On Education, The Brits, And The CONgress

It is customary these days, both in India as well as in Britain, to blame most of India’s present-day ills on the colonial administration. Thus, referring to a chapter in James Tooley’s The Beautiful Tree, a chapter titled “Men Who Uprooted The Tree,” a reader posted a comment on my post of yesterday, which asserts:

The East India company men introduced British style central planning to education in India even though a bottoms up, student fee & philanthropy funded education system existed and flourished before Munro and Macaulay.

Tooley is a dear old friend, but I have yet to read this book of his. If this is the point of view he has expressed, then I would like to counter his contention. I will argue that the British planted a tree, an entirely new tree, and it was the CONgress who uprooted this beautiful tree.

First, Munro had nothing to do with education. He is remembered for his work in settling land records in the south – in Baramahal and the Canara districts. And as for Macaulay, there was much happening on the education front in India before the Whig historian appeared on the scene, in the 1840s.

The first officer of the East India Company who took steps to educate the natives was Mountstuart Elphinstone, Governor of Bombay in 1819. Philip Mason notes that this was a hugely “enlightened” policy, for back home in England those days, public opinion held out no role for the State in education. Elphinstone’s motive must also be noted: the idea was to create natives who would rise to western standards of thought. A few years later, in far away Calcutta, Raja Ram Mohun Roy – father of the “Bengal Renaissance” – would strongly support the idea of western education for the natives. Macaulay arrived only 12 years later, by which time the climate of opinion had been created for inculcating western learning in India, under the aegis of the EIC administration.

In 1823, in Bengal, the British government announced plans to support the setting up of a school of Sanskrit studies. Raja Ram Mohun Roy’s letter in protest, addressed to the Governor-General, is worth quoting, for it reflects on the quality of native education at the time. It also illustrates the widespread feeling among the Bengal elites that EIC rule was a boon, and that western education was to be strongly encouraged. Macaulay, 12 years later, did not invent his education policy. The idea had already captured the public imagination.

Raja Ram Mohun Roy wrote:

The establishment of a new Sangscrit School in Calcutta evinces the laudable desire of government to improve the Natives of India by Education – a blessing for which they must ever be grateful; and every well-wisher of the human race must be desirous that the efforts made to promote it should be guided by the most enlightened principles, so that the stream of intelligence may flow in the most useful channels.

When this Seminary of learning was proposed, we understood that the Government in England had ordered a considerable sum of money to be annually devoted to the instruction of its Indian Subjects. We were filled with sanguine hopes that this sum would be laid out in employing European Gentlemen of talent and education to instruct the Natives of India in Mathematics, Natural Philosophy, Chemistry, Anatomy, and other useful Sciences, which the Natives of Europe have carried to a degree of perfection that has raised them above the inhabitants of other parts of the world.

While we looked forward with pleasing hope to the dawn of knowledge to the rising generation, our hearts were filled with mingled feelings of delight and gratitude; we already offered up thanks to Providence for inspiring the most generous and enlightened Nations of the West with the glorious ambition of planting in Asia the Arts and Sciences of modern Europe.

We find that the Government are establishing a Sangscrit school under Hindoo pandits to impart such knowledge as is already current in India. This seminary (similar in character to those which existed in Europe before the time of Lord Bacon) can only be expected to load the minds of youth with grammatical niceties and metaphysical distinctions of little or no practicable use to the possessors or to society. The pupils will there acquire what was known two thousand years ago, with the addition of vain and empty subtleties since then produced by speculative men, such as is already commonly taught in all parts of India…

Thus it was that the British administration took up western education in India and “planted a tree.” Natives were taught western ideas, particularly the idea of Liberty. This is most forcefully illustrated in Surendranath Banerjea’s presidential address to the Indian National Congress in 1895, full 72 years after Raja Ram Mohun Roy's letter cited above. Banerjea said:

Above all, we rely with unbounded confidence on the justice and generosity of the British people and of their representatives in Parliament…. Nevertheless we feel that much yet remains to be done, and the impetus must come from England. To England we look for inspiration and guidance. To England we look for sympathy in the struggle. From England must come the crowning mandate which will enfranchise our peoples. England is our political guide and our moral preceptor in the exalted sphere of political duty. English history has taught us those Principles of Freedom which we cherish in our lifeblood. We have been fed upon the strong food of English constitutional freedom. We have been taught to admire the eloquence and genius of the great masters of English political philosophy. We have been brought face to face with the struggles and the triumphs of the English people in their stately march towards constitutional freedom. Where will you find better models of courage, devotion, and sacrifice? Not in Rome, not in Greece, not even in France in the stormy days of the Revolution – courage tempered by caution, enthusiasm leavened by sobriety, partisanship softened by a large-hearted charity – all subordinated to the one predominant sense of love of country and love of God.

We should be unworthy of ourselves and of our preceptors – we should, indeed, be something less than human – if, with our souls stirred to their innermost depths, our warm Oriental sensibilities roused to an unwanted pitch of enthusiasm by the contemplation of these great ideals of public duty, we did not seek to transplant into our own country the spirit of those free institutions which have made England what she is.

Banerjea was a fruit of the “beautiful tree” the British planted, encouraged by enlightened Indians like Raja Ram Mohun Roy.

Of course, by then the EIC had gone and the British State ruled India. The greatest disservice to good government was done by Lord Curzon, the ultimate imperialist, who partitioned Bengal along communal lines in 1905 and was forced to run away with his capital to New Delhi by the resultant social unrest. The Indian Muslim League was founded in 1906 – in Dacca. Soon, the Indian National CONgress turned disloyal to the regime and became “nationalist.” And “socialist.” Just like the Nazis in Germany. The Brits could no longer control the turn of events. Gradually, they handed over portions of their administration to CONgress politicians in the provinces. The reforms of 1919 handed over “education.” Soon, the CONgress flag was flying atop every government school – much to the chagrin of British ICS district officers, as Philip Mason notes. This “education” turned nationalist and socialist, and was “used” for the CONgress’ political purposes. Natives were no longer enlightened; they became slaves of propaganda. This continues to the present day. That is why Chacha Manmohan S Gandhi shamelessly wants to control education. It is viewed as an essential prop to CONgress power. If we want Indians to see the light of truth, there is no choice before us but to kick The Chacha State out of education. Out!

As for my old friend Tooley: I do believe he suffers from what Peter, Lord Bauer, called “western guilt” over colonialism. In truth, British rule was benign in the utmost. If it had not been for them, we would have been an even more backward civilization. Today, we have a vibrant English press, widespread knowledge of the English language – and these are good things. As Lord Bauer often said, countries of the Third World that did not have contacts with the west have fared much worse. We must keep this in mind.

Finally, on a personal note, our little cottage in south Goa is up for sale. We are moving to Jamaica, or Morocco, or the Canary Islands, or Poona – we are not yet decided. If you want to know more about this cottage, click here.