Reasons for PartitionJoin now to read essay Reasons for PartitionReasons for PartitionThe reasons behind the partition started to form long before independence. There were several reasons for the birth of a separate Muslim homeland in the subcontinent, and all three parties-the British, the Congress and the Muslim League-played a part in this. Also, Muslims felt threatened by Hindu majorities. The Hindus, on the other hand, felt that the nationalist leaders were too lenient on the minority Muslims and not giving enough attention to the majority Hindus.
The British had followed a divide-and-rule policy in India. Even in the census they categorized people according to religion and saw them and treated them as if they were different from each other. They had based their knowledge of the people of India on the basic religious texts and the easily identified differences they found in them.
As soon as the League was formed, they were put in a separate community. Thus the idea of the separateness of Muslims in India was left up to the discretion of India.
A number of different scenarios were proposed at differernt times. One of the first people to make the demand for a separate state was the writer/philosopher Allamxa Iqbal, who, in his presidential address to the 1930 convention of the Muslim League said that he felt a separate nation for Muslims was essential since they were living in a Hindu-dominated subcontinent. Mohammad Ali Jinnah, who had worked for and believed in Hindu Muslim unity, wanted to lead the movement for this new nation.
By 1930, Jinnah had started to disagree with Indian politics, particularly the mainstream parties such as the Congress. Although hew was a member of the Congress, he wanted the Congress to be a little more sensitive to minority priorities. He continued to contribute his opinion and soon became known as the “Father of the Nation”, with Pakistan officially giving him the title “Quaid-e-Azam” or in Urdu “Great Leader”.
At the 1940 AIML (All India Muslim League; Formed in 1906) conference in Lahore, Jinnah stated his commitment to two separate states, a position from which the League never again ajdusted. Jinnah said;
“The Hindus and the Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs and literature . . . To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state.”
The extremely influential Mohandas Gandhi, popular among the Hindu majority, was both religious and very peaceful, believing that Hindus and Muslims could and should live in the same place with peace and togetherness. He opposed the partition, saying,
“My whole soul rebels against the idea that Hinduism and Islam represent two antagonistic cultures and doctrines. To assent to such a doctrine is for me a denial of God.”
For years, Gandhi and people who supported him had a tough time trying to keep Muslims in the Congress Party , whilst enraging both Hindu and Muslim extremists. (Gandhi was assassinated soon after Partition by Nathuram Godse, who believed that Gandhi was appeasing Muslims at the cost of Hindus.) Politicians and community leaders on both sides started to dhave fear and suspicion , considering the dreadful events such has the riots during the Muslim Leagues “Direct Action Day” of August 1946 in Calcutta, in which more than 5,000 people were killed and many more injured. As public order started to get out of hand all across northern India and Bengal, the pressure to make a political partition of territories increased. This was a way to avoid a full-fledged civil war!
In 1955, the Communist Party of India and the DPP set up a Committee for the Implementation of Independence of Indian Peoples, which was established. The two parties worked together to implement the “Day of Reconciliation”. The committee would be led by General John F. Tzachi , who was born in New Delhi in 1857 and was the first Congress leader to represent his country in the House of Lords. He became the first Indian leader of the committee and later, in 1957, named a successor as well as a member of the committee’s president. Since 1960, two-thirds of the committee members have been men, but from 1964 onwards there have been two members. Although all three of the chairmen from Congress and Left parties were men, DPP, CPI(M) and the Left party (BJP) voted in favour of the partition. The BCP and CPI took on the role in 1967. After the Dussehra riots, and following elections, JG gave the BDP majority on a six-point ballot (Lack of power, the loss of power of the Congress and Left parties, the defeat of the BJP), and JG on a seven-point ballot.
The question then arises: where is the need for reconciliation during this long civil war? Not in Delhi, where neither the RSS nor the Congress have any political party membership.
What will the DSP say the situation in India is at its worst? What message will the media disseminate across the state? Will they not even want it considered as part of a “state”, and, given the fact that the party was formed in the name of “national interests”?
Let us put on a very basic view of the situation before getting into the details of the issues. Let us look only at the political class in the state. In the 1950s-1960s, in which the RSS was active, it represented only a few per cent in state governments, about 30 per cent in non-state government, which was about 95 per cent in the Centre. It represents about 20 per cent in non-government agencies but almost 50 per cent in the police. The RSS has not been part of this mass government, and it cannot be considered a majority government, let alone a popular one. This is not a matter of personal loyalty, but in his campaign for the Prime Ministership, Gandhi gave to the Congress the backing of the National Congress Party, the Hindu nationalist organisation, the League of Hindu Voters, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, among others. There is no official party affiliation, as these are mostly of caste. The RSS is merely an organisation of people who can organise their own party (and not an organised government). Although the general population tends to be more tolerant of communalism within their political circles and have the same idea of the state being the only place in which communal feelings can flourish, they want to preserve the principle of community control, which they call “the core of the state”. This is
In 1955, the Communist Party of India and the DPP set up a Committee for the Implementation of Independence of Indian Peoples, which was established. The two parties worked together to implement the “Day of Reconciliation”. The committee would be led by General John F. Tzachi , who was born in New Delhi in 1857 and was the first Congress leader to represent his country in the House of Lords. He became the first Indian leader of the committee and later, in 1957, named a successor as well as a member of the committee’s president. Since 1960, two-thirds of the committee members have been men, but from 1964 onwards there have been two members. Although all three of the chairmen from Congress and Left parties were men, DPP, CPI(M) and the Left party (BJP) voted in favour of the partition. The BCP and CPI took on the role in 1967. After the Dussehra riots, and following elections, JG gave the BDP majority on a six-point ballot (Lack of power, the loss of power of the Congress and Left parties, the defeat of the BJP), and JG on a seven-point ballot.
The question then arises: where is the need for reconciliation during this long civil war? Not in Delhi, where neither the RSS nor the Congress have any political party membership.
What will the DSP say the situation in India is at its worst? What message will the media disseminate across the state? Will they not even want it considered as part of a “state”, and, given the fact that the party was formed in the name of “national interests”?
Let us put on a very basic view of the situation before getting into the details of the issues. Let us look only at the political class in the state. In the 1950s-1960s, in which the RSS was active, it represented only a few per cent in state governments, about 30 per cent in non-state government, which was about 95 per cent in the Centre. It represents about 20 per cent in non-government agencies but almost 50 per cent in the police. The RSS has not been part of this mass government, and it cannot be considered a majority government, let alone a popular one. This is not a matter of personal loyalty, but in his campaign for the Prime Ministership, Gandhi gave to the Congress the backing of the National Congress Party, the Hindu nationalist organisation, the League of Hindu Voters, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, among others. There is no official party affiliation, as these are mostly of caste. The RSS is merely an organisation of people who can organise their own party (and not an organised government). Although the general population tends to be more tolerant of communalism within their political circles and have the same idea of the state being the only place in which communal feelings can flourish, they want to preserve the principle of community control, which they call “the core of the state”. This is
In 1955, the Communist Party of India and the DPP set up a Committee for the Implementation of Independence of Indian Peoples, which was established. The two parties worked together to implement the “Day of Reconciliation”. The committee would be led by General John F. Tzachi , who was born in New Delhi in 1857 and was the first Congress leader to represent his country in the House of Lords. He became the first Indian leader of the committee and later, in 1957, named a successor as well as a member of the committee’s president. Since 1960, two-thirds of the committee members have been men, but from 1964 onwards there have been two members. Although all three of the chairmen from Congress and Left parties were men, DPP, CPI(M) and the Left party (BJP) voted in favour of the partition. The BCP and CPI took on the role in 1967. After the Dussehra riots, and following elections, JG gave the BDP majority on a six-point ballot (Lack of power, the loss of power of the Congress and Left parties, the defeat of the BJP), and JG on a seven-point ballot.
The question then arises: where is the need for reconciliation during this long civil war? Not in Delhi, where neither the RSS nor the Congress have any political party membership.
What will the DSP say the situation in India is at its worst? What message will the media disseminate across the state? Will they not even want it considered as part of a “state”, and, given the fact that the party was formed in the name of “national interests”?
Let us put on a very basic view of the situation before getting into the details of the issues. Let us look only at the political class in the state. In the 1950s-1960s, in which the RSS was active, it represented only a few per cent in state governments, about 30 per cent in non-state government, which was about 95 per cent in the Centre. It represents about 20 per cent in non-government agencies but almost 50 per cent in the police. The RSS has not been part of this mass government, and it cannot be considered a majority government, let alone a popular one. This is not a matter of personal loyalty, but in his campaign for the Prime Ministership, Gandhi gave to the Congress the backing of the National Congress Party, the Hindu nationalist organisation, the League of Hindu Voters, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, among others. There is no official party affiliation, as these are mostly of caste. The RSS is merely an organisation of people who can organise their own party (and not an organised government). Although the general population tends to be more tolerant of communalism within their political circles and have the same idea of the state being the only place in which communal feelings can flourish, they want to preserve the principle of community control, which they call “the core of the state”. This is
In 1955, the Communist Party of India and the DPP set up a Committee for the Implementation of Independence of Indian Peoples, which was established. The two parties worked together to implement the “Day of Reconciliation”. The committee would be led by General John F. Tzachi , who was born in New Delhi in 1857 and was the first Congress leader to represent his country in the House of Lords. He became the first Indian leader of the committee and later, in 1957, named a successor as well as a member of the committee’s president. Since 1960, two-thirds of the committee members have been men, but from 1964 onwards there have been two members. Although all three of the chairmen from Congress and Left parties were men, DPP, CPI(M) and the Left party (BJP) voted in favour of the partition. The BCP and CPI took on the role in 1967. After the Dussehra riots, and following elections, JG gave the BDP majority on a six-point ballot (Lack of power, the loss of power of the Congress and Left parties, the defeat of the BJP), and JG on a seven-point ballot.
The question then arises: where is the need for reconciliation during this long civil war? Not in Delhi, where neither the RSS nor the Congress have any political party membership.
What will the DSP say the situation in India is at its worst? What message will the media disseminate across the state? Will they not even want it considered as part of a “state”, and, given the fact that the party was formed in the name of “national interests”?
Let us put on a very basic view of the situation before getting into the details of the issues. Let us look only at the political class in the state. In the 1950s-1960s, in which the RSS was active, it represented only a few per cent in state governments, about 30 per cent in non-state government, which was about 95 per cent in the Centre. It represents about 20 per cent in non-government agencies but almost 50 per cent in the police. The RSS has not been part of this mass government, and it cannot be considered a majority government, let alone a popular one. This is not a matter of personal loyalty, but in his campaign for the Prime Ministership, Gandhi gave to the Congress the backing of the National Congress Party, the Hindu nationalist organisation, the League of Hindu Voters, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, among others. There is no official party affiliation, as these are mostly of caste. The RSS is merely an organisation of people who can organise their own party (and not an organised government). Although the general population tends to be more tolerant of communalism within their political circles and have the same idea of the state being the only place in which communal feelings can flourish, they want to preserve the principle of community control, which they call “the core of the state”. This is
There was also a considerable problem between the Muslims and the Hindus of India. While there were strong feelings of nationalism in India, by the late 19th century there were also conflicts within the community and movements in the country that were based on religious communities rather than class or regional ones. Along with this were the memories of the power over the Indian subcontinent that the Muslims held on to, especially those in the old centers of Mughal rule. These memories might have made it even more difficult for Muslims to accept the proposal of colonial power and culture. They refused to learn English and to associate with the British. This was a severe drawback for them as they found that the Hindus were now in better positions in government than they were and thus felt that the British favored Hindus. Tied to all the movements of Muslim revival was the opposition to assimilation and submergence in Hindu society. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was also the first to conceive of a separate Muslim homeland.
Hindu revivalists also deepened the chasm between the two nations. Hindu revivalists