<–2/”>a >Early phase of Indian National Congress was that of Moderators,They expected that if the problems of’ the nation were brought to Light through proper propaganda, the colonial government would take steps to improve matters. Thus in the initial years through lectures, writings in newspapers the nationalists put forward the main problems of the nation and ways in which they could be remedied. They believed in loyalty to the British Crown. They believed that the British Presence in India was a blessing to Indians and they relied on the British to guide the Politics in India. Some of them professed that the British rule has done much good in India by cleansing the Society/”>Indian Society of its ills like the customs of sati, untouchability, child marriage, etc. Moderates also praised the British for introducing in India contemporary development in science and technology.
The prominent moderate leaders were Womesh Chandra Banerjee, Dadabhai Navroji, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Romesh Chunder Dutt, Pherozeshah Mehta, Madan Mohan Malaviya, Sir Surendranath Banerjee, Sir Dinshaw Edulji Wacha, Justice Mahadeo Govind Ranade, Badruddin Tyabji, Sir William Wedderburn.
The period from 1905 was known as the era of extremism in the Indian National Movement. The extremists or the aggressive nationalists believed that success could be achieved through bold means. The important extremist leaders were Lala Lajpat Rai, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal and Aurobindo Ghosh.
Main causes of developement of Extremism in Congress were as follows:-
1. Recognition of the True Nature of British Rule. The British rule and its policies were responsible for the economic ruin of India and her deepening POVERTY. Dadabhai Naoroji, for example, exposed the exploitative nature of British rule in India and proved that Britain was „bleeding India white? and the constant „drain of wealth? from India was directly responsible for India?s economic miseries.
Nationalist leaders like Ananda Charlu, R.N. Mudholkar, D.E. Wacha, G.K. Gokhale, Madan Mohan Malaviya too exposed the exploitative nature of British rule in India. R.C. Dutt and G.V. Joshi, examined thread-bare the true nature of British Land Revenue policy.
2. Reaction to Increasing Westernization. The new Leadership felt the stranglehold of excessive Westernization in Indian life, thought and politics—Christianity and utilitarianism (visible in the teachings of Brahma Samaj) were a
challenge to Indian religion and thought.
3.Dissatisfaction with the Achievement of the Congress. The younger Elements within the Congress were dissatisfied with the achievements of the Congress during the first 15-20 years and were disgusted with the cold and reactionary
Attitude of the Government. They had lost all faith in the British sense of justice and fairplay. They were strongly critical of the methods of peaceful and, constitutional agitation
4. Deteriorating Economic Condition of India. The economic miseries of the closing years of the 19th century provided a congenial Atmosphere for the Growth of extremism in Indian national activity.
5. Contemporary International Influences. Events outside India exercised a powerful influence on the younger generation. The humiliating treatment metedout to Indians in British colonies, especially in South Africa, created anti- Britishfeelings. Further, nationalist movements in Egypt, Persia, Turkey and Russia gave Indians new hopes and new aspirations.
6. Curzon’s Reactionary Policies. Curzon?s seven-year rule in India which was full of missions, omissions and commissions created a sharp reaction in the Indian mind.
7. The Partition of Bengal. The worst and most-hated aspect of Curzon?s administration was the partition of Bengal into two provinces of Bengal and Eastern Bengal and Assam in 1905.,
The Moderates and Extremists were two main factions within the Indian National Congress (INC) in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The Moderates believed in constitutional methods of achieving independence, while the Extremists believed in more radical methods, such as boycotts and protests.
The Moderates were led by men such as Dadabhai Naoroji, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Pherozeshah Mehta, and Surendranath Banerjee. They were educated in Western schools and universities, and they believed that India could achieve independence through cooperation with the British. They argued that India was not ready for self-rule, and that it needed to undergo a period of social and Economic Development before it could be independent.
The Extremists were led by men such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Lala Lajpat Rai, Bipin Chandra Pal, and Aurobindo Ghosh. They were less educated than the Moderates, and they were more hostile to the British. They believed that India could only achieve independence through radical methods, such as boycotts, protests, and even violence.
The Moderates and Extremists often clashed with each other, but they also worked together on some issues. In 1905, they united to protest the partition of Bengal. The partition was a British attempt to divide the Bengali-speaking Population of India, and it was widely seen as a betrayal of the Indian people. The protests against the partition were a major turning point in the Indian independence movement, and they helped to radicalize both the Moderates and the Extremists.
In the early 1900s, the Extremists gained the upper hand in the INC. This was due in part to the growing popularity of their radical methods, and in part to the failure of the Moderates to achieve any significant concessions from the British. The Extremists’ rise to power led to a more militant phase in the Indian independence movement.
The Moderates and Extremists were both important figures in the Indian independence movement. The Moderates laid the foundation for the INC and helped to bring about a more moderate approach to achieving independence. The Extremists helped to radicalize the Indian independence movement and to bring about a more militant approach to achieving independence. The legacy of the Moderates and Extremists continues to be debated today. Some historians argue that the Moderates were too willing to cooperate with the British, while others argue that they were the only ones who could have achieved anything at the time. Some historians argue that the Extremists were too radical, while others argue that they were the only ones who could have led India to independence. The debate over the legacy of the Moderates and Extremists is likely to continue for many years to come.
The Moderates and Extremists were both important figures in the Indian independence movement. They had different ideas about how to achieve independence, but they both played a significant role in the struggle for Indian freedom.
The Indian independence movement was a long and complex struggle that lasted for over a century. There were many different groups and individuals involved in the movement, and they had a variety of different goals and strategies.
One of the most important divisions within the Indian independence movement was between the moderates and the extremists. The moderates were a group of Indian nationalists who believed that India could achieve independence through peaceful means, such as negotiation and petitioning the British government. The extremists, on the other hand, believed that India could only achieve independence through violent revolution.
The moderates were led by men such as Gopal Krishna Gokhale and Pherozeshah Mehta. They were mostly educated, upper-caste Hindus who had a strong belief in British rule. They believed that India could benefit from British rule, and they wanted to work with the British to improve the lives of Indians.
The extremists were led by men such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Bipin Chandra Pal. They were mostly lower-caste Hindus and Muslims who were frustrated with British rule. They believed that India could only achieve independence through violent revolution.
The moderates and the extremists often clashed with each other. The moderates accused the extremists of being reckless and irresponsible, while the extremists accused the moderates of being cowards and collaborators.
Despite their differences, the moderates and the extremists both played an important role in the Indian independence movement. The moderates helped to raise awareness of the Indian independence movement in Britain and other parts of the world. The extremists helped to inspire Indians to fight for their independence.
In the end, it was the extremists who were more successful in achieving their goals. The Indian independence movement was ultimately successful because of the combined efforts of the moderates and the extremists.
Here are some frequently asked questions about the moderates and extremists in the Indian independence struggle:
What were the main differences between the moderates and the extremists?
The moderates believed that India could achieve independence through peaceful means, such as negotiation and petitioning the British government. The extremists believed that India could only achieve independence through violent revolution.Who were the main leaders of the moderates and the extremists?
The moderates were led by men such as Gopal Krishna Gokhale and Pherozeshah Mehta. The extremists were led by men such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Bipin Chandra Pal.What were the main achievements of the moderates and the extremists?
The moderates helped to raise awareness of the Indian independence movement in Britain and other parts of the world. The extremists helped to inspire Indians to fight for their independence.What was the ultimate outcome of the Indian independence movement?
The Indian independence movement was ultimately successful in achieving its goal of independence for India.What are some of the lessons that can be learned from the Indian independence movement?
The Indian independence movement is a complex and fascinating topic that can teach us a lot about the history of India and the struggle for independence. Some of the lessons that can be learned from the Indian independence movement include the importance of unity, the power of non-violent resistance, and the need for compromise.
The following are some MCQs about the Indian independence struggle:
Who was the leader of the Indian National Congress (INC) from 1885 to 1900?
(A) Dadabhai Naoroji
(B) Gopal Krishna Gokhale
(C) Bal Gangadhar Tilak
(D) Mohandas GandhiWhat was the name of the organization founded by Bal Gangadhar Tilak in 1896?
(A) The Indian National Congress
(B) The All-India Muslim League
(C) The Home Rule League
(D) The Swaraj PartyWhat was the name of the movement launched by Mahatma Gandhi in 1919?
(A) The Non-Cooperation Movement
(B) The Civil Disobedience Movement
(C) The Quit India Movement
(D) The Salt MarchWho was the first Prime Minister of India?
(A) Jawaharlal Nehru
(B) Lal Bahadur Shastri
(C) Indira Gandhi
(D) Rajiv GandhiWhen did India gain independence from British rule?
(A) 1947
(B) 1948
(C) 1949
(D) 1950Who was the leader of the All-India Muslim League?
(A) Muhammad Ali Jinnah
(B) Liaqat Ali Khan
(C) Maulana Abul Kalam Azad
(D) Zakir HussainWhat was the name of the country that was created in 1947 when India was partitioned?
(A) Pakistan
(B) Bangladesh
(C) Sri Lanka
(D) NepalWhat was the name of the agreement that was signed in 1930 between the British government and the INC?
(A) The Gandhi-Irwin Pact
(B) The Poona Pact
(C) The Simla Agreement
(D) The Lahore ResolutionWhat was the name of the organization that was founded by Subhas Chandra Bose in 1942?
(A) The Indian National Army
(B) The Forward Bloc
(C) The All-India Forward Bloc
(D) The Revolutionary Socialist PartyWho was the Governor-General of India from 1947 to 1948?
(A) Lord Mountbatten
(B) Lord Wavell
(C) Lord Linlithgow
(D) Lord Irwin
These are just a few examples of MCQs that can be asked about the Indian independence struggle. There are many other topics that could be covered, such as the role of Women in the struggle, the impact of the British Raj on Indian society, and the legacy of the independence movement.