India Under Britain

Dr Gupta fulfilled anticipations when he attacked the subject of the "connection with Britain" as an issue in Indian Nationalist Politics, 1885 to 1947, Dr Gupta put forward an argument which obtained considerable agreement from the meeting.

However, the leader of discussion; Dr T. Beaglehole, made the point that the argument was "on an ideological plane." The factors underlying it were complex. This, he emphasized, did not detract from the value of the argument.

The argument maintained that the development of Indian nationalist politics was based on "the struggle of various socio-economic groups; amongst themselves, against British groups with vested interests in India, and against British rule."

"The attitude of the nationalists ... a shifting attitude . . . towards the Empire was conditioned by the sectional interests represented by the leadership from time to time."

Dr Gupta elaborated by matching changes in the demands of the nationalist movement with the entry of new socio-economic groups into political life. Thus, demands for administrative collaboration, representative government, self government, and for complete independence match the ascendancies of early career-minded groups, rising industrialists, the largely Hindu lower middle classes and finally the peasants, workers and other illiterate elements under the leadership of Gandhi and Nehru.

British policy and action, as the other element in the process, was seen by Dr Gupta to have one aspect of continuity: to "maintain British paramountcy in India." In the first phase, the British were successful in this policy of counter poise of natives against natives."

"Their ability to recognise and concede the claims of new groups as they arose in Indian politics" allowed the British to declare that they were liberal. This, claimed Gupta, was demonstrated in British support of moderates against extremists.

Britain also supported Muslim professional groups against the Hindus.

Dr Gupta thus contradicted an earlier supposition of J. C. Beaglehole that the British in India had formalised objects that caused them to be permanently behind in their adaptations to the developing situation.

As the nationalist movement, developed it included more elements with new demands. These demands were so diverse that the aims of the nationalist movement widened.

When the demand in India for independence increased and support for the imperialist policy de-creased in Britain, the stream of British paramountcy ran dry.

Dr Gupta concluded with a point about historical method. He justified his efforts by saying that there were plenty of microscopic and detailed studies available in many historical fields. These detailed studies need to be linked into general themes.

W.A.