Indigo By Louis Fischer

                                                                             Indigo

By Louis Fischer

 

Q: Why is Rajkumar Shuka described as being ‘resolute’?

 

Ans. Rajkumar Shukla is described as “resolute” because of his unwavering determination to bring Mahatma Gandhi to Champaran to address the plight of the indigo farmers. Shukla was a poor sharecropper who, despite his lack of resources and influence, persisted in his efforts to convince Gandhi to visit Champaran. He followed Gandhi everywhere, from his ashram in Ahmedabad to Kanpur and other places until Gandhi agreed to accompany him. This persistence and determination to secure justice for his fellow peasants demonstrate why he is described as “resolute.”

 

Q: Why do you think the servants thought Gandhi to be another peasant?

 

Ans. The servants at Rajendra Prasad’s house mistook Gandhi for another peasant because of his simple appearance and modest demeanor. Gandhi, at that time, dressed in a simple dhoti and traveled like an ordinary Indian. His humility and lack of any outward show of wealth or status led the servants to assume that he was an ordinary peasant, much like the other poor sharecroppers who frequently came to see Rajendra Prasad.

 

Q: List the places that Gandhi visited between his first meeting with Shukla and his arrival at Champaran.

Ans. After his first meeting with Rajkumar Shukla in Lucknow, Gandhi visited several places:

Ø  Kanpur: where Shukla continued to meet him.

 

Ø  Ahmedabad: Gandhi’s ashram, where Shukla followed him.

 

Ø  Calcutta (now Kolkata): Gandhi stayed there before agreeing to go to Champaran.

 

 

Ø  Patna: Gandhi went to Patna to meet Rajendra Prasad.

 

Ø  Muzaffarpur: Gandhi stayed here to collect more information about conditions in Champaran

 

 

Ø  Champaran: Finally, Gandhi reached Champaran to directly address the issues faced by the indigo farmers.

Q: What did the peasants pay the British landlords as rent? What did the British now want instead and why? What would be the impact of synthetic indigo on the prices of natural indigo?

Ans. The peasants paid the British landlords rent in the form of a fixed portion of their land’s produce, and they were specifically required to grow indigo on 15% of their land. However, when Germany developed synthetic indigo, the British landlords no longer found the cultivation of natural indigo profitable. They demanded compensation from the peasants for being released from the agreement to grow indigo, even though the change was in the landlords’ favor. The advent of synthetic indigo drastically reduced the demand and market value for natural indigo, which would have likely led to a collapse in its prices.

Q: The events in this part of the text illustrate Gandhi’s method of working. Can you identify some instances of this method and link them to his ideas of Satyagraha and non-violence?

Ans. Gandhi’s method of working is reflected in several instances throughout the Champaran episode. His approach was based on non-violent civil disobedience, known as Satyagraha, which he developed as a means of passive resistance to oppressive systems:

Ø  Gathering Facts: Gandhi first gathered complete information by meeting peasants and listening to their grievances. This shows his insistence on understanding the problem thoroughly before taking action.

 

Ø  Appealing to Reason and Justice: Gandhi appealed to the conscience of the British landlords and authorities rather than resorting to violence. For example, when he decided to stay in Champaran despite the magistrate’s order to leave, he remained firm yet non-violent, showing his commitment to the principles of Satyagraha.

 

Ø  Moral persuasion: He persuaded the lawyers to support the peasants not for fees but for justice. This indicates his belief in moral principles over professional obligations.

 

Ø  Negotiation and Compromise: His agreement to a 25% refund demonstrated his ability to negotiate and find a compromise without compromising the core principles of justice for the oppressed.

 

These methods illustrate his ideas of Satyagraha and non-violence, focusing on truth, moral persuasion, and non-cooperation with unjust systems.

Q: Why did Gandhi agree to a 25 percent refund to the farmers?

Ans. Gandhi agreed to a 25% refund to the farmers as a strategic move. While the amount might seem small, the refund was significant because it symbolized the surrender of the British landlords’ prestige. It was not just about money but about establishing the farmer’s rights and breaking the psychological hold that the landlords had over them. The landlords had to concede that they had been wrong, which was a moral victory for the farmers, and step forward in the larger struggle against colonial oppression.

Q: How did the episode change the plight of the peasants?

Ans. The Champaran episode brought about a significant change in the plight of the peasants:

Ø  End of Oppression: The immediate result was that the inhumane exploitation of the sharecroppers ended. The 25% refund marked the beginning of the end of the British Planters’ tyranny.

 

Ø  Empowerment: The episode instilled confidence and courage among the peasants. They realized their rights and became aware that they could resist and challenge unjust authority.

 

Ø  Impact on the Freedom Struggle: The success in Champaran demonstrated the efficacy of Satyagraha and became a model for future struggles against British rule.

Q: Why do you think Gandhi considered the Champaran episode to be a turning point in his life?

Ans. Gandhi considered the Champaran episode a turning point because it was his first active involvement in India’s freedom struggle. The success of the movement not only brought significant relief to the oppressed peasants but also demonstrated the power of Satyagraha and non-violence in action. It was the beginning of his mass movement approach in India, setting the stage for his future campaigns.

Q: How was Gandhi able to influence lawyers? Give instances.

Ans. Gandhi influenced the lawyers through his principled stand and moral conviction. For example, when he declared that he would fight alone if the lawyers refused to support the cause without fees, it shamed them into joining him. His leadership was rooted in selflessness and commitment to truth and justice, which inspired others.

Q: What was the attitude of the average Indian in smaller localities towards advocates of ‘home rule’?

Ans. The average Indian in smaller localities was generally indifferent or fearful of joining the struggle for ‘home rule’. However, Gandhi’s presence and the success of his methods, like in Champaran, gradually inspired confidence and support among them. The fear of authority and lack of awareness were common, but Gandhi’s work helped bridge this gap.

Q: How do we know that ordinary people too contributed to the freedom movement?

Ans. The ordinary people, especially the peasants in Champaran, contributed significantly by standing up for their rights despite the fear of retribution. The fact that they supported Gandhi and shared their stories without fear showed their participation in the freedom struggle.

Q: “Freedom from fear is more important than legal justice for the poor.” Do you think that the poor of India are free from fear after independence?

Ans. While India gained independence, the question of whether the poor were truly free from fear remains debatable. Despite legal frameworks guaranteeing rights, social and economic inequalities persist, leading to fear of injustice, exploitation, and deprivation. True freedom for the poor would require not only legal justice but also socio-economic empowerment and a life free from intimidation and insecurity.

Q: What are the qualities of a good leader?

Ans. A good leader, as exemplified by Gandhi, should have qualities such as integrity, empathy, perseverance, and the ability to inspire others. They should lead by example, prioritize the welfare of the people, and remain committed to truth and justice. Gandhi’s actions in Champaran demonstrated these qualities, making him a respected leader who could galvanize people towards a common cause.