ABOUT ME

Dr. MAHIPAL SINGH RATHORE

I teach History, Polity and

Current Affairs for UPSC CSE
6 Years of teaching Experience.
Mentor for UPSC aspirants
Follow me on @mahipalsir

mahipalrathore
Pathfinder Telegram : https://t.me/pathfinder_upsc
OR
Scan QR Code:
• The withdrawal of the Civil Disobedience Movement was
followed by a debate on the strategy ahead.

3 responses:

1. Gandhiji emphasized constructive work in the villages

(like revival of village crafts).
According to him, constructive work would lead to
consolidation of people’s power.
This would help in mobilization of the masses in the next
phase of mass struggle.
2. The new Swarajists (led by Dr. M.A. Ansari, Asaf Ali, Satyamurthy,
Bhulabhai Desai and Dr. Bidhan Chandra Ray) advocated the
revival of the constitutional method of struggle and participation
in elections to the Central Legislative Assembly in 1934.

According to them, the Congress was not in a position to sustain a

mass movement, in this period of political apathy and depression.

Therefore, it was necessary to utilize elections and work in the

legislative councils to keep up the political interests and morale of
the people.

**They also made it clear that they did not have faith in
the capacity of constitutional politics to achieve freedom.
C. Rajagopalachari (a no-changer earlier) recommended
the Swarajist approach to Gandhiji with the additional
condition that Congress should directly undertake
parliamentary work itself (no more Swaraj party split).
3. The Leftists in the Congress (led by Jawaharlal Nehru and
Subhas Chandra Bose) were against both council-entry
and the suspension of CDM & its replacement by
constructive programme.

They felt that both these methods would sidetrack direct

mass action and divert attention from the basic issue of
struggle against the colonial rule.

• The leftists instead called for the resumption of non-

constitutional mass movement.
They felt that the situation continued to be revolutionary
because of the continuing economic crisis and the
readiness of the masses to fight.
• Nehru felt that the withdrawal of CDM + recourse to
constructive work and council-entry = represented a
“spiritual defeat” and a retreat from the revolutionary to
reformist mentality.

Equivalent to going back to the pre-1919 moderate

phase.
 Nehru’s solution
• Understanding the class basis of society – a genuine anti-colonial
struggle needs to incorporate the struggle of the masses by against
the capitalist colonisers.
• The role of class struggle.
• Revising vested interest in favour of the masses.

These meant:
Taking up economic demands of peasants and workers against the
landlords and capitalists.
Organising Kisan Sabhas and trade unions – affiliated to the INC, so
that the Congress could direct their functioning.
The Rise of Differences

1935 – Several chapters of Nehru’s

autobiography were published.

Spoke of ideological differences with

Gandhiji, in a friendly tone.
• Nehru challenged the basic
Gandhian strategy of struggle – the
3 phases of Struggle-Truce-Struggle
(S-T-S).

Under the Gandhian strategy,

phases of vigorous non-
constitutional mass movements,
alternate with
phases when direct confrontation is
withdrawn (and political
concessions/reforms from the
authorities are accepted).
• During the ‘Truce’ phase, political work was to be carried
on among the masses within constitutional means.

• This phase was to be used for bringing social reforms and

for recruiting cadres, who would be at the frontline during
the ‘Struggle’ phase.

•Nehru did not agree with this strategy.

• Nehru believed that the Indian National Movement had now
reached a stage where there should be permanent
confrontation and conflict with colonialism, till it was
overthrown.

He accepted that the struggle had to go through phases of

upswing and downswing – but felt that these should not lead to
a passive phase or a stage of compromise.

According to Nehru, there should be no stage of ‘cooperation’

with the colonial framework, only permanent hostility/ non-
cooperation.

Thus, he countered the ‘S-T-S’ strategy with ‘S-V’ (Struggle –

Victory), i.e., permanent waging of non-violent mass struggle
till victory was won.
• The differences between the leftists and council-entry
proponents gave rise to fears of a split in the Congress once
more.

• However, Gandhiji moved to diffuse the situation.

• Acceded to the demand of the proponents of council-entry,

by allowing them to contest elections to the legislatures.

May 1934 – A parliamentary board was set up at the AICC

meeting at Patna, in order to fight elections under the aegis
of the Congress itself.
• Gandhiji appeased Nehru and the leftists by strongly
backing Nehru for the Presidentship of the Lucknow
session of the Congress (1936), despite fierce opposition
from the right–wing leaders like C. Rajagopalachari.

• Gandhiji also assured the leftists that only CDM had been
discontinued; the war continues.

October 1934 – Gandhiji announced his retirement from the

Congress, because of fundamental disagreement with the
socialists and the parliamentarians alike (they did not agree
with Gandhiji’s focus on the spinning wheel + constructive
work in the form of an extensive ‘Harijan’ campaign).
November 1934 – Elections to the Central Legislative
Assembly held.

Congress won 45 out of the 75 elected seats available for

Indians.

Viceroy Willingdon reacted: “Singularly unfortunate; a

great triumph for little Gandhi”.

August 1935 – The British Parliament passed the

Government of India Act of 1935.
Aimed to pacify the Liberals and other moderates who
believed in constitutional methods (so that they fight
Nehru).
 Government of India Act
1935
Government of India Act of 1935 was passed on the basis of –

• the report of the Simon Commission

• the outcome of the Round Table Conferences

• the White Paper issued by the British Government in 1933

• 321 sections and 10 schedules.

 Features/Provisions of 1935 Act

• Provision for the establishment of an All India Federation at

the Centre, consisting of the Provinces of British India and
the Princely States

• Did not come into existence since the Princely States refused
to give their consent for the union
• Division of powers into three lists –
1. Federal List (59)
2. Provincial List (54)
3. Concurrent List (36)
• Introduction of Diarchy at the Centre

The Governor-General and his councillors administered the

“Reserved subjects”.

The Council of Ministers were responsible for the “Transferred”

subjects.

• Abolition of Diarchy and the introduction of Provincial Autonomy

in the provinces.
Provincial
Legislatures of
Bengal, Madras,
Bombay, United
Provinces, Bihar and
Assam were made
bicameral.
(6 out of 11)
• The working of the provincial autonomy was not successful.

• The Governors were not bound to accept the advice of the ministers.

• In reality, the real power in the Provincial Government was with the
Governor.

• But, despite these drawbacks in the scheme, the Congress decided to

take part in the elections to the Provincial Legislatures with the
consideration that it was an improvement over the previous Acts.

• Provincial Elections in 1937 – INC swept to power

in 7 provinces
Extension/Continuation of the principle of Separate
Electorates to

 Sikhs

Europeans

Indian Christians

Anglo Indians
• Establishment of a Federal Court at Delhi with a Chief Justice and 6
judges.

• Establishment of Reserve Bank of India (RBI) in the year 1935.

(Recommended by Hilton-Young Commission)
A partial reorganization of the provinces:

Sindh was separated from Bombay

‘Bihar & Orissa’ was split into separate provinces
of Bihar and Orissa
Burma was completely separated from India
Aden was also detached from India, and established as a
separate Crown colony
• The introduction of direct elections, thus increasing the
franchise from seven million to thirty-five million people

• No mention of Dominion status or future concessions!

• The British hoped that ‘Provincial Autonomy’ as
provided in the Act of 1935, would create powerful
provincial leaders in Congress.

Provincial leaders would break away from the central

leadership, in order to protect their own
administrative prerogatives.

Thus, the Congress’ authority of a central all-India

leadership would be weakened.
The Act of 1935 was unanimously rejected by the INC

INC instead demanded the convening of a Constituent

Assembly (elected on the basis of universal adult
franchise) to frame the Constitution of for an independent
India.
Reactions on 1935 Act
• Nehru
"a machine with strong brakes but no engine".
"Charter of Slavery”

• Jinnah
"thoroughly rotten, fundamentally bad and totally
unacceptable."
 The Second Debate
• After imposing the Act of 1935, the British authorities
immediately decided to put “Provincial Autonomy” into
practice.

Announced elections to provincial legislatures in 1937

(please keep in mind that the 1934 elections were to the
Central Legislative Assembly).

Debate among nationalists: if the Congress got majority in

a province, should it agree to form government or not?
• Jawaharlal Nehru, Subhas Bose, the Congress Socialists and
the communists opposed office acceptance.

• They felt that by forming provincial governments, the INC

would be able to do little for the people + would be
cooperating with the repressive apparatus of colonialism.

• Office acceptance would take away the revolutionary

character of the national movement imbibed since 1919.

• What Nehru and leftists wanted instead: enter the

assemblies with a view to create deadlocks and make the
working of the 1935 Act impossible. (Remember the old
Swarajist views of Motilal and CR?)
• Those who favoured office acceptance also agreed that
constitutional methods would not lead to independence.

• However, they believed that the short-term political environment

required them to go through a constitutional phase of the struggle,
as the option of a mass movement was not available at that time.

• Again, a debate between S-T-S and S-V.

• The right-wing pro-office-acceptance leaders also believed that

despite their limited powers, the provincial ministries could
promote constructive work like – village and Harijan upliftment,
khadi, alcohol prohibition, burden of debt/taxes/rent on peasants.
 Lucknow session of the Congress 1936
• President = Jawahar Lal Nehru.

• Nehru urged the Congress to adopt socialism as its goal.

• Backed by Bose.
• Opposed by right wing conservatives – Rajendra Prasad,
Sardar Patel, Rajagopalachari, etc.
• Decided to fight elections.

• Postponed the choice of office acceptance to the post-

election results period.
 Faizpur session of the Congress 1937
• President = Jawahar Lal Nehru.

• First session held in a village.

The Congress went all out to win the provincial assemblies’ elections of
February 1937.

Its election manifesto promised:

• total rejection of the 1935 Act.
• restoration of civil liberties,
• the release of political prisoners,
• the removal of disabilities on grounds of sex and untouchability,
• the radical transformation of the agrarian system,
• Substantial reduction in rent and revenue,
• Scaling down of rural debts,
• Provision of cheap credit,
• The right to form trade unions and the right to strike.
 Lord Willingdon

Viceroy from 1931 to 1936.

1931 – 2nd RTC.

1932 – Communal award for separate

electorates.

1932 – 3rd RTC.

1935 – Government of India Act.
– Burma separated from India.
Telegram Link:

For PDFs Download

Telegram Channel : pathfinder_upsc
 Personal Guidance Study Planner
Get one on one guidance Customized study plan
from top exam experts with bi-weekly reviews

Live Classes Weekly Tests

ICONIC PLUS
Structured Unlimited
Courses Access
Test Analysis Study Material
Get one on one guidance Specialised Notes & Practice
from top exam experts Sets

Experts' Guidelines
Study booster workshops by
exam experts
Get Subscription Now

MAHIPAL MAHIPAL

PLUS ICONIC
MAHIPAL MAHIPAL
APPLY CODE
Get 10% Discount

MAHIPAL
Like, Share, and
Subscribe!