Thursday, December 29, 2011

Simultaneous Growth of Extremism and repression by the Government

The split that occurred in the Surat Congress (1907) gave green signal to the rulers to unleash a fresh wave of repression.The victims of these repressions were the Congressmen of both the factions, organisations, individuals and news papers.Before the Surat session the Viceroy issued in May, 1907, an ordinance empowering local authorities to prohibit public meetings, without prior permission.The ordinance was designed to place obstacles before all forms of legitimate political activities.
Many including the Secretary of State for India, Lord Morley, questioned desirability of such measures.
1.In 1908, the Press Act; to empower authorities to close down the publication of any newspaper and confiscate any printing press at the discretion of the District magistrate.
2.The explosives Act; enables deportation for 14 years of any person in possession of a bomb or the materials of a bomb or any person assisting any person in the making of bomb.
3. A third Act empowered the authorities to ban any organisation which they found to be functioning in a manner prejudicial to the law and order of the country and to imprison any person participating  in the activities of a banned organisation, and to confiscate any building, property, or material found to be used for the activities of such an organization.
In other words , the acts passed during this period was simply to curb the activities of political parties and organizations.
Even the moderates were victims of these acts.
A short table, published in the Statesman, showing how the sale and purchase of British clothes stored in the mofussil towns in September, 1905, compared with the previous year, is given below;
District.................Value goods purchased in.....Value of goods being purchased
..............................Sept., 1904. ........................in Sept. 1905
Jessore.................Rs. 30,000.............................Rs. 2,000
Bogra....................,,     1,700............................. ,,       200
Dacca....................,,     5,000..............................,,   2,000
Arrah......................,,    1,500..............................,,      200
Hazaribagh...............,, 10,000..............................,,       500
Nadia........................,,15,000...............................,, 2,500
Malda ........................,,8,000................................,,1,300
Burdwan.....................,, 6,000...............................,, 1,000
-------------------------------------------------------------               

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Split of Congress-moderates and Extremists

The wavering policy of the Benaras Congress of 1905 in lending full-throated support to " boycott" and the mendicancy of the Moderates mirrored in their appeasement of Mr. Morley, the Liberal Secretary of State for India, in early 1906, increasingly hardened Extremism in Bengal. So long, Surendranath banerjee was the accredited leader of the movement, but from now on Bipin pal came to the fore-front.He found his close associate in Aurobindo Ghose whose whole-hearted plunge into Bengal politics from mid-1906 invigorated the movement to a considerable extent. The bureaucratic highhandedness to the Barisal conference (April 1906) as revealed in its prohibition of shouts of Bandemataram and manhandling of the leaders and delegates including Surendranath  Banerjee convinced the extremists of the need for a more vigorous policy vis-a-vis the Government. So they reorganised themselves into the New  Party or Nationalist Party as distinct from the Moderates.
The split took place chiefly on the political level. The demand of the Moderates was "graduated colonial self-Government' and that of the Extremists were Purna Swaraj or unqualified National Independence.The former wanted to advocated for their demand " boycott orpassive resistance" where as the extremists wanted to take "violent means to attain Complete Independence". There was a third trend introduced by Dr. Sumit Sarkar's viz., Rabindranath's constructive idea of Swadeshi.
Bipin Pal published in his own initiative and with a sum of about Rs. 500/- the English daily Bandemataram  and had set out extensive tour of Eastern bengal and Assam.This daily paper turned into a limited concern with the major financial assistance of Subodh Chandra Basu Mallick.under the able editorship of Aurobindo Ghose (1906-1908) as the greatest propaganda machinaryof the ideas of the movement.   
Under the able leadership of Pal-Ghose the Nationalist Party caused terror in the minds of the bureaucracy.

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Swadeshi and Boycott

The most important propagators of Swadeshi and Boycott movement were the young men of Bengal coming vastly from the student community. It was they who, working under the banner of Bande Mataram. After the publication of the Government proclamation on Partition on 1 Sept., to be effective on 16 October , the Boycott-Swadeshi Movement gained a renewed zeal and fervour. The Samitis and their branches at various mofussil centres such as Bandhab Samity of Barisal, Surhid Samity of Mymensingh etc.and numerous volunteer organisations newly formed devoted themselves wholeheartedly to the task of propagation and implementation of of Swadeshi "even at a sacrifice". The members of the Dawn society (1902-1907)and those of the Bande matarram Sampradaya (1905-1907)were zealous prechears so far as Calcutta concerned. The Sampradaya formed for this very purpose strolled the streets of Calcutta and the suberbs every Sunday singing Bande Mataram in which many patrons, patriots, and poets also joined including Dwijendralal Roy and Rabindranath Tagore. Both Calcutta and Mofussils observed 16 October, the day of bengal Partition, as a daay of national mourning, wearing black badges  and performing A-Randhan ( no cooking)and Rakhi-bandhan, symbol for women participation and national unity. In the evening a solemn Proclamation, prepared by the aged and ailing leader Ananda Mohan  Bose, was adopted at a huge gathering on the of the present Federation hall, calcutta.    
A landmark in the march of the movement was reachesd in October , 1905 when the repressive Carlyle Circular (10 October)was issued threatening students with expulsionfrom schools and stoppage of scholarships or concessions for participation in swadeshi meetings and processions.As the mofussils students in  defiance of the Carlyle Circular joined inlarge numbers in meetings on 1 November to read the proclamation they stood face to face with expulsions and other punishments.To fight against the Carlyle Circular, a National School at Rangpuron 8th November, 1905 and formed a national Council of Education, Bengal (11 march 1906). A large number of schools were also established. A National College was established at 166 Bowbazar Street with Aurobindo Ghose as its Principal and Satish Chandra Mukherjee as Superintendant.  This was expressed in Jatiya Vidyalaya written by Rabindranath.          

Monday, December 26, 2011

Bal Gangadhar Tilak (contd-2)

 Life after prison
Tilak had mellowed after his release in June 1914, more because of the diabetes and hardship in Mandalay prison. When World war I started in August, Tilak, cabled the King-Emperor in Britain of his support and turned his oratory to find new recruits for war efforts. He welcomed The Indian Councils Act, popularly known as Minto-Morley Reforms which had been passed by British parliament in May 1909 terming it as ‘a marked increase of confidence between the Rulers and the Ruled’. Acts of violence actually retarded than hastened the pace of political reforms, he felt. He was eager for reconciliation with Congress and had abandoned his demand for direct action and settled for agitations ‘strictly by constitutional means’ - a line advocated by his rival Gopal Krishna Gokhale. Tilak saw the spark in Gandhi and tried his best to convince Gandhi to leave the idea of "Total Ahinsa" and try to get "Swarajya" by all means. Gandhi though looked upon him as his guru, did do not change his mind.

 All India Home Rule League
Later, Tilak re-united with his fellow nationalists and re-joined the Indian National Congress in 1916. He also helped found the All India Home Rule League in 1916-18 with G. S. Khaparde and Muhammad Ali Jinnah. After years of trying to reunite the moderate and radical factions, he gave up and focused on the Home Rule League, which sought self-rule. Tilak travelled from village to village trying to conjure up support from farmers and locals to join the movement towards self-rule. Tilak was impressed by the Russian Revolution, and expressed his admiration for Lenin.
Tilak, who started his political life as a Maratha propagandist, progressed into a prominent nationalist after his close association with Indian nationalists following the partition of Bengal. When asked in Calcutta whether he envisioned a Maratha type of government for Free India, Tilak replied that the Maratha dominated Governments of 17th and 18th centuries were outmoded in the 20th century and he wanted a genuine federal system for Free India where every religion and race was an equal partner. He added that only such a form of Government would be able to safeguard India's freedom. He was the first Congress leader to suggest that Hindi written in the Devanagari script be accepted as the sole national language of India.
 Social contribution
In 1894, Tilak transformed household worshipping of Ganesha into Sarvajanik Ganeshotsav and he also made Shiva Jayanti(birth anniversary celebrations of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj) as a social festival. Gopal Ganesh Agarkar was the first editor of Kesari, a prominent Marathi weekly in his days which was started by Lokmanya Tilak in 1880-81. G Lokmanya Tilak, established the Shri Shivaji Raigad Smarak Mandal along with Senapati Khanderao Dabhade IInd of Talegaon Dabhade, who became the Founder President of the Mandal. In 1895, Tilak founded the Shri Shivaji Fund Committee for celebration of 'Shiv Punya Tithi' and for the reconstruction of the Samadhi of Shivaji Maharaj at Fort Raigad.
Tilak said, "I regard India as my Motherland and my Goddess, the people in India my kith and kin, and loyal and steadfast work for their political and social emancipation my highest religion and duty"
Books
In 1903, he wrote the book The Arctic Home in the Vedas. In it he argued that the Vedas could only have been composed in the Arctics, and the Aryan bards brought them south after the onset of the last Ice age. He proposed the radically new way to determine the exact time of Vedas. He tried to calculate the time of Vedas by using the position of different Nakshatras. Positions of Nakshtras were described in different Vedas.
Tilak also authored 'Shrimadbhagwadgeetarahasya' - the analysis of 'Karmayoga' in the Bhagavadgita, which is known to be gift of the Vedas and the Upanishads.
Other collections of his writings include:
The Hindu philosophy of life, ethics and religion (published in 1887).
Vedic chronology and vedanga jyotisha.
Letters of Lokamanya Tilak, edited by M. D. Vidwans.
Selected documents of Lokamanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak, 1880–1920, edited by Ravindra Kumar.
Jedhe Shakawali (Editor)
He also wrote a book named 'Oorayan' when he was imprisoned at Mandalay in Burma.
Praised by government
In 2007, the Government of India released a coin to commemorate the 150th birth anniversary of Bal Gangadhar Tilak

Bal Gangadhar Tilak (contd-1)

Swadeshi Movement was spread to other provinces of India such as Maharashtra, Punjab, Madras, and parts of Madhyapradesh and the Deccan. The hurricane tour of Tilak, assisted by Khaparde, throughout maharashtra spread the ideas of boycott, Swadeshi, National educationand Swaraj. his two organs, the Marhatta and Keshari,  freely used for the purpose. He also made periodic visits to Calcutta and did everything necessary to popularize the swaraj and ganapati festival in Bengal. The Sivaji festival first celebrated in Bengal in 1902, was most enthusiastically performed in the presence  of Tilak at Calcutta in 1906 when the Swadeshi Movement was in its full swing. The Sivaji ideal, i.e., creating a free state against the enemies, now became the national object of pride and dignity, one for emulation by Imdians.
Tilak's prominent role at Surat to save the Congress from  Moderates'        influence and his courageous drive thereafter for disseminating the ideologies of the movement without frown or fear of the bureaucracy resulted in his arrest in June, 1908 and transportationto the Mandalay jail for six years.

 Indian National Congress
Tilak'' joined the Indian National Congress in 1890. He opposed its moderate attitude, especially towards the fight for self government. He was one of the most eminent radicals at the time.
Despite being personally opposed to early marriage, Tilak opposed the 1891 [1891 Age of Consent Act
Age of Consent bill]], seeing it as interference with Hinduism and a dangerous precedent. The act raised the age at which a girl could get married from 10 to 12. A plague epidemic spread from Mumbai to Pune in late 1896, and by January 1897, it reached epidemic proportions. In order to suppress the epidemic and prevent its spread, it was decided to take drastic action, accordingly a Special Plague Committee, with jurisdiction over Pune city, its suburbs and Pune cantonment was appointed under the Chairmanship of W. C. Rand, I. C. S, Assistant Collector of Pune by way of a government order dated 8 March 1897.Tilak took up the people's cause by publishing inflammatory articles in his paper Kesari.[Kesari was written in Marathi and Maratha was written in English], quoting the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad Gita, to say that no blame could be attached to anyone who killed an oppressor without any thought of reward. Following this, on 22 June, Rand and another British officer Lt. Ayerst were shot and killed by the Chapekar brothers and their other associates. Tilak was charged with incitement to murder and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment. When he emerged from prison, he was revered as a martyr and a national hero and adopted a new slogan, "Swaraj (Self-Rule) is my birth right and I shall have it."
Following the partition of Bengal in 1905, which was a strategy set out by Lord Curzon to weaken the nationalist movement, Tilak encouraged a boycott, regarded as the Swadeshi movement.[5]
Tilak opposed the moderate views of Gopal Krishna Gokhale, and was supported by fellow Indian nationalists Bipin Chandra Pal in Bengal and Lala Lajpat Rai in Punjab. They were referred to as the Lal-Bal-Pal triumvirate. In 1907, the annual session of the Congress Party was held at Surat (Gujarat). Trouble broke out between the moderate and the extremist factions of the party over the selection of the new president of the Congress. The party split into the "Jahal matavadi" ("Hot Faction," or extremists), led by Tilak, Pal and Lajpat Rai, and the "Maval matavadi"("Soft Faction," or moderates). Nationalists like Aurobindo Ghose were Tilak supporters.
 Arrest
On 30 April 1908 two Bengali youths, Prafulla Chaki and Khudiram Bose, threw a bomb on a carriage at Muzzafarpur in order to kill the Chief Presidency Magistrate Douglas Kingsford of Calcutta fame, but erroneously killed some women travelling in it. While Chaki committed suicide when caught, Bose was hanged. Tilak in his paper Kesari defended the revolutionaries and called for immediate Swaraj or Self-rule. The Government swiftly arrested him for sedition. He asked a young Muhammad Ali Jinnah to represent him. But the British judge convicted him and he was imprisoned from 1908 to 1914 in the Mandalay Prison, Burma. While imprisoned, he continued to read and write, further developing his ideas on the Indian Nationalist movement. While in the prison he wrote the most famous "Gita Rahasya". Lots of copies of which were sold and the money was donated for the freedom fighting.
Sardar Griha Lodge, Tilak stayed here when in Mumbai
Much has been said of his trial of 1908, it being the most historic trial. His last words on the verdict of the Jury were such: "In spite of the verdict of the Jury, I maintain that I am innocent. There are higher powers that rule the destiny of men and nations and it may be the will of providence that the cause which I represent may prosper more by my suffering than by my remaining free". These words now can be seen imprinted on the wall of Room. No. 46 at Bombay High Court.

Sunday, December 25, 2011

Bal Gangadhar Tilak

Lokmanya Tilak Born as Keshav Gangadhar Tilak, 23 July 1856(1856-07-23)–1 August 1920(1920-08-01) (aged 64), was an Indian nationalist, teacher, social reformer and independence fighter who was the first popular leader of the Indian Independence Movement. The British colonial authorities derogatorily called the great leader "Father of the Indian unrest". He was also conferred with the honorary title of Lokmanya, which literally means "Accepted by the people (as their leader)". Tilak was one of the first and strongest advocates of "Swaraj" (self-rule) in Indian consciousness. His famous quote, "swaraj is my birthright, and I shall have it!" is well-remembered in India even today.
Tilak was a brilliant politician as well as a profound scholar who believed that independence is the foremost necessity for the well being of a nation and that to win it through extreme measures should not be dispensed with. He was the first intellectual leader to understand the importance of mass support and subsequently became the first mass leader of India. He realized that the constitutional agitation in itself was futile against the British and that, moreover, India was ill prepared for an armed revolt.

As a result, although he was helpful to revolutionaries such as Savarkar, Aurobindo Ghosh and Chaphekar, he did not venture into it himself. Instead, he martialled the extremist wing of Indian National Congress. His movement was based on the principles of Swadeshi (Indigenous), Boycott and Education. It was he who, through his own example, gave prestige to imprisonment in freedom struggle. It is a tragedy that his work is not given the recognition due to it.
Tilak is often misinterpreted. Perhaps it is so because of his style of operation which raised bitter controversies and still more bitter opponenents even outside the beurocracy. Violent arguements characterized his relationship with social reformists such as Agarkar, Ranade and moderates like Ferozshah Mehta. Many blame him for opposing the Age of Consent Bill which raised the age limit for marriage of girls to 12 (from 10). But is fact that at the same time he had signed a counter-proposal where in one of the clauses was that the girls (boys) should not be married until they are 16 (20). He educated all of his daughters and did not marry them till they were over 16. There are instances when he privately paid for the education of women. Still it remains true that he was a reactionary and did not use his considerable influence to give a much-needed support to the social reformists. Probably, he did not want to offend the prevalent rigid system - he, himself, having been brought up in the culturally narrow surroundings of Pune. It seems as if his canvas presented him no room for active social reforms.
He had several discussions with Shankaracharya of Sankeshwar and asserted that like Swami Vivekananda, the modern Shankaracharya must be educated on modern lines. Tilak received Bachelor of Arts degree from The Deccan College, Pune in 1879 and L.L.B. from the Elphinston College, Mumbai in 1882. He was among the founders of the New English School, Pune (1881) of which Prof Chiplunkar became the Principal. He had a genius for organisation and with Agarkar, the then foremost social reformist, started the newspapers 'Kesari' and 'The Maratha' in 1881 and in 1890's started the annual celebration of 'ShivajiFestival' and 'Ganapati Festival' which served a platform for people to join in the nationalist movement against the British. Soon he came to be regarded as the undisputed leader of Maharashtra and was honored with the title 'Lokamanya' in 1893 which became synonymous with him in the 1900. As the nation fumed over the partition of Bengal (1905), Tilak assumed the national leadership with his extremist attitude and stated his position unequivocally as "Swarajya (self rule) is my birth right and I shall have it."
The next three years saw meteoric rise in his stature and the British power which had long since considered him their chief concern and had sent him to prison twice already, decided on a firmer measure. Much has been said of his trial of 1908. He utilized his time in prison in scholarly pursuits and wrote "GitaRahasya", a commentary on the Gita. He returned to Indian political scene in 1915. The political situation was fast changing under the shadow of World War I. Mahatma Gandhi's star was on rise with Satyagraha at Sabarmati in 1914.
The British charged Tilak in 1918. He fought those charges both in India and England, and was judged guilty. Amidst rumors of yet another sentence, he headed the Home-Rule commission in England to debate India's constitutional demands. By that time, Gandhi had made preparations of the first nation wide non-cooperation movement and, perhaps, it was to make way for Gandhi that Tilak left for England. Tilak was, probably, the only leader who could have put brakes on Gandhi. Both had conflicting approaches. Gandhi had the courage to address and solve the issue of untouchability once and forever. He, unlike Tilak, was a fluent speaker in Hindi and could thus reach the masses more easily. It is no secret that he had little respect for Tilak's real politick and Tilak hated adopting means which killed self pride of the masses. Whereas Gandhi preached, "Overcome hatred with love", Tilak pooh poohed moderates saying, "There is no empire lost by a free grant of concession by the rulers to the ruled." In both world wars, Gandhi encouraged Indians to fight for the British Empire unconditionally whereas Tilak held that if Indians were to remain slaves then it mattered little whether they joined army or not. The Mahatma was modern with novel methods. His was a welcome arrival both for the Moderates who needed an answer to the Extremists and Tilak, in particular, and the British who would rather acknowledge and have a saint as the foremost adversary.
In the 20's many of Tilak's followers, Dadasaheb Khaparde and N.C. Kelkar being the most prominent among them, supported Gandhi but none could have his say in the new order. Aurobindo Ghosh had retired to an ascetic life and Savarkar was serving two life sentences in Andaman. The Lokamanya had no worthy successor. Tilak's health continued to deteriorate rapidly at end of July 1920 and he went delirious and was unconscious for 3 days. His last words in the final momentary recovery were, "This happened in 1818 (End of Peshwai) and this in 1918. A hundred years' history - what a life of servitude...Unless Swaraj is obtained, India shall not prosper. It is necessary for our very own existence."
At 00:40 hrs (IST) on Aug 1, 1920, he was declared dead. It is said that the British made an extraordinary request that his brain be handed over to them so that it could be studied, preserved and exhibited. It was not complied with.

Friday, December 23, 2011

Swadeshi Movement (1905- 1911)- contd-1

The present state of Independence movement is mainly due to the conflict between the rising Capitalist Class in India and the British Capitalists. There was other contradictions also.i.e., contradiction between the fuedal lords with the British and the working class and the exploiting classes.During the early years of the 20th century, the working time in the  factories was, on the average, 12 hours and 7minutes per day. In some factories , it was even 14 hours. In Bombay, workers had to toil for over 12 hours ( in some factories which had started using electric power it was between 14and 1/2, and 15 hours.). In Broach it was 14 and 1/2 hours, in Agra 13 and 3/4 to 15 and 1/4 hours, in Lucknow 13 and 3/4 to 14 and 1/2 hours and in Amritsar aqnd lahore it was 13 to 13 and 3/4 hours. In agricultural field class conflicts are getting intensified as in the case of factories.     
A new sets of leaders from different walks of life by the educated sections of the people. Teachers, lawyers, Doctors and various other professions. 
Lokmany  Tilak was the most eminent amomg the extremist        

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Growth of Capitalism (contd-2)

Annexed figures give the growth of capitalism in Europe (fig-1) and Growth of Imperialism by European states (fig-2).
Swadeshi at that time was the symbol of 'extremist' politics, which had been developling as a socio-economic movement over the past quarter of a country. From 1880, voices of proptest were being raised in Eastern as well as Western against the crisis of Partition of Bengal and Indian Industries. Even at that time, Swadeshi had become a slogan symbolising patriotism. This is evident from the fact the new textile mill established by Jamshedji Tata in 1885 was named the "Swadeshi Mill". Mass organisations like the Sarvajanik sabha of Poona adopted Swadeshi as the sole means to liberate India.
The main programme of the movement was "boycott of foreign goods" along with other forms of agitation.the agitational significamce was given by Rabindranath Tagore, Bipin Chandra pal, Balgangadhar Tilak, lala Rajpath Rai, popularly known as Lal-Bal-Paltriumvirate. It was they who placed before the people a programme of action comprising Swadeshi , boycott of british goods, and a national education policy, and strove to get this programme adopted by the Congress.
It was again they who openly stated that the aim of the freedom fighters was not administrative reforms, as demanded by the Congress earlier, but the administrative system in which Indians have as much share as the Englishmen have in England. Interestingly thesse slogans also adopted by the moderates also.        


Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Growth of Capitalism (contd-1)

World capitalism underwent a basic change towards the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th. century. Monopoly capitalism or imperialism came into being during the time in Europe. Henceforth, the world was having 3 contradictions;
1. Contradiction between farmers and feudal lords;
2. Cpntradiction between Capitalist and Working Class;
3. Contradiction between Capitalists and feudal lords. At this stage another contradiction had developed,
4, Inner contradiction between Capitalists; which led to 1st World War.
It was during this period the parties of the Working Class developed in strength in Germany, France, Italy, Russia and other parts of the world.
In Britain Working Class started movement for reduction of workng hours and  enhancement of wages.Working class in Germany, france, Italy grew in strength and formed their own party.
The waves of these developments swept over the independence struggle in India, too.A branch of the Indian National Congress began to function in England.
It is on record that Dadabhoy Naoroji and Madame Cama participated in two different conferences of the Second International.Later, Madame cama and her colleagues established contacts with various revolutionary groups all over Europe, when they started organising revolutionary groups all over Europe.They sought the help and cooperation of the revolutionaries in France, Germany and Russia for securing arms and training in their use. Lala Rajpat Rai, one of the renowned extremist leaders of India stated; It is beyond doubt that the struggle for independence in India received liberal support from the International forces.
Workers and other toiling people of Russia conducted a revolution against the Czar's regime. As a part of the revolution of nationalist movement of China , a move was taken to boycott American goods.Within the Congress a movement was started to dominate the activities of the organisation by the Extremist group and the petition-minded group.
The British monopolist and the Indian Capitalists invested their capitalin Industries in India and their respective interests came to conflict with each other.The capital invested in india by companies registered in England during Russo-Japanese war was 96.7 million pound sterling which was thrice the total investment of capital by all the companies registered in India. This shows that the companies registered in England enjoyed a dominant position in India. Moreover, a considerable number of Industries registered in India were either owned or controlled by the British.
However, the number of industries registered in India and the volume of Capital invested were rapidly increasing. Between 1897 and 1906, the capitaql invested by companies registered in India increased by 36.8 pc. In certain sectors of industry, including the textile industry in Bombay, Indian Capitalists had predominance.The British Government had planned not to allow the development of Indian Capitalism.The resultant conflicts led to the slogan of Swadeshi and triggered a socio-political movement based on it. The Indian Capitalists realized that just as the British capitalists exert influence on their Government for the protection of their own interests, so there was a need for them to influence the rulers both in Britain and in  india to protect their own interests. But these were of no avail because when there was a conflict between the British and the Indian capitalists , the British Government always took the side of the British Capitalists. So, the latter came to realize that there was a need for freedom struggle. The situation got aggravated in 1905 when the British Government announced a partition of Bengal.

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Growth of Capitalism at the end of 19th century in Europe

The rudiments of Capitalist relations started , in Western Europe and then to the whole of Europe, appeared in the 14th and 15th century.This is the 1st stage of Capitalism. Marx said without wage labour , there is no production of surplus value and without production of surplus value there is no production there is no capitalist production and hence no capital and no capitalist. Therefore, from Marx there was no Capitalist before 14th century.
This stage of capitalism lasted for about 18th century when the Steam Engine was discovered (1760).Capitalism entered in its 2nd stage after the discovery of the steam engine when productive force got an impetus to develop in a galloping state. Marx said in his "Manifesto of the Communist Party" that "the bourgeoisie,historically, has played a most revolutionary part.The Bourgeoisie wherever it has got the upper hand ,has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations.It has pitilessly torn asunder the motley ties that bound man to his "natural superiors", and has left remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self interest, than callous "cash payment."
The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first condition of existence for all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real condition of life and his relations with his kind.

The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere.
The bourgeoisie has, through its exploitation of the world market, given a cosmopolitan character to production and consumption in every country. To the great chagrin of reactionaries, it has drawn from under the feet of industry the national ground on which it stood. All old-established national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed. They are dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death question for all civilized nations, by industries that no longer work up indigenous raw material, but raw material drawn from the remotest zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter of the globe. In place of the old wants, satisfied by the production of the country, we find new wants, requiring for their satisfaction the products of distant lands and climes. In place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we have intercourse in every direction, universal inter-dependence of nations. And as in material, so also in intellectual production. The intellectual creations of individual nations become common property. National one-sidedness and narrow-mindedness become more and more impossible, and from the numerous national and local literatures, there arises a world literature.
The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization. The cheap prices of commodities are the heavy artillery with which it forces the barbarians' intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image.
The bourgeoisie has subjected the country to the rule of the towns. It has created enormous cities, has greatly increased the urban population as compared with the rural, and has thus rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life. Just as it has made the country dependent on the towns, so it has made barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on the civilized ones, nations of peasants on nations of bourgeois, the East on the West.
The bourgeoisie keeps more and more doing away with the scattered state of the population, of the means of production, and of property. It has agglomerated population, centralized the means of production, and has concentrated property in a few hands. The necessary consequence of this was political centralization. Independent, or but loosely connected provinces, with separate interests, laws, governments, and systems of taxation, became lumped together into one nation, with one government, one code of laws, one national class interest, one frontier, and one customs tariff.
The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together. Subjection of nature's forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalization or rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground -- what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labor?
We see then: the means of production and of exchange, on whose foundation the bourgeoisie built itself up, were generated in feudal society. At a certain stage in the development of these means of production and of exchange, the conditions under which feudal society produced and exchanged, the feudal organization of agriculture and manufacturing industry, in one word, the feudal relations of property became no longer compatible with the already developed productive forces; they became so many fetters. They had to be burst asunder; they were burst asunder.
Into their place stepped free competition, accompanied by a social and political constitution adapted in it, and the economic and political sway of the bourgeois class.
A similar movement is going on before our own eyes. Modern bourgeois society, with its relations of production, of exchange and of property, a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells. For many a decade past, the history of industry and commerce is but the history of the revolt of modern productive forces against modern conditions of production, against the property relations that are the conditions for the existence of the bourgeois and of its rule. It is enough to mention the commercial crises that, by their periodical return, put the existence of the entire bourgeois society on its trial, each time more threateningly. In these crises, a great part not only of the existing products, but also of the previously created productive forces, are periodically destroyed. In these crises, there breaks out an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity -- the epidemic of over-production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears as if a famine, a universal war of devastation, had cut off the supply of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed. And why? Because there is too much civilization, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce. The productive forces at the disposal of society no longer tend to further the development of the conditions of bourgeois property; on the contrary, they have become too powerful for these conditions, by which they are fettered, and so soon as they overcome these fetters, they bring disorder into the whole of bourgeois society, endanger the existence of bourgeois property. The conditions of bourgeois society are too narrow to comprise the wealth created by them. And how does the bourgeoisie get over these crises? On the one hand, by enforced destruction of a mass of productive forces; on the other, by the conquest of new markets, and by the more thorough exploitation of the old ones. That is to say, by paving the way for more extensive and more destructive crises, and by diminishing the means whereby crises are prevented.
The weapons with which the bourgeoisie felled feudalism to the ground are now turned against the bourgeoisie itself.
But not only has the bourgeoisie forged the weapons that bring death to itself; it has also called into existence the men who are to wield those weapons -- the modern working class -- the proletarians."  

Friday, December 16, 2011

Swadeshi Movement (1905- 1911)

As soon as Andrew Fraser's ( He joined the Indian Civil Service in 1871, serving in the Central Provinces for nearly thirty years. In 1897, he was appointed a CSI and was knighted with the KCSI in 1902. During his service he rose to be the Chief Commissioner of Central Provinces in 1899 followed by President of Police Commission in 1902. In 1903, he was selected the successor of James Bourdillon to the post of the Lieutanant Governor of Bengal) scheme was made public the Bengalis burst out in (Remains of the house of Sir Andrew Fraser, Lieutenant Governor of Bengal (1903 -1908), at Frasergunj, near Bakkali ) frenzied fury and rose to a man in protest against the proposed partition. The main reason is to divide the majority Bengali Hindu population in Bengal into two non-majority Bengali Hindu population, 1. Assam and Eastern Bengal and 2. West Bengal with Orissa and Bihar. Hundreds of protest meetings were organised in different parts of Eastern Bengal and dozens of leaflets included An Open Letter to Lord Curzon published from Dacca in April, 1904. To gain support on the decision of Bengal Partition Lord Curzon underook memorable tour of Eastern regions (February 1904) and delivered important speeches at  Chittagong, Dacca, and Mymensingh in order to specify the agitated people. A mammoth meeting was organised in the Town Hall of calcutta on 18 march ,1904,with Raja Peary Mohan Mukherjee in the chair. Even in the Bombay Congress of 1904, a resolution was passed recording its " emphatic protest against the proposals of the Government of India, for the partition of Bengal in any manner whatsoever." But the news of Partition of Bengal was first published in the Calcutta Press on 6 July,1905 and the official announcement was published on 19 July, 1905.
The Swadeshi Movement was formally born at the historic Town Hall meeting of Calcutta on 7 Aug,1905, under the presidentship of Maharaja Manindra Chandra Nandyof Cossimbazar. The meeting took the solemn pledges of Boycott and Swadeshi and expressed its firm resolution to carry on the movement until the reversion of Bengal Partition was accomplished.The whole of Bengal became excited with its battle-cry of Bande Mataram. 
The leaders who stood at the forefront in the propagation of the Boycott and Swadeshi ideologies were ;
Surendranath Banerjee of Bengalee ,  Motilal Ghose of Amrita Bazar Patrika, Brahmabandhab Upadhyay od Sandhya, Bipin Chandra Pal of New India, and Krishna Kumar Mitra of Sanjivani, Satish Chandra Mukherjee of Dawn and Dawn Soviety's Magazine. Special mention should be made of Rabindranath Tagore who by creating his unique poetry of patriotism kept the flame of the movement ablaze. A good number of legal luminaries, such as Rashbehari Ghose , Goorudas Banerjee, Ashutosh Choudhury, Jogesh Chandra Chodhury, Abdul Rasul, and hirendranath Datta, also strength behind it. Moreover, Maharaja Manindra chandra  nandy, Raja Peary Mohan Mukherjee of Uttarpara, Brajendrakishore Roychoudhury of Gouripur, Maharaja Surya Kanta Acharyay of Mymensingh and Subodh chandra Basu Mallik of Calcutta.   .      
  

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Lord Curzon (contd-1)

The new Indian Viceroy Lord Curzon (1899-1905) autocratic measures  as revealed in Municipaliries Act (1899) and Indian Universities Act (1904) evoked severe protests from the educated elite of Bengal. While feeings were already very tense, Curzon's next bombshell in the Plan of Bengal Partition drove the Bengali nation almost into a revolt.
The scheme of Bengal Partition was not a novelty in India. It had been brewing in the minds of the British administration as early as 1868, when Sir Stafford Northcote after the terrible orissa famine had suggested a reduction of the large-sized Bengal Presidency for administrative convenience .After the organisation of Assam into a separate province under a chief commissioner (1874) no fresh and effective drive for territorial dismemberment was made until we come across Bengal's Lt. Governor Andrew Fresher's scheme (March 1903) proposing the transfer of the Chittagong division and the districts of Dacca and Mymensingh to Assam which obtained the approval of the Government of India in the Risley letter, 3 December, 1903. The proposal as finally sanctioned by the Home Government (9June)revealed a few more changes in the process . It was decided that the divisions of Chittagong, Dacca and Rajshahi minus Darjeeling as well as Malda and Hill Tipperah would go to Assamto form the province of "Eastern Bengal and Assam" under a new Lt. Governor. The official announcement was releasedon 19 July, 1905.     

Lord Curzon

Curzon was the eldest son and second of 11 children of Alfred Curzon, the 4th Baron Scarsdale (1831–1916), Rector of Kedleston in Derbyshire, and his wife Blanche (1837–1875), daughter of Joseph Pocklington Senhouse of Netherhall in Cumberland. He was born at Kedleston Hall, built on the site where his family, who were of Norman ancestry, had lived since the 12th century. His mother, worn out by childbirth, died when George was 16; her husband survived her by 41 years. Neither parent exerted a major influence on Curzon's life.He was educated at Eton College and Balliol College, Oxford. At Eton he was a favorite of Oscar Browning, an over-intimate relationship that led to his tutor's dismissal. While at Eton, he was a controversial figure who was liked and disliked with equal intensity by large numbers of masters and other boys. This strange talent for both attraction and repulsion stayed with him all his life: few people ever felt neutral about him. At Oxford he was President of the Union and Secretary of the Oxford Canning Club. Although he failed to achieve a first class degree in Greats, he won the Lothian and Arnold Prizes, the latter for an essay on Sir Thomas More (about whom he confessed to having known almost nothing before commencing study, literally delivered as the clocks were chiming midnight on the day of the deadline). He was elected a prize fellow of All Souls College in 1883.

A teenage spinal injury, incurred while riding, left Curzon in lifelong pain, often resulting in insomnia, and required him to wear a metal corset, contributing to an unfortunate impression of stiffness and arrogance. While at Oxford, Curzon was the inspiration for the following Balliol rhyme, a piece of doggerel which stuck with him in later life. In 1895 he married Mary Victoria Leiter, the daughter of Levi Ziegler Leiter, an American millionaire of German origin and co-founder of the Chicago department store Field & Leiter (now Marshall Field). She had a long and nearly fatal illness near the end of summer 1904, from which she never really recovered. Falling ill again in July 1906, she died on the 18th of that month in her husband's arms, at the age of 36.It was the greatest personal loss of his life.
Viceroy of India (1899–1905)

Lord Curzon-Procession to Sanchi Tope, 28 Nov 1899
Lord Curzon and the Maharaja of Gwalior pose with hunted tigers, 1901In January 1899 he was appointed Viceroy of India. He was created a Peer of Ireland as Baron Curzon of Kedleston, in the County of Derby, on his appointment. This peerage was created in the Peerage of Ireland (the last so created) so that he would be free, until his father's death, to re-enter the House of Commons on his return to Britain.
Reaching India shortly after the suppression of the frontier risings of 1897–1898, he paid special attention to the independent tribes of the north-west frontier, inaugurated a new province called the North West Frontier Province, and pursued a policy of forceful control mingled with conciliation. The only major armed outbreak on this frontier during the period of his administration was the Mahsud-Waziri campaign of 1901.
In the context of the Great Game between the British and Russian Empires for control of Central Asia, he held deep mistrust of Russian intentions. This led him to encourage British trade in Persia, and he paid a visit to the Persian Gulf in 1903. At the end of that year, he sent a British expedition to Tibet under Francis Younghusband, ostensibly to forestall a Russian advance. After bloody conflicts with Tibet's poorly-armed defenders, the mission penetrated to Lhasa, where a treaty was signed in September 1904. No Russian presence was found in Lhasa.
Lord Curzon and Lady Curzon arriving at the Delhi Durbar, 1903.Within India, Curzon appointed a number of commissions to inquire into education, irrigation, police and other branches of administration, on whose reports legislation was based during his second term of office as viceroy. Reappointed Governor-General in August 1904, he presided over the 1905 partition of Bengal, which roused such bitter opposition among the people of the province that it was later revoked (1911).
He also took an active interest in military matters. In 1901, he founded the Imperial Cadet Corps, or ICC. The ICC was a corps d'elite, designed to give Indian princes and aristocrats military training, after which a few would be given officer commissions in the Indian Army. But these commissions were "special commissions" which did not empower their holders to command any troops. Predictably, this was a major stumbling block to the ICC's success, as it caused much resentment among former cadets. Though the ICC closed in 1914, it was a crucial stage in the drive to Indianise the Indian Army's officer Corps, which was haltingly begun in 1917. Military organisation proved to be the final issue faced by Curzon in India. A difference of opinion with the British military Commander-in-Chief in India, Lord Kitchener, regarding the status of the military member of the council in India, led to a controversy in which Curzon failed to obtain the support of the home government. He resigned in August 1905 and returned to England. During his tenure, Curzon undertook the restoration of the Taj Mahal, and expressed satisfaction that he had done so.
Lord and Lady Curzon on the elephant Lakshman Prasad, 29 December 1902. The Indian famineMain article:
Indian famine of 1899–1900
A major famine coincided with Curzon's time as viceroy in which 6.1 to 9 million people died. Large parts of India were affected and millions died, and Curzon is nowadays criticised for having done little to fight the famine. Curzon did, however, implement a variety of measures, including opening up famine reliefs works that fed between 3 and 5 million, reducing taxes and spending vast amounts of money on irrigation works. However, Curzon did state "any government which imperiled the financial position of India in the interests of prodigal philanthropy would be open to serious criticism; but any government which by indiscriminate alms-giving weakened the fibre and demoralized the self-reliance of the population, would be guilty of a public crime." He also cut back rations that he characterized as "dangerously high" and stiffened relief eligibility by reinstating the Temple tests.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Lord Curzon [ contd to my next account Encyclopedea Indiana ]

George Curzon, the eldest son of Baron Curzon, was born on 11th January, 1859. A brilliant student, at Eton College he won a record number of academic prizes before entering Oxford University in 1878. He was elected president of the Oxford Union in 1880 and although he failed to achieve a first he was made a fellow of All Souls College in 1883.
A member of the Conservative Party, Curzon was elected MP for Southport in 1886. It was a safe Tory seat and Curzon neglected his parliamentary duties to travel the world. This material provided the material for Russia in Central Asia (1889), Persia and the Persian Question (1892) and Problems of the Far East (1894).
In November, 1891, Marquis of Salisbury appointed Curzon as his secretary of state for India. Curzon lost office when Earl of Rosebery formed a Liberal Government in 1894.
After the 1895 General Election, the Conservative Party regained power and Curzon was rewarded with the post of under secretary for foreign affairs. Three years later the Marquis of Salisbury granted him the title, Baron Curzon of Kedleston, and appointed him Viceroy of India.
Curzon introduced a series of reforms that upset his civil servants. He also clashed with Lord Kitchener, who became commander-in-chief of the Indian Army, in 1902. Arthur Balfour, the new leader of the Conservative Party, began to have doubts about Curzon and in 1905 he was forced out of office.
Curzon returned to England where he led the campaign against women's suffrage in the House of Lords. In 1908 he helped establish the Anti-Suffrage League and eventually became its president.
In 1916 the new prime minister, David Lloyd George, invited Curzon into his War Cabinet. Curzon served as leader of the House of Lords but refused to support the government's decision to introduce the 1918 Qualification of Women Act. Despite Curzon's objections, it was passed by the Lords by 134 votes to 71.
Curzon was appointed foreign secretary in 1919 and when Andrew Bonar Law resigned as prime minister in May, 1923, Curzon was expected to become the new prime minister. However, the post went to Stanley Baldwin instead. He continued as foreign secretary until retiring from politics in 1924.
George Curzon died on 20th March

Monday, December 12, 2011

Swadeshi Movement - Bengal Partition

Partitioning Bengal was first considered in 1903. There were also additional proposals to separate Chittagong and the districts of Dhaka and Mymensingh from Bengal and attaching them to the province of Assam.
The government officially published the idea in January 1904, and in February, Lord Curzon made an official tour to eastern districts of Bengal to assess public opinion on the partition. He consulted with leading personalities and delivered speeches at Dhaka, Chittagong and Mymensingh explaining the government's stand on partition. The idea was opposed by Henry John Stedman Cotton, Chief Commissioner of Assam 1896-1902.
The Partition of Bengal in 1905 was made on October 16 by then Viceroy of India, Lord Curzon. Partition was promoted for administrative regions; Bengal was as large as France but with a significantly larger population. The eastern region was thought to be neglected and under-governed. By splitting the province, an improved administration could be established in the east where, subsequently, the population would benefit from new schools and employment opportunities. However, other motives lurked behind the partition plan. Bengali Hindus were in the forefront of political agitation for greater participation in governance; their position would be weakened, since Muslims would now dominate in the East. Hindus tended to oppose partition, which was more popular among Muslims. What followed partition, however, stimulated an almost national anti-British movement that involved non-violent and violent protests, boycotts and even an assassination attempt against the Governor of the new province of West Bengal.
The new province would consist of the state of Hill Tripura, the Divisions of Chittagong , Dhaka and Rajshahi (excluding Darjeeling) and the district of Malda incorporated with Assam province. Bengal was to surrender not only these large eastern territories but also to cede to the Central Provinces the five Hindi-speaking states. On the western side it was offered Sambalpur and five minor Oriya-speaking states from the Central Provinces. Bengal would be left with an area of 141,580 square miles (366,700 km2) and population of 54 million, of which 42 million would be Hindus and 12 million Muslims.
The new province was named Eastern Bengal and Assam with Dhaka as its capital and subsidiary headquarters at Chittagong. Its area would be 106,540 square miles (275,940 km2) with a population of 31 million, where 18 million would be Muslims and 13 million Hindus. Administration would consist of a Legislative Council, a Board of Revenue of two members, and the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court would be left undisturbed. The government pointed out that Eastern Bengal and Assam would have a clearly demarcated western boundary and well defined geographical, ethnological, linguistic and social characteristics. The government of India promulgated their final decision in a resolution dated July 19, 1905 and the partition of Bengal was effected on October 16 of same year.
The provinces of Bengal and Assam were reconstituted so as to form the two provinces of manageable size. Western Bengal, with a population of 54 million (42 million Hindus and 9 million Muslims); and Eastern Bengal and Assam with a population of 31 million (12 million Hindus and 18 million Muslims). The territory to be transferred from Bengal to the new province consisted of the districts of Chittagong and Dhaka Divisions, Rajshahi Division excluding Darjeeling, and the District of Malda.

Curzon, the Viceroy of India, sent the proposal to London in February 1905. The Secretary of State for India St. John Brodrich sanctioned it in June, and the proclamation of the formation of the new province was issued in September. The province of Bengal and Assam came into being on October 16 1905.
Incidentally, the partition went in favor of the Muslims. Before the partition, Western Bengal, being the first area to come under western influence, was developed and industrialized. It was a striking contrast to the eastern part where the Muslim peasantry was crushed under the Hindu landlords, the river system was infested with pirates, and very few funds were allocated for education. It was dreaded as a place of banishment. The partition helped boost Bengali literature and language; efforts were also made towards the social, economic and educational uplift of the Muslims.
Proposed Didvision:
The enlarged scheme received the assent of the governments of Assam and Bengal. The new province would consist of the state of Hill Tripura, the Divisions of Chittagong, Dhaka and Rajshahi (excluding Darjeeling) and the district of Malda amalgamated with Assam. Bengal was to surrender not only these large territories on the east but also to cede to the Central Provinces the five Hindi-speaking states. On the west it would gain Sambalpur and a minor tract of five Uriya-speaking states from the Central Provinces. Bengal would be left with an area of 141,580 sq. miles and a population of 54 million, of which 42 million would be Hindus and 9 million Muslims.

The new province was to be called 'Eastern Bengal and Assam' with its capital at Dhaka and subsidiary headquarters at Chittagong. It would cover an area of 106,540 sq. miles with a population of 31 million comprising of 18 million Muslims and 12 million Hindus. Its administration would consist of Legislative Council, a Board of Revenue of two members, and the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court would be left undisturbed. The government pointed out that the new province would have a clearly demarcated western boundary and well defined geographical, ethnological, linguistic and social characteristics. The most striking feature of the new province was that it would concentrate within its own bounds the hitherto ignored and neglected typical homogenous Muslim population of Bengal. Besides, the whole of the tea industry (except Darjeeling), and the greater portion of the jute growing area would be brought under a single administration. The government of India promulgated their final decision in a Resolution dated 19 July 1905 and the Partition of Bengal was effected on 16 October of the same year
Lord Curzon, the viceroy of India decided to partition Bengal for administrative purposes, creating a new province of East Bengal and Assam, with a population of 31 million people and with its capital at Dhaka. The Brahmaputra and the Padma (the Ganges) rivers physically defined this first partition of Bengal. East Bengal prospered, Dhaka assumed its old status as capital and Chittagong became an important sea port.

Given below is the proclamation of partition:


The Governor-General is pleased to constitute the territories at present under the administration of the Chief Commissioner of Assam to be for the purposes of the Indian Councils Act 1861... a province to which the provisions of that Act touching the making of laws and regulations for the peace and good order of the presidencies of Fort St. George and Bombay shall be applicable and to direct that the said province shall be called and known as the province of Eastern Bengal and Assam....
The Governor-General in Council is pleased to specify the sixteenth day of October, 1905 as the period at which the said provisions shall take effect and 15th as the number of councilors whom the Lieutenant-Governor may nominate for his assistance in making laws and regulations.
The Governor-General in Council is further pleased to declare and appoint that upon the constitution of the said province of Eastern Bengal and Assam, the districts of Dacca, Mymensingh, Faridpur, Backergunge, Tippera, Noakhali, Chittagong, the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Rajashahi, Dinajpur, Jalpaiguri, Rangpur, Bogra, Pabna, and Malda which now form part of the Bengal Division of the Presidency of Fort William shall cease to be subject to or included within the limits of that Division, and shall thenceforth be subject to and included within the limits of the Lieutenant-Governorship of the province of Eastern Bengal and Assam.
Lord Curzon, the viceroy of India decided to partition Bengal for administrative purposes, creating a new province of East Bengal and Assam, with a population of 31 million people and with its capital at Dhaka. The Brahmaputra and the Padma (the Ganges) rivers physically defined this first partition of Bengal. East Bengal prospered, Dhaka assumed its old status as capital and Chittagong became an important sea port.

Given below is the proclamation of partition:


The Governor-General is pleased to constitute the territories at present under the administration of the Chief Commissioner of Assam to be for the purposes of the Indian Councils Act 1861... a province to which the provisions of that Act touching the making of laws and regulations for the peace and good order of the presidencies of Fort St. George and Bombay shall be applicable and to direct that the said province shall be called and known as the province of Eastern Bengal and Assam....
The Governor-General in Council is pleased to specify the sixteenth day of October, 1905 as the period at which the said provisions shall take effect and 15th as the number of councilors whom the Lieutenant-Governor may nominate for his assistance in making laws and regulations.
The Governor-General in Council is further pleased to declare and appoint that upon the constitution of the said province of Eastern Bengal and Assam, the districts of Dacca, Mymensingh, Faridpur, Backergunge, Tippera, Noakhali, Chittagong, the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Rajashahi, Dinajpur, Jalpaiguri, Rangpur, Bogra, Pabna, and Malda which now form part of the Bengal Division of the Presidency of Fort William shall cease to be subject to or included within the limits of that Division, and shall thenceforth be subject to and included within the limits of the Lieutenant-Governorship of the province of Eastern Bengal and Assam.
Given below the Proclamation of Partition :
The governor General is pleased to constitute the territories at present under the admission of the chief commissioner of Assam to be for the purpose of the Indian Councils Act 1861...a province to which the provisions of the Act touching the making of laws and regulations for the peace and good order of the presidencies of Fort St. George and Bombay shall be applicable and to direct that the said province shall be called and known as the provonce of East Bengal and Assam.
*The Governor-General in Council is further pleased to specify the sixteenth day of October, 1905 as the period at which the said provisions shall take effect and 15th as the number of councilors whom the Lieutenant-Governor may nominate for his assistance in making laws and regulations.
* The Governor-General in Council is further pleased to declare and appoint that upon the constitution of the said province of Eastern Bengal and Assam, the districts of Dacca,ymensingh, Faridpur, Backergunge, Tippara, Chittagong,the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Rajshahi, Dinajpur, Rangpur, Bogra,Pabna and Malda which now form part of the Bengal Division of the Presidency of DFort William shall cease to be subject to or included within the limits of that Division, and shall thencforth be subject to and included within the limits of the Lieutenant-Governorship of the province of Eastern Bengal and Assam.

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Swadeshi Movement (1905- 1911)

The decision of the Partition of Bengal was announced on 19 July 1905 by the Viceroy of India, Lord Curzon. The partition took effect on 16 October 1905. Due to the high level of political unrest generated by the partition, the eastern and western parts of Bengal were never united because of Muslim pressure.

The province of Bengal had an area of 189,000 miles2 and a population of over 80 million. Eastern Bengal was almost isolated from the western part by geography and poor communications. In 1836, the upper provinces were placed under a lieutenant governor, and in 1854 the Governor-General-In-Council was relieved of the direct administration of Bengal. In 1874 Assam, including Sylhet, was severed from Bengal to form a Chief-Commissionership, and the Lushai Hills were added to it in 1898. It was hard to manage a province as large as Bengal with this large population.
Historical Background;
At the dawn of the 20th century the Indian situation seemed to gloomy on various reasons. 
1. The revolt of 1857, 2. Indigo agitation, 3. Hindu Mela, 4. Development of a Nationalist literature, 5. Independence of the Indian Press, 6. Political propaganda of Surendranath Banerjee and others, 7. Ilbert Bill agitation, 8. Contempt Case of Surendranath Banerjee (1883), 9, Formation of Indian national Congress, 10. Continuous drain of Indian resources and destruction of Indian indigigenous Industry and Trade.
11. The Arya Samaj of Dayananda Saraswati and he the Theosophist movement, Ramkrishna- Vivekananda Movement awakened our ancient heritage and National feeling which gained momentum under the leadership of Bal Gangadhar Tilak by the introduction of Ganapati and Sivaji festival.The arrest of Tilak in Bombay on 27 July , 1897, caused a All India basis strike.
The policy of Congress of application and appeal came under a challenge of Cambridge-educated Aurobindo Ghoshe in his serial articles "New lamps for old" and Bankim Chandra Chatterjee's novel Anandamath opened a new avenues for freedom movement.Aurobindo Ghoshe tried to organise a secret society in Bengal through the agency of Jatindranath Banerjee of Gaekwad's army. The result was the foundation of a secret society in Calcutta (1901-02) by Jatin Banerjee with a handful of associates like Abinash Bhattacharya, Barin Ghosh, Bhupen Dutta and others.. This organisation functioned under the outward cover of a physical-culture training centre . Many kindred bodies were also springing up in Bengal about the same time.      

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

Imperialism, Highest Stage of Capitalism (contd-1)- Lenin

Contents
PREFACE-187
PREFACE TO THE FRENCH AND GERMAN EDITIONS-189
I. CONCENTRATION OF PRODUCTION AND MONOPOLIES-196
II. BANKS AND THEIR NEW ROLE-210
III. FINANCE CAPITAL AND THE FINANCIAL OLIGARCHY-226
IV. EXPORT OF CAPITAL-240
V. DIVISION OF THE WORLD AMONG CAPITALIST ASSOCIATIONS-246
VI. DIVISION OF THE WORLD AMONG THE GREAT POWER-254
VII. IMPERIALISM AS A SPECIAL STAGE OF CAPITALISM-265
VIII. PARASITISM AND DECAY OF CAPITALISM-276
IX. CRITIQUE OF IMPERIALISM-285
X. THE PLACE OF IMPERIALISM IN HISTORY-298

Monday, December 5, 2011

Imperialism, Highest stage of Capitalism

"In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or – this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms – with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure"- Marx and Engeles
E. Germain studied "The Marxist Theory of Imperialism and its critics- August 1955"
Introduction

Since the spring of 1916 when Lenin wrote his pamphlet Imperialism, that work has been a focal point of discussion by both Marxists and non-Marxist political economists. Many critics have attempted to prove that Lenin’s analysis of contemporary capitalism is essentially incorrect; others that it is partially incorrect, but not outdated. Lenin’s “official” defenders in Moscow have tried to prove that every word written in 1916 is still totally valid today, while Marxists have taken into account the developments and changes of the last 50 years, modifying and adding to Lenin’s theory in the light of these changes.
For the students of Lenin’s Imperialism, the two essays contained in this bulletin will serve as an introduction to the contemporary debate, indicating the questions which are being discussed and how they are being answered by both critics and defenders of the Marxist concept of imperialism.
The author of the first article, E. Germain, is one of the leading theoreticians of the Fourth International and the author of numerous essays on Marxist economics. The Theory of Imperialism and Its Critics was a lecture originally given more than ten years ago to a group of Marxist students already familiar with Lenin’s Imperialism. After discussing the historical development of the theory, Germain goes on to deal briefly with the most important contemporary critics.
Ernest Mandel, editor of the Belgian socialist weekly, La Gauche, and a leader of the Belgian Socialist Workers Confederation, is one of the world’s leading Marxist economists. His two volume Traité d’Economie Marxiste will soon be published in English by Monthly Review Press. The article reprinted here is a review of Michael Barratt Brown’s work After Imperialism, and first appeared in the June 1964 issue of the British periodical New Left Review.
Mary-Alice Styron
July 1966
To Marxists, “imperialism” is not simply the “trend towards expansion” or the “conquest of foreign lands,” as it is defined by most political scientists and sociologists. The word is used in a much more precise sense to describe the general changes which occurred in the political, economic and social activity of the big bourgeoisie of the advanced capitalist countries, beginning in the last quarter of the 19th century. These changes were closely related to alterations in the basic structure of this bourgeoisie.
Marx died too early to be able to analyze these changes. He did not see more than the preliminary signs. Nevertheless, he left some profound remarks in his last writings which later Marxists used as starting points for developing the theory of imperialism.
In studying the rapid development of limited liability corporations, Marx underlined, in the Third Volume of Capital (chap.23), that these companies represent a new form of the expropriation of a mass of capitalists by a small handful of capitalists. In this expropriation the legal owner of capital loses his function as entrepreneur and abandons his role in the process of production and his position of command over the productive forces and the labor force.
In fact, private property seems to be suppressed, says Marx elsewhere, it is suppressed not in favor of collective ownership but in favor of private ownership by a very small number.
Concentration of Capital
Marx foresaw the modern structure of capitalism as the final phase of capitalism resulting from the extreme concentration of capital. This was also the starting point taken by most Marxists, especially Hilferding and Lenin.
In a paragraph devoted to countertendencies to the trend toward a falling rate of profit (Capital, Volume III, chap.14), Marx also underlined the importance of the export of capital to backward countries. A little further on he generalized this idea by insisting that a capitalist society must continuously extend its base, its area of exploitation.
Engels added a more detailed elucidation to Marx’s comments. In his last writings, especially in his famous 1892 introduction to The Condition of the Working Class in England, he underlined other structural phenomena to which the theoreticians of imperialism attached great importance. Engels wrote that from the beginning of the industrial revolution until the 1870’s, England exercised practically an industrial monopoly over the world market. Thanks to that monopoly, in the second half of the 19th century, at the time of the rise of craft unions, English capitalism could grant important concessions to a section of the working class. But, towards the end of the 19th century the German, French, and American competition made inroads into this English monopoly, and inaugurated a period of sharp class struggle in Great Britain.
The correctness of Engels’ analysis was borne out as early as the first years of the 20th century. The trade union movement grew not only among the laborers and the masses of the unskilled, but also broke its half-century long alliance with petty-bourgeois radicalism (the Liberal Party) and founded the Labor Party, the mass workers’ party.
In two comments on the Third Volume of Capital, edited by Engels in 1894 (comments on the 31st and 32nd chapters), Engels emphasized how difficult it was going to be for capitalism to find a new basis for expansion after the final conquest of the world market. (Elsewhere he says “after the conquest of the Chinese market.”) Competition is limited internally by cartels and trusts, and externally by protectionism. All this he thought represented “the preparations for a general industrial war for the domination of the world market.”
Lenin began with these remarks by Engels in developing his theory of the imperialist struggle for the division and re-division of the world market, as well as his theory of the workers’ aristocracy.


Sunday, December 4, 2011

Congo river, Republic of the Congo, Dem. Rep. of the Congo






The Congo river ( Also known as Zaire
is the second largest river in Africa (after Nile) and
7th. largest river in the world. The Congo gets
its name from the ancient kingdom of the Bantu









The Congo river at Matadi
Kings . The name of the two countries were
borrowed from the name of this river.
European exploration :
The mouth of the Congo riverwas visited (1482)
by Diogo Cao, the Portuguese navigator, it became
known as the Zaire River ( a cooruption of the
local name Mzadi meaning "great water") and
was referred to as the Congo River ( for the









The Congo River near Maluku
Kongo Kingdom located near its mouth); it
was called Zaire River by the Govt. of Zai
now Congo (Kinshasa) from 1971 to 1997.
Economic Importance :








The Congo river basin encompasses the world's
second largest contiguous rain forest, surpassed
only by that of the Amazon. The region is
biologically diverse and a huge watershed .
The forest is threatened by illegal logging and
the poaching of large mammals (specially the
bushmeat trade) , but two summits (1999, 2005)
that brought togethherthe nations of the basin
have committed its participants to forest conservation
and have led to the establishment of wildlife preserves.



































Rep. of the Congo or Congo Brazzaville or the Congo
is located in the central- western part of the Sub -
Saharan Africa , transacted by the Equator. To the
south and eastof it is the Democratic Republic of
the Congo.
The earliest inhabitants of the region were Pigmy people
who later were largely isplaced and absorbed as sl
by Bantu Tribes uring Bantu expansions. The Bakongo
are a Bantu ethnicity that also occupied parts
of present - day Angola, Gabon, and Dem.rep. of
the Congo.Several Bantu Kingdoms - notably those

of the Kongo , The Loango, and the Teke - built trade
links leading into the Congo River basin.
The inhabitants of the Comgo River delta first came into contact with the Europeans in the 15 th. century with portuguese expeditions charting the African coast line. Commercial relationships were quickly established between the inland Bantu kingdoms and European merchants who traded various commoditiea , manufactured goos and slaves captured from the hinterlands. For centuries Congo River elta was a major commercial hub for trnsatlantic trade. However, when direct European colonisation of the African continent began in the late 19th. century when the power of the Bantu families eroded.
The history of the Congo is divided in four parts :
1. Early history of the Congo (Upto 1484) ,
2. Contact with Europe (upto 1883),
3. French Colony (upto 1960),
4. Independent period (from 15th. Aug. 1960 on wards).
The mouth of the Congo River was the base for the Kongo Kingdom, which encountered the Portuguese in 1484. Trading contracts gave the CongoleseTextiles, jewelry, and manufactured goods in return for ivory , copper and slaves .
The portugese didnot venture into interior but bought goods and slaves captured in the interior through African brokers on the coast.The coastal area was a major source for the transatlantic slave trade. Western education and Christianity were introduced into the region at that time. When the slave trade diminished Portugese bought slaves from other tribes resulting in the fight between different tribes weakennin