Discover the reasons behind Gandhi's withdrawal of the Non-Cooperation Movement, including the Chauri Chaura incident, misunderstandings of non-violence, movement fatigue, and the Khilafat issue's decline.
×
Why Gandhi Withdrew the Movement
Lack of Understanding of Non-Violence
Gandhi felt that people had not fully understood the method of non-violence. Incidents like Chauri Chaura demonstrated that the movement could potentially turn violent.
He believed that such excitement and fervor could lead to widespread violence, which could be easily suppressed by the colonial regime. The regime would use these incidents as a pretext to employ armed force against the protestors.
Movement Showing Signs of Fatigue
The movement was beginning to show signs of fatigue, which was expected as sustaining a movement at a high pitch for an extended period was difficult.
The government showed no inclination towards negotiation, making it harder to maintain the momentum of the movement.
Dissipation of the Khilafat Question
The central theme of the agitation, the Khilafat question, lost its relevance soon after the people of Turkey, under Mustafa Kamal Pasha, deprived the Sultan of political power in November 1922.
Turkey was transformed into a secular state, and by 1924, the caliphate was abolished, thus nullifying the very basis of the Khilafat Movement.
Turkey adopted a European-style legal system, granted extensive rights to women, nationalized education, and developed modern agriculture and industries.
Evaluation of Khilafat Non-Cooperation Movement
The movement successfully brought urban Muslims into the national movement, but it also communalized national politics to some extent.
Although Muslim sentiments reflected a broader anti-imperialist feeling, national leaders failed to elevate the religious political consciousness of Muslims to a secular political level.
The Non-Cooperation Movement spread nationalist sentiments across the country, politicizing every stratum of the population, including artisans, peasants, students, urban poor, women, and traders.
This mass politicization and activization imparted a revolutionary character to the national movement.
The movement debunked two myths that sustained colonial rule: that British rule was in India's interest, and that it was invincible. The economic critique by Moderate nationalists had already challenged the first myth, and the mass satyagraha movement effectively challenged the second.
The masses lost their pervasive fear of colonial rule and its repressive mechanisms, setting the stage for future struggles.
We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. By continuing to browse, you agree to our use of cookies. Please review our
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Use for more information.
Stay focused & Stay away from distractions
At Studento, we make sure you always remain focused on your studies
