{"id":340949,"date":"2025-06-20T08:44:32","date_gmt":"2025-06-20T03:14:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/?p=340949"},"modified":"2025-06-20T08:44:32","modified_gmt":"2025-06-20T03:14:32","slug":"psir-power-50-day-16-capsule-indian-nationalism-part2-2-practice-qs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/psir-power-50-day-16-capsule-indian-nationalism-part2-2-practice-qs\/","title":{"rendered":"PSIR Power 50 \u2013 Day 16 Capsule: Indian Nationalism Part2\/2 + Practice Qs"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Hello everyone,<\/p>\n<p>Today we cover<strong> perspectives<\/strong> of Indian National movement. There are <strong>5 ten-mark, 0 fifteen-mark, and 1 twenty-mark questions <\/strong>in the last 12 years PYQs.<\/p>\n<p><strong>COLONIALIST PERSPECTIVE<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Key historians<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>James Mill<\/strong> \u2013 <em>History of India<\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong>Mountstuart Elphinstone<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>Henry M. Elliot &amp; John Dowson<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>William Wilson Hunter<\/strong><\/li>\n<li><strong>Vincent Arthur Smith<\/strong><\/li>\n<li>Additional advocates: <strong>John Strachey<\/strong>, <strong>Sir John Robert Seeley<\/strong>, <strong>W. W. Hunter<\/strong>, <strong>Herbert Hope Risley<\/strong>, <strong>Valentine Chirol<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Main arguments<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Denied India\u2019s nationhood; called it only a \u201cgeographical expression.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Stressed caste, tribe, religion and language as permanent barriers to unity.<\/li>\n<li>Claimed British \u201cbenevolent despotism\u201d alone prevented \u201csanguinary strife.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Vincent Arthur Smith: without outside authority India would break into \u201cmutually repellent molecules.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>National movement dismissed as a selfish \u201cBengali Babu\u201d agitation lacking a genuine national base.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>NATIONALIST RESPONSES<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two explanatory lines<\/strong><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Western-influence thesis<\/strong> \u2013 English education and liberal ideas awakened modern nationalism.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Indigenous-roots thesis<\/strong> \u2013 Cultural-political unity long pre-dated colonial contact.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Representative scholars and claims<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Surendranath Banerjea<\/strong> \u2013 India a \u201cnation-in-the-making\u201d; middle class tasked with unification.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Bisheshwar Prasad<\/strong> \u2013 Anti-colonial resentment visible in uprisings culminating in 1857.<\/li>\n<li><strong>R. C. Majumdar<\/strong> \u2013 Early vacuum of national identity filled by the Indian National Congress.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Tara Chand<\/strong> \u2013 Nationhood arose from modern economic-political change.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Radha Kumud Mookerji<\/strong> \u2013 <em>Fundamental Unity of India<\/em> (1914): enduring geographic-cultural cohesion.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Har Bilas Sarda<\/strong> \u2013 <em>Hindu Superiority<\/em> (1906): ancient Hindus \u201cthe greatest nation.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><strong>Lala Lajpat Rai<\/strong> \u2013 <em>Young India<\/em> (1916): India has been a nation for 2 000 years.<\/li>\n<li><strong>K. P. Jayaswal<\/strong> \u2013 <em>Hindu Polity<\/em> (1924): ancient India\u2019s republics matched modern Britain.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Rabindranath Tagore<\/strong> \u2013 Nationalism as inclusive, assimilative civilisation.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Mahatma Gandhi<\/strong> \u2013 Spiritual-moral unity rooted in past.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Subhas Chandra Bose<\/strong> \u2013 <em>The Indian Struggle<\/em>: \u201cfundamental unity\u201d despite diversity.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Jawaharlal Nehru<\/strong> \u2013 \u201cUnity in diversity\u201d; a cultural mosaic.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Factors cited by nationalists<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Economic exploitation (high land revenue, indigo coercion, drain of wealth, military charges).<\/li>\n<li>Discriminatory policies (Lord Lytton, Ilbert Bill controversy, Partition of Bengal 1905).<\/li>\n<li>Rise of an educated <strong>middle class<\/strong> leading politics (underlined by Banerjea, Lajpat Rai, C. F. Andrews &amp; Girija Mukerji).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Idealism and leadership<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Leaders portrayed as patriotic, selfless, transcending caste, class, religion and uniting a pan-Indian anti-imperialist front.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>MARXIST APPROACHES<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Early Marxists<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>M. N. Roy<\/strong> \u2013 <em>India in Transition<\/em> (1922): nationalism grows from world capitalism; bourgeois dominance; only the working class can be truly revolutionary.<\/li>\n<li><strong>R. P. Dutt<\/strong> \u2013 <em>India Today<\/em> (1947): 1857 feudal; Congress first a \u201csafety-valve\u201d of British policy, later a bourgeois-led national force.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ol>\n<li><strong> R. Desai\u2019s five phases<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<ol>\n<li>Intelligentsia (Rammohan Roy) to 1885<\/li>\n<li>Bourgeoisie 1885-1905<\/li>\n<li>Lower-middle class 1905-1918 (Swadeshi)<\/li>\n<li>Peasants &amp; workers 1918-1934 \u2013 elite still in charge<\/li>\n<li>1934-1939 \u2013 Congress Socialists (petty bourgeois); rise of communalism<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Common Marxist themes<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Fundamental conflict with imperialism plus inner class contradictions.<\/li>\n<li>Bourgeois \u201cvacillation\u201d: backed nationalism yet feared radical mass action.<\/li>\n<li><strong>R. P. Dutt<\/strong> dubbed Gandhi \u201cmascot of the bourgeoisie\u201d; halts of 1922 and 1934 seen as bourgeois safeguards.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Later refinements<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Bipan Chandra<\/strong> (1966): autonomy of ideas; leaders not mere class agents.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Bipan Chandra<\/strong> (1988): adopts <strong>Gramsci<\/strong>, views movement as \u201cwar of position\u201d; Gandhian non-violence a mobilisation strategy.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Sumit Sarkar<\/strong>: uses <strong>Trotsky\u2019s \u201csubstitutionism\u201d<\/strong> and <strong>Gramsci\u2019s \u201corganic vs. traditional intellectuals.\u201d<\/strong> Gandhi sometimes overlaps but is not a puppet.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>CAMBRIDGE SCHOOL<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Principal historians<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John Gallagher, Ronald Robinson, <strong>Anil Seal<\/strong>, Gordon Johnson, C. A. Bayly, David Washbrook, C. J. Baker, B. R. Tomlinson<\/p>\n<p><strong>Core propositions<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Main conflicts lay <strong>within Indian society<\/strong>, not between Indians and British.<\/li>\n<li>Politics driven by <strong>elite rivalry for scarce offices<\/strong> created by the Raj.<\/li>\n<li>Mobilisation \u201chorizontal\u201d along caste\/community lines; later work stresses \u201cvertical\u201d factional patronage networks.<\/li>\n<li>Movements such as Non-Co-operation and Civil Disobedience labelled \u201cmimic warfare\u201d or \u201csimulated combat.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Nationalist rhetoric used to bargain with the colonial state; leaders motivated by self-interest.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Criticisms<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Accused of echoing colonial denials of anti-imperialism and of ignoring popular agency and ideological commitment.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>SUBALTERN STUDIES<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Founders and contributors<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Ranajit Guha, Gyanendra Pandey, Shahid Amin, David Hardiman, Sumit Sarkar (initially)<\/strong>; later <strong>Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Partha Chatterjee<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Tenets<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Elitist historiography (colonial &amp; nationalist) excluded the <strong>\u201cpolitics of the people.\u201d<\/strong><\/li>\n<li>Subaltern classes (peasants, tribals, workers) possessed an <strong>autonomous political domain<\/strong>: informal, horizontal, often spontaneous and violent, rooted in local solidarities.<\/li>\n<li>Bourgeois and colonial ideologies failed to achieve hegemony over this domain.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Influential essays<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Guha<\/strong>: \u201cOn Some Aspects\u2026\u201d, \u201cProse of Counterinsurgency.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><strong>Pandey<\/strong>: Awadh peasant revolt independent of Congress.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Amin<\/strong>: \u201cGandhi as Mahatma\u201d \u2013 popular magical interpretation of Gandhi.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Hardiman<\/strong>: Tribal politics in Gujarat.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Sarkar<\/strong>: Subaltern militancy often out-paced leaders.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Later direction<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Post-modern turn: <strong>Spivak<\/strong> (\u201cCan the subaltern speak?\u201d), <strong>Chatterjee<\/strong> (\u201csubalternity of the elite\u201d); scepticism about nationalism; preference for \u201cfragments\u201d and discourse analysis.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Main criticisms<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Overstated autonomy of subalterns; later work seen as losing focus on material conditions; \u201csubaltern\u201d category arguably too broad.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>DALIT PERSPECTIVES<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Leading reformers<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Jyotirao Phule<\/strong> \u2013 Satyashodhak Samaj; Aryan invasion thesis.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Narayana Guru<\/strong> \u2013 \u201cOne caste, one religion, one god.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><strong>B. R. Ambedkar<\/strong> \u2013 Mahad Satyagraha 1927; demand for separate electorates; <strong>Independent Labour Party<\/strong>; drafting of constitutional safeguards; mass conversion to Buddhism 1956.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Critique of mainstream nationalism<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Congress prioritised political over social emancipation; dominated by upper castes (\u201cBrahmin-Baniya party\u201d).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Poona Pact 1932<\/strong> forced withdrawal of separate electorate demand.<\/li>\n<li>Political freedom meaningless without annihilation of caste.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Impact<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Inserted caste justice into national agenda; won constitutional guarantees (Articles 15-17); broadened meaning of Indian freedom.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>RADICAL HUMANIST PERSPECTIVE (M. N. Roy)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Philosophical foundations<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Primacy of the individual<\/strong>; freedom and truth as biological drives.<\/li>\n<li>Humans inherently <strong>rational and moral<\/strong>; ethics stem from reason.<\/li>\n<li>History shaped by ideas as well as material forces; introduces \u201c<strong>Physical Realism<\/strong>.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Critique of Indian National Movement<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Collectivist nationalism<\/strong> stifles individual liberty; risks new authoritarianism.<\/li>\n<li>Sought political, not ethical, revolution; compromised with religion and conservatism; left superstition intact.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Critique of Marxism<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Over-emphasis on economics; dialectical materialism dispensable; communist regimes authoritarian; ethics neglected.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Alternative programme<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Philosophical renaissance<\/strong> before social change.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Decentralised radical democracy<\/strong> via people\u2019s committees; party-less politics.<\/li>\n<li>Economic re-organisation to foster individual development.<\/li>\n<li>Ethical-moral culture built on rationality.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Objections raised<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Vision branded impractical and overly idealistic; underestimates collective identity; hard to implement without existing structures.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>COMPARATIVE SNAPSHOT<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><strong>Perspective<\/strong><\/td>\n<td><strong>Unity of India<\/strong><\/td>\n<td><strong>Motor of struggle<\/strong><\/td>\n<td><strong>View of leadership<\/strong><\/td>\n<td><strong>Place of the masses<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Colonialist<\/td>\n<td>Denied<\/td>\n<td>\u2013<\/td>\n<td>British guardians<\/td>\n<td>Largely invisible<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Nationalist<\/td>\n<td>Real, ancient or emerging<\/td>\n<td>Patriotism + economic grievance<\/td>\n<td>Idealist patriots<\/td>\n<td>Essential but led<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Marxist (early)<\/td>\n<td>Secondary to class<\/td>\n<td>Bourgeoisie vs. imperialism<\/td>\n<td>Bourgeois manipulators<\/td>\n<td>Growing yet curbed<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Marxist (later)<\/td>\n<td>Cultural-ideological war<\/td>\n<td>Multi-class \u201cwar of position\u201d<\/td>\n<td>Organic\/traditional intellectuals<\/td>\n<td>Centre of hegemony<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Cambridge<\/td>\n<td>Product of elite bargains<\/td>\n<td>Factional competition<\/td>\n<td>Self-interested office-seekers<\/td>\n<td>Mobilised via patrons<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Subaltern<\/td>\n<td>Many local unities<\/td>\n<td>Peasant\/tribal agency<\/td>\n<td>Often irrelevant<\/td>\n<td>Primary historical subject<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Dalit<\/td>\n<td>Unity irrelevant without caste justice<\/td>\n<td>Anti-caste + anti-colonial twin agenda<\/td>\n<td>Often oppressive elites<\/td>\n<td>Dalits self-mobilise<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Radical Humanist<\/td>\n<td>Secondary to individual liberty<\/td>\n<td>Ethical-rational awakening<\/td>\n<td>Should dissolve elite power<\/td>\n<td>Empowered individuals<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong><u>\u00a0<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><u>\u00a0<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong><u>\u00a0<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><u>\u00a0<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><u>Practice Questions<\/u><\/strong><strong><u> (Write before 4 p.m.)<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Question 1<\/strong><strong>.<\/strong> <strong>Analyse the Marxist perspective of the nature of Indian National Movement. [2021\/10m]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Question 2.<\/strong> <strong>Critically examine the Radical Humanist perspective on Indian National movement. [2016\/10 m]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Question 3. <\/strong><strong>Discuss the contribution of the Dalit struggle to establish egalitarianism in Indian society during freedom movement. [2024\/20m]<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\ud83d\udccc <em>Model answers drop this evening on the Telegram channel:<\/em> <a href=\"https:\/\/t.me\/psirbyamitpratap\"><strong>https:\/\/t.me\/psirbyamitpratap<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 keep notifications on.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>See you tomorrow on Day 17. Keep practicing!<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>\u2014<strong>Amit Pratap Singh<\/strong> &amp; Team<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>A quick note on submissions of copies and mentorship<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>2025 Mains writers<\/strong>: <strong>Cohort 1 of O-AWFG<\/strong> started on <strong>12 June<\/strong> and <strong>ATS<\/strong> on <strong>15 June<\/strong>. The above practice set will serve as your <em>revision tool<\/em>, just <strong>do not miss booking your mentorship sessions<\/strong> for personalised feedback especially for starting tests. Come with your evaluated test copies.<\/li>\n<li><strong>2026 Mains writers &#8211; <\/strong>keep uploading through your usual dashboard. Act on the feedback and improve consistently.<\/li>\n<li>Alternate between mini-tests <strong>(O-AWFG)<\/strong> and full mocks <strong>(ATS)<\/strong> has been designed to tackle speed, content depth, and structured revision\u2014line-by-line evaluation pinpoints your weaknesses and errors. Follow your <strong>PSIR O-AWFG &amp; ATS <\/strong>schedule and use the model answers to enrich your content, as rankers recommended based on their own success.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Hello everyone, Today we cover perspectives of Indian National movement. There are 5 ten-mark, 0 fifteen-mark, and 1 twenty-mark questions in the last 12 years PYQs. COLONIALIST PERSPECTIVE Key historians James Mill \u2013 History of India Mountstuart Elphinstone Henry M. Elliot &amp; John Dowson William Wilson Hunter Vincent Arthur Smith Additional advocates: John Strachey, Sir&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/psir-power-50-day-16-capsule-indian-nationalism-part2-2-practice-qs\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">PSIR Power 50 \u2013 Day 16 Capsule: Indian Nationalism Part2\/2 + Practice Qs<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10394,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[12128,9],"tags":[1679,12012],"class_list":["post-340949","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-psir-optional","category-public","tag-psir","tag-psir-forumias","entry"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","views":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/340949","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10394"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=340949"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/340949\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=340949"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=340949"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=340949"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}