Debates on Future Strategy After Civil Disobedience

At a Glance

• Phase Non-mass struggle, 1934-35
• Three views Constructive work; council entry; continued mass struggle
• Gandhi’s decision Allowed council entry; AICC at Patna, May 1934, set up a Parliamentary Board
• Result Congress won 45 of 75 Indian seats in the Central Assembly, November 1934
• Exam link UPSC Prelims, Modern History: Congress After Civil Disobedience and the Provincial Ministries

Where Does It Fit?

This is the first topic of the category on the Congress after civil disobedience and the provincial ministries. The previous topic compared Gandhi and Ambedkar. This topic covers the first stage of the debate on strategy after 1934. The next topic covers the Government of India Act, 1935 and the Congress response. Previous topic: Gandhi and Ambedkar: Ideological Differences and Similarities.

What Were the Two Stages of the Debate?

After the withdrawal of the Civil Disobedience Movement there was a two-stage debate on the future strategy of the nationalists. The first, in the phase of non-mass struggle in 1934-35, was on what course the national movement should take in the immediate future. The second, in 1937, was on whether to accept office after the provincial elections held under the autonomy provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935. The second stage is in Congress in the 1937 Elections. The withdrawal itself is described in Third Round Table Conference and the Resumption of Civil Disobedience.

What Were the Three Perspectives?

Three perspectives were put forward on what to do immediately after the end of the movement. The first two were traditional responses, and the third showed the rise of a strong leftist trend within the Congress.

What Was Nehru’s Vision?

Nehru said that the basic goal before the Indian people, as before the world’s people, was the abolition of capitalism and the establishment of socialism. He regarded the withdrawal of civil disobedience and council entry as a spiritual defeat, a surrender of ideals and a retreat from a revolutionary to a reformist mentality. He suggested that vested interests be revised in favour of the masses by taking up the economic and class demands of peasants and workers, and of landlords and capitalists, and by organising the masses in their class organisations, kisan sabhas and trade unions, which should be allowed to affiliate with the Congress and so influence its policies. He argued that there could be no genuine anti-imperialist struggle without incorporating the class struggle of the masses. The earlier growth of these ideas is in Spread of Socialist and Marxist Ideas, Youth Activism and Trade Unionism.

What Was the Struggle-Truce-Struggle Strategy?

A large number of Congressmen led by Gandhi believed that a phase of mass struggle had to be followed by a phase of reprieve before the next phase of struggle. The truce would let the masses recover their strength and give the government a chance to respond to the demands. The masses could not go on sacrificing indefinitely, and if the government did not respond, the movement could be resumed with mass participation. This was the struggle-truce-struggle, or S-T-S, strategy.

Nehru criticised it. After the Lahore call for purna swaraj, he argued, the movement had reached a stage in which there should be continuous confrontation with imperialism until it was overthrown. He advocated a policy of continuous direct action without a constitutionalist phase, saying that real power could not be won by two annas and four annas. Against S-T-S he suggested a struggle-victory, or S-V, strategy. The Lahore session is in Lahore Congress and Purna Swaraj.

How Did Gandhi Resolve the Debate?

Nationalists feared, and British officials hoped, that the Congress would split on Surat lines. Gandhi instead conciliated the supporters of council entry by agreeing to let them enter the legislatures. He said that parliamentary politics could not lead to freedom but that Congressmen who could not offer satyagraha or do constructive work should not remain unoccupied and could use council work, provided they were not sucked into constitutionalism or self-seeking. To reassure the left he said that withdrawal of the movement did not mean bowing before opportunists or compromising with imperialism. The earlier split is in Surat Split, 1907.

In May 1934 the All India Congress Committee met at Patna and set up a Parliamentary Board to fight elections under the Congress’s own banner. Gandhi knew he was out of tune with powerful trends in the Congress: a large section of the intelligentsia favoured parliamentary politics, which he fundamentally disagreed with, another section was estranged by his emphasis on the spinning wheel as the second lung of the nation, and the socialists under Nehru differed with him. In October 1934 he announced his resignation from the Congress, to serve it better in thought, word and deed.

Nehru and the socialists thought that the British had to be expelled before the struggle for socialism could be waged, that unity around the Congress, still the only anti-imperialist mass organisation, was essential, and that it was better to radicalise the Congress gradually than to be isolated from the masses. The right wing was no less accommodating. In the November 1934 elections to the Central Legislative Assembly, the Congress captured 45 of the 75 seats reserved for Indians. As an analytical point, the outcome was a compromise in which each tendency received a place: the council-entry group its Parliamentary Board, the left its place within the Congress, and Gandhi his leadership outside office. The Act that the councils were to work under is in Nationalist Response to the Government of India Act, 1935.

Why Is This Topic Important?

• Three views A standard Mains point on the strategy after 1934
• S-T-S strategy Named strategies are frequently asked
• Left within the Congress Shows the rise of Nehru and the socialists

What Came Next?

The next topic covers the Government of India Act, 1935 and the nationalist response to it. Next topic: Nationalist Response to the Government of India Act, 1935.

Key People and Terms

• S-T-S Struggle-truce-struggle strategy
• S-V Nehru’s struggle-victory alternative
• Parliamentary Board Body set up at Patna in May 1934 to fight elections for the Congress
• Council entry Joining the legislatures
• Constructive work Gandhian social and economic work
• Kisan sabhas Peasant organisations

Exam Corner

Mains Angle

Questions ask about the debate and its resolution. These points add depth.

• Views Constructive work, councils and the left
• Strategy S-T-S versus S-V
• Resolution Council entry and Patna