Describe the role of tamilnadu in the civil disobedience movement
Answers
Answer:The Vedaranyam March (also called the Vedaranyam Satyagraha) was a framework of the nonviolent civil disobedience movement in British India. Modeled on the lines of Dandi March, which was led by Mahatma Gandhi on the western coast of India the month before, it was organised to protest the salt tax imposed by the British Raj in the colonial India.
C. Rajagopalachari, a close associate of Gandhi, led the march which had close to 150 volunteers, most of whom belonged to the Indian National Congress. It began at Trichinopoly (now Tiruchirappalli) on 13 April 1930 and proceeded for about 150 mi (240 km) towards the east before culminating at Vedaranyam, a small coastal town in the then Tanjore District. By collecting salt directly from the sea the marchers broke the salt law. As a part of the march, Rajagopalachari created awareness among the people by highlighting the importance of khādī as well as social issues like caste discrimination. The campaign came to an end on 28 April 1930 when the participants were arrested by the police. Its leader Rajagopalachari was imprisoned for six months. The march along with the ones at Dandi and Dharasana drew worldwide attention to the Indian independence movement.
Explanation:
Civil disobedience movement
Explanation:
The civil disobedience moment in Tamil Nadu between 1930 and 1932. Suggest that in its early phases, many of which were very dramatic, it had little or no direction from provincial leaders. It also suggests that the ideology of picketing liquor shops at considerable appeal because such ideological goals satisfied both local and nationalist requirements. At the same time, though the congress in the area sought to establish its monopoly over the symbols of authority, this had little or no connection with the direct personal appeal of Gandhi at this time.
Furthermore, it will be suggested that economic motives have much to do with defiance of many private individuals and groups which contributed to the success of the congress. Economic distress pushed many individuals to harass the government and the government of madras found it more and more difficult to maintain its coercive power through the police in confronting a mounting agitation and economic depression.
In the phase of these pressures, the government was unable to maintain its own prestige and credibility. Despite important congress success in several local elections in late 1931, the decision to undertake renewed civil disobedience activity in early 1932 and the fact that these victories where sporadic prevented the congress in Tamil Nadu from being able to establish its legitimacy effectively or to obtain access to local patronage.
This is the role of Tamil Nadu in the civil disobedience movement.