The Struggle for Indian Independence and Summary
Overview
Statewide Dual Credit Modern World History: Unit 12, Lesson 10
A discussion of the Indian independence movement, focusing on the role of Mohandas Gandhi and his non-violent protests. It also covers the partition of India and Pakistan, and the lasting impact of Gandhi's legacy. Includes excerpts from "Indian Home Rule" by M. K. Gandhi.
During the latter part of the 19th century, a new, more direct form of Indian nationalism developed. Indians were well aware that other parts of the empire had been given more control over local affairs, a process the British had resisted in India. Over a million Indians volunteered to serve during the First World War. Many expected that, due to their sacrifices, after the war, they would be granted more control over the running of India. The British did hire and promote more Indians within the civil service but ultimately refused to hand over actual control. As such, British India continued to be run by the British to serve and enrich Britain.
After the war, discontent in India grew as inflation, high taxes and an influenza pandemic put many people on edge. Failing to fix the underlying problems and increasingly fearful of rebellion, the British extended wartime emergency measures, which prevented Indians from gathering or protesting British rule. The violence of British rule could be seen on April 13, 1919 when, General Reginald Dyer ordered his men to open fire on a crowd that had gathered to celebrate a Sikh religious festival. According to British figures (which some claim are far too low), the Amritsar Massacre killed 379 people and wounded more than 1,000. The violence of Amritsar encouraged many to join the movement for Indian independence.
Mohandas Gandhi (1869-1948) is most closely associated with this new push for self-rule. Born into a relatively wealthy family, Gandhi studied law in England. In 1893, he became involved in a labor dispute in the Colony of Natal in Southeast Africa. In Natal, Gandhi came face-to-face with the poor conditions suffered by migrant Indian workers. Similar to elsewhere, especially in the Caribbean, plantation owners in Natal had imported thousands of indentured laborers from India. After completing their indentureship, some wished to stay in Natal, but new and increasingly strict regulations limited their freedom and discriminated against them. This included an 1896 law that stripped Indians of the right to vote. Learning firsthand that while the courts could be a valuable tool for change, they could be ignored by oppressive governments, Gandhi wanted a more direct way to confront and end Natal’s discriminatory laws. After some soul searching, which included reading Hindu and Christian texts, Gandhi developed a form of non-violent resistance known as satyagraha. Roughly translated as “truth force,” satyagraha is a non-violent protest in which the protester tries to alter the oppressor through love, compassion and a demonstration of resolve. Gandhi further integrated the philosophy of satyagraha into his vision for self-government in India, as outlined in his 1909 publication, "Indian Home Rule".
Gandhi organized protests to draw attention to the unfair and discriminatory laws. Tired of the disruption and bad press, in 1914, the government of Natal abolished a slew of discriminatory laws, including unfair taxation of Indian workers and property owners; they recognized non-Christian marriage and agreed to continue to allow free non-indentured Indian people to remain and to immigrate to Natal.
Returning to India a national hero (he received the moniker “mahatma,” meaning great soul) in 1915, Gandhi wanted to learn more about his native land. As he toured around India, Gandhi witnessed how the repressive and discriminatory laws of the British held India back. Developing a version of Indian independence rooted in the traditions of the village, Gandhi advocated that people use non-violence to free India from British rule. He asked Indians to stop supporting colonialism by boycotting British products, to stop working for the British state, and to no longer pay unfair and predatory taxes.
During the 1920s, Gandhi successfully turned the Indian National Congress (a nationalist political party) into a mass movement capable of challenging British rule. With the help of Gandhi, the independence movement grew in power and popularity. Gandhi worked toward his vision of a multicultural and free India based on mutual respect. Employing his direct non-violent stance, Gandhi and his supporters demanded that Britain “Quit India.”
During the 1930s and 1940s, the power of another independence group, the All-Indian Muslim League, had increased. Led by Muhammed Ali Jinnah (1876- 1948), the Muslim League wanted to partition India into separate Hindu and Muslim states. This was in direct opposition to the pluralistic cooperative state envisioned by Gandhi. As it became increasingly apparent that the British would be forced to ‘Quit’ India, violence between Hindus and Muslims increased.
The British agreed to partition India, which led, in August 1947, to the creation of an independent India and Pakistan. Millions of Muslims in India and Hindus in the newly created state of Pakistan would uproot their lives and travel, often long distances, to create a new life among their co-religionists. Independence did not end the political and religious violence.
On January 30, 1948, Gandhi was assassinated by a Hindu nationalist who shot him three times. Gandhi remains a national hero who helped India achieve independence. His stance on civil disobedience, his unwavering dedication, and his successful application of direct non-violent resistance have inspired many political activists.
SUMMARY
World War I ushered in a new era of warfare. Not only had conflict become global, but it was now much more destructive and deadly. The war also demonstrated how the modern state could be reconstituted to fight what is now known as total war. The Russian Revolution led to the creation of the first Marxist-inspired state. Sympathizers hoped that the Soviet Union would create a more egalitarian society along Marxist-Leninist lines. Instead, a strong one-party authoritarian dictatorship emerged that ruled with little opposition and increasing repression of alternative voices by sending political opponents to forced labor camps. The independence movement in India gave birth to new nations and forms of national conflict and struggle. The campaign for Indian independence inspired other colonies to fight for sovereignty. The early decades of the 20th century presented numerous issues and problems but also brought hope as dedicated groups all across the globe struggled for increased freedoms and equality.
Primary Source | Gandhi
Excerpts from M. K. Gandhi's "Indian Home Rule" (1909)
EDITOR:
I would say to the extremists: "I know that you want Home Rule1 for India; it is not to be had for your asking. Everyone will have to take it for himself. What others get for me is not Home Rule but foreign rule; therefore, it would not be proper for you to say that you have obtained Home Rule if you have merely expelled the English. I have already described the true nature of Home Rule. This you would never obtain by force of arms. Brute-force is not natural to Indian soil. You will have, therefore, to rely wholly on soul-force. You must not consider that violence is necessary at any stage for reaching our goal." I would say to the moderates: "Mere petitioning is derogatory; we thereby confess inferiority. To say that British rule is indispensable, is almost a denial of the Godhead. We cannot say that anybody or anything is indispensable except God. Moreover, common sense should tell us that to state that, for the time being, the presence of the English in India is a necessity, is to make them conceited.
"If the English vacated India, bag and baggage, it must not be supposed that she would be widowed. It is possible that those who are forced to observe peace under their pressure would fight after their withdrawal. There can be no advantage in suppressing an eruption; it must have its vent. If, therefore, before we can remain at peace, we must fight amongst ourselves, it is better that we do so2. There is no occasion for a third party to protect the weak. It is this so-called protection which has unnerved us. Such protection can only make the weak weaker. Unless we realize this, we cannot have Home Rule. I would paraphrase the thought of an English divine3 and say that anarchy under Home Rule were better than orderly foreign rule. Only, the meaning that the leaned divine attached to Home Rule is different from Indian Home Rule according to my conception. We have to learn, and to teach others, that we do not want the tyranny of either English rule or Indian rule."
If this idea were carried out, both the extremists and the moderates could join hands. There is no occasion to fear or distrust one another.
READER:
What then, would you say to the English?
EDITOR:
To them I would respectfully say: "I admit you are my rulers. It is not necessary to debate the question whether you hold India by the sword or by my consent. I have no objection to your remaining in my country, but although you are the rulers; you will have to remain as servants of the people. It is not we who have to do as you wish, but it is you who have to do as we wish. You may keep the riches that you have drained away from this land, but you may not drain riches henceforth. Your function will be, if you so wish, to police India; you must abandon the idea of deriving any commercial benefit from us. We hold the civilization that you support to be the reverse of civilization. We consider our civilization to be far superior to yours. If you realize this truth, it will be to your advantage and, if you do not, according to your own proverb4, you should only live in our country in the same manner as we do. You must not do anything that is contrary to our religions. It is your duty as rulers that for the sake of the Hindus you should eschew beef, and for the sake of Mahomedans5 you should avoid bacon and ham. We have hitherto said nothing because we have been cowed down, but you need not consider that you have not hurt our feelings by your conduct. We are not expressing our sentiments either through base selfishness or fear, but because it is our duty now to speak out boldly. We consider your schools and courts to be useless. We want our own ancient schools and courts to be restored. The common language of India is not English but Hindi. You should, therefore, learn it. We can hold communication with you only in our national language.
"We cannot tolerate the idea of your spending money on railways and the military. We see no occasion for either. You may fear Russia; we do not. When she comes we shall look after her. If you are with us, we may then receive her jointly. We do not need any European cloth. We shall manage with articles produced and manufactured at home. You may not keep one eye on Manchester6 and the other on India. We can work together only if our interests are identical.
1Independence, self-government.
2Gandhi thus foresees the possibility of something like the divisive violence that occurred at Independence, even though it was to break his heart and take his life.
3Clergyman.
4"When in Rome, do as the Romans do."
5 An old English term for "Muslim." Note that Gandhi is already trying to be sensitive to both religions. This was the issue that in the end defeated him.
6The center of the English cotton-weaving trade. One of Gandhi's most important campaigns was to persuade Indians to wear only traditional Indian homespun garments, boycotting English imports.
Gandhi, M. K. (1922). Indian Home Rule (5th ed.). Ganesh & Co. from https://www.gutenberg.org/files/40461/40461-h/40461-h.htm