Friends Of India

The first nationalistic sentiment among the members of the Indian National Congress was to representation in the government bodies. Dadabhai Naoroji successfully contested in an election and become the first Indian member in the British House of Commons.

Aware of the economic devastation that British rule had brought on the country, India's broad masses were responding eagerly to the nationalist message. But the nationalist movement was also becoming exceedingly divided between two poles representing radically different currents and tendencies. Whereas one side attempted to restrict the national movement to a struggle for political reforms, the other side sees the aspirations of the general public and called for the complete liberation from colonial rule.

Bal Gangadhar Tilak eloquently and succinctly summarized the sentiments of the new and increasingly militant national movement. He spoke of British rule as having ruined trade, caused the collapse of industry, and destroyed the people's courage and abilities. Under the colonial regimen, Tilak asserted that the country was offered neither education, nor rights, nor respect for public opinion. Without prosperity and contentment, the Indian people suffered constantly from poverty, famine and drain. He believed that without political power Indian industry could not develop, the nation's youth couldn't be educated, and the country could win neither social reforms nor material welfare for its people.

Swaraj can mean generally self-governance but the word usually refers to Gandhi's concept for Indian independence from foreign domination. Swaraj lays stress on governance not by a hierarchical government, but self governance through individuals and community building.

Tilak was the first Indian nationalist to embrace Swaraj as the destiny of the nation. Tilak deeply opposed the British education system that ignored and defamed India's culture, history and values. He resented the denial of freedom of expression for nationalists, and the lack of any voice or role for ordinary Indians in the affairs of their nation. So he considered Swaraj as the natural and only solution. His popular slogan "Swaraj is my birthright, and I shall have it" became the source of inspiration for Indians.

For Tilak the idea of swaraj is not only an end to foreign rule but also an end to exploitative social traditions indigenous to the country. He knew that it is possible only by drawing our people belonging to all sections of society in to the national movement. His vision and his desire to achieve Swaraj through the mobilization of common people constituted a turning point in the independence movement. The Home Rule Movement that he started with other prominent members forced the British to concede that introduction of responsible Government was their final objective. His activism and his passionate advocacy, especially through the media, inspired an entire generation. Tilak wrote in the journal Kesari: “When Hindus and Muslims jointly ask for Swarajya from a common platform, the British bureaucracy has to realize that its days are numbered.”

Gandhi had a more philosophical view of Swaraj. According to him, adopting Swaraj means implementing a system whereby state machinery is virtually nil, and the real power directly resides in the hands of people. Gandhi wrote "Independence begins at the bottom... A society must be built in which every village has to be self sustained and capable of managing its own affairs... It will be trained and prepared to perish in the attempt to defend itself against any onslaught from without... This does not exclude dependence on and willing help from neighbors or from the world. It will be a free and voluntary play of mutual forces... In this structure composed of innumerable villages, there will ever widening, never ascending circles. Life will not be a pyramid with the apex sustained by the bottom. But it will be an oceanic circle whose center will be the individual. Therefore the outermost circumference will not wield power to crush the inner circle but will give strength to all within and derive its own strength from it."

The Swadeshi movement was a successful economic strategy to remove the British Empire from power and improve economic conditions in India through following principles of swadeshi (self-sufficiency). Strategies of the swadeshi movement involved boycotting British products and the revival of domestic-made products and production techniques. Swadeshi, as a strategy, was a key focus of Gandhi who described it as the soul of Swaraj

Gandhi described Swadeshi as "a call to the consumer to be aware of the violence he is causing by supporting those industries that result in poverty, harm to workers and to humans and other creatures." Gandhi recognized that alienation and exploitation often occur when production and consumption are divorced from their social and cultural context, and that local enterprise is a way to avoid these problems. "Swadeshi is that spirit in us which requires us to serve our immediate neighbors before others, and to use things produced in our neighborhood in preference to those more remote. So doing, we serve humanity to the best of our capacity. We cannot serve humanity by neglecting our neighbors".

# posted by Friends Of India @ 1:49 AM 1 Comments

In India, the decades after the First War for Independence (1857) were a period of growing political awareness, manifestation of public opinion, and emergence of leadership at national and provincial levels. Gloomy economic uncertainties created by British colonial rule and the limited opportunities that awaited for the increasing number of western-educated graduates began to dominate the rhetoric of leaders who had begun to think of themselves as a nation despite differences along the lines of region, religion, language, and caste.

Dadabhai Naoroji formed East India Association in 1867, and Surendranath Banerjee founded Indian National Association in 1876. Indian National Congress is formed in 1885 in a meeting in Bombay attended by seventy-three Indian delegates. The delegates were mostly members of the upwardly mobile and successful Western-educated provincial elites, engaged in professions such as law, teaching, and journalism. They had acquired political experience from regional competition in the professions and from their aspirations in securing nomination to various positions in legislative councils, universities, and special commissions.

The Congress had no well-defined ideology or necessary resources to be a political organization at the beginning. It functioned more as a debating society that met annually to express its loyalty to the British Raj and passed numerous resolutions on less controversial issues such as civil rights or opportunities in government etc. These resolutions were submitted to the viceroy's government and, sometimes to the British Parliament without any positive results. With a membership consists only of urban elites the Congress voiced their interests even though it claims to represent India.

Indian National Congress failed to attract Muslims to the organization. Although the Congress made efforts to enlist the Muslim community in its struggle for Indian independence, most of the Muslims remained reluctant to join the Party.

Islamic rule was established across northern India between the 7th and the 14th centuries. The Muslim Mughal Empire ruled most of India from Delhi from the early 16th century until its power was broken by the British in the 19th century. This left a disempowered and discontented Muslim minority, afraid of being swamped by the Hindu majority. Muslims represented about 23% of the population of British India, and constituted the majority of the population in several regions.

By 1900, the Indian National Congress had emerged as an all-India political organization, Muslims began to realize their inadequate education and under representation in government service. Muslim leaders saw that their community had fallen behind the Hindus. Attacks by Hindu reformers against religious conversion, cow killing, and the preservation of Urdu in Arabic script deepened their fears of minority status and denial of their rights if the Congress alone were to represent the people of India. For many Muslims, loyalty to the British crown seemed preferable to cooperation with Congress leaders. Sir Sayyid Ahmad launched a movement for Muslim regeneration that culminated in the founding in 1875 of the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College (renamed Aligarh Muslim University in 1921) at Aligarh, United Provinces (now Uttar Pradesh). Its objective was to educate wealthy students by emphasizing the compatibility of Islam with modern Western knowledge. The diversity among India's Muslims, however, made it impossible to bring about uniform cultural and intellectual regeneration. A turning point came in 1900 when the British administration in the United Provinces acceded to Hindu demands and made Hindi as the official language. This seemed to aggravate Muslim fears that the Hindu majority would seek to suppress Muslim culture and religion in an independent India. A British official, Sir Percival Griffiths, wrote of "the Muslim belief that their interest must be regarded as completely separate from those of the Hindus, and that no fusion of the two communities was possible."

All India Muslim League founded at Dhaka in 1906 on the occasion of the annual All India Muhammadan Educational Conference in Shahbagh, Dhaka. The meeting was hosted by Nawab Salimullah Khan and was attended by three thousand delegates. The resolution was moved by Nawab Salimullah says “The musalmans are only a fifth in number as compared with the total population of the country, and it is manifest that if at any remote period the British government ceases to exist in India, then the rule of India would pass into the hands of that community which is nearly four times as large as ourselves …our life, our property, our honor, and our faith will all be in great danger, when even now that a powerful British administration is protecting its subjects, we the Musalmans have to face most serious difficulties in safe-guarding our interests from the grasping hands of our neighbors.”

# posted by Friends Of India @ 4:08 AM 17 Comments

British India or British Raj is the term used to refer to the period of direct British imperial rule of the Indian Subcontinent which included the present-day India, Myanmar, Bangladesh and Pakistan from 1858 to 1947. Much of the territory under British control during this time was not directly ruled by the British, but was nominally independent Princely States which were directly under the rule of the Maharajas, Rajas, Thakurs and Nawabs who entered into treaties as sovereigns with the British monarch as their feudal superior.

The British abolished the British East India Company and replaced it with direct rule under the British Crown in 1858. In proclaiming the new direct-rule policy to "the Princes, Chiefs, and Peoples of India", Queen Victoria promised equal treatment under British law, which never materialized.

Many existing economic and revenue policies remained virtually unchanged under British Raj. But several administrative modifications were introduced including the creation in London of a cabinet post, the Secretary of State for India. The governor-general headquartered in Calcutta, ran the administration in India, assisted by executive and legislative councils. Beneath the governor-general were the governors of Provinces of India, who held power over the division and district officials, who formed the lower ranks of the Indian Civil Service. For decades the Indian Civil Service was the exclusive preserve of the British-born, as were the superior ranks in such other professions as law and medicine. This continued until the 1880s when a small but steadily growing number of native-born Indians, educated in British schools on the Subcontinent or in Britain, were able to assume such positions.

The Governor General of India announced in 1858 that the government would honor former treaties with princely states and renounced the "Doctrine of Lapse", whereby the East India Company had annexed territories of rulers who died without male heirs. About 40 percent of Indian Territory and 20–25 percent of the population remained under the control of 562 princes notable for their religious and ethnic diversity.

A more thorough re-organization was effected in the constitution of army and government finances. Shocked by the extent of solidarity among Indian soldiers during the rebellion, the government separated the army into the three presidencies.

British attitudes toward Indians shifted from relative openness to narrow-mindedness and racism. Even against those with comparable background and achievement as well as loyalty. British families and their servants lived in cantonments at a distance from Indian settlements. In 1883 there was an attempt to remove race barriers in criminal jurisdictions by introducing a bill empowering Indian judges to adjudicate offences committed by Europeans. However, Public protests and editorials in the British press forced the drastic modification of the bill. It exposed the racial gap that already existed, sparking even greater Indian nationalism and reaction.

Lord Brentford in his speech to Parliament said; “We did not conquer India for the benefit of the Indians. I know that it is said at missionary meetings that we have conquered India to raise the level of the Indians. That is cant. We conquered India as an outlet for the goods of Great Britain. We conquered India by the sword, and by the sword we shall hold it.” An Indian Colonial Administrator F.J. Shore said; “The fundamental principle of the English has been to make the whole Indian nation subservient, in every possible way, to the interests and benefits of themselves. They have been taxed to the utmost limit; every successive province, as it has fallen into our possession, has been made a field for higher exaction ...” Karl Marx summarized the British Policy as “The aristocracy wanted to conquer India, the moneyocracy to plunder it and the millocracy to undersell it.”

British India also experienced a period of unprecedented calamity when the region was swept by a series of frequent and devastating famines. Approximately 25 major famines spread through states such as Tamilnadu in South India, Bihar in the north, and Bengal in the east in the latter half of the 19th century, killing 30–40 million Indians. The famines continued until independence in 1947. The most devastating one was the Bengal Famine of 1943 which killed 3–4 million Indians during World War II.

Observers attributed the famines both to uneven rainfall, drought, and British economic and administrative policies. Since 1857 these policies had led to the seizure and conversion of local farmland to foreign-owned plantations, restrictions on internal trade, inflationary measures that increased the price of food, and substantial exports of staple crops from India to the United Kingdom. It never happened before colonial rule and didn’t happen after independence. So it is not hard to find the culprit.

Ancient civilizations of the East were built primarily upon two foundations. The communal ownership of the land with no private land-ownership and a system of artificial soil irrigation which is vitally necessary to the agricultural life of the country. Indian communal villages are built on this foundation along with the famous handicraft and manufacturing industries, caste system and hereditary division of labor, the numerous variations of religions and cults, and bureaucratic and priestly adjuncts.

The colonial rule overthrew the native village communities and industries. Indian was excluded from importation into England as early as 1697. Indian agriculture fell into complete decay as the system of artificial irrigation which requires continual care and repair broke down. For the first time in thousands of years of Indian history, systems of private ownership of land and land tenancy (Zemindaree and Ryotwar) were created. India became a prime source of food stuffs. English-owned plantations run by forced labor were established to furnish these needs. Heavy land taxes were placed upon the peasantry. The result has been described by Isaiah Bowman in his The New World: “Pressing upon the people of India in a manner to produce great distress is the land tax, in addition to which is the water tax in the irrigated areas. The land tax keeps the mass of the population in a state bordering upon slavery. Millions cannot get sufficient food. At the end of his year of labor, the farmer finds his crop divided between landlord and the government. He has to go into debt to the village shopkeeper, getting credit for food and seed in the ensuing year. Since 240,000,000 people in India are connected directly or indirectly with agriculture, this means that a large majority of them, probably two-thirds, are living in a state of squalor.” Rickarts, an extensive English writer on Indian affairs, estimated that in 60 years of the 18th Century, one thousand millions sterling had been brought back from India. The London Daily News wrote, “The whole wealth of the country is absorbed and the development of its industry is checked by a government which hangs like an incubus over it.”

# posted by Friends Of India @ 11:47 PM 5 Comments

India's First War of Independence was a revolt of Indian soldiers and people against the British rule. Historians have used the terms like the Indian Mutiny or the Sepoy Mutiny to describe this event. The rebellion by Indian troops of the British Raj started in March 1857 and continued for months. It had diverse political, economic, military, religious and social causes.

Under the Doctrine of Lapse introduced by Lord Dalhousie as part of the British policy of expansionism, if a feudal ruler did not leave a male heir through natural process the land became the property of the British East India Company. In eight years Lord Dalhousie annexed many kingdoms including Jhansi, Awadh or Oudh, Satara, Nagpur and Sambalpur to the company's territory. The feudal landholders and royal armies found themselves unemployed and humiliated. Even the jewels of the royal family of Nagpur were publicly auctioned in Calcutta, a move that was seen as a sign of abject disrespect by the remnants of the Indian aristocracy.

In the Bengal Army, the 140,000 Indians who were employed as sepoys were completely subordinate to the roughly 26,000 British officers. These sepoys bore the brunt of the First Britsh-Afghan War (1838-42), the two closely contested Punjab Wars (1845-6, and 1848-9) and the Second Anglo-Burmese War. They were shipped across the seas to fight in the Opium Wars against China (1840-42) and (1856-60) and the Crimean War against Russia (1854). Although at constant risk of death, the Indian sepoy faced very limited opportunities for advancement and all positions of authority were monopolized by the Europeans.

Many of the sepoys in the Bengal Army came from the Hindi speaking plains of Northern part of India where the British had enforced the "Mahalwari" system of taxation which involved constantly increasing revenue demands. In the first half of the 19th century - tax revenues payable to the British increased 70%. This led to mounting agricultural debts with land being mortgaged to traders and moneylenders at a very rapid rate. This inhumane system of taxation causes dissatisfaction against the British among the agricultural communities.

By bankrupting the nobility and the urban middle class, the demand for many local goods was almost eliminated. Also the local producers were confronted with unfair competition from British imports. As a result the weavers, the cotton dressers, the carpenters, the blacksmiths, the shoe-makers and others lost their livelihood. British policies virtually eliminated Indian artisans and products. As Thomas Lowe noted, "the native arts and manufactures as used to rise for India a name and wonder all over the western world are nearly extinguished in the present day; once renowned and great cities are merely heaps of ruins..."

Even as official taxation was back-breaking enough, British officers routinely used their powers to coerce additional money, produce, and free services from the Indian peasants and artisans. And courts routinely dismissed their pleas for justice. In the first report of the Torture Commission at Madras presented to the British House of Commons in 1856, this was acknowledged along with the admission that officers of the East India Company did not abstain from torture, nor did they discourage its use. Desperate communities had often no choice but to resist to the bitter end.

The rebellion started over a new rifle issues to sepoys throughout India. In order to load the new rifle, soldiers had to bite the cartridge open and pour the gunpowder it contained into the rifle's muzzle, then stuff the cartridge case, which was typically paper coated with some kind of grease to make it waterproof, into the musket as wadding, before loading it with a ball. It was believed that the cartridges that were standard issue with this rifle were greased with pork fat which was regarded as unclean by Muslims, or beef fat, regarded as sacred to Hindus.

The revolt of the sepoys was soon accompanied by a rebellion of the civil population, particularly in the North Western Provinces and Oudh. The masses gave vent to their opposition to British rule by attacking government buildings and prisons. They raided the "treasury", charged on barracks and court houses, and threw open the prison gates. The civil rebellion had a broad social base, embracing all sections of society - the territorial magnates, peasants, artisans, religious mendicants and priests, civil servants, shopkeepers and boatmen.

The British rulers poured in immense resources in arms and men to suppress the struggle. The superior weaponry, brutality of the British in defending their empire and the betrayal of some Indian rulers let the British prevail. British barbarity in suppressing the uprising was unprecedented. As Frederick Engels commented, "The fact is there is no army in Europe or America with so much brutality as the British. Plundering, violence, massacre - things that everywhere else are strictly and completely banished - are a time honored privilege, a vested right of the British soldier ...” Thomas Lowe wrote, "To live in India now was like standing on the verge of a volcanic crater, the sides of which were fast crumbling away from our feet, while the boiling lava was ready to erupt and consume us".

India's First War of Independence was a major event in the history of modern India. The Parliament of the United Kingdom closed down the British East India Company. The United Kingdom started ruling India directly through its representative called the Viceroy of India. It made India a part of the British Empire.

The British sent Bahadur Shah II, the last Mughal Emperor, out of India, and kept him in Yangon (then called Rangoon), Burma where he died in 1862. The Mughal dynasty, which had ruled India for about four hundred years, ended with his death.

It also ended the Hindu-Muslim unity in India. After 1857 the British embarked on a furious policy of "Divide and Rule", fomenting religious hatred as never before. By spreading rumors and falsehoods, they deliberately recast Indian history in highly communal colors. They practiced malicious communal politics to divide the Indian masses. That legacy continues to plague the sub-continent today.

The British also took many steps to employ Indian higher castes and rulers into the government. They stopped taking the lands of the remaining princes and rulers of India. They stopped interference in religious matters. They started employing Indians in the civil services but at lower levels. They increased the number of British soldiers, and allowed only British soldiers to handle artillery.

# posted by Friends Of India @ 1:16 AM 6 Comments

The East India Company was granted an English Royal Charter by Elizabeth I on December 31, 1600, with the intention of favoring trade privileges in India. The Royal Charter effectively gave the company a 21 year monopoly on all trade in the East Indies. The Company transformed from a commercial trading venture to one that virtually ruled India as it acquired auxiliary governmental and military functions, until its dissolution in 1858.

Based in London, the company presided over the creation of the British Raj. In 1617, the Company was given trade rights by the Mughal Emperor. 100 years later, it was granted a royal dictate from the Emperor exempting the Company from the payment of custom duties in Bengal, giving it a decided commercial advantage in the Indian trade. A decisive victory by Sir Robert Clive at the Battle of Plassey in 1757 established the British East India Company as a military as well as a commercial power. By 1760, the French were driven out of India, with the exception of a few trading posts on the coast, such as Pondicherry. In south east Asia, the company would establish the first trading posts and exert its military dominance leading to the eventual establishment of British Malaya, Hong Kong and Singapore as British Crown Colonies.

Initially, the British traders had come to India with hopes of selling Britain's most popular export item to Continental Europe (British Broadcloth), but were disappointed to find little demand for it. Instead, like their Portuguese counterparts, they found several Indian-made items they could sell quite profitably in their homeland. Competing with other European traders, and competing with several other trade routes to Europe (the Red Sea route through Egypt, the Persian Gulf Route through Iraq, and the Northern Caravan Route through Afghanistan, Persia and Turkey), the early British Traders were in no position to dictate terms.

Considering the long route (around the African Cape) that the British had to take in reaching England, it was surprising that they made as much money as they did. But other factors outweighed this disadvantage. First, owing to their legally sanctioned monopoly status in England, they had substantial control on the British market. Second, by buying directly at the source, they were able to eliminate the considerable mark-up that Indian goods enjoyed en-route to Europe. Thirdly, the East India Company probably enjoyed better economies of scale since their ships were amongst the largest in the Indian Ocean. In addition, they were able to develop new markets for Indian goods in Africa, and in the Americas.

The Company traders were frequently engaged in hostilities with their Dutch and Portuguese counterparts in the Indian Ocean. A key event providing the Company with the favor of Mughal emperor Jahangir was their victory over the Portuguese in the Battle of Swally in 1612. Perhaps realizing the futility of waging trade wars in remote seas, the English decided to explore their options for gaining a foothold in mainland India, with official sanction of both countries, and requested the Crown to launch a diplomatic mission. In 1615, Sir Thomas Roe was instructed by James I to visit the Mughal emperor Jahangir. The purpose of this mission was to arrange for a commercial treaty which would give the Company exclusive rights to reside and build factories in Surat and other areas. In return, the Company offered to provide to the emperor goods and rarities from the European market. This mission was highly successful.

The company with patronage from Mugal Emperor soon managed to eclipse the Portuguese Estado da India, which had established bases in Goa, Chittagong and Bombay. It managed to create strongholds in Surat (1612), Madras (1639), Bombay (1668) and Calcutta (1690). By 1647, the Company had 23 factories, each under the command of a master merchant, and 90 employees in India. In 1634, the Mughal emperor extended his hospitality to the English traders to the region of Bengal and in 1717 completely waived customs duties for the trade. The company's mainstay businesses were by now in cotton, silk, indigo dye, saltpeter and tea. By 1689, the Company was arguably a "nation" in the Indian mainland, independently administering the vast presidencies of Bengal, Madras and Bombay and possessing a formidable and intimidating military strength.

The prosperity that the employees of the company enjoyed allowed them to return to their country and establish sprawling estates and businesses, and to obtain political power. Consequently, the Company developed for itself a lobby in the English parliament. There was a constant see-saw battle between the Company lobby and the parliament. The Company sought a permanent establishment, while the Parliament would not willingly allow it greater autonomy, and so relinquish the opportunity to exploit the Company's profits. In 1712, another act renewed the status of the Company, though the debts were repaid. By 1720, 15% of British imports were from India, almost all passing through the Company.

At this time, Britain and France became bitter rivals, and there were frequent skirmishes between them for control of colonial possessions. The Seven Years' War (1756 – 1763) resulted in the defeat of the French forces and limited French imperial ambitions and the French were forced to maintain their trade posts only in small enclaves in Pondicherry, Mahe, Karikal, Yanam, and Chandernagar without any military presence. Around the same time, Britain surged ahead of its European rivals with the advent of the Industrial Revolution. Demand for Indian commodities was boosted by the need to sustain the troops and the economy during the war, and by the increased availability of raw materials and efficient methods of production. As home to the revolution, Britain experienced higher standards of living, and this spiraling cycle of prosperity, demand and production had a profound influence on overseas trade. The Company became the single largest player in the British global market, and reserved for itself an unassailable position in the decision-making process of the Government.

By the middle of the 17th century, the East India Company was re-exporting Indian goods to Europe and North Africa and even Turkey. This was to have a severely deleterious effect on the Ottomans, the Persians, the Afghans, since much of the revenues of these states came from the India trade. It also seriously impacted the revenues of the Mughals, and while the activities of the Arab and Gujarati traders were not entirely eliminated, their trade was much curtailed, and largely reduced to the inter-Asian trade which continued unabated. In any case, the Mughal state was unable to resist centrifugal forces and rapidly disintegrated. This left the East India Company with considerably more leverage and emboldened it to expand its activities, and demand even greater concessions from Indian rulers.

The battle of Plassey was to be only the first of several assaults that no regional Indian power was able to fend off successfully. The conquest of India continued with conclusive defeats of the Marathas in 1818, the Sikhs in 1848 and the annexation of Awadh in 1856. 1857 was a brave attempt to rollback the victories of the East India Company, but instead it now brought on the might of the entire British imperial government. The Indian colonies of the British East India Company became British Colonial India and so began a new phase of colonial plunder from the sub-continent. A phase that saw constant challenges to British hegemony in the region but it was not till Mohandas Gandhi enters the scene.

There was a systematic transfer of wealth from India to Europe for almost 200 years. Although Britain may have been the primary beneficiary, its allies in Europe and the new world benefited no less. British Banks used their Indian capital to fund industry in the US, Germany and elsewhere in Europe. The industrial revolution and the development of modern capitalism were based on the colonization of India and the rest of the world. It was the forced pauperization of the colonized world that allowed nations such as Britain, or the US to industrialize and modernize.

# posted by Friends Of India @ 1:55 AM 0 Comments