Swarajists and No-Changers

Introduction
After Gandhi’s arrest in March 1922, the national movement experienced disintegration and confusion. Two major ideological streams emerged within the Congress: the Swarajists, who supported entering legislative councils, and the No‑Changers, who wanted to continue constructive work and boycott councils.

Genesis of Swarajya Party
• At the Gaya Session (1922), the Swarajists’ proposal to end the boycott of councils was defeated.
• C.R. Das resigned as Congress President and Motilal Nehru as General Secretary.
• The Swarajya Party was formed with C.R. Das as President and Motilal Nehru as Secretary.

Arguments of Swarajists
• Council entry would not weaken Non‑Cooperation, but provide a new arena of struggle.
• Wanted to prevent government loyalists from capturing councils.
• Planned to enter councils only to expose their limitations and create deadlocks.
• Intended to use councils for political obstruction, not for cooperation with colonial rule.

Arguments of No-Changers
• Council entry would dilute revolutionary spirit and weaken constructive work.
• Constructive work—khadi, national schools, removal of untouchability—would prepare the masses for the next Civil Disobedience Movement.
• Feared parliamentary politics would lead to political corruption.

Follow-up Steps
• Congress allowed Swarajists to contest elections as a Congress group.
• The only difference: Swarajists would join councils; No-Changers continued constructive work.
• Elections to Central and Provincial Assemblies were held in November 1923.

Swarajist Election Manifesto (1923)
• Strong anti‑imperialist stand.
• Demand for self‑government to be raised in councils.
• If rejected, they would adopt consistent obstruction to make governance difficult.
• Aim: wreck councils from within through adjournments, debates, and budget rejections.

Swarajist Performance in Councils
• Won 42 out of 141 elected seats in 1923.
• Clear majority in Central Provinces.
• Practised effective obstruction: defeating bills, blocking budgets, and exposing imperial policies.

Gandhi’s Changing Stand
• Initially opposed council entry.
• After release in 1924, Gandhi moved toward compromise.
• Government repression of Swarajists and revolutionaries led Gandhi to support Swarajists.
• At Belgaum Session (1924), Gandhi presided and accepted that Swarajists work within Congress.

Decline of Swarajists
• Communal tensions weakened unity.
• Split among Swarajists into “Responsivists” (Lajpat Rai, Malaviya, Kelkar) and the original group.
• C.R. Das’s death in 1925 deeply weakened the party.
• Swarajists lost Muslim support in Bengal by not supporting tenant causes.
• By 1926, the party was disorganised and performed poorly in elections.
• With the Lahore Resolution (1930) and launch of Civil Disobedience, Swarajists finally withdrew.

Achievements of Swarajists
• Exposed the weaknesses of the Montford Reforms.
• Demonstrated that legislative councils could be used for nationalist agitation.
• Vithalbhai Patel became the first Indian President of Central Legislative Assembly (1925).
• Defeated the repressive Public Safety Bill in 1928.
• Provided political continuity during the lull after NCM’s withdrawal.

Failures of Swarajists
• Failed to coordinate council work with mass movements.
• Obstructionist strategy had limitations and did not achieve structural reforms.
• Coalitions were unstable and often collapsed due to conflicting interests.
• Many leaders got influenced by privileges of office.
• Failure to support Bengal peasants reduced credibility among Muslims.

Constructive Work by No-Changers
• Focused on village uplift, khadi promotion, prohibition campaigns, and removal of untouchability.
• National schools were set up with non-colonial curricula.
• Ashrams worked on mobilisation of peasants, tribals, and lower castes.
• Constructive workers later became the backbone of Civil Disobedience Movement.

Limitations of No‑Changers
• National education mainly benefited urban middle classes.
• Khadi was expensive compared to imported cloth.
• Untouchability work remained symbolic; economic issues of landless labourers were not addressed.
• Could not serve as a substitute for direct political action.

Conclusion
The Swarajists and No-Changers represented two complementary strategies—parliamentary obstruction and constructive mobilisation. Despite differences, their combined efforts helped sustain national momentum during the 1920s and prepared the ground for the next phase of mass struggle.

---

PDF File:

No PDF attached

---

Subject: Modern History

← Back