Towards the Civil Disobedience Movement
The withdrawal of the Non-Cooperation Movement (NCM) and the imprisonment of Gandhi in March 1922 weakened the national movement, and it entered a passive phase. As a result, the nationalist ranks became disorganized, disintegrated, and demoralized.
Gaya Annual Session of the Congress (1922)
Two currents of thought emerged within the Congress after the NCM regarding the nationalist activities to be carried out during the passive phase:
- The Swarajists advocated for Council entry.
- The No-changers opposed Council entry and advocated for constructive work among the masses.
| Swarajists/Pro-changers | No-Changers | |
| Background | They were the nationalists who opposed Gandhi’s withdrawal of the NCM following the Chauri-Chaura incident of Feb 1922. | This stream of nationalists agreed to follow Gandhi’s decision to withdraw the NCM and continue the program of the boycott of the legislative councils. |
| Leaders | CR Das, Motilal Nehru, Ajmal Khan, Narasimha Chintaman Kelkar
Other leaders: Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, Subhas Chandra Bose, Vithalbhai Patel. |
Vallabhbhai Patel, Rajendra Prasad, C Rajagopalachari, MA Ansari |
| Programme of action for the passive phase |
|
|
| Points of agreements | 1. Civil disobedience (CD) was not possible immediately.
2. No mass movement could be sustained indefinitely or for an extended period. Therefore, some breathing time is necessary for the nationalist forces to recover, rejuvenate and gather strength before the next round of mass struggle can be launched. 3. Both accepted the essentiality of Gandhi’s leadership. |
|
| Arguments they put forward | 1. Council entry would fill the temporary political void as the CD was not possible in the near term.
2. Works in the Councils, such as the speeches, electioneering, voting out the government, etc., would keep the public politically engaged and provide them with fresh avenues for political propaganda and agitation. 3. Council entry is complementary to the NCM. It is a continuation of the NCM but in the Councils. 4. Council entry would help the Congress maintain its stronghold in the Councils by frustrating the efforts of undesirable elements to weaken the Congress and the government’s actions to gain legitimacy for their laws. The aim would be to expose the legislatures as ‘sham parliaments’. 5. The Councils would not be used the way Liberals have used them for seeking a gradual transformation of the colonial state. Instead, they would be used to carry a struggle to overthrow the colonial government. 6. Politics of obstruction: They would obstruct the Councils consistently and continuously and make the government through them impossible. |
1. Constructive work is essential for preparing for the next round of struggle. Engaging in Parliamentary work would lead to the neglect of constructive work and work among the masses.
2. Revolutionary zeal would fade away. 3. Council entry would also lead to political corruption. o The Congress legislators eventually would abandon the politics of obstruction, get enmeshed in the imperial constitutional framework and start cooperating with the foreign government on petty reforms and piecemeal legislation. |
At the Gaya Annual Session, Dec 1922, presided over by CR Das, the programs of the two groups were put to the vote. The no-changers emerged victorious. As a result, C.R. Das and Motilal Nehru resigned from their respective posts in Congress and formed the Swarajist party.
