Effects Of Decolonisation Of India

Mohandas Gandhi’s methods not only led to India’s independence from Britain but also had victories over racial

It became evident that the British could maintain the empire only at enormous cost. At the end of the Second World War, they saw the writing on the wall, and initiated a number of constitutional moves to effect the transfer of power to the sovereign State of India. For the first and perhaps the only time in history, the power of a mighty global empire 'on which the sun never set', had been challenged and overcome by the moral might of a people armed only with ideals and courage.

In 1757, Great Britain extended its empire into India. This occupation would not fully end until 1947. In the time between, there were many movements by the Indian people to gain independence from the British. The movement that finally succeeded in winning India’s independence was led by one of the most influential figures of the 20th century, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Gandhi’s methods for fighting against the occupation of the British were very different from those of any of the freedom movements before. And that was why it worked. Gandhi did not agree with the general reasoning of the time: that conflicts could be solved through negotiation and forceful resistance.1 Rather, his faith led him to go

The general cause of the Indian Independence Movement was India’s desire for independence from British, French and Portuguese Rule. The aim of the movement was “Swaraj, a self-governing India” (Sharma, 2005, p. 22). One, more specific, cause of the Indian Independence Movement took place in 1905 when the province of Bengal was divided into two provinces,

In Asian areas, India was prominent to serve economic balance and independence. Mahatma Gandhi believed that with economic independence, India would be have an uplift within every individual. Mahatma Ghandi spoke that their decolonization must not imitate the wrong, for example, the Nazi rule in Germany or the ones in Britian. Basically, the cause of wanting independence in India was due to the British. The consequence of leaving the British's ways is that some help/aid would now be gone and India must now find their own way of developing the country.

In 1939 World War II broke out in Europe. Britain proclaimed India’s involvement in the war without consulting the Indian people. This led to increased protest and volatility. In 1942 India established a national army and proposed the Quit India Movement. This movement promised to lend Indian military support to Britain in return for complete independence. If they refused this treaty the Indian people promised civil disobedience. In 1947 India was granted its independence and became self governing (Luscombe, 2012). On January 26, 1950 the Republic of India was proclaimed and it drafted a constitution. The first democratic elections were held in 1952. However the Hindus and Muslims were not united and colonial India was divided into Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India (History, 2010).

British imperialism had a negative impact on the politics of India because of the establishment of the framework for India that leads to their downfall and the Indian Army which they used to control their own kind. According to Dr.Lalvani, the British established the framework for India’s justice system, civil services, loyal army, and the efficient loyal police. (Paragraph #6). While this is true, the framework didn’t include the Indians, because “Of 960 civil offices, 900 are occupied by English men and 60 by natives”(Doc. #2). British laws often benefited the British and were designed to limit the freedom of speech of the Indians, for example, the Rowlatt Act in 1919. (Gandhi). This evidence shows that the British, when creating the framework for the new and improved India wanted to benefit from it while trying to lower the Indian’s and limit the

(Document 5) This shows that even though Britain gave education to Indians they only gave it to who could afford it and hardly anyone could. Lalvani claims that over the 200 year span of British imperialism, India’s religions felt safer and less discriminated against. ( According to Dr.Lalvani) Although the British thought this was true it actually was not. Christians were mocking and discriminating against Muslims and Hindus. (Gandhi) Similarly Hinduism believes in nonviolence so when the protest at Amritsar took place the Indians were brutally slaughtered while being unarmed. (Gandhi) Because of their non-violence beliefs the Hindus had no defense and were killed by what they thought was their

British Imperialism had a negative impact on the politics of India because the British took away control of the country for their benefit and enforced laws that discriminated against Indians. Lavani claims the British “established the framework for India’s justice system, civil service, loyal army, and efficient police force.” However, this framework was not intended for the Indians, but for the British. For example, 94% of government positions were held by Englishman (Doc. #2). These people had “no permanent interest in their well-being” and returned to England after “forty-five or fifty-five years of age with large pensions (Doc. #2).” This shows the British government used India as a source of wealth and controlled the people without

Britain had a desire to have a more economic, political, and social influence over India. Even though the British never preserved a notable military existence in India, they were able to maintain political control. Many changes were made, which benefitted India, but there were also some changes, which contributed to its deterioration. Despite the negative impacts Britain left on India, imperialism is best understood as a strong country extending its authority, in order to increase its wealth, by bringing more of the world under its control, because Britain helped in the development of India from a nation-state, to a unified country, which is modernly the world’s largest democracy.

That said, the act of Decolonization that affected the largest number of people was the granting of Independence to India and Pakistan in 1947. There had been relatively little political impulse to grant Independence to India before the war: Most discussions in the pre-war period centered on what level of self-rule India itself should have, and the extent to which native Indians themselves should have over the governing of that country.

Throughout the years many historians have compilated and examined why Indian people were so desperate to gain back their independence from the British Empire during their rule over India, from 1612 to 1947. The reasoning can most definitely be found as the British discriminated against Indian people as they believe that they were inferior; it is no surprise that Indian people fought so hard for their independence. Throughout the British Raj, they placed and put forward unbelievably racist acts and laws which discriminated against Indian people. Which of course led to Indians to rebel against the British rule and which the British reacted with causing massacres. Explaining the nationalistic many India’s felt during the British Raj.

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and Ho Chi Minh are the leaders of national independent movements from late 19th to early 20th century. Both of them defeated the colonial rulers and won national independence. This paper will talk about the influences of ideas and circumstances, the goals that they wanted to get and the historical significance of their behaviors.

Aroused by the massacre of Amritsar in 1919, Gandhi devoted his life to gaining India’s independence from Great Britain. As the dominant figure used his persuasive philosophy of non-violent confrontation, he inspired political activists with many persuasions throughout the world (Andrews 23). Not only was Mahatma Gandhi a great peacemaker, but also his work to achieve freedom and equality for all people was greatly acknowledged. Gandhi’s unconventional style of leadership gained him the love of a country and eventually enabled him to lead the independence movement in India.

Hence, the purpose of this letter was written in hopes of giving the British government an idea of the tension India has with them since they do not approve of their constrictive efforts and lack of acknowledgment for the war effort. It emphasizes the trend of decreased Indian involvement due to British policy and outlines the effects this has on the people of India. This source is a valuable example of a personal statement made by the leader of the Indian people and it introduces key concepts as to why British rule is a “curse.” However, limitations to my investigation using this source are that it may be biased since Gandhi is a Hindu reformer and this letter outlines his actions personally not the entire nation. Another limitation is the time period in which the letter was written as it could not meet the needs of the people and the sacrifice they made and wanting