Download Challenges to Nehruvian era and more Study notes Political Science in PDF only on Docsity!
CHALLENGES TO NEHRUVIAN ERA:
INTRODUCTION:
The year of 1952-1964 marked a years of maturity and achievement. THESE WERE THE YEARS MARKED BY HOPES AND ASPIRATION. These were also the years when India was more or less stable, when its political system took on its distinct form, the country began to progress in all directions, and above all there was the beginning of the massive reconstruction of the polity and the economy. People experienced an advance towards the basic objectives of democracy, civil liberties, secularism, a scientific and international outlook, economic development and planning, with socialism at the end of the road. Among the several areas of progress and achievement, though marked by certain weaknesses and limitations, were:
(a) the consolidation of the nation and the solution of the language and tribal problems,
(b) the initiation of the process of independent and planned economic development,
(c) the evolution of an independent and innovative foreign policy,
(d) the initiation of the electoral process,
(e) the rooting of democracy, (f) the setting in place of an administrative structure, (g) the development of science and technology, (h) the beginnings of the welfare state.
ELECTORAL PROCESS:
Democracy took a giant step forward with the first general election held in 1951–52 over a four-month period. The elections were held on the basis of universal adult franchise, with all those twenty-one years of age or older having the right to vote. There were many voters, most of them poor, illiterate, and rural, and having had no experience of elections. The big question at the time was how would the people respond to this opportunity. Many were doubtfull about such an electorate being able to exercise its right to vote in a politically mature and responsible manner. Some said that democratic elections were not suited to a caste-ridden, multi-religious, illiterate and backward society like India’s and that only a benevolent dictatorship could be effective politically in
such a society. The coming elections were described by some as ‘a leap in the dark’ and by others as ‘fantastic’ and as ‘an act of faith’
ESTABLISHMENT OF DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS:
The tradition of the supremacy of the civil government over the armed forces was fully established during these years. The Indian armed forces had been traditionally non-political and had accepted civilian control and leadership. But the continuation of this role by them was not guaranteed. Nehru, in particular, was worried about the possibility of the armed forces intervening in politics and the government in case of exceptional circumstances, as happened in nineteenth-century France and Germany and in many Third World countries. To avoid such a possibility in India he took several steps in this regard. He kept the size of the armed forces relatively small, refusing to permit their expansion even after large-scale US military aid to Pakistan began in 1954. The expenditure on the defence forces was also kept extremely low, less than 2 per cent of the national income. Abandoning the British colonial practice of recruiting men in the army on the criterion of ‘martial’ classes, the armed forces were given a heterogeneous character, with almost every region and section of society being represented in them. India was thus protected from the danger of militarism in its formative years. The small size of the armed forces and of expenditure on them were also prompted by two other considerations: avoidance of diversion of scarce resources from economic development; and given the absence of domestic defence industries, to avoid dependence on foreign powers and the possibility of their intervention in India’s internal and foreign affairs. One blemish, though not a simple one, on the democratic record of the Nehru years occurred when the Communist government in Kerala was dismissed in 1959 and President’s Rule was imposed in the state.
THE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE:
after independence, it was to be decided whether the government of independent India should carry on with the administrative structure and machinery inherited from the colonial regime and ‘designed to serve the relatively simple interests of an occupying power’.. Initially, there were differences in approach to the question between Nehru and Patel, who, as Home Minister, dealt directly with the administrative services. Nehru was a staunch critic of the ICS and bureaucracy as a whole not only because of their colonial ancestry but also because of their basic conservatism.
Nehru in particular was fully aware of the inadequacy of the existing bureaucracy to understand the problems of the people and to implement the
reform among Muslims had in the modern period lagged far behind that among Hindus and consequently social change had been quite slow even among middle-class Muslim women. Nehru was not willing to alarm the Muslim minority which was, he believed, even otherwise under pressure. He would make changes in Muslim personal law and enact a uniform civil code but only when Muslims were ready for it.
EDUCATION AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM:
In 1965, 5 per cent of the rural population was not served by any school at all. Moreover, the facilities provided in the existing schools were very poor, with the majority of schools having no pucca building, blackboards or drinking water. The basic weakness of the Community Development programme, the Panchayati Raj and the cooperative movement was that they ignored the class division of the rural society where nearly half the population was landless or had marginal holdings and was thus quite powerless. The village was dominated socially and economically by the capitalist farmers and the rich and middle peasantry ; and neither the dominant rural classes nor the bureaucrats could become agents of social transformation or popular participation.
