP in 1888 according to which, cow was not a religious object and thus its slaughter could not be held as violation of the law.

The neo-nationalists had strong ties with India and they did not consider everything western as the best. They were more critical of the English. Their ideas and notions were more in connection with the problems of the masses. They were more reactionary than the moderates. They also encouraged the use of Swadeshi products for developing Indian industries. The Swadeshi enterprise can be traced back to Gopalrao Deshmukh of Poona who advocated use of indigenous products as early as 1849 and in Bengal it was encouraged through Hindu Mela or National Mela founded by Nabagopal Mitra in 1867. Rabindranath Tagare called for self-reliance / atmasakti through Swadeshi and national education. Lala Lajpat Rai, an Arya Samajist advocated Swadeshi cult in the Punjab.

But since the neo-nationalists glorified the ancient past, they bypassed the medieval period which had Muslim power structure at the main seat of power. So India came to be identified as being Hindu. For this reason the neo-nationalists found very little support from the Muslims.

The main contribution of the neo-nationalists was in mobilizing the masses, educating them to participate in the political struggle.

The categories of Moderate and Extremists emerged on the basis of methods used. The purpose of both groups was same- not overthrow of the British Rule but obtaining a larger share of power for the people in the administration of the country. The extremists made the demand for Swaraj OR Home-Rule OR Self-Government their main demand and not just administrative reforms. The extremists wanted Indians to get a larger share in the administration of the country and end of British exploitation.

BUT the methods used by the neo-nationalists were different.

•        Moderates pleaded to through petitions and writings to the British government; the extremists believed that Indians should be mobilized and take an active part in putting their demands.

•        The technique of agitation was to be based on the pride in India’s glorious past and religious traditions.

•        Their techniques instead of petitions were boycott and Swadeshi, non-cooperation with the British government and passive resistance. The extremists wanted Swadeshi and boycott to extend to the whole of the country rather than just Bengal. They were seen as methods of political warfare. The moderates stressed the economic aspect of Swadeshi and boycott only as a temporary method.

¨ Miserable Plight of Indians Abroad

The anti-British feelings were further roused by the treatment meted out to Indians in the British colonies in Africa particularly in South Africa where they were treated as sub-castes. They could not own and build houses in certain localities exclusively reserved for Europeans. They were disenfranchised, and in 1896 the indentured emigrants in Natal (South Africa) were asked either to renew their indenture for labourer pay a poll-tax amounting to half their annual earnings. By 1898, three more disabling laws were made, and the life of the Indians was made very hard. While the then Viceroy, Lord Elgin, consented to these laws being passed, the Secretary of State, Lord George Hamilton, characterized India a “nation of savages”. The important official organs, like the Civil and Military Gazette of Lahore, openly abused the Indians.

¨ External Events

There was, during the nineteenth century, an all pervading belief in the military invincibility and technological superiority of the European countries. The success of the British in India in suppressing the national Uprising of 1857 was largely attributed to the superiority. But some events took place on the international scene and these exploded that myth. These were the defeat of Italy by Abysainia in 1896 and of Russia by Japan in 1905. These debacles exercised an enlightening effect upon the Indian mind. The victory of the non-European nations was attributed to their high sense of patriotism and spirit of sacrifice. The political leaders in India realized that if the Japanese and the Abyssinians could defeat the Russians and the Italians respectively, the Indians could also liberate their land from the ‘scourge of British Imperialism”.

The defeat of the forces of Imperial Russia by Japan served as a signal and the nationalist movement in India sprang to life.

¨ Reactionary Policies of Viceroy Curzon

Despite the, accumulating causes of despondency and irritation the main Congress body remained hopefully cooperative “It needed a Curzon”, as super has put it “to complete breach between a slow-moving Government and politically conscious Indians”. Lord Curzon was sent to India as Viceroy in 1898 with the firm object of strengthening the foundations of the British rule. Two years after his stay in the country Curzon wrote: “In my belief Congress is tottering to its fall, and one of my great ambitions while in India is to assist it to a peaceful demise”.

When he assumed charge of his office he began his “policy of efficiency” with the Calcutta Corporation Act (1899) whereby the number of the elected members was reduced to half their original strength and the administration of the Corporation was vested in General Committee. This measure was opposed by the Indian communities of Calcutta, and twenty-eight members of the corporation resigned as a protest.

In order to solve the frontier problem Curzon formed a new Province known as the “North West Frontier Province” consisting of the trans-Indus districts of Peshawar, Kohat, Bannu and Dera lsmail Khan, together with a few political agencies. The new Province was inaugurated on King Edward’s birthday in 1901, the old “North-West Province” being re-christened “The United Provinces of Agra and Oudh”. The Punjab Government, thereafter, exercised no jurisdiction west of the Indus except in Dera Ghazi Khan. It aroused a tempest of opposition among the older civil servants in the Punjab. The open competitive tests for the provincial civil services were abolished, and his Police Commission resulted in excluding the Indians from the Special Police Service. Secret circulars encouraging the employment, on a more extensive scale, of Eurasians and Christians at the expense of the other Indian communities were sent. By a resolution of 24 May 1904, Curzon made race, instead of merit, the test of qualification. This policy led even Lord Morlay to observe that what India resented was racial domination, not so much political domination.

The administration of Curzon was also marked by a costly Durbar at Delhi, which bore striking resemblance to the Imperial Assemblage of 1877, in that it followed upon other terrible famines of’ 1892, 1896-97 and 1899 and the prevalence of plague in 1896. The increasing poverty and ever-growing suffering of the masses were attributed by the educated Indians to the lack of British interests in minimizing the causes of distress.

In the teeth of universal opposition, the Official Secrets Act was passed in 1904 whereby the poser vested in the Government by the earlier Official Secrets Acts of 1889 and 1890 were considerably widened., The earlier Acts covered only military secrets, but the new Act covered secrets relating to civil matters also.

Even the newspaper criticism, likely to bring “suspicion or contempt” to Government, was not spared. This step was condemned by the entire Press, Indian as well as Anglo-Indian protests from many quarters poured in; but the Viceroy was implacable and the Gagging Act was passed.

Most of the animosity of Indian politicians against Curzon dated from the appearance of the Universities Bill that was introduced in the Legislative Council towards the end of 1903. This Bill was designed apparently to “reform” the educational system but actually to bring the university education under official control. Despite much public criticism and consternation, the Bill was passed on 21 March 1904. The autonomy of the universities was almost destroyed, and they were brought under rigid bureaucratic control by increasing the number of nominated members of the Senates and the Syndicates. Curzon made no serious attempt to pacify the critics of Government’s educational policy.. He rather embittered the educated Indians further by his Convocation Address, in February 1905 to the graduates of the Calcutta University. He spoke of the “untruthfulness” and ‘wile of the East’ and denied that there was such a thing as “Indian nation”. This statement raised the national temper to fever heat; the whole country was shocked; and the Indian people, in the words of Annie Besant, “smarting under the afflictions of plague and famine, of broken pledges and repressive measures, rose as one man against the monstrous and studied insult flung with a high magisterial air at everything that they loved and revered, at their religion, their literature, their social institutions”.

Nothing was resented by the Indians more than the Government resolution of 3 December 1903 announcing, that the entire Chittagong division and the two districts of Dacca and Mymensing would be separated from Bengal and incorporated with Assam. This partition, that took place on 20 July 1905, divided the homogeneous Bengali-speaking people into two Provinces. Nationalism was very strong in Bengal, and it was probably to destroy the solidarity of the Bengalis that Curzon decided to divide them. The motive behind the plan of partition was quite clear. It was undoubtedly a master-plan to destroy the nascent nationalism in Bengal. The partition served as a signal for a most extensive and intensive agitation.

Go Back To Main Page