Era of one-party dominance — NCERT Solutions

Given: The passage by Rajni Kothari discusses Patel's vision of transforming Congress into a tight, disciplined party with a single ideology versus the eclectic role Congress was required to play as a governing party.

Answer:

The author, Rajni Kothari, argues that Congress should not have been made into a cohesive and disciplined party with a single ideology for the following reasons:

1. Eclectic Role of Congress as Government: As the ruling party of a newly independent, diverse nation, Congress was required to accommodate a wide variety of interests — regional, linguistic, religious, caste-based, and ideological. A single rigid ideology would have made this impossible.

2. All-embracing Character: The Congress had historically functioned as a broad-based movement that included people of vastly different political views — from socialists to conservatives, from secularists to religious nationalists. This all-embracing character was its strength, not a weakness.

3. Discipline vs. Comprehension: Kothari argues that Patel valued discipline over comprehension. But governing a complex, plural society like India required comprehension of diverse needs and flexibility, not rigid party discipline.

4. Danger of Exclusion: If Congress had become a narrow, disciplined cadre-based party, it would have excluded many groups and interests, reducing its ability to build consensus and manage the challenges of nation-building.

In short, the author believes that the eclectic, inclusive character of Congress was essential for it to govern effectively in the early decades of Indian democracy.

Given: The 'eclectic role' refers to Congress's ability to accommodate diverse and even contradictory ideologies, interests, and groups within itself.

Examples of the Eclectic Role of Congress in the Early Years:

1. Accommodation of Diverse Ideologies: Congress included leaders of very different political persuasions — Jawaharlal Nehru (socialist, secular), Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel (conservative, pragmatic), and others. It thus served as an umbrella for left-wing, centrist, and right-wing thinking simultaneously.

2. Inclusion of Various Social Groups: Congress brought together peasants, industrialists, workers, landlords, upper castes, lower castes, minorities, and women under one political platform. It did not represent any single class or community.

3. Balancing Regional Interests: Congress accommodated strong regional leaders and gave them significant autonomy, thus managing the demands of linguistic and regional groups. For example, the reorganisation of states on linguistic lines in 1956 was a response to such pressures.

4. Tolerance of Internal Factions: Congress allowed various internal groups and factions — such as the Congress Socialist Party (before Independence) — to function within it, rather than expelling those with differing views.

5. Mixed Economy Policy: In economic policy, Congress balanced socialist planning (Five Year Plans, public sector) with the interests of private industrialists and capitalists, reflecting its eclectic approach.

Thus, Congress acted less like a single-ideology party and more like a coalition of interests, which was crucial for governing a diverse nation.

Given: The passage states that 'Gandhi took too romantic a view of carrying on the movement.'

Answer:

Rajni Kothari describes Gandhi's view about Congress' future as 'romantic' for the following reasons:

1. Gandhi's Suggestion to Dissolve Congress: After Independence, Gandhi had suggested that the Congress, having achieved its primary goal of freedom, should dissolve itself or transform into a social service organisation (Lok Sevak Sangh) rather than continue as a political party. This was an idealistic vision.

2. Ignoring Political Realities: Gandhi's idea of 'carrying on the movement' — i.e., continuing as a mass movement for social and moral upliftment — ignored the hard political realities of governing a newly independent nation. A government needs organised political structures, not just a movement.

3. Underestimating the Need for Political Organisation: Gandhi did not fully appreciate that in a democratic system, political parties are essential instruments for contesting elections, forming governments, and managing state power. A movement-style organisation cannot effectively perform these functions.

4. Idealism over Pragmatism: Gandhi's vision was rooted in moral and spiritual idealism — he believed in the power of voluntary service and non-political action. But the author sees this as 'romantic' because it was disconnected from the practical demands of running a modern democratic state.

In essence, Kothari calls Gandhi's view 'romantic' because it was idealistic and impractical — it did not account for the complex political, administrative, and electoral challenges that Congress would face as the ruling party of independent India.