Extremists VS Moderates
The Indian National Congress was not a monolith and consisted of groups with different
shades of opinions and beliefs. It was the first all-India political organization founded in
1885 by AO Hume during the reign of Governor-General Lord Duffering. Its first session
was held in Bombay in 1885 under the presidency of W.C. Banerjee. It witnessed a
political split early in its life at the 1907- Annual Congress Session at Surat.
Sources- 1)Amales Tripathi- The extremist challenge, in India between 1890 and 1910
2) Sanjay Seth- Moderate nationalism in India
Congress politics during the first twenty years of its history is roughly referred to as
moderate politics. National leaders like Dadabhai Naoroji, Pherozeshah Mehta, DE
Wacha, WC Bonnerjea, and SN Banerjee dominated the congress policies during the
early phase(1885-1905) and were staunch believers in liberalism and moderate politics
and came to be known as Moderates.
● their political outlook as a happy combination of liberalism and moderation.
● worked to procure for Indians freedom from race and creed prejudices, equality
between man and man, equality before the law, the extension of civil liberties, the
extension of representative institutions, etc.
M.G. Ranade explained, “Moderation implies the conditions of never vainly aspiring
after the impossible or after too remote ideals, but fairness."
● They believed that the BRitish wanted to be just to the Indians but were not
aware of the real conditions.
● Public opinion could be created and public demand could be presented to the
government through resolutions, petitions, meetings, etc.
● They worked on two prolonged methodologies-
1) Create a strong public opinion to arouse conscience and national spirit and then
educate and unite people
2) Persuade the british government and british public opinion to introduce reforms in
India
● Thinks Political connections with Britain were in India’s interest. The Moderate
leaders stood for the maintenance of the Nation, rather than the strengthening of
the British Empire. This approach was the outcome of their apprehension that
anarchy and disorder would reappear in India if the British Government was
superseded. In their eyes, British rule was the embodiment of Peace and Order
in the country.
● Gokhale explained this viewpoint when he said, “Whatever the shortcomings of
bureaucracy, and however intolerable at times the insolence of the individual
Englishman, they alone stand today in the country for order; and without
continued order, no real progress is possible for our people.
● The moderates claimed social equality and a share in the British Government of
India because they were British subjects, placed their reliance on English history
and English political ideas
● The moderates were primarily influenced by utilitarian theories, as Edmund
Burke, John Stuart Mill, and John Morley had left a mark on their thoughts and
actions.
● They didn’t demand equality, which seemed to be a rather abstract idea; they
equated liberty with class privilege and wanted gradual or piecemeal reforms.
● But in return, they got Lord Cross's Act or the Indian Councils Amendment Act of
1892, which only provided for a marginal expansion of the legislative councils
both at the Centre and the provinces. Very few of the constitutional demands of
the moderates were fulfilled by this act.
Demands
● They demanded the Indianisation of the services as on the economic grounds
british civil servants got very high emoluments while the inclusion of Indians
would be more economical, on the political grounds that it would stop the
drainage of money, which was annually expatriated through the payment of
salary and pension of the European officers and on moral grounds that Indians
were being discriminated against being kept away from positions of trust and
responsibility.
● The Imperial Legislative Council constituted by the Indian Councils Act(1861) had
very few Indian members and most of them were wealthy, landed and with
loyalist interests. From 1885 to 1892, the nationalist demands for constitutional
reforms were centred around:
1)expansion of council and reform in council- demand conceded in the Indian
Councils Act and they also demand self-government on the lines of self-
governing colonies of Canada and Australia.
● they demanded civil service examinations both in India and London with the
raising of the age limit for appearing in such examinations from nineteen to
twenty-three.
● In 1892-93 under the initiative of William Gladstone, the House of Commons
passed a resolution for simultaneous examination, the maximum age for
examination was further lowered to the disadvantage of the Indians.
● The British Indian army was used in imperial wars in all parts of the world,
particularly in Africa and Asia. The moderates argued over this military
expenditure, and they demanded that this expenditure should be evenly shared
by the British government; Indians should be taken into the army as volunteers
and more and more of them should be appointed to higher ranks.
● The other administrative demands of the moderates included the extension of
trial by jury, repeal of the arms act, complaint against over-assessment of land
revenue and demand for the extension of the Permanent Settlement, demand for
the abolition of salt tax, and a campaign against the exploitation of the indentured
labour at the Assam tea gardens.
● All these demands represented a plea for racial equality and a concern for civil
rights and also perhaps reflected a concern for the lower orders, though of a very
limited nature. But it is needless to mention that none of the demands were even
considered by the colonial administration.
● Apart from this, they offered an economic critique of colonialism. They carefully
analysed the political economy of British rule in india and put forward the drain
of wealth theory. important names-Dadabhai Naoroji in his Indian Poverty and
un-British Rule in India (1901), Justice M.G. Ranade’s Essays in Indian
Economics (1898), Dinshaw Wachaand, R.C who published The Economic
History of India (1901-03) were the arsenals from which new leaders shot their
arrows at the British rule in India.
● Dada bhai naorji’s main argument was that direct drainage of wealth took place
through the payment of home charges, military charges, and guaranteed interest
payments on railway investments to British rule. The burden became heavier
because of the falling exchange rates of the rupee in the 1890s and was
compounded by budget deficits, higher taxes, and military expenditure.
● These leaders by linking Indian poverty to colonialism were trying to corrode the
moral authority of colonial rule, and also perhaps by implication challenging the
whole concept of paternalistic imperialism of British benevolence
● They created an all-India public opinion that british rule in India was the major
cause of Indian poverty and economic backwardness.
● Sarkar points out they had a disdain for the uneducated masses and cultivated
support primarily amongst the professional intelligentsia, proprietor groups and
industrialists.
● Bipan Chandra has summed up the political method of the Moderates as
● “constitutional agitation within the four walls of law and slow, orderly political
progress.
The moderate phase of the national movement had a narrow social base and teh
masses played a passive role and couldn’t take militant political positions against the
authorities.
The closing decade of the 19th century and early years of the 20th century witnessed
the emergence of a new group within the Indian National Congress which was sharply
critical of the ideology and method of the old leadership. The Extremists emerged strong
from 1905 but the rise of extremism on the Indian political scene was not sudden. In
fact, it had been growing steadily since the uprising of 1857.
● various reasons for the rise–
1. Factionalism as the Cambridge School points out 2. Frustration with failure of early
Moderate policies/methods, 3.The belligerent Curzonian administrative policies – Indian
Universities Act-1904, Indian Official Secrets Amendment Act(1904) and finally the
Partition of Bengal(16th oct1905).
The ‘peaceful’ methods used by the moderate leaders were not effective in making the
British Government accept their demands. As a result, several politically conscious
people became frustrated and disillusioned. At the end of the 19th century, a strong
feeling arose among the people that more radical political action was needed to force
the British to accept popular demands.
These 'angry young men' advocated the adoption of Swaraj as the goal of Congress to
be achieved by more self-reliant and independent methods. The extremist leaders of
INC like Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, Lala Lajpat Rai and Aurobindo Ghose
articulated radical political ideas against colonial rule.
Their radical ideology and the programme became popular during the movement
against the Partition of Bengal, also known as the ‘Swadeshi Movement.
The new group came to be called the Extremist Party in contrast to the moderates
neither believed in the goodness of the British rule nor in their sense of justice and fair
play. They were aware that the British were driven by selfishness and had come to India
to exploit her resources. It was necessary to use pressure to make them accept the
demands, not by petitioning or praying like the moderates, but by openly agitating
against them. For Lokmanya Tilak, ‘Swaraj’ was a ‘birthright’ and was not at all
dependent on British assurances.
Various international events also gave impetus to the growth of extremism in India.
Revolutionary movements in Ireland, Russia, Egypt, Turkey, China and the Boer War in
South Africa made the Indian leaders aware that British rule could only be challenged
by putting a united stand against it. The defeat of the Italian Army by the Ethiopians in
1896, and the Russian Army by the Japanese in 1905, showed that the Europeans were
not invincible. All these instilled a sense of self-respect and self-confidence in the Indian
Nationalists.
They also stressed the involvement of the masses in politics for which some of them
used- Hindu revivalism to garner mass support. In the latter half of the 19th century, the
work of leaders like Ramkrishna Paramhansa, Swami Vivekanand, Swami Dayanand
Saraswati, and Vishnusastri Chiplunkar and Sri Aurobindo instilled a sense of pride in
the ancient Indian civilisation.
Shekhar Bandhopadhyay says their goal was swaraj-self government- which was
interpreted differently by various extremists ranging from Bipin Chandra Pal and
Aurobindo Ghosh who defined it as complete freedom to some who saw it as self-rule
within British imperialism.
Extremism was an attitude of mind and a practical strategy to meet a particular
situation.The extremists talked of democracy, constitutionalism, and progress and
talked of broadening the social base of the national movement. Most of them
represented the urban lower middle class and aimed at spreading the Congress
message to the people.
Thus, the main focus of their politics was (a) to get a larger share for Indians in the
administration of their country and to end Britain's economic exploitation of India. They
also realized that these objectives could not be realized without pressure tactics and
some sort of direct action.
The extremists felt the power hold of excessive Westernization in Indian life, thought
and politics, Christianity, and utilitarianism (visible in the teachings of Brahmo Samaj)
were a challenge to Indian religion and thought; the materialistic and individualistic
Western civilization was eroding the values of Indian culture and civilization.
● The intellectual and emotional inspiration of the new leadership was Indian. They
drew inspiration from Indian spiritual heritage; they appealed to heroes of Indian
history and hoped to revive the glories of ancient India.
The terrible famines of 1896-97 and 1899-1900 coupled with the bubonic plague which
broke out in Maharashtra took a heavy toll on life. The Government relief machinery
was inadequate, slow-moving, and badly organized. Even recurring famines were
attributed to the anti-national policy followed by the Government.
● Advocates of extremism ranged from active revolutionaries at one end to secret
sympathizers of revolutionary activities, to those who were opposed to all violent
methods at the other end. Aurobindo Ghose and Lokmanya Tilak played a major
role in developing the blue
● print of the extremist programme, which involved the following activities:
● a) ‘Boycott’ of foreign goods and promotion of ‘Swadeshi’ goods to give impetus
to
● the growth of indigenous industry and commerce.
● b) Non-cooperation with the bureaucracy; this included a ‘boycott’ of
governmental activities.
● c) Establishment of schools and colleges that gave education in the Indian
languages and instil in the students' pride for the glorious heritage of India,
d)Passive Resistance’ to British rule by non-payment of revenue and taxes and by
organising separate ‘indigenous administrative institutions.
● Aurobindo Ghose reinterpreted Vedanta philosophy, which advocated the unity of
man and God and based his concept of nationalism on it.
● To Tilak, the Gita gave the message of disinterested action with full self-
knowledge rather than that of Bhakti or Sanyasa.
● The spread of education led to an increased awareness among the masses and
increased unemployment and underemployment.
● They strongly criticised the three P’s -prayer, protest, petition and described
these methods as ‘political mendicancy’.
● gave new slogans to the Indian nationalist movement like 'non-cooperation,
passive resistance, mass agitation, self-reliance, the discipline of suffering’ etc.
● The Extremists transformed patriotism from ‘an academic pastime’ to ‘service
and suffering for the nation’.
● demand for “complete freedom from foreign control and full independence to
manage national affairs without any foreign restraints".
● They were successful, to a certain extent, in promoting political radicalism and
bridging the gulf between the masses and the English-educated class.
Historiography
1-R.C. Dutt, M.N. Roy conceptualized the split as a result of class conflict- as Rajat
Kanta Ray points out. • They held that the Moderates came from and represented the
bourgeoisie or the “big bourgeoisie” while Extremists came from and represented the
“Petty Bourgeoisie”.
2-David Washbrook, J.R. McLane explained the rise of the Extremists as a result of
factional conflict between ‘ins’ and ‘outs’ for the control of the Congress. The factional
struggle in Madras politics in terms of triangular conflict between clique’-the ‘in’ group
(led by VB Iyengar, S.Subramania Iyer and VK Iyer), their rivals the ‘Egmore
Clique’(some Extremists) and the mofussil/suburban ‘outs’(Extremists) led by T.
Prakasam and Krishna Rao in Andhra and Chidambaram Pillai in Tuticorin. By 1905-
some Egmore men and the mofussil outs allied to constitute Madras Extremists.
3- Anil Seal described the ‘Surat Split’ as the ‘most conspicuous form’ of Extremism
and held that the extremists were ‘an all India coalition of dissidents who tried to reverse
at the top the defeats they had suffered at in the localities’.
4-Sumit Sarkar -the Congress was not a proper political party waiting to be ‘captured’,
but more an annual forum of discussion. Secondly, the Extremists right till 1907-8 were
still strong in their regional bases of Bengal, Punjab, Maharashtra and Madras.
5-Bipan Chandra-the Moderates despite their early achievements (e.g economic
critique of colonial rule) had largely failed to acquire the support of the masses, were
unable to organize any all-India campaign, failed to get any significant concessions from
the British, inability to adapt to the changing demands.Chandra and Sumit Sarkar-
Extremists wanted to extend Boycott and Swadeshi to the rest of India while moderates
wanted the movement limited to Bengal and boycott to foreign goods.
6- Rajat Kanta Ray-Moderates and Extremists were loose groupings lacking formal
organization and discipline like political parties. “they represented different
psychological moods”. By this he means Moderates represented that section of opinion
which was still capable of being appeased by the political concession made by the
British and the Extremists represented the alienation of the Bengali mind from the
British and that section which couldn’t be appeased-
7-Amales Tripathi:-Extremists' emphasis on direct action and mass mobilization
accelerated the pace of India's nationalist movement.
The methods employed by the two groups (Moderates and Extremists) were different in
their tempo and approach. These interpretations reflect the diverse views among
historians regarding the roles and contributions of the Moderates and Extremists to the
Indian nationalist movement. While Moderates sought gradual reforms and cooperation
with the colonial administration, Extremists advocated for more radical methods and
the goal of immediate independence. As a result, the Moderates' actions are often seen
as cautious and conservative, while the Extremists' actions are viewed as more
assertive and revolutionary. While their goals are interpreted differently, their
contributions to the struggle for independence are acknowledged as integral to the
shaping of modern Indian nationalism.
