Note that your answers to the questions of this primary source analysis will be graded based on the thoroughness of your response and keep in mind that all assignments are checked for plagiarism (see Introduction module.) The policy stated in the syllabus applies to every assignment submitted in this class.
As just explained in the video lecture, the British withdrew from India soon after World War II was over. The Indian independence movement now had to decide which path an independent India should pursue. There were differing visions, even among friends who had fought together for Indian independence. The excerpts of an exchange of letters between Gandhi and Nehru gives you an idea of these divisions.
Keeping in mind the rules for "How to Read a Historical Document" (available in the Introduction module), carefully read through the text of the primary sources below and answer all following questions. In your response, make sure to clearly separate each answer by including the number of the question you are answering.
Questions (all of your answers must be based on the documents):
1. How does Gandhi envision India’s postcolonial future?
2. What reasons does Gandhi give for his vision for India?
3. How does Nehru’s vision for India differ from that of his friend Gandhi?
4. What are the main reasons why Nehru disagrees with Gandhi’s vision for India?
PRIMARY SOURCES: Gandhi and Nehru exchange ideas on development strategy, October 1945
Historical Background Information: By fall 1945, all understood that the end of British colonial rule was only a matter of time. Mohandas Gandhi (1869-1948), the leader of the Indian independence movement, wanted to discuss the question of what to do with the independence that his Congress party had won. The discussions within the leadership of the party worried him and prompted him to turn for clarification to Jawaharlal Nehru (1889-1984), a close friend and eminent Indian freedom fighter. While the two men shared a deep affection for each other and had worked almost as father and son to secure India’s freedom, their vision of India’s future differed.
October 5, 1945 [Letter from Gandhi to Nehru]
My dear Jawaharlal,
I, have been desirous of writing to you for many days but have not been able to do so before today. […]
The first thing I want to write about is the difference in outlook between us. If the difference is fundamental then I feel the public should also be made aware of it. […]
I am convinced that if India is to attain true freedom and through India the world also, then sooner or later the fact must be recognized that people will have to live in villages, not in towns, in huts not in palaces. Crores [literally tens of millions] of people will never be able to live at peace with one another in towns and palaces. They will then have no recourse but to resort to both violence and untruth. I hold that without truth and non-violence there can be nothing but destruction for humanity. We can realize truth and nonviolence only in the simplicity of village life and this simplicity can best be found in the Charkha [spinning wheel] and all that the Charkha connotes. I must not fear if the world today is going the wrong way. It may be that India too will go that way and like the proverbial moth burn itself eventually in the flame round which it dances more and more furiously. But it is my burden to protect India and through India the entire world from such a doom. The essence of what I have said is that man should rest content with what are his real needs and become self- sufficient. If he does not have this control he cannot save himself. After all the world is made up off individuals just as it is the drops that constitute the ocean. I have said nothing new. This is a well-known truth.
[…] You must not imagine that I am envisaging our village life as it is today. The village of my dreams is still in my mind. After all every man lives in the world of his dreams. My ideal village will contain intelligent human beings. They will not live in dirt and darkness as animals. Men and women will be free and able to hold their own against anyone in the world. There will be neither plague nor cholera nor small pox; no one will be idle, no one will wallow in luxury. Everyone will have to contribute his quota of manual labour. I do not want to draw a large scale picture in detail. It is possible to envisage railways, post and telegraph offices etc. For, me it is material to obtain the real article and the rest will fit into the picture afterwards. If I let go the real thing, all else goes.
[…]
You are working hard. I hope you are well. I trust Indu too is fit.
Blessings from
BAPU
October 9, 1945 [Letter from Nehru to Gandhi]
MY DEAR BAPU,
I have received today, on return from Lucknow, your letter of the 5th October. I am glad you have written to me fully and I shall try to reply at some length but I hope you will forgive me if there is some delay in this, as I am at present tied up with close- fitting engagements. […]
Briefly put, my view is that the question before us is not one of truth versus untruth or non-violence versus violence. One assumes as one must that true co-operation and peaceful methods must be aimed at and a society which encourages these must be our objective. The whole question is how to achieve this society and what its content should be. I do not understand why a village should necessarily embody truth and non-violence. A village, normally speaking, is backward intellectually and culturally and no progress can be made from a backward environment. Narrow-minded people are much more likely to be untruthful and violent.
Then again we have to put down certain objectives like a sufficiency of food, clothing, housing, education, sanitation, etc. which should be the minimum requirements for the country and for everyone. It is with these objectives in view that we must find out specifically how to attain them speedily. Again it seems to me inevitable that modern means of transport as well as many other modern developments must continue and be developed. There is no way out of it except to have them. If that is so inevitably a measure of heavy industry exists. How far that will fit in with a purely village society? Personally I hope that heavy or light industries should all be decentralized as far as possible and this is feasible now because of the development of electric power. If two types of economy exist in the country there should be either conflict between the two or one will overwhelm the other.
The question of independence and protection from foreign aggression, both political and economic, has also to be considered in this context. I do not think it is possible for India to be really independent unless she is a technically advanced country. I am not thinking for the moment in terms of just armies but rather of scientific growth. In the present context of the world we cannot even advance culturally without a strong- background of scientific research in every department. There is today in the world a tremendous acquisitive tendency both in individuals and groups and nations, which leads to conflicts and wars. Our entire society is based on this more or less. That basis must go and be transformed into one of co-operation, not of isolation which is impossible. If this is admitted and is found feasible then attempts should be made to realize it not in terms of an economy, which is cut off from the rest of the world, but rather one which co-operates. From the economic or political point of view an isolated India may well be a kind of vacuum which increases the acquisitive tendencies of others and thus creates conflicts.
There is no question of palaces for millions of people. But there seems to be no reason why millions should not have comfortable up-to-date homes where they can lead a cultured existence. Many of the present overgrown cities have developed evils which are deplorable. Probably we have to discourage this overgrowth and at the same time encourage the village to approximate more to the culture of the town.
[…]
I hope you are keeping well and have completely recovered from the attack of influenza.