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
These improvements and benefits from British rule eventually led to Indian nationalism. The exposure to European ideas caused an Indian nationalist movement, the people dreamed of ending Imperial rule.
“Englishmen.. have given the people of India the greatest human blessing - peace.” (Dutt). Merely coming to India in the 1600s to trade, the British East India Company established trading outposts. After ridding of French influence in India during the Seven Years’ War and having Indians mutiny against British rule, Britain gained full control of India. India was under the imperialist control of the British until their independence in 1947.
Under British rule in India, the British were harshly oppressive and only interested in exploiting products from India for their own use, causing many Indians to become extremely poor. They became so oppressed they were on the verge of violent civil disobedience, when Gandhi appeared to negotiate with the British threw non-violent tactics such as sit-ins and hunger strikes. The people were supportive on Gandhi and were set to become violent if anything happened to him. Things were resolved without violence.
... British had colonized India for approximately 200 years, there were lasting effects on the country in terms of many sectors, specifically the economical and industrial sectors. Due to India’s non-participation and manipulation of agriculture by the British, some would argue that the British obliterated the economy. Others would argue that the British instead helped due to the creation of the railroad, improved communication and created the beginnings of an industry. The British harmed the economy and industrial sector more than they helped it, and effectively caused the destruction of the economy both in the short term and the long term. The growth rate directly after the independence was less than 1% for almost 5 years (BIC 4). It was necessary for India to rebuild the economy if they ever wanted to be on the same playing field as the other countries at the time.
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.
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
One could approach this topic from two points of view; the British and the Indian. One could choose either party and find very different opinions. When British colonizers first arrived in India, they slowly gained more and more control in India through many ways, the most prominent being trade and commerce. At first, they managed India’s government by pulling the string behind the curtain. However, soon they had acquired complete rule over India, converting it into a true British colony. The British considered Indian civilization to be inferior and implemented their western ways overriding ancient Indian customs. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that British imperialism in India resulted in both positive as well as negative reforms in political, economic and social aspects of its new colony.
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.
"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)
4 # Stein, Burton (2001), a History of India, New Delhi and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. xiv, 432, p.222
…….…, “Amitav Ghosh’s The Hungry Tide and the Blurring of National Boundaries”. Conference issue of South Asian Review 25.3; 2004.
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.
The British administered India for a period of about two centuries and brought about revolutionary changes in
The Quit India Movement was an important movement for independence although it did not gain Indian independence at that exact moment. It was a Segway into to the movement that changed Indian lives. Gandhi launched his “Quit India movement in August 1942 in Bombay. This speech was to (encourage) Indians to wage one last struggle for independence or die trying. he repudiates. Many claim that the Quit India speech by Gandhi was a Civil Disobedience Movement that was a huge launch for independence. Throughout Gandhi’s speech he requested the withdrawal of British rule from India through mass nonviolent protest asking desperately for the freedom for (of) the Indian People. Throughout Gandhi’s Passionate speech for freedom he proclaimed that “every Indian who desires there freedom and strives must be his own guide. And that “every Indian should consider there selves a free man. This speech was mostly described as an Inspirational and motivating speech that is to persuade Indians to seek their freedom. In Gandhi’s speech he had told Indians to follow non-violent civil disobedience. He told the multitudes and masses to act as an independent nation that would soon follow freedom for their people. This movement that Gandhi had given the call “Quit India” to the British and pressed Indians with his emotive slogan ‘Do or Die’. It was during this time that Gandhi made a statement: "We shall either free India or die in the attempt; we shall not live to see the perpetuation of our slavery". His goal and aims throughout his speech was to encourage the British government to negotiate through determined, but passive resistance.
The British invasion formed into a historical development of British colonialism in India. Despite India under the British rule, Mahatma Gandhi played an important role in gaining Independence. He not only changed India but also strongly fought for India's independence, using various strategies. The British Empire ruled as long as they could to reform India both politically and socially.