British Raj In India's Crisis

1783 Words8 Pages
With the end of the World War I, the British Raj in India fell into crisis. The political situation of India was in constant disturbance. Because of the war a number of reforms were carried out in India which became one of the major reasons of colonial crisis in India. This paper will discuss what impact different reforms of the British Raj had on the politics of India, how the arrival of Gandhi changed the political scenario in India, how the Muslim league was affecting politics, and how these factors lead to the catastrophic partition of the sub-continent. Since the beginning of the Raj, the British imposed various reforms on the Indian population which continued to happen till the end of the colonial rule. In 1906, the Secretary of the…show more content…
To achieve this end he used the tactic of non-violent non-cooperation. His method involved passive resistance. Gandhi also supported the Khilafat movement, which was carried by the Muslims of India in 1919, to pressurize the British Raj and to protect the Ottoman Empire. He supported it because he wanted to oppose the social and economic policies which were imposed by the British. Because of the disappointment of the Rowlett act of 1919 Gandhi got the chance to introduce All-India agitation. He also opposed the act of 1919, by calling it “a ‘black act’ passed by a ‘satanic’ government” (Jalal and Bose, p. 110). The British’s hideous brutality of the Jallian wala Bagh massacre was unexpected for Gandhi. He was profoundly affected by this massacre and described it as “thinly disguised whitewash” (Metcalf and Metcalf, p. 169). Due to this massacre he lost his faith on the British’s good intentions and began the mass nationalist movements of 1920. It included the boycott of schools, courts, councils, and all the imported foreign goods. With the passage of time the movement continued with great participation from the masses, like the whole Punjab was against the imperial rule. The movement was very successful as Jalal and Bose have suggested, “the boycott of British goods and institutions was much more effective in 1921 than it had been in 1905” (p. 116) Another motive of non-cooperation was also to introduce native institution that could compete and replace the British institutions, to meet this end majority contributed money and some leaders like Tilak and Lalaji started their own institutions. The tension was thick between the Congress and the Government throughout 1921. The movement completely irritated the British as they did not know how to respond it. They could not throw Gandhi and his
Open Document