It comes very easy for unthinking Indians to credit the British for any semblance of positives in their society and derogate their own past achievements & heritage as something mythical and non existent. It is also easier for them to be elated when a white skinner praises them & also get sceptic when someone amongst them does the same. So because of these reasons , many Indians came to be known as revolutionaries by doubting the idea of India!
Colonial Brits pat themselves for bringing democracy to India. Many historians give credit to them too. They inscribed this mythical positive in the text books of slavish Indians & called themselves as Gods who rescued India from mire. Blamed India for superstitions and backwardness to cover up the fact British wrought on Indians the most sordid barbaric exploitation of a society to serve the cause of their own country.
As a result, Lord Ribon was hailed as the father of local governance in India and one of India’s oldest local bodies, the headquarters of Chennai Corporation proudly has been named after him as Ripon buildings. But for British, India wouldn’t have been a democracy, we are told. Really? Even the great defender of Indians during British rule , Will Durant believed that Brits gave Indians the idea and the ideals of democracy. It is by condemning and hiding India’s past that these hooligans contrived to hide the legacy of India and crown themselves as messiahs for the Indians.
Democracy comes from a Greek root. World’s oldest parliament was set to have existed in Iceland. Democracy as a perfect political system where majority voice prevails and where all have equal rights exists somewhat imperfectly across the world now. Yet some famed democracies have vested powers with minorities called monarchies and oligarchies. Yet call themselves democratic. From Japan to England to Spain to Malaysia.
Democracy as self governance existed in India in 599 BCE as Ganarajya where people chose their kings in Vajji, Vaishali. Monarchy was not hereditary in India. Vaishali was the birthplace of 24th and last Tirthankara of Jainism, Lord Mahavira. Village communities existed in ancient India. According to Arthashastra, the village headman was heriditary. But democratically elected village assemblies managed village affairs. Under the rule of Chozhas and Pandyas, well organised assemblies existed with wide powers of self governance with many executive committees. Equal rights were widely and deeply practiced. These executive committees were elected by people within rules framed by themselves. The Assemblies settled disputes, decided on taxation, took steps for public works, education,health and managed temples. During the time of Buddha in sixth century BCE, villages became autonomous self sufficient set ups. Mahatma by coining Ram Rajya desired to bring that equalitarianism that the ancient India had witnessed.
Medieval India saw introduction of democratic institutions in the name of Panchayats. Main reason was the rulers neglected the subjects and the subjects decided to find own means for survival and happiness. It’s a fact that Panchayats helped people to lead a productive and happy life. People were protected from even mischievous rulers. Rule by the people for the people in true sense.
Democracy as universal suffrage was a 20th century idea. Even US was late in giving voting rights to women. Some Middle East nations are yet to follow. But democracy as self governance was an ancient thought. Democracy as mere right for voting followed by years of authoritarian rule under pretext of democracy exists in many countries even today. Yet contemporary world pats itself as most progressive. British society were far behind other societies in civilisation but as with industrial revolution they managed to create many myth that were forced into Indian school text books even now.
Assuming British heralded Democracy, Self governance and suffrage in India, lets study the history of the system as introduced by British in India.
During the World War #1, the position of British became critical as they needed the support and sacrifice of Hindus. What better way to stimulate them by promise of a democracy! Edwin Montagu, Secretary of State for India, made a statement in the House of Commons: The Policy of His Majesty’s Govt with which the Govt of India are in complete accord, is that of the increasing association of Indians in every branch of the administration and the gradual development of self governing institutions with a view to the progressive realisation of responsible government of India as an integral part of the British empire.
Later Montagu along with Lord Chelmsford visited India to draw reforms widely known as Montagu Chelmsford reforms. The viceroy of India who was enjoying power objected to it and as WW1 ended, British went back on their words with PM Lloyd George declaring in British parliament that India shall remain under British dominance. After failed reforms, a system of Dyarchy was established by which every province will have two ministries, one responsible to the provincial legislature and having no powers and the other responsible to the British authorities but possessing all fundamental powers. Any act of the provincial legislature could be overruled by the Governor and any act of the Governor , if he considered it necessary to the interests of the empire could be passed by decree over the heads of the legislature, Will Durant amplified. This is the democracy British desired to give India !
So existed similar rights in the Central Assembly where members can only speak. No more. All powers were vested with the Viceroy. He was empowered to enact any law or act or any measure which might seem necessary to him and can overrule even an unanimous adverse vote of the assembly. He can collect taxes without Assembly’s approval , can control government expenses and revenue and can pay salary and pensions as deemed fit by him. British MP Dr Rutherford spoke thus: “Never in the history of the world was such a hoax perpetrated upon a great people as England perpetrated upon India , when in return for India’s valuable service during the war, we gave to Indian nation such discreditable , disgraceful, undemocratic, tyrannical constitution”.
India gave one million troops to British to fight world war #1 in Europe. While 62,000 died, another 67,000 were injured. And in return British continued to treat Indians as dust under their shoes. Let’s amplify further British contribution to creating democratic institutions in India.
In the Central Assembly, one fifth in the lower house and one half in the upper house were named directly by the British Govt. The lower house was by a generous franchise that enabled one out every #250 to vote while for the upper house it was tougher. Voters were further divided into secretarian divisions such as Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Europeans,etc where they were given representation unmatching and unconnected to their numbers. Each candidate was permitted to represent only his community and not of all citizens on election. By such manipulations, British succeeded in creating hostility between groups that led to led to hostile groups. The Tories in England towed the line that it was unwise to give legislative powers to such a large illiterate people.
In came the Simon Commission in 1928. To study the impact of Montagu Chelmsford reforms on India. The commission had die hard conservatives as members and no hindu representation. On finding a bandh on arrival in Mumbai on Feb 3rd, 1928,Sir John Simon tried to placate by inviting the Indian Assembly to appoint an Indian central committee from its membership to sit with Simon Commission on its second visit to India. India boycotted the Simon commission which was meant to tighten the British grip on India. As the Round Table Conference in Oct, 1930 excluded the members of the Simon Commission , India was pacified as it remained irked by the report of the Simon Report.
What did the infamous Simon Report say? It recommended that the Central legislature should be elected by provincial legislatures and not by the people. That the powers of this federal assembly should be severely reduced to leave each province almost independent of the central government and that the powers of the provincial governors and Viceroy shall remain as broad and unfettered as earlier.
The proposal by Simon Commission was to extend British generosity from earlier franchise for the election of the provincial legislatures from 3% to 10% of the people. Can such selective minor representation be ever called democracy? The report also suggested that owning of property, educational qualification as eligibilities for voting. To maintain disunity of India, communal elections were continued. Governors received over riding powers over legislatures. This was the advanced mature democracy implemented by British in India for which they laud themselves. The Viceroy had the over riding powers over every thing else to protect the interests of the British empire and not the interests of the People of India. India remained a slave colony.
British had all the power over Indian democracy..all the army, navy, airforce, police, an iron control of the Hindu press which was a propaganda arm of the British. They wanted India to be democratic only as much as they remain at their mercy and Call. Divide et impera became motto of the British under guise of self governance and democracy as every step was designed to rule Indians by dividing them. The Rowlatt act reimposed restrictions on press and speech and even provided powers for British to arrest people without notice , detain them as long as they desired and the accused need not be given benefit of lawyers. Though later repealed, it exposed the British contribution to Indian democracy.
British contribution history is hogwash. They protected India only to keep out other poachers. The claim that British taught Indian democracy is most dishonest and hypocritical. Unfortunately, the political parties and governments that ruled free India followed these British practices to control, rule the people following the same divide and rule procedures.
Plato said that Democracy evolves from tyranny. Indian democracy is still evolving from British tyranny and from the tyranny of self seeking politicians who ruled her post freedom for six decades. British became not a another race but a condition of the mind. We need to stop admiring British look alike and respect those few who represent her civilisation. Time to wake up!
Comments
Post a Comment