CENTRE FOR HISTORICAL STUDIES

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY, NEW DELHI

TUTORIAL – 1

Course Name: Indian National Movement Mass Phase 1905 – 1947

Submitted to: Dr. Manoj Sharma

Submitted by: Saarvoshini. B

Enrolment No: 24/61/HH/011

Introduction:

The role of Extremists in Indian National Movement is absolutely quintessential as like all other
phases and factions. When the call for nationalism was lingering, the so called Extremists gave
life to it through different methods. As the Moderates were becoming more and more confined to
their methods of prayers and petitions being a large part of the Anglo - Indian bureaucracy, the
need for the emergence of extremism arises. The soil was ripe for it. The New Nationalists
invoked the glorious ancient past of India to eliminate the western influence through Hindu
revivalism with references to the ideas of Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, Swami Vivekananda and
Swami Dayananda Saraswathi. They emphasized that political freedom is only be possible with
inward uprising based on spiritualism and religious emotions which always remained as a bone
of contention. All the Neo Nationalists were initially Moderates who were unsatisfied with the
political mendicancy, loyalty of English educated elites or intelligentsia which was the
Moderates as evident from Tilak’s words as follows:

“The Extremists of to-day will be Moderates of tomorrow, just as the Moderates of to-day were
Extremists of yesterday”.

Transformation from Regionalism to Nationalism:

Initially, the Extremist phase was vigorous only in Bengal which soon united with various
factions like Punjab, Maharashtra to get an ‘All India’ character. It was due to Curzon’
administration and his colleagues’ proposals for the partition of Bengal. Curzon’s prediction
didn’t go wrong. Herbert Risley, the Home Secretary to the Government of India said on 6
December 1904: ‘Bengal united, is power, Bengal divided, will pull several different ways. That
is what the Congress leaders feel: their apprehensions are perfectly correct and they form one of
the great merits of the scheme… in this scheme one of our main objects is to split up and thereby
weaken a solid body of opponents to our rule’. 1 Indian nationalism was at the embryonic stage
which had Bengal as its centre. In an attempt to weaken Congress stronghold, Curzon failed. It
was topsy - turvy. Partition of Bengal united Indians to fight against the British rule. It actually
added strength to the growing discontent to throw off the foreign yoke. As Abdul Rasul,
1
Bipin Chandra et al., India’s Struggle for Independence (UK: Penguin, 2016), 125.
President of Barisal Conference, April 1906, put it: ‘What we could not have accomplished in 50
or 100 years, the great disaster, the partition of Bengal, has done for us in six months. Its fruits
have been the great national movement known as Swadeshi Movement’ 2. Partition of Bengal
gave an opportunity for Neo Nationalists to break the Congress claim of ‘too often, too much for
too little’ which meant constitutional demands. Anti - partition movement instilled national
consciousness. Bengal was the France, nay, the Athens of India.3 Clearly evident from
Aurobindo’s expression that liberation of Bengal will light up the fire for India’s freedom.
British created the psychological background for the split in Congress. They pitted the Moderates
against the Extremists on one hand and on the other hand, they created suspicions about Bengali
identity as a divisive factor. Lord Dufferin’s language and allegories of ‘microscopic minority’,
‘disloyal babus’, ‘seditious Brahmins’ were visible allegations. 4 So the Anti - partition
movement came as a shock to British with the solidarity of Indians. It was for the first time large
sections of society came into active participation in modern nationalist politics. With this came
the formal proclamation of Swadeshi Movement on 7 th August, 1905. Soon, 16th October, 1905
was declared a Day of Mourning. Tilak took the movement in full swing in Poona and Bombay,
Lal and Ajit Singh in Punjab, Syed Haidar Raza in Delhi, V. O. C in Madras Presidency
accompanied by Bipin Chandra Pal’s tour. Partition had now become the ‘pettiest and narrowest
of all political objects’5. Its techniques were pioneer to Gandhian mass politics in the form of
Samitis or Corps of Volunteers. They also rendered life to “Bengali Renaissance”. Thus, one era
in Indian freedom struggle had just begun. It strengthened the idea of nationalism in a creative
way. More than nationalism, it showcased to the British, the ability and capacity to agitate with
unity eroding the hegemony of the Raj. Curzon forgot that he was addressing not the young
Bengal of the early 19th century but the Extremist Bengal of the early 20th century.6

2
Chandra et al., India Struggle for Independence, 127.
3
Amlesh Tripathi., The Extremist Challenge: India Between 1890 and 1910 (Hyderabad: Orient
Longmans, 1967), 64.
4
Chandra et al., India Struggle for Independence, 115.
5
Ibid., 128.
6
Tripathi, The Extremist Challenge, 99.
Swadeshi and implications:

Boycott and Swadeshi had double implications such as economic pressure on Manchester and
dispelling illusion (Maya) of British power.7 They launched Swadeshi to attain economic self –
reliance and to eliminate foreign dependence which will shook very foundations of British
Empire. They extended it to administration also. The new method of passive resistance that is
boycott applicable to economic, educational, judicial and administrative machineries with unity
but with some religious tone like mixture of bone dust in Mauritius sugar etc., It aimed to include
all sections of the society which was successful in binding jute mill workers, railway workers
etc., Holistically, it tried to reach out the masses and reduced the gap between rich and poor. On
technological front, the study of technology was expected to forge our links with future.8 Both
the elements are integral to national education. Thus the National Council of Education, Bengal
National College was born. Through these agendas, Extremists tried to establish India’s capacity
to self sufficiency devoid of western industrialization and its malice. Boycott or Swadeshi or
national education was all means to single great end – Swaraj.9 It laid foundations to future
Gandhian mass mobilizations based on constructive programme. Though it couldn’t sustain for
long, it prepared the field for Gandhi to take up. Swadeshi idea of economic regeneration added
strength to nationalism and feared British. The Mahratta remarked “If the insatiable greed of
Lancashire is to rule India let the heroic determination of India ruin Lancashire”. 10

Swaraj and its legacy:

Swaraj or the idea of self rule was different to its advocates. Tilak considered Swaraj in initial
stages as non severance of Indian connections with Britain but the institution of self government.
Later, he asserted that it is impossible. According to Bipin Chandra Pal, these two concepts are
irreconcilable. He ably understood and explained the vicious circle of British control in foreign
policy which needs access to finance to maintain army in a way breaking the autonomy of self
government. Aurobindo also considered political independence as the foremost objective as
evident from the following words: “It would mean either no real self government for us or no

7
Amlesh Tripathi., The Extremist Challenge, 109.
8
Ibid., 119.
9
Ibid., 124.
10
Ibid., 50.
real overlordship for England”.11 Tilak emphasized bloodless revolution, later he realized that it
wouldn’t work and so he gave the clarion call – “Swaraj is my birthright and I shall have it”.
Lala Lajpat Rai insisted on working with united front to set aside the differences with fellow
Congressmen (i.e. Moderates). Extremists were successful in persuading Moderates to accept the
goal of Swaraj which was articulated in the Calcutta session of Indian National Congress
presided by Dadabhai Naoroji. He declared the goal of INC was ‘self government or Swaraj like
that of the United Kingdom or the Colonies’.12 The call for Swaraj through mobilization invited
and saw successful widespread participation of women and marginalized sections of the society.
It had its legacy in demand for complete withdrawal of the British from India with Gandhi and
Nehru’s ‘Poorna Swaraj’ carried on with ‘Quit India’ in Indian freedom struggle.

Hindu – Muslim polarization:

British’s policy of ‘Divide and Rule’ was successful in many ways such as annulment of
partition etc., Most significant factor which led to the turmoil of Hindu - Muslim relations was
the appeal of Hindu revivalism and nationalism by Extremist leaders. There were communal riots
during Swadeshi Movement in East Bengal: Iswaganj (Mymensingh), Comilla, Jamalpur,
Dewangunj, Bakshigunj. Tagore pointed amply that, ‘Satan cannot enter till he finds a flaw’, and
the crucial problem was that ‘a great ocean separates us educated few from millions in our
country’.13 Provocative language of Neo Nationalists such as Muslims who supported Partition as
‘hired agents’ of the British. Hindu revivalism at its zenith persuaded the Muslims to take
reciprocal claims like that of Swajati with Swadeshi purely Moslem commerce, industries and
education. Tilak’s insistence of Shivaji and Ganapati festival and Aurobindo’s reference of
goddess Kali, Durga expressed communal tone. “The common factor in Indian society”, said
Tilak, “is the feeling of Hinduttva..., we say that the Hindus of the Punjab, Bengal, Maharashtra,
Telangana and Dravida are one and the reason for this is only Hindu dharma”14. Aurobindo
attributed his claims to Vivekananda’s ideal of religion as common ground. Lal, an orthodox
Arya Samajist adhered strictly to Hindu nationalism. Extremists couldn’t rally Muslims during
Swadeshi Movement. To add fuel to the fire, Muslim League was also born pretending the lack

11
Amlesh Tripathi., The Extremist Challenge, 125.
12
Chandra et al., India’s Struggle for Independence, 128.
13
Sumit Sarkar., Modern India: 1885 – 1947 (Macmillian, 1989), 105.
14
Amlesh Tripathi., The Extremist Challenge, 61.
of representation. Thus, Anti - Partition and Swadeshi Movement sidelined Muslims and sowed
the seeds for future debacles. Destiny wrote that day of another and more tragic partition to
come, but the Bengali Hindus, exulting over the apparent success of their parochial nationalism,
failed to read the ominous writing on the wall.15

Emergence of new trends in Indian National Movement:

The rise of revolutionary nationalism in Bengal was not unconnected with the decline of
Extremist phase. A trend called revolutionary nationalism evolved. The failure of Extremists led
to ‘the politics of bomb’.16 Their adherence to self-sacrifice drew these young men to commit
violence expressing their patriotism. These men inspired by Irish and Russian methods of
revolution took to assassination of officials and created terror among them. Men used it as an
opportunity to inspire people to follow as ‘propaganda by deed’. 17 All their beliefs had roots in
the Extremists’ emphasis on violence especially Aurobindo. Thus, Extremists acted as
forerunners for these youths. Many secret societies came up such as Anushilan Samity and
Yugantar. Its striking feature of support from abroad was novel step. India House at London was
established by Shyamji Krishnaverma in 1905. The chain of events were Ghadar Movement in
California, Canada coincided with War years. They carried their revolutionary activities on the
same lines of Extremists with religious parochialism. This method didn’t result in any open
polarization but added to the existing separatist tendencies. Aurobindo himself trained
revolutionaries based in Midnapur from 1902. Hemachandra Kanungo’s aid from Paris
frightened British for their worldwide contacts. The social limitations of Bengal revolutionary
terrorism remains obvious; in a 1918 official list of 186 killed or convicted revolutionaries, no
less than 165 came from these upper castes, Brahman, Kayastha and Vaidya. 18 Though the socio
economic base of these revolutionaries was slightly marginalized, their approaches adhered to
religion and traditions made it face the same fate as Extremists met. After a decade of silence,
the bomb burst again among the revolutionaries due to the failure of Non - Cooperation
Movement. The revolutionary nationalism of 1920s owes strong connections with Extremists
approaches. There were also enhanced differences and improvements in their ideologies
15
Amlesh Tripathi., The Extremist Challenge, 103.
16
Chandra et al., India’s Struggle for Independence, 142.
17
Ibid., 143.
18
Sumit Sarkar., Modern India: 1885 – 1947 (Macmillian, 1989), 125.
neglecting religion in the place of socialism and western revolutionary thoughts. Notably, same
provinces which were the epicenters of extremism gave momentum to revolutionary terrorism in
1920s. The emergence of Bhagat Singh on the scene changed scenario to some extent. Apart
from some individual converts to communalism, and a few efforts at the combining the old and
the New in what came to called “Terro - Communism”, the sheer weight of the established
terrorist tradition still prevented serious rethinking on matters like Hindu religiosity includes
terror and the cult of heroic self sacrifice by the few. 19 Communism made inroads into India in
later stages.

Why it was short-lived?

As the Government possesses autocratic authority and control, it was able to inflict severe
repression. The communal tone of the extremists was portrayed as such by the Britishers.
Though it had religious tone, the use of traditional, customs, festivals etc., in order to gain the
attention and support of the masses have been misrepresented, distorted by the Raj as
“Communalists”. Swadeshi Movement was meted out with severe repression in the form of
expulsion of students from government institutions, ban of public gatherings, curbing the
freedom of press. Barisal Conference was a painstaking example of it. Swadeshi Movement and
new techniques of struggle led by Extremists was successful initially, but soon declined due the
attitude of moderates not to the extend Swadeshi beyond Bengal. Suddenly all the key figures got
arrested and retired from politics which gave deathblow to the movement. Swadeshi as a
programme succeeded but not in means of organization due to lack of prior experiences or model
as Swadeshi will be to Gandhian techniques. Faced with repression, it couldn’t sustain for long
only with the call for self-sacrifice practically. Every mass movement had to undergo a passive
phase after which strong rise can be witnessed. But Extremists couldn’t regroup for resurgence.
Thus, they fell prey to the British policy of “Repression, Reconciliation and Suppression”. As
Curzon said, ‘The Congress is tottering to its fall, and one of my greatest ambitions in India is to
assist it to a peaceful demise’,20 virtually became true with division in the nationalist ranks.

19
Sumit Sarkar., Modern India: 1885 – 1947 (Macmillian, 1989), 252.
20
Chandra et al., India’s Struggle for Independence, 137.
Conclusion:

Extremist phase is no exception to setbacks and failures but the essence of it have been replicated
in future stages of Indian national movement. Gokhale’s words are true in that sense as follows:
‘Let us not forget that we are at a stage of the country’s progress when our achievements are
bound to be small, and our disappointments frequent and trying. That is the place which it has
pleased Providence to assign to us their struggle, and our responsibility is ended when we have
done the work which belongs to that place. It will, no doubt, be given to our countrymen of
future generations to serve her mainly by our failures the strength will come which in the end
will accomplish great tasks’.21 Ifs and buts can’t be neglected in history. What if the Extremists’
approaches were on secular notes, the Hindu - Muslim relations would be mutual without
animosity. It would have averted the long course of communalism thus, avoiding Partition in
1947. Thus, Extremists laid the ground for Gandhi and others to lead the freedom movement.
Moderates laid the firm foundations upon which Extremists were able garner mass mobilizations.
Both the phases are inevitable and inseparable. They realized this virtue after a period of painful
separation. Radicals as well as Moderates were natural defense to each other against imperial
rule. Tilak’s release from Mandalay in 1914 expressed willingness ‘to accept any means to lift
the congress out of the present bog’. 22 Under the auspices of Annie Besant, the reunification
process was successful. The famous Lucknow Pact was also successful in securing and repairing
Hindu -Muslim unity. A.C Mazumdar, welcomed the Extremists: “… after ten years of painful
separation… Indian national party has come to realize the fact that united they stand, but divided
they fall, and brothers have at least met brothers…” It was to borrow the imagery used by
Antonio Gramsci an important ‘battle’ in the long drawn out and complex ‘war of position’ for
Indian independence.23 Extremists’ role is indispensable in the Indian National Movement.

Bibliography:

21
Chandra et al., India’s Struggle for Independence, 80.
22
Sumit Sarkar., Modern India: 1885 – 1947 (Macmillian, 1989), 129.
23
Ibid., 134.
 Tripathi, Amlesh. The Extremist Challenge: India Between 1890 and 1910. Hyderabad:
Orient Longmans, 1967.
 Chandra, Bipin, Mukerjee Mridula, Mukerjee Aditya, Mahajan Sucheta, Panikkar K. N.
India’s Struggle for Independence. UK: Penguin, 2016.
 Sarkar, Sumit. Modern India: 1885 – 1947. Macmillan, 1989.