India in True Perspective
The Reconstruction of India. By Edward J. Thompson. (Faber and Faber. Ws. ad.) THROUGHOUT the last hectic year, in which the relations of Great Britain and India have gone from' bad to worse—a grim tragedy, relieved only by Lord Invin's " brave, mag- nanimous and entirely statesmanlike " reminder, that the goal of British policy is Dominion status for India—we have waited- patiently for an authoritative and objective view of the situation. The " authority " on India is, as a rule, the least capable of understanding the psychological background of the present deadlock. Mr. Edward Thompson, however, as one " above the battle," has written just such a fair, well-balanced and compelling book as the situation demands. No praise can be too high for his manner of treating the major problem of our time. It is a book which, for the first time, places the British-Indian question in proper perspective, and, coming from one who has so recently (vide three articles in the Times, July 21st, 22nd and 23rd) chastised with whips the misguided moral indignation and idealism of freedom-proclaiming Americans, this deft applies- tion of scorpions to Englishmen and Indians alike may yet bring home, even to the most obtuse British Member of Parliament or the most hardened Conservative, the realities of the Indian situation. Towards the end Mr. Thompson writes :—
" I have written, and felt, hopefully. Yet there are times when it is hard to ward off darker forebodings. I fear most of all the stiffening of my own people, fear lest they should stand on dignity and on abstract and absolute right—that they should demand some sign of humiliation for the provocation of the last ten years of folly."
Here, and not in the blather about " independence," or in the incident of Mr. Gandhi and his followers making salt, is the true resemblance with the British-American position of 1773, " when the Government, justly incensed, could think only of the tea flung into the harbour, and lost sight of the deeper and wider causes of the quarrel."
Of the three parts into which Mr. Thompson divides his leek, the first—" Historical "—is, of course, the most successful, the author having spent the best years of his life in educational work in India. In the statement of the hundred and one political difficulties he tells us nothing new, though perhaps, from his long acquaintance with things Indian, he is able to convey their deeper meaning far better that the Simon Commissioners, or the gentlemen of long administrative experience, who go on crying " lehabod." But those who, like the Spectator, have insisted all along on the paramount need for sympathy and understanding of the mental attitudes which are in conflict, may perhaps be pardoned for drawing especial attention to Part 3—" Prac- tical "—with its splendid realism, its resolute endorsement of our conviction—and Lord Invin's—that Dominion status for India can, and must, be achieved in the very near future. Of course " we could have looked to nothing less, unless we are liars, and have been so all along." The need for practical safeguards in the transition period presents no obstacle whatsoever.
The author notes that our fundamental fault in India has been an inability or a disinclination to think adequately. For generations every British servant there has been a good man at his job, yet " in no country has British thought been so sterile and stagnant and satisfied with a few generalizations passed on from one decade to the next." Similarly, while in most cases the individual Englishman has been " wise, friendly, unpatronizing," the standard product " British rule " has not elevated or encouraged, but depressed the alien people. Hence the machine-like quality of the Govern. ment—against which Rabindranath Tagore inveighs, and, in the long run, " the twist of exasperation, of despair, at ever getting the Englishman to sec anything except his own view of the situation." An example of this governmental tactlessness was that the Rowlett Act should have been timed almost simultaneously with the Montagu-Chelmsford Report. Educated Indians realized that such a measure would. never lie tolerated in England, that once again, after all the hopes of better things coming out of Indian loyalty and help in -the War, they were going to be treated " as subjects for administration, and not as citizens." Apart from the " maddening reluctance " of the Administration, the " aloof- ness and chill adequacy of officialdom," there was, too, until quite recently, the open sore of the treatment of Indians in the Dominions and Colonies. No wonder so much store is laid by Dominion status ! And finally, there was the " Kipling attitude," now, indeed, as dead as mutton, but what an advertisement to the rest of the world for Britain's good name ! We are- reminded of Lady Lawrence's defence of her husband (Sir Henry Lawrence) against a newspaper attack some eighty years ago :- " If it be unlike an English gentleman to consider the rank and feelings of other men, irrespective of their colour, creed or language, then truly he has renounced his birthright to adopt 'native ideas.' . . . I watch the conduct of the English in India, and from the private to the general officer, from the clerk to the judge, I see prevalent the spirit that talks of the black fellows,' that, perhaps unconsciously, assumes that the natives are very much in our way in their own country, except so far as they may be turned to our comfort and aggrandisement."
Can we honestly say that that spirit has been exorcized to-day ? • Telescoped tcriether like this, these counts seem indeed 'en unfair totalogue of British failings. We can assure our
readers, however, that Mr. Thompson is no more sparing of blame for the faults on the Indian side. There was, fur instance, the " preposterous " Khilafat movement, and Gandhi's first great mistake when he supported it from motives of political expediency. Here Gandhi yielded to a natural temptation " like any politician," and the Lucknow Pact has haunted Indian politics these twelve years. It is now dead, but, as the Nehru Report showed, there. remains " the old wretched battle between Hindus and Moslems for the division of seats and jobs." Gandhi, who in South Africa, according to our author, was " overwhelmingly in the right," has made several mistakes since—notably his demands to the Viceroy last January—and at Lahore last year, as we know, he was beaten by the " young men " of the Swami movement ; nevertheless, in earlier days he was publicly thanked by the- Government for notable ambulance service, and he has been, with intervals, " sitting Dhartia"* at the Empire's threshold for thirty years—and is still. Nothing could be more stupid than to look upon him as a kind of Bolshevik who is consumed with anti-British hatred.
Mr. Thompson's conclusion is, that although the difficulties are immense—he enumerates them all here very fairly—yet they could all be surmounted if Englishmen would but strive to acquire the necessary new mental outlook attuned to the music of an age which is as the poles apart from the post-War " jumpiness " that made possible an Amritsar. Here is a fine passage which drives this point home :— " It is unfortunate that Indians do not realize what a change has come over the British in India, since 1920. We have moved out of all sight of where we were. Our old selves are obsolete, our old attitude towards war, poverty, imperialism, is a dream. The War madness raged for two or three years after the Armistice, in all nations, not alone in the British in India. To-day, though we have still in our midst those who have learnt nothing and have changed no segment of their minds, they are like Giants Pope and Pagan. It is a pity that outside England their words are taken seriously. They will not get hold of power again, while a generation lives vividly mindful of the havoc they have wrought before."
Previous page
