Political Science, asked by pankajtandon8520, 11 months ago

Read the following passage and answer the questions below:
"Patel, the organisational man of the Congress, wanted to purge the
Congress of other political groups and sought to make of it a cohesive
and disciplined political party. He …. sought to take the Congress away
from its all-embracing character and turn it into a close-knit party of
disciplined cadres. Being a ‘realist’ he looked more for discipline than
for comprehension. While Gandhi took too romantic a view of "carrying
on the movement," Patel’s idea of transforming the Congress into
strictly political party with a single ideology and tight discipline showed
an equal lack of understanding of the eclectic role that the Congress,
as a government, was to be called upon to perform in the decades to
follow." — RAJNI KOTHARI
(a) Why does the author think that Congress should not have been
a cohesive and disciplined party?
(b) Give some examples of the eclectic role of the Congress party
in the early years.
(c) Why does the author say that Gandhi’s view about
Congress’ future was romantic?

Answers

Answered by viny10
16

Answer:

(a) The author thinks that Congress should not have been a cohesive and disciplined party as it would have stopped Congress from becoming a platform for numerous groups, interests and even political parties to take part in the national movement.

(b) Congress played the eclectic role in the early years. For example, from 1935 the Communists worked mainly from within the fold of the Indian National Congress. Similarly the Congress Socialists Party was formed within the Congress in 1934 by a group of young leaders who wanted a more radical and egalitarian Congress.

(c) Gandhi’s view about Congress’s future was romantic because there were all groups of people representing India’s diversity. It was an ideological coalition and was a necessity for ‘carrying on the movement’ to hold these people together. 

Explanation:

Plzz mark me as brainlist and follow me also.

Answered by aburaihana123
0

Answer:

a)  The author thinks that Congress should not have been a cohesive and disciplined party as it would have prevented the party and restricted it from being a common platform for people from various ideologies, backgrounds, religions as well as political parties. Therefore, this would have affected the participation in the national movement for freedom.  

b) Congress played an eclectic role in several ways in the early years. For instance, year 1935 onwards, the Communists functioned mainly from within the congress Part. At the same time, the Congress Socialist Party was also formed in 1934 from within the Congress. It was led by a group of young leaders. They advocated for a rather radical and egalitarian Congress.  

c) The author says that Gandhi’s views about the Congress’ party future  was romantic since people from several backgrounds, ideologies, religions saw it as a common platform where they could unite. It represented the diversity of India and there’re, upheld democracy. This unifying factor was seen as crucial to the national movement for freedom.  

Similar questions