Class - X Nationalism In India

NCERT TEXTBOOK QUESTIONS

Q.1. Explain

A) Why growth of nationalism in the colonies is linked to the anti-colonial movement?

Ans. In India, as in other colonial countries like Vietnam, the growth of nationalism is totally linked with anti-colonial movement. In their fight against colonialism, people began to discover their unity. They found out they had a common oppressor and had common complaints, so it created a bond among different groups. They realised they were fighting for the same causes — against poverty, discrimination, high taxes, begar, crop failures, forced recruitment to the army during the First World War etc. These shared hardships created a feeling of unity, and aroused nationalism against the common colonial ruler. Though the aims of each group were not similar, now they had a common demand “Swaraj”.

B) How did the First World War help in the growth of National Movement in India?

Ans. (i) It created new economic and political problems. The war had led to huge expenditure which was financed by heavy loans and increase in taxes. Customs duties were raised and income tax was introduced.

(ii) The prices had doubled between 1913-18 and the common people underwent great hardships.

(iii) Crops had failed between 1918-19 and 1920-21 leading to famine and disease. There were epidemics killing between 12-13 million people (Census, 1921).

(iv) People’s hope that the end of war would bring an end to their goals were belied, and this led to their support to the national movement.

(v) The Muslims were antagonised by the British ill-treatment of the Khalifa, after the First World War.

(vi) Indian villagers were also incensed by the British Government’s forced recruitment of men in the army.

(vii) The Congress and other parties were angry with the British for not consulting them before making India a party on their side against Germany.

(viii) Taking advantage of the First World War, many revolutionary parties cropped up and they incited the people to join the anti-colonial movement in India (i.e. the National Movement).

C) Why Indians were outraged by the Rowlatt Act.

During Indian struggle for Independence British government passed a law named after Sidney Rowlatt who was a government official, whose work was to find out who were behind Indian independence support and stop the changes responsible for the Independence were mainly.

Three officers in this commission and all were Britishers. Indian freedom fighters called it “Black Law”. This Act gave the government enormous powers to repress political activities and allowed detention of political prisoners without trial for two years.

The opposition against this law started with a hartal by Gandhi. Rallies were organised in many cities, workers stopped working, went on strike. Shops and workshops were closed. By this way the reaction of the people came out against this Act.

D) Why did Gandhiji call off the Non-Cooperation Movement?

Ans. The Chauri Chaura incident near Gorakhpur made him to do so. A peaceful procession turned violent and burnt a police chowki at Chauri Chaura and 22 policemen were burnt alive. Gandhiji, an apostle of non-violence, was shocked .

Within the Congress some leaders were by now tired of mass struggle and wanted to participate in elections to the provincial councils that had been set up by the Government of India Act of 1919.
Thus Mahatma Gandhi decided to call-of the movement.

 

Q.2. What is meant by the idea of Satyagraha?

Ans. Gandhiji said ‘Satyagraha’ was not passive resistance but it called for intensive activity. Physical force was not used against the oppressor, nor vengeance was sought. Only through the power of truth and non-violence, an appeal was made to the conscience of the oppressor. Persuasion, not force, would make the oppressor realise the truth. This ‘dharma’ of non-violence and truth united people against the oppressor and made them realise the truth.

Q.3. Write a newspaper report on

(a) The Jallianwala Bagh massacre.

Ans. April 13, 1919 will be a date never forgotten by Indians — those who were present and those who will come later. Generations will talk about the infamous, brutal massacre at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar. Hundreds of villagers had come to Amritsar to celebrate Baisakhi and attend a fair. They were totally unaware of the martial law, which General Dyer had imposed on the city because of the ‘hartal’ observed on April 6 against the Rowlatt Act. On 10 April the police had fired upon a peaceful procession, which had provoked widespread attacks on banks, post offices and railway stations.

General Dyer entered the area where a peaceful meeting was going on in Jallianwalla Bagh. He blocked all the exit points and ordered his troops to fire upon the unarmed people. His object was to create terror and awe in the minds of the satyagrahis and produce a “moral effect”. Hundreds of innocent people were killed, some were drowned as they jumped into a well to escape bullets.

The mass murder was not enough; the government used brutal repression to crush people who rose in anger after this massacre. The satyagrahis were forced to rub their noses in the dirt, crawl on the streets and “Salaam” all “Sahibs”. People were mercilessly flogged and in some villages bombs were also used (Gujranwala in Punjab). It was the most shameful act in the history of British rule in India.

(b) The Simon Commission.

Ans. In 1927, the British Government appointed a seven-member commission under the chairmanship of Sir John Simon. It was to report about the extent to which the Act of 1919 had worked out  successfully. It was to examine the functioning of the constitutional system in India. This Commission was boycotted by the Indians as it had not a single Indian member.

It was welcomed with black flags and slogans of “Simon go back” when it landed in India. At Lahore, a procession taken out under the leadership of Lala Lajpat Rai was lathi-charged and he was fatally wounded in 1928.

The Simon Commission led to Jawaharlal Nehru demanding “Poorna Swaraj” at the Lahore Session of the Congress. The Nehru Report was also a reaction to this Commission and it gave Gandhiji an opportunity to start his Civil Disobedience Movement in India.

Q.4. Compare the image of Bharat Mata with the image of Germania. Do you find any

similarities? Why do you think these images of Bharat Mata will not appeal to all castes

and communities?

Ans. Germania is portrayed as a heroic figure. Look at the sword in one hand, flag in the other. She

stands for partriotism and heroism. This portrait resembled the Bharat Mata. The figure

extends purity and authority.

Q.5. List all the different Social Groups which joined the Non-Cooperation Movement of 1921. Then choose any three and write about their hopes and struggles to show why they joined the movement.

Ans. (i) The middle class joined the movement because the boycott of foreign goods would make the sale of their textiles and handlooms go up.

(ii) The peasants took part in the movement because they hoped they would be saved from the oppressive landlords, high taxes taken by the colonial government.

(iii) Plantation workers took part in the agitation hoping they would get the right to move freely in and outside the plantations and get land in their own villages.

Q.6. Discuss the Salt March to make clear why it was an effective symbol of resistance against

colonialism.

Ans. Mahatma Gandhi found in salt a powerful symbol that could unite the nation. On 31 January, 1930, he sent a letter to the Viceroy Lord Irwin, making eleven demands. Some of these demands were of general interest, some were specific demands of different classes from industrialists to peasants. The idea was to make the demands all-embracing and wide-ranging, so that all classes within Indian society could identify with them and work together in a united campaign. He made the “Salt tax” his target and called it the most repressive Act of the British government. This tax hit both the poor and the rich as salt was used in every household. The British had the monopoly in producing salt and they misused their power.

Gandhi started his famous “Salt March” on March 12, 1930 from Sabarmati Ashram to Dandi, a small coastal village in Gujarat. He started with 78 followers and thousands joined him on his 240-miles route.

It took him 24 days of 10 miles walking per day. On April 16, 1930 he broke the Salt Law by boiling sea water and extracting salt. Newspapers carried day-to-day reports of his march and the speeches he made on the way. It is reported that about 300 Gujarat village officials resigned their posts and joined Gandhiji.

His Salt March led to violation of Salt Law all over the country. It also led to boycott of foreign goods and picketing of liquor shops. Students and women played a significant role in this movement. Peasants refused to pay taxes, forest people broke forest laws and grazed their cattle, collected wood in prohibited forest areas. There was an uprising against the government everywhere in India and the British had to use brutal force to suppress it.

Q.7. Imagine you are a woman participating in the Civil Disobedience Movement. Explain what the experience meant in your life.

Ans. Women entered the National Movement in large numbers for the first time by participating in the Civil Disobedience Movement. During Gandhiji’s ‘Salt March’, thousands of women came out of their homes to listen to him. They participated in protest marches, manufactured salt, picketed foreign goods and liquor shops. They came in the urban areas from high caste families. In the rural area they were from the rich peasant households. They took part in the movement as their sacred duty. They stood by their men and suffered physical blows also. They included old women, women with babies in their arms, and young girls. It did not win them any new status. Even Gandhiji thought women’s place was at home, as good mothers and good wives. The Congress did not give them any position in the organisation — but the women

made their presence felt. Women who had never stepped out of their homes, women in purdah could be seen marching side by side with their men. 

Q.8. Why did political leaders differ sharply over the question of separate electorates?

Ans. By separate electorates we mean a system in which people of one religion vote for a candidate of their own religion. The British used this system to divide the people of India and thus to weaken the National Movement. This would make their position strong in India and make them rule for a long time. They succeeded in driving a wedge between the Hindus and Muslims which finally led to the partition of the country in 1947.

The different political leaders did not agree with this policy and held different opinions.

(i) Congress : It opposed tooth and nail the British policy of separate electorates. It understood the mischief created by the divide and rule policy. It was in favour of joint electorates.

(ii) Muslim leaders like Muhammad Iqbal and M.A. Jinnah wanted separate electorates to safeguard the political interests of the Muslims. They were afraid, as a minority religious group, that they would never be able to win elections in a joint electorate and the Hindus would always dominate them.

(iii) The leaders of the Depressed Classes under Dr B.R. Ambedkar also wanted a separate electorate, because they were also afraid of Hindu dominance in a joint electorate. After Gandhi’s fast unto death, the Poona Pact was signed between him and Dr. Ambedkar. Gandhiji saw it as a blow to national unity and feared that the Dalits would never become one with the Hindu society, under separate electorate. 

Dr. Ambedkar agreed to a joint electorate provided the Depressed Classes had reserved seats in the Provincial and Central Legislative Councils.