Moderate Nationalism

Phases of the Indian National Movement

Historians often divide the journey of the Indian National Congress into three broad phases:

1. Moderate Nationalism (1885–1905) – A phase of cautious, polite, constitutional demands.
2. Militant Nationalism (1906–1916) – A phase where leaders like Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, and Lala Lajpat Rai (Lal–Bal–Pal) pressed for bolder action, including boycotts and swadeshi.
3. Gandhian Era (1917–1947) – Where Gandhiji turned the movement into a mass struggle with satyagraha and non-cooperation.

So, the Moderate phase is essentially the first chapter in this larger story.

Nature of the Moderate Phase

Between 1885 and 1905, the Indian National Congress (INC) was dominated by leaders we call the Moderates.

• These leaders were cautious in their demands. They wanted reforms but did not wish to anger the British government.
• Their method was: petition, prayer, and protest—writing resolutions, sending memorials, meeting British officials, and requesting gradual changes.
• Why so cautious? Because this was the beginning. They were just building an organisation, and any hasty move could have led to harsh suppression.

But remember: not all nationalists were moderates. Alongside them were extremists or radical nationalists like Bal Gangadhar Tilak. These leaders had no faith in British goodwill. They argued: “India’s future lies in the strength of her own people, not in the mercy of British rulers.”

Thus, right from the start, there was a tension between two approaches—the moderate and the extremist.

Who Were the Moderates?

If we look closely at the social background of the Congress in its early years, some patterns emerge:

• The party was dominated by the educated middle class—the new group created by Western education.
• A large proportion were lawyers, because law gave them both prestige and experience in argumentation.
• Many belonged to the Brahmin caste, especially from the three presidencies: Bombay, Bengal, and Madras.
• In short, Congress was a middle-class organisation in its early years.

And this makes sense—this was the class most exposed to modern ideas like democracy, nationalism, and rights. They were the first to feel the contradictions of being educated in liberty and justice, but living under colonial subordination.

Programme and Activities of the Early Nationalists

Now, what were the Moderates trying to achieve? Their goal was not immediate independence. Instead, they focused on nation-building.

They believed:

• India had only just begun the process of becoming a nation.
• People were divided by caste, region, and religion.
• So the first step was to arouse national sentiment and organise public opinion on an all-India basis.

Their activities included:

• Creating an all-India political consciousness—a sense that Indians were part of one nation with common interests.
• Formulating popular demands (like administrative reforms, economic relief, representation in councils) and presenting them with one united voice.
• Training Indians in politics—teaching them how to debate, how to argue, how to demand rights within a constitutional framework.

Thus, their role was like laying the foundation stone of the freedom movement. They were not storming the fort yet; they were preparing the ground.

👉 In simple words: Moderates were the builders of the foundation. Extremists were the ones who started shaking the structure. And Gandhi finally became the architect who completed the building of independence.

The Nature of Moderate Demands

The Moderates (1885–1905) were cautious. Their programme was not revolutionary, but modest and reformist. They wanted:

• Constitutional reforms (a bigger role in governance)
• Economic relief (to stop exploitation and poverty)
• Administrative reorganisation (a more responsive, Indianised bureaucracy)
• Defence of civil rights (freedom of speech, press, association, etc.)

Their vision was gradual progress, step by step, towards self-government.

Constitutional Reforms

Moderates believed India should eventually have democratic self-government, but they did not demand it immediately. Instead, they asked for incremental reforms:

• Expansion and reform of Legislative Councils → This was their main demand.
  • Their agitation led to the Indian Councils Act of 1892.
  • By this Act:
    • The number of non-official members was increased.
    • Councils could now discuss the budget, though they still couldn’t vote on it.
    • But official majority remained intact.

👉 The Moderates called this Act a “hoax” because it gave too little. So, they raised new demands:

• Indian majority in councils
• Control over budget → “No taxation without representation”
• Wider powers for legislatures

By the early 20th century, their demands became bolder:

• Swarajya (self-government) on the model of colonies like Canada and Australia.
• Gopal Krishna Gokhale (1905, Banaras session) and Dadabhai Naoroji (1906, Calcutta session) openly demanded self-government.

Economic Reforms

Moderates paid great attention to the economic drain caused by British rule.

• Dadabhai Naoroji’s Drain Theory (explained in his book Poverty and Un-British Rule in India) showed how wealth was being siphoned off to England through:
  • Salaries and pensions of British officials
  • Savings remitted abroad
  • Payments to British troops
  • Profits of British companies

This agitation forced the British to appoint the Welby Commission, where Dadabhai became the first Indian member.

Moderates held British policies responsible for:

• Poverty and economic backwardness
• Failure of modern industries
• Destruction of handicrafts

Their proposed solutions:

• Rapid industrialisation with tariff protection and government aid.
• Promotion of swadeshi and boycott of British goods.
• Abolition of salt tax, reduction of land revenue, and cut in military expenditure.

👉 Notice: even before the Extremists, Moderates sowed the seed of Swadeshi.

Administrative Reforms

Moderates wanted to make the administration cheaper, fairer, and more Indianised. Their major demands were:

1. Indianisation of higher services (ICS and other posts):
   • Economic grounds: Indians could work at lower salaries, saving money.
   • Political grounds: Indian officials would understand Indian needs better.
   • Moral grounds: To end the racist monopoly of Europeans.
2. Separation of Judiciary and Executive → to ensure impartial justice.
3. ICS exam in India as well as England → so more Indians could compete.
4. Spread of primary education and expansion of technical/higher education.
5. Better medical and health facilities.
6. Agricultural reforms:
   • Agricultural banks to free peasants from moneylenders.
   • Large-scale irrigation projects to prevent famines.
7. Better treatment of Indian labour abroad → They were suffering racial discrimination in British colonies.
8. Police reforms → To make the police honest and people-friendly.
9. Right to bear arms → They opposed the Arms Act of 1878, which forced Indians to pay license fees, while Europeans and landlords were exempt.

In short, Moderates wanted the British government to trust Indians, give them equal rights, and make governance more inclusive.

Defence of Civil Rights

Beyond reforms, Moderates valued civil liberties.

• They defended freedom of speech, press, thought, and association.
• Whenever the government tried to restrict these rights, Moderates resisted strongly.

This shows their vision was not just about economic relief but also about democratic principles.

Methods of Political Work

The Moderates believed in constitutional agitation within the framework of law.
Their politics can be summarised as petition, prayer, and protest—always peaceful, always legal.

They had a two-fold strategy:

1. Build public opinion in India – make Indians aware of their rights, and unify them around national issues.
2. Persuade the British Government – through petitions, resolutions, and meetings, hoping that if the truth of India’s condition was presented, reforms would follow.

An interesting aspect: the Moderates genuinely believed that the British public and Parliament were fair-minded, but ignorant of India’s realities. So, they took it upon themselves to educate British opinion.

• British Committee of the INC was set up in 1889.
• In 1890, they launched a journal called India to spread awareness in Britain.
• Dadabhai Naoroji himself spent much of his life in England, lobbying for India’s cause. He even got elected to the British Parliament—the first Indian to do so—and formed an “Indian lobby” in the House of Commons.

👉 Thus, their politics rested not on religious appeals or emotional slogans, but on rational arguments, data, and the lived reality of Indian poverty.

Role of the Press and Congress Sessions

• The annual sessions of Congress (3 days long) gave them a platform to pass resolutions and deliver speeches.
• But since these sessions were too short, the press became the real weapon. Newspapers like The Hindu, Amrita Bazar Patrika, and Indian Mirror kept Congress propaganda alive throughout the year.

👉 This reliance on press and platform created an intellectual-political culture, where ideas of democracy, rights, and nationalism slowly spread among the educated public.

Loyalty to the British Rule

A common criticism is that Moderates were “loyal” to the British. But we must understand this in context:

• They were patriots, but they genuinely believed that at that stage, India’s link with Britain was useful—for modern education, law, and administration.
• They thought challenging the Raj outright would be premature.
• However, when their demands were repeatedly ignored, even Moderates like Gokhale and Dadabhai began to demand self-government by the early 20th century.

So, their “loyalty” was more of a tactical stance than blind submission.

Role of the Masses

One of the biggest limitations of the Moderates was their narrow social base.

• They did not involve the common people actively.
• They feared that a society divided by caste, religion, and region was not yet ready for mass politics.
• They believed in first educating and preparing society before launching it into political struggles.

But this was also a mistake—they overlooked the fact that unity among diverse groups often comes during a common struggle.
As a result, the masses remained passive in this phase. Congress remained, in essence, a middle-class movement.

Attitude of the Government

From the beginning, the British were suspicious of Congress.

• Initially, they tolerated it, hoping that A.O. Hume’s involvement would keep it “harmless.”
• But as Congress gained popularity, hostility grew. British officials mocked its leaders as “disloyal babus, seditious brahmins, and violent villains.”
• Lord Dufferin (1887) dismissed Congress as representing only a “microscopic minority.”

When the national movement began to unite people, the British responded with “Divide and Rule”:

• They encouraged pro-British leaders like Sayyid Ahmed Khan and Raja Shiva Prasad to criticise Congress.
• They deliberately tried to widen the Hindu–Muslim divide.

Yet, despite opposition, Congress survived, grew stronger, and became the central platform of nationalism.

Evaluation of the Early National Movement

Now comes the critical question: Did the Moderates succeed or fail?

Criticism:

• Their reforms were modest, yet even those were mostly rejected.
• They failed to expand their democratic base to include the masses.
• Many called them “political beggars.”

Achievements:

But dismissing them as failures would be a serious mistake. They achieved something invaluable:

• National Awakening → They gave Indians a sense of belonging to one nation.
• Democratic Ideals → They spread the ideas of liberty, rights, and representative government.
• Economic Critique of Colonialism → They exposed the exploitative nature of British rule (Drain Theory, poverty, destruction of industry).
• Moral Delegitimisation of the Raj → By exposing its injustice, they shook the moral foundation of imperialism.
• Political Training → They created a generation of Indians skilled in debate, organisation, and politics.

👉 In essence, the Moderates laid the foundations of nationalism. The structure may have been built later by Extremists and Gandhi, but without this foundation, the house of freedom could not stand.

The Final Balance

• Weakness → Too cautious, elitist, and cut off from masses.
• Strength → Created national consciousness, democratic ideals, and economic critique.

So, the Moderate phase was not a failure, but a necessary first step in India’s long march to freedom.

✨ To sum up:
The Moderates were like the first school teachers of nationalism—they patiently taught Indians how to think as a nation, how to demand rights, and how to see through the exploitative nature of colonialism. Later leaders would take the movement to the streets, but without this early classroom, India’s struggle would have lacked clarity and direction.