Within the context of the period 1847-1947 to what extent was Indian independence primarily the result of the growth of Indian nationalism? The decision to grant independence to India was not the logical culmination of errors in policy, neither was it as a consequence of a mass revolution forcing the British out of India, but rather, the decision was undertaken voluntarily. Patrick French argues that: “The British left India because they lost control over crucial areas of the administration, and lacked the will and the financial or military ability to recover that control”. Whilst the growth of Indian nationalism put considerable pressure on the Raj, historians offer many interpretations as to the fundamental cause of Independence. Gandhi’s non-cooperation movement and subsequent campaigns meant that nationalism began to appeal to the masses and helped establish a broad based movement for Independence. However, the British were always able to supress the nationalist movements, through reform or by using force, up to the Quit India movement of 1942. British involvement in the Great War and particularly the Second World War placed them in a weaker position economically, whilst the social and political expectations of the Indian people were changing, which strengthened nationalism and discontent. There is a distinct difference between popular Indian nationalism, that is the nation believing in a state independent of Britain, and Indian nationalist movements, for example the Muslim League or the Hindu revivalist movement. These movements fought for independence but were far more religiously orientated and were fighting in their own interests. Although Indian nationalism initially found expression in the Mutiny of 1857, its deve... ... middle of paper ... ...ence in 1947. BIBLIOGRAPHY BOSE, Sugata and JALAL Ayesha. Modern South Asia: history, culture, political economy. London, Routledge, 2011 BROWN, Judith M. Modern India: the Origins of an Asian Democracy. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1985 DALRYMPLE, William. The Last Mughal. London, Bloomsbury, 2006 FRENCH, Patrick. Liberty or Death. London, Penguin Books, 1997 JUDD, Denis. Empire: the British Imperial Experience, from 1765 to the Present. London, 1996 LEADBEATER, Tim. Britain and India 1845-1947. London, Hodder Education, 2008 REES, Rosemary. India 1900-47. Harlow, Heinemann, 2006 Websites www.hisorylearningsite.co.uk: TRUEMAN, Chris & co. India 1900-1947 www.thenagain.info: KOELLER, David. India’s Independence from Britain 1947 www.open.ac.uk: Making Britain: 1947 quit India Movement www.bbc.co.uk: KAUL, Chandrika. History: from empire to Independence
To begin, British Imperialism had many political effects on India’s people throughout the years. The forcefulness of Europe’s invasion brought plenty of fear and destruction among the government, which in the following years would become run completely by British officials. According to document two, “The Indians have no control whatsoever over their own taxation...The entire civil government is now carried on by men who live lives quite remote from the people they govern.” According to Dr. Lalvani in paragraph twelve, Imperialism brought Indians together. He states, “perhaps the most innovative of all was the bringing together of several different states into one unified India.” That may have been the result in sight, but the truth is, as shown in document one, when Gandhi states, “For a hundred years, you have done everything for us. You have given us no responsibility for our own
Self determination is the process by which a country determines its own statehood and forms its own allegiances and government. This is exactly what India and Pakistan were able to do when they were separated. For example, they both played parts in the cold war. India was completely neutral, and Pakistan allied with the United States to prevent Soviet expansion in Asia (India, 36). Another example would be in 1974 when India tested a plutonium-based bomb after Pakistan celebrated their 40th anniversary separated from India. India said it was a “peaceful nuclear explosive (Schorr, 19). These examples show that the Britain’s separation and withdrawal from the two subcontinents allows them to make their own choices and possibly benefit from
Imperialism in India lasted 190 years, from 1757 to 1947. India was taken over by the British for their interests in the potential for power and goods that were available there. However, the British were pressured to take India by some of Europe, including the French and Dutch, because they all wanted to share the resources that could be removed. The overall effects on the British imperializing India were negative.
Let us begin by discussing the development of nationalism in India. Nationalism can be lightly traced back to a rebellion called the Indian Mutiny in 1857. This mostly sparked from the Sepoys refusing to use cartridges greased from pork or beef. According to our document “The Indian Revolt”, “The overt ground of the general mutiny was offence to caste feelings, given by the
British Imperialism in India and South Asia forever changed the course of history, having both positive and negative effects on these nations and ultimately resulting in an imperialized system that limited the freedom of citizens in India and brought tremendous wealth to Britain. Imperialism is the policy of extending the rule of a country over other countries or colonies To this degree, Britain took control of India and South Asia because they saw an opportunity for trade superiority and were enticed by the potential these regions held. From the mid eighteenth to twentieth centuries, India was governed by two different variations of British imperialism. First through the British East India Company, perhaps the most powerful private trading entity the world has ever seen, and second, through the direct control of the British government. The British East India Company came to dominate and control India for nearly two centuries, exploiting the nation's resources and rendering them economically and socially delayed . These centuries of imperialism ended in many issues in India, including economic instability, social inequity, crime, and political corruption. These factors drastically altered their culture, forever changing India's future potential, primarily for the worse. While the British carried out many modifications that seemed, at first, to aid the Indian populace, such changes were irreparably damaging and left the nation helpless and underdeveloped.
"All the leadership had spent their early years in England. They were influenced by British thought, British ideas, that is why our leaders were always telling the British "How can you do these things? They're against your own basic values.". We had no hatred, in fact it was the other way round - it was their values that made us revolt." -Aruna Asaf Ali, a leader of the Indian National Congress. (Masani, quoted in Wood, 32, 1989)
Gandhi, famous for his peaceful ways of protesting, led India to independence by defying the British legislation. Despite being arrested and beaten, Gandhi never gave up and used the setbacks to fuel his determination to fight for independence. The three major events in the fight against the British rule included the massacre at the Golden Temple, the homespun movement, and the salt march. Each event brought India closer to being a free country. Led by Gandhi, India struggled to gain independence from Britain in a nonviolent approach, but remained peaceful in their protests even with the British mercilessly obstructing their fight for freedom.
Thousands of years ago, Indian society developed into a complex system based on different classes. This system was known as the Caste System. It separated Indians into different castes based on what class were born into. As thousands of years went by, this system grew larger and became further complex (Wadley 189). This system caused frustration for the Indian citizens because they were receiving inequality. Not only did the inequality and separation of the Indian society frustrate the citizens of India, but the imperialism Britain had upon them as well. In the early 20th century, Indian nationalists wanted to take a stand against the British rule and make India independent. The British created unfair laws that created a nationalist movement
After WW2 Britten had been considerably weaken because of World War 2. The fighting also took an exhausting tool on them and on the military and financial recourses. They were so exhausted from the war that they did not resist much when a global independence move swept through the countries they colonized. While the colonized people had a new desire to fight for their independence the Europeans were to war-weary and had little desire to fight back. For years now India had been demanding self-rule from Britten, but as their wish drew closer so did the tension between the Muslim minorities in a land who’s majority was Hindu. Most of the leaders in India were Hindu and they wanted to involve both Muslims and Hindus into the Congress Party. But
James, Lawrence. "The Mutiny: 1857-59." Raj: the Making and Unmaking of British India. New York: St. Martin's Griffin, 1997. 233-98. Print.
India holds a prominent place in the history of imperialism and decolonization, making recent events in this country of nearly one billion especially important to the current day citizen. India also faces problems associated with accommodating religion and diversity within a large federal republic, making their experience important for Americans concerned with these issues. India faces growing action of governing which invites the use of violence to achieve political objectives. In spite of India's size and importance, it is hard for an American to gain an understanding of the issues and conflicts which have set the stage for the most recent revival of Hindu nationalism. The central feature of this new reform in Indian federal politics is the clash between Hindu and secular nationalists.
When the Indian nationalists were revolting against the British Empire, it changed the way of life in India. It let women have a more active role in everyday activities. Mehta’s father played a very active role in the revolutions; he used his house as a place for Indian nationalists to hide out for this he was placed in jail for several years. Her uncle was sentenced to seventeen years in a torture camp for different charges. Yet when asked what their worst memory of being under British rule was, they simply provided a simple story with not much significance. Now instead of being under British rule, the India people are under the rule of leaders that view themselves as being the person who drove the British out of India. One thing remains the same though, the people of India view their land as being their own, and that is what is important to them.
In this article we will see how Dr.Rajendra Prasad played a pivotal role in independence movement. Though his extra-ordinary role in independence, he his remembered as the first president of India rather than a freedom fighter. This is because of his charismatic personality and the elegant way in which he carried the peace message of India to foreign country in post independence era. Amidst all this, we will see how unknowingly in the process of achieving the bigger goal of independence resulted in weakening of social fabric of Hindus and Muslim. Most importantly we would also investigate how the “bad evil”,that polluted the society in name of Indian culture, made the process of independence more complex and difficult. We would
By the year 1857 the British had established complete political control of India. As Western education was introduced and missionaries eroded Hindu society resentment among Indian people grew and it was joined by unease among the old governing class when the British decided to formally abolish the Mughal Empire.
In 1857, British ruled two thirds of India through East India Company. The remaining part of the country was under the control of Princes with whom the British had an alliance. The year 1857 was an eventful year in the history of the Indian people. It was in that year that the great armed uprising took place against the British rule in India. It began on 10th May 1857 at Meerut with the mutiny of Indian soldiers or ‘sepoys’ as the British used to call them. Next day these soldiers marched into Delhi where they were joined by the soldiers stationed at Delhi. The city of Delhi passed into their hands. The unrest against the British rule that had been brewing for a long time now broke out into a revolt. It was by far the most widespread challenge to the British rule. It brought together soldiers of different regions and many rulers and chiefs of different states and principalities to fight for the common aim of overthrowing the British rule. Many other sections of Indian society- landlords, peasants, artisans, scholars- joined the revolt. Because of the widespread and popular nature of the revolt, some consider it the first Indian war of independence.