APPROACHES TO INDIAN NATIONALISM

India's nationalism is a multidimensional and intricate phenomenon that has roots

in the colonial era. It exemplifies territorial nationalism, which embraces all of
India's citizens regardless of their disparate cultural, linguistic, and religious
backgrounds. As a result of the 19th-century spread of the most recent western
education, many Indians required a modern, secular, democratic, and nationalist
political outlook. This group of people, who were educated in England, was the
driving force behind the major political upheavals and was the one who gave the
Indian political guild the reins of power.
A sense of communal belonging among individuals from different communities
and religions fueled the nationalist movement and derived a national identity. This
essay shall focus on examining four well-known methods or schools for
researching Indian nationalism. All the approaches offer a different perspective
that helps us understand the intricacies and workings of Indian nationalism. The
Nationalist approach, the Imperialist approach, the Marxist approach, and the
Subaltern approach, providing detailed insights into socio-cultural, political,
economic, regional, gender and contemporary perspectives.

NATIONALIST SCHOOL-
There are essentially two points of view among nationalist historians: some
contend that nationalist concepts date back to ancient times, while others claim
that they were adopted as a result of Western influence. It emphasizes the roles
played by political parties, Indian leaders, and the people's overall will in achieving
independence. According to nationalist historians, the leaders of the nationalist
movement were devoted idealists motivated by a sense of patriotism and the
betterment of their nation. According to this perspective, despite being middle
class, the nationalist leaders had no personal, group, or class interests and were
committed to the cause of the country and Indian people. Surendranath Banerjea
saw India as "a nation-in-the-making."
They said that the goal of the national movement was to bring together Indians
from different backgrounds and geographical areas of life into a unified country
based on their shared complaints. Rc Majumdar and Bipin Chandra believed that
the Congress's initiatives were what "gave reality to the ideal of Indian unity." And
that the combined economic and political change was the reason behind the
recent emergence of the Indian nation. India therefore had a much greater
civilizational and cultural unity than just being a geographical entity. It was in the
spirit of assimilation and inclusivity rather than the political unrest, that Tagore
pinpointed India's identity as a nation, and set it apart from nationalism in Europe.
Others like Gandhi and Nehru also talked of a fundamental unity.

MARXIST APPROACHES-
The Marxist approach is based on the analysis of the modes of production and
classes and paying attention to economic factors and class differentiation in their
analysis of the phenomenon of nationalism. It asserts that class conflicts within
Indian society were reflected in the Indian nationalist movement in addition to its
fight against colonialism. Marxist scholars like M.N Roy, A.R Desai contend that
nationalist sentiments were largely fueled by economic inequality and
exploitation.
They argue that in their pursuit of independence, the economically dependent
Indian bourgeoisie discovered a shared cause with the larger Indian populace.
They started the Indian national movement's Marxist thought process, portrayed
as a bourgeois-dominated movement. Their primary claim is that while different
social classes, such as the working class and the peasantry, classes took part in it,
but its fundamental nature stayed bourgeois. The Marxist approach's economic
viewpoint highlights how British colonialism was exploitative, siphoning off India's
wealth for the benefit of the British Empire. The two main issues influencing
nationalist sentiments were this economic exploitation and the unequal
distribution of wealth. Bipan Chandra comes to the conclusion that the early
nationalist leaders' overall economic outlook was "basically capitalist" based on
his examination of their economic thought, which included both the so-called
moderates and the extremists. Bhagat Singh is one of the well-known individuals
connected to the Marxist interpretation of Indian nationalism. Singh, a
revolutionary who battled the British, is a symbol of the movement's more
extreme and aggressive elements.
Critics of the Marxist thought contend that doing so may obscure other facets of
Indian nationalism and reduce its complex nature to a fight mainly for economic
justice and class equality.

IMPERIALIST APPROACH
This method seeks to comprehend how the British Empire viewed and handled
India's growing nationalist movement. It sheds light on the difficulties and tactics
the British used to hold onto power in India. In order to understand the colonial
administration's tactics for restraining and directing the Indian nationalist
movements, imperialist historians examine official British records, letters, and
policies. They also research how the British responded to important events. The
Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, the rowlatt act of 1919, were events that revealed the
extent the colonial government was prepared to go in order to stifle criticism.
the writers of the imperialist school, was not a people’s movement but a
product of the needs and interests of the elite groups who used it to serve either
their own narrow interest or the interests of their prescriptive groups.
the writers of the imperialist school, was not a people’s movement but a
product of the needs and interests of the elite groups who used it to serve either
their own narrow interest or the interests of their prescriptive groups.
the writers of the imperialist school, was not a people’s movement but a
product of the needs and interests of the elite groups who used it to serve either
their own narrow interest or the interests of their prescriptive groups.
Although various limitations of this theory have been pointed out. This approach
denies the existence and legitimacy of exploitative nature of British rule and of
Nationalism as a movement of the Indian people to overthrow imperialism. It
deliberately misses the economic exploitation,under development,racialism and
the role of the masses in the anti-imperialistic struggle.
The British government employed censorship as well. Newspapers and
publications that were critical of British rule were banned or censored, limiting the
flow of information. This strategy was designed to suppress dissent and stop anti-
colonial ideas from spreading.

SUBALTERN APPROACH
Understanding society via the conditions of subordination of individuals from
diverse castes, classes, ages, genders, and racial backgrounds is known as the
subaltern perspective. It aims to offer a different perspective on society by
presenting the often-underrepresented masses' point of view. Ranajit Guha and
his associates, including Partha Chatterjee, David Hardiman, Shahid Amin,
Gyanendra Pandey, David Arnold, Sumit Sarkar, and Dipesh Chakrabarty, are
primarily credited for this project. Various intensities can be seen in the peasant,
tribal, and marginalized groups' movements, protests, and acts of resistance
against the colonial power during the colonial era.
People themselves were the ones who organized and led their resistance,
independent of the elite. "Graded inequality" was one of the key ideas Ambedkar
presented in relation to the caste system. He makes a distinction between
inequality and inequality with grades. Ambedkar claimed that the Indian caste
system was a special kind of graded inequality in which, with the exception of
Shudras and Untouchables, everyone else is granted privileges based on their
social rank within the traditional social structure. Prominent individuals such as
Annie Besant, Sarojini Naidu, and Kamala Nehru played a crucial role in promoting
women's participation in the independence movement and their rights. Their
contributions went beyond simply assisting organizations and male leaders.
The major limitation of this approach is that It can be difficult to access and
interpret the perspectives of subaltern communities because of the scarcity of
historical records and documentation.
SUMMING UP
The Imperialist approach sheds light on colonial perspectives, the Marxist
approach emphasizes class and economic dynamics, the Subaltern approach
emphasizes the agency of marginalized communities, and the Nationalist
approach highlights the contributions of Indian leaders and organizations. When
combined, they provide a thorough framework for comprehending the complex
aspects of Indian nationalism. These methods don't have to be combined in order
to comprehend Indian nationalism holistically; in fact, combining knowledge from
each is necessary. It is essential to understand that the Indian nationalist
movement was a complex tapestry made of many threads.