How far did extremism represent radicalization of the national movement?

The intellectual roots of extremism can be traced in the writings of Bankim Chandra,
Vishnu hastri, Vivekanand and others! However, the ob"ective conditions for its
development were provided b# the events around the turn of the centur# which threw up
a number of leaders who were more radical in their approach! The $ndian Councils %ct of
&'() was *uite inade*uate and disappointing! The councils still remained ridden with
official nominees+ members were elected indirectl# and were ineffective in preventing the
government from carr#ing out its decisions! The government imposed excise dut# on
cotton goods produced in $ndia to help the British trading interests+ it did not adhere to
the demands of the Congress to $ndianize the services, reduce militar# expenditure or
lower the taxes! econdl#, the economic exploitation of $ndia b# British traders,
manufactures and financial groups, and the resultant growing povert# of the $ndian
people also helped in the rise of extremism in $ndian politics! ,nemplo#ment became so
acute and disastrous that people lost their faith in -oderate leadership and constitutional
methods for redressing their grievances!
The political discontent among the people further increased b# the high.handed measures
of /ord Curzon during his vicero#alt#! He passed a number of acts like the Calcutta
Corporation %ct in &'(( which curtailed the powers of the local self.government and was
a move directl# connected with the interests of the Calcutta 0uropean business
communit#, the 1fficial ecrets %ct which curtailed the freedom of press, and the
,niversities %ct of &(23 which curtailed educational autonom# and made education more
expensive! However, the most offensive incident was the partition of the province of
Bengal in &(24! $t was claimed that the partition was for better administration of an
unwield# province, but in realit# it was meant to curb the radical Bengali nationalism!
There was also the motive of placating the -uslims and creating a solid -uslims bloc
against the Hindus! %lso, the purpose was to create a division among the predominantl#
Hindu politicians of the 5est and the 0ast Bengal!
The people of Bengal considered partition as an attack on the growing solidarit# of
Bengali nationalism and felt that the# had been humiliated! The partition revolutionized
the political life of Bengal! The anti.partition sentiment took the form of a movement!
Breaking from the past methods of protests, it developed a variet# of new and militant
techni*ues, attracted larger number of people than before into the national movement and
broadened into a national struggle for wara"! The agitation against the partition was an
unprecedented one in the histor# of modern $ndia and a landmark in the growth of $ndian
nationalism!
The basic elements of extremist attitude were alread# visible b# &'(2s but the# were not
so prominent! $t was the administration of /ord Curzon and particularl# his decision to
partition Bengal which brought extremist nationalism into the forefront! The extremist
leadership was provided b# B!C! 6al and %urobindo 7hosh in Bengal, Tilak in
-aharashtra, /a"pat 8ai in 6un"ab, etc! The extremists drew inspiration from $ndia9s past,
invoked the great episodes in the histor# of $ndian people and tried to infuse national
pride and self.respect among them! The political philosoph# of the extremists was not a
consistent whole! 5hile the Bengal school of extremists was influenced b# the neo.
Vedanta movement of wami Vivekanad, Tilak revived the memor# of hiva"i9s struggle
against the -ughal 0mpire! :ationalism in their hands was expressed in religious terms!
/a"pat 8ai was greatl# influenced b# the %r#a ama"! $n sum, all of them emphasized that
idealizing British culture b# the -oderates onl# engendered an inferiorit# complex
among the $ndians!
-aking a difference between the -oderates and the 0xtremists, Tilak made it clear that it
was not b# their purpose but b# their methods that the# have earned the name
;0xtremists9! The purpose is the same as that of -oderates that is it was not concerned
with abolishing the British rule completel# but with obtaining a larger share of power for
the people in the administration of the countr#! 5hereas -oderates were concerned with
sending deputations to the British authorities, supporting a newspaper or pleading for
"ustice, the 0xtremists emplo#ed other methods! Their motto was self.reliance, not
mendicanc#! Besides the wadeshi movement, the# popularized bo#cott and passive
resistance! -oderates appealed to the British government and the British nation, the
0xtremists on the other hand appealed to their own people and to their own 7od! The
political ideas of 0xtremists were based upon different assumptions! The# were lack of
faith in foreign government and administration!
0xtremists did not aim at mere administrative reforms but declared self.government as
the onl# means through which the economic, social and cultural progress of $ndia could
be assured! The 0xtremists made wara" as their motto and wadeshi, bo#cott and
passive resistance as a means to achieve these ob"ectives! $t favoured self.help through
wadeshi industries, national schools and attempt at improvement and organization of
villages! $t also came to be associated with religious revivalism! Hinduism came to be
combined with extremist nationalism!
The two new techni*ues adopted to popularize the struggle were bo#cott and wadeshi!
The bo#cott was to include the bo#cott of foreign goods, government schools and
colleges, courts, titles, government services, civil disobedience of un"ust laws and even
the organization of strikes! The bo#cott of foreign goods met with great success at the
popular level! Bo#cott and public burning of foreign cloths, picketing of shops selling
foreign goods became common in Bengal and other parts of the countr#! The demand for
foreign goods considerabl# decreased from &(2< onwards! However the movement could
not retain its momentum for long!
The positive side of bo#cott was a call for wadeshi = a vigorous drive for the production
and sale of indigenous goods and services, it was a means to achieve industrial and
general economic regeneration and advancement for $ndia! The movement gave a
stimulus to cottage industries and even large scale enterprises of various sorts! $t also
brought about a significant revival in handloom, silk.weaving and some other traditional
crafts! However, the lack of capital became a critical factor at economic level! 1n the
whole, wadeshi as an economic weapon could never seriousl# threaten the British hold
over the $ndian econom#!
>The 0xtremists had certain common features! ?irstl#, the# gave a new meaning to the
concept of $ndian nation! The# invented and spread such terms as ;mother $ndia9 and
wara"! :ationalism was the first political creed of the 0xtremists! econdl#, the#
instilled courage and self.confidence among the politicall# conscious sections of the
people of the countr#! Thirdl#, the# aroused enthusiasm of the masses for political action
and gave a democratic direction to the movement b# broadening the mass base! ?ourthl#,
through economic bo#cott, 0xtremists succeeded in promoting economic nationalism as
well as political nationalism!
-ilitant nationalism contributed in a big wa# in advancing the cause of national
movement! $t clarified the ob"ectives of the movement, brought in new methods of
political organization, broadened the social base of the movement and taught the people
self.reliance! $t declared wara" as the ultimate goal of the movement! $t improved the
methods of mass mobilization! %s a result, the social base of the movement increased
considerabl# which now included lower middle class in the cities and small towns!
However, the movement lacked effective organization and part# structure! Though it
threw in new ideas and methods such as swadeshi, bo#cott, passive resistance and social
reforms but it could not give a centralized disciplined focus carr#ing the bulk of $ndia
politicall# with it and convert these techni*ues into actual political practice! %lso, it could
not mobilize the peasantr#! $t could not get the support of the -uslim communit#! The
colonial rule consciousl# attempted to use communalism to turn the -uslims against
swadeshi and bo#cott movement! The %ll $ndia -uslim /eague was set up during this
period with the active guidance and support of the government and with the sole purpose
of opposing the wadeshi movement!
0xtremist nationalism thus proved short.lived! Between &(2@ and &(2', when its
prominent leaders were either arrested or deported almost at one stroke, the entire
movement was rendered leaderless! Those who survived took to the path of revolutionar#
terrorism! But it made a lasting contribution in eroding the hegemon# of colonial ideas
and institutions!
%part from the partition of Bengal, the battle between the -oderates and 0xtremists was
fought out within the $ndian :ational Congress itself, culminating in a split at the urat
session in &(2@!
The 0xtremists wanted to extend the wadeshi and the bo#cott movement from Bengal to
the rest of $ndia! The# also wanted to extend the techni*ue of bo#cott from merel#
foreign goods to ever# form of cooperation with the colonial government! The
-oderates, on the other hand, wanted to restrict the movement to Bengal and were
opposed to the expansion of bo#cott to the administration!
?urthermore, in the Calcutta session in &(2<, the 0xtremists proposed the name of Tilak
as the 6resident of the Congress! To defeat the 0xtremists in their attempt of gaining
control of the Congress, the -oderates invited Aadabhai :aoro"i to preside over the
session! However, Aadabhai supported the extremist techni*ues of wadeshi, bo#cott and
national education!
wara", wadeshi and bo#cott were interpreted differentl# b# the two factions! 5hile the
0xtremists considered swadeshi and bo#cott as weapons of political warfare, the
-oderates laid stress on the economic aspect of swadeshi and regarded bo#cott as onl# a
temporar# measure! The government, on the other hand, bolstered the -oderates9
position through reforms and tried to undercut the 0xtremists b# repressive measures!
The 0xtremists selected /a"pat 8ai as their candidate for presidentship when the
Congress met at urat in &(2@! The -oderates opposed the move and succeeded in
getting their own candidate 8ash Behari 7hosh elected! The 0xtremists wanted the four
resolutions = wara", wadeshi, Bo#cott and :ational 0ducation = of &(2< Calcutta
session to be passed! To force the -oderates to compl# with their demands, the# decided
to raise ob"ection to the dul# elected 6resident! Tilak attempted to address the delegates
but he was not allowed to speak! ome delegates tried to push him, and a shoe was hurled
at him which in turn hit !:! Baner"ee and 6herozeshah -ehta! The session was
ad"ourned sine die! ubse*uentl# the Congress spilt into two camps!
6recise responsibilit# for the clash has remained controversial but arkar argues that the
ma"or provocation seems to have come from the -oderates! The 0xtremist group
repeatedl# tried for a reunion of the Congress in the months following urat! Tilak
viewed the split as a ;catastrophe9! He valued the Congress as a great national fact and for
its unrealized possibilities! This split caused the 0xtremists to lose their organizational
base and the# were unable to develop a new one of their own! 8epression b# the
government further reduced their effectiveness! The government helped the -oderates b#
arresting most of the 0xtremist nationalists! 0xtremists9 newspapers and public meetings
were banned! Tilak was sent to -andla# "ail for six #ears! %urobindo 7hosh escaped to
6ondicherr#! B!C! 6al retired from politics and /a"pat 8ai left for ,nited tates in &(2(!
The -oderates retained control over the Congress! The# met immediatel# after the
session and drafted a new constitution, redefined their aims and tightened up the
organization! The# gave up all radical programs and excluded 0xtremists from the 6art#!
The# agreed that their ob"ectives should be attainment of self.government colonies of the
British 0mpire, and that $ndia should advance towards that goal b# constitutional means!
1n the whole, due to the infighting of -oderates and 0xtremists, the national movement
declined after &(2'! %ccording to Bipan Chandra the fault lied with both the groups!
:either saw that in a vast countr# like $ndia ruled b# a powerful imperialist nation, onl# a
broad based united movement had an# chance to succeed!
Bipan Chandra
$t had been generall# assumed that the $ndian national movement underwent a basic
mutation in &(24 and possibl# a second one in &(&(! Conse*uentl#, it is customar# to
divide it into three distinct stages or periods! However, the basic continuities and changes
involved in this periodization are a matter of some controvers#!
>The basic elements of a movement areB political ob"ectives, program and ideolog#,
strateg# and methods and techni*ues of political struggle, social base, and class or social
character!C
>The basic political ob"ectives of the -oderates were to help the process of unif#ing
$ndian people into a nation, to introduce modern politics based on the doctrine of the
sovereignt# of the people and on the notion that politics is not the preserve of the ruling
classes onl#, to create among the $ndian people the feeling of self.confidence, to create an
all $ndia national political leadership, to generate, form and cr#stallize an anti.imperialist
ideolog#, to promote the growth of modern capitalist econom#, and in the end to create a
broad all $ndia national movement! $n this process, the# also undertook an anal#sis of the
basic character of British colonialism in $ndia and to spread their understanding of its
exploitative character among the $ndian people! The# created a national political platform
and program on which all $ndians belonging to different regions, religions and social
classes could agree and which could serve as the basis for all.$ndia political activit#,
whose basic aim was not good government but democratic self.government! The later
nationalists were in the main to build on their program and their concrete exposure of the
character of British rule!C
%ccording to Bipan Chandra, a difference in political aim or goal, between self.
government as in the colonies and compete independence, has been wrongl# used to
define the basic political difference between the earl# nationalists or -oderates and the
0xtremists or the militant nationalists! %fter all, the -oderate nationalists were as much
and as basicall# interested in the *uestion of political power as the militant nationalists!
The demand for $ndian political power was a function of the emotional needs of the time,
tactics, and relation of political forces! Tilak and 7andhi had no hesitation in going back
again and again from the demand for complete independence to dominion status or even
less!
The overall strateg# of the national movement was basicall# the same on all the three
periods, onl# one of its aspects undergoing a basic change!
?irstl#, the -oderate nationalists laid down that the struggle for freedom was to be
peaceful and bloodless! 6olitical progress was to be harmonized with and based on order!
This continued to be a basic tenet of the dominant leadership of the national movement
up to the end! 1nl# some of the 0xtremist leaders deviated from it in theor#! But, in
practice, the# too operated within its basic framework!
econdl#, the -oderates did not assign an important role to the masses or to mass
struggle in their work! The# assumed that for the time being political activit# was to be
confined to the educated classes! 0ven when the# saw the need for active participation b#
the masses, the# lacked confidence in the capacit# of the $ndian masses to take part in
modern politics for a long time to come! $n its turn the absence of a mass base led them to
political moderation! /acking mass support, the# confined their political work to
agitation and propaganda, and felt that the time was not ripe for throwing a challenge to
the powerful foreign rulers! To do so, the# felt, would be to invite premature repression
and destruction of the existing political movement!
The most important, and perhaps the onl# significant, shift in the nationalist political
strateg# came on this point! Tilak, Bipin Chandra 6al, and other 0xtremist leaders had
infinite faith in the power of the masses in action and in the $ndian people9s capacit# to
bear the strain of a prolonged political struggle against imperialism! The# believed that
suppression b# the government would not throttle the mass movement! $nstead, it would
educate the people, arouse them further, strengthen their resolve to overthrow
imperialism, and lead to a heightened political struggle! The# therefore advocated the
organization of a mass struggle against imperialism and as a first step the taking of
politics to the masses! However, even at the height of the 0xtremist movement in Bengal,
the peasantr# was not mobilized! The alienation between the educated 0xtremist political
workers and the masses was not lessened to an# significant extent! The# onl# succeeded
in spreading the movement deeper among the lower middle classes who had alread# been
brought within the ambit of nationalism in the -oderate era! Tilak himself accepted in
&(2@ that he was the leader primaril# of the educated $ndians! /a"pat 8ai too
acknowledged in &(2' that the political movement in $ndia had to depend on the educated
because of the backwardness and apath# of the masses!
imilarl#, the 0xtremists failed to evolve an ade*uate techni*ue of political actionD!!in
laptop
7andhi too had an immense faith in the $ndian peopleE he based his entire politics on their
militanc# and self.sacrificing spirit! He made the sharpest break with the -oderate
tradition b# reaching down to the masses, arousing them to political activit#, and bringing
them into the forefront of the struggle! This was the revolutionar# aspect of the 7andhian
period of the nationalist struggle! -oreover, 7andhi alone discovered a new and viable
method of political struggle and mass action, thus enabling him to immediatel# capture
the leadership of the movement and to retain it till the end!
However, there were serious limitations in the 7andhian leadership! The extent to which
the 7andhian movement politicized and involved the masses is often exaggerated! The
agricultural workers and poor peasants in most parts of the countr# and the masses in
general in several parts were not brought into the political process or even touched b#
nationalist politics, so that the social base of the national movement was still not ver#
strong in &(3@! The intelligentsia still provided the leadership of the movement! 5hile
the masses were moved into action, the# were never politicall# organized in spite of the
four.anna membership! The# remained outside the Congress organizational structure!
?urthermore, the political activit# of the masses was rigidl# controlled b# the middle
class leaders! The masses never became an independent political force!
The crucial weakness of the 7andhian movement and its essential continuit# with the
earlier tradition of keeping the movement within the bourgeois framework did not lied in
the refusal to take recourse to militant forms of struggle or in the predominance of non.
violent forms! This weakness la# in the utterl# restricted and subordinated role of the
masses in the political struggle, in the complete absence of an# mechanism or channel
through which the# could influence the course of the struggle or its outcome! Thus the
pattern of leadership and control remained the same as before &(24!
The -oderates assumed that the force of the public opinion of the educated $ndians and
of the British democratic opinion would suffice to provide the pressure that was to set the
entire mechanism in operation! These assumptions were ridiculed b# the later nationalists!
However, what changed after &(24 was the nature of the political pressure that was to be
brought to bear upon the rulers! Tilak and 7andhi too were not working for the direct
overthrow of British rule! The# too emphasized the techni*ue of negotiations backed b#
controlled mass action! The aim of ever# one of their movements was to compel the
British to negotiate and give concessions! Thus, even though the later nationalists gave
several calls for immediate independence, it did not mean that their strategic approach
was different!
The later nationalists did significantl# change the mode of persuasion or putting pressure!
The# put greater pressure behind their demands! The# shifted from intellectuals to the
masses, from memorials, petitions, and resolutions to processions, demonstrations and
cast mass movements! But the political advance was still to occur b# stages and through
compromise, that is ultimatel# through British consent and action!
The changing social base of the national movement was one of the elements of change in
its three phases! $n the earl# -oderate phase it was extremel# narrow, being limited to the
urban educated $ndians! $n this phase the movement continuousl# widened its social base
to include fresh social strata, especiall# sections of the lower middle classes! This is
clearl# revealed b# the stead# growth and spread of vernacular newspapers! -ost of the
earl# nationalist leaders for example, Aadabhai :aoro"i, urendranath Baner"ee, 8anade,
Tilak, 7okhale, were connected with $ndian language newspapers! The social base of the
0xtremists la# primaril# in the urban lower middle classes whom the# succeeded in
politicizing in some parts of the countr#!
:either the -oderates nor the 0xtremists had been able to get the active support of the
capitalist class since both the class and its contradiction with imperialism matured full#
onl# during and after the ?irst 5orld 5ar!
-an# historians have asserted the changes in the class or social character of the $ndian
national movement! The school of nationalist writers asserts that the earl# nationalists
represented the upper classes or at the most the educated elite and the 0xtremists
represented either the people or at least the lower, non.upper class segments of societ#,
and that 7andhi represented the oppressed peasant thus making the nation movement a
people9s movement!
However, Bipan Chandra argues in this context of the most important continuit# for the
class character of the national movement was the same throughout from its inception to
&(3@! $t was a bourgeois democratic movement, that is, it represented the interests of all
classes and segments of $ndian societ# vis.F.vis imperialism but under the hegemon# of
the industrial bourgeoisie! $n this respect, Tilak and 7andhi were no different from the
-oderates+ the# were no less bourgeois!
$n $ndia the bourgeoisie did not see a mass movement as a threat to its interests so long as
it was confined within limits that did not threaten its hegemon# over social development!
5hile the -oderates established bourgeois ideological hegemon# over the small social
segment of the intelligentsia, the political leadership of the 7andhian era established
bourgeois ideological, political and organizational hegemon# over the vast mass of
peasants, workers, and lower middle classes! Thus even though the mass bases of the
-oderates, 0xtremists, and 7andhi were so ver# different, the movements led b# them
were e*uall# bourgeois nationalist in character!
The social origins and modes of existence of the national leadership were virtuall# the
same throughout the three stages! The national leadership fro &''2 to &(3@ can be best
characterized as nationalist intelligentsia! The direct leadership of the movement was
never in the hands of the capitalists or the masses or even the lower middle classes, but
was monopolized b# the middle class nationalist intellectuals! This was recognized b# the
-oderates, Tilak, 7andhi, :ehru and others!
$n their program and ideolog#, the earl# nationalists worked for the creation of a modern
bourgeois state, econom# and societ#! Their program represented the interests of all
classes in so far as the# came into conflict with imperialism! %t the same time, the# kept
out all issues and demands which would bring one section of the $ndian societ# into
conflict with another! There was little in their program to arouse the uneducated peasants,
workers, or the urban poor! Their entire program was bourgeois in so far as it was
confined within the broad parameters of bourgeois social development!
The national leadership of the 0xtremists and 7andhian era also represented a similar
bourgeois social order! :either Tilak nor 7andhi transcended the -oderate economic and
political program or social vision! Tilak or the Bengal 0xtremists did not made an#
advance over the -oderates so far as advocac# of the interests of the masses was
concerned! Thus 7andhi and Tilak were as much the ideological and political
representatives of the industrial bourgeoisie as the -oderates in the sense that the#
viewed national interest from the point of view of the industrial bourgeoisie, and that
once the# had broken the hold of imperialist ideological hegemon# over the minds of the
$ndian people, the# all helped structure bourgeois hegemon# over $ndian societ#!
History of the Freedom Movement in India S.N. Sen
Differences between the Moderates and Etremists = S. !. Mehrotra
The earl# nationalist called -oderates had tended to regard British rule as a beneficial
necessit#! 0xtremists believed that an# foreign rule, however "ust and benevolent, was a
curse! ?or -oderates, lo#alt# was s#non#mous with patriotism! 0xtremists thought that
lo#alt# to British rule was incompatible with patriotism! -oderates had faith in the
liberalit# and sense of "ustice of the British people! 0xtremist dismissed this faith earl#
Congressmen as a delusion! 6hilanthrop#, according to them, had no place in politics!
-oderates had anxiousl# kept down the racial element in their political agitation!
0xtremists, on the other hand, did not hesitate to foster racial antagonism!
-oderate leaders had devoted themselves to demanding isolated reforms and the redress
of particular grievances! However, 0xtremists did not believe in such a methodolog#!
The# demanded a radical change in the s#stem of government itself! -oderates believed
that the continuance of British rule was the indispensable condition of $ndia9s progress
and prosperit#! 0xtremists argued that political freedom was the essential preliminar# to
all national progress! %s %urobindo 7hose succinctl# put itB ;6olitical freedom is the life.
breath of a nation+ to attempt social reform, educational reform, industrial expansion, the
moral improvement of the race without aiming first and foremost at political freedom, is
the ver# height of ignorance and futilit#!9
0ngland and its constitutional form of government had been the model for the -oderates!
The# could not conceive of a trul# popular and democratic government in $ndia except b#
a process of gradual and slow evolution! 0xtremists, however, dismissed the 0nglish
model as unsuited to $ndia! The# appealed instead to the revolutionar# traditions of
?rance, %merica, $tal# and $reland! Constitutional agitation, the# said, in a countr# where
there was no constitution and the people had no control over the administration, was
futile! Borrowing the methods of the $rish inn ?ein, the# preached the need for
organized passive resistance and self.reliance! The# advocated a bo#cott of British goods,
government.controlled schools and colleges, law courts, and executive authorit# in
general! %long with this bo#cott, a campaign of self.development was to be launched
aimed at the promotion of swadeshi GindigenousH goods, national education, etc! $f the
government did not pa# an# heed to their demands, recourse was to be taken to such
measures as the non.pa#ment of taxes! 0xtremists hoped to achieve their ob"ectives b#
peaceful and legal methods, but the# did not rule out the possibilit# of resistance to un"ust
laws, or of resorting to force in self.defence!
%urobindo 7hose wrote in &(2@B ;The Congress had contented itself with demanding
self.government as it exists in the Colonies! 5e of the new schools would not pitch our
ideal one inch lower than absolute wara" = self government as it exists in the ,nited
Iingdom! 5e believe that no smaller ideal can inspire national revival or nerve the
people of $ndia for the fierce, stubborn and formidable struggle b# which alone the# can
again become a nation!9 B!C! 6al argued that self.government within the British 0mpire
would either be no self.government for $ndia or no real overlordship for Britain! $ndians
would not be satisfied with a ;shadow of self.government9 nor would Britain be satisfied
with ;a shadow# overlordship9D!!