Glimpses of World History

by Jawaharlal Nehru

  The Industrial Revolution took place in the second half of the eighteenth century. This was the very period when the British were fighting in India and Canada. It was then that the Seven Years’ War took place. These events acted and reacted on each other greatly. The enormous sums of money that the East India Company and its servants (you will remember Clive) extorted out of India, after the Battle of Plassey and later, were of great help in starting the new industries. I have told you earlier in this letter that industrialization is an expensive job to begin with. It swallows up money without any return for some time. Unless plenty of money is available, either by loan or otherwise, it results in poverty and distress till such time as the industry begins to work and make money. England was extraordinarily fortunate in getting these vast sums of money from India just when she wanted them most for her developing industries and factories.

  Having built up these factories, new wants arose. The factories wanted raw material to convert it into manufactured articles. Thus cotton was required to make cloth. Even more necessary were new markets where the new goods produced by the factories could be sold. England had got a tremendous lead over other countries by starting factories first. But in spite of this lead she would have had difficulties in finding easy markets. Again India came, very unwillingly, to the rescue. The English in India adopted all manner of devices to ruin Indian industries and force English cloth on India. I shall say more of this later. Meanwhile it is important to note how the Industrial Revolution in England was helped by the British holding India and forcing it to fit in with their schemes.

  Industrialism spread to all parts of the world during the nineteenth century, and capitalist industry developed elsewhere on the general lines laid down in England. Capitalism led inevitably to a new imperialism, for everywhere there was a demand for raw materials for manufacture and markets to sell the manufactured goods. The easiest way to have the markets and the raw materials was to take possession of the country. So there was a wild scramble among the more powerful countries for new territories. England, again, with her possession of India and her sea power, had a great advantage. But of imperialism and its fruits I shall have to say something later.

  With the coming of the Industrial Revolution the English world was more and more dominated by the great cloth manufacturers of Lancashire, and the iron-masters and the mine-owners.

  99

  America Breaks away from England

  October 2, 1932

  We shall now consider the second great revolution of the eighteenth century—the revolt of the American colonies against England. This was a political revolution only, and not so vital as the Industrial Revolution, which we have been studying, or the French Revolution, which was to follow it soon and shake the social foundations of Europe. And yet this political change in America was important and destined to bear great results. The American colonies which became free then have grown today into the most powerful, the richest, and industrially the most advanced country in the world.

  Do you remember the Mayflower, the ship that took a batch of Protestants from England to America in 1620? They did not like the autocracy of James I; nor did they like his religion. So these people, since then called the “Pilgrim Fathers”, shook the dust of England off from their feet and went to the strange new land across the Atlantic Ocean, to found a colony where they would have greater freedom. They landed in the north, and called the place New Plymouth. Colonists had gone before them to other parts of the North American coastline. Many others followed them, till there were little colonies dotted all over the east coast from north to south. There were Catholic colonies, and colonies founded by Cavalier nobles from England, and Quaker colonies—Pennsylvania is named after the Quaker Penn. There were also Dutchmen, and Germans and Danes and some Frenchmen. They were a mixed lot, but by far the greatest number of them were the English colonists. The Dutch founded a town and called it New Amsterdam. When the English took this later they changed the name to New York—so well known now.

  The English colonists continued to acknowledge the British King and Parliament. Many of them had left their homes because they were discontented with their lot there and did not approve of much that the King or Parliament did. But they had no desire to break away. The southern colonies, consisting of cavaliers and supporters of the King, were even more attached to England. The colonies lived their separate lives, and had little in common with each other. By the eighteenth century there were thirteen colonies on the east coast, all under British control. To the north was Canada, to the south Spanish territory. The Dutch and Danish and other settlements in these thirteen colonies had all been swallowed up by them and were under British control. But remember that the colonies were along the coast only, and some distance inland. Beyond them, to the west, lay vast territories stretching right up to the Pacific Ocean, nearly ten times the size of the thirteen colonies. These territories were not occupied by any European colonists. They were inhabited by, and were under the control of, various tribes or nations of Red Indians. The chief of these were the Iroquois.

  In the middle of the century there was, as you will remember, a world-wide struggle between England and France. This was known as the Seven Years’ War (1756–63), and it was waged not only in Europe, but in India and Canada. England won, and France had to give up Canada to her. France was thus eliminated from America, and England controlled all the settlements in North America. Only in the province of Quebec in Canada was there any French population; otherwise the settlements were predominantly English. Quebec, strange to say, is still an island of French language and culture surrounded by an Anglo-Saxon population. Montreal (from Mont Royal), the biggest city of Quebec Province, has, I believe, more French-speaking people in it than any city other than Paris.

  I have told you, in an earlier letter, of the slave trade that was carried on by European countries to bring Negro workers from Africa to America. This terrible and ghastly trade was largely in the hands of the Spanish, Portuguese and English. Labour was needed in America, especially in the southern States, where large tobacco plantations had grown up. The people of the country, the so-called Red Indians, were nomads and did not like to settle down; besides, they refused to work under conditions of slavery. They would not bend; they preferred to be broken, and broken they were in subsequent years. They were practically exterminated, and most of them died off under the new conditions. There are not many left today of these people who once inhabited a whole continent.

  As the Red Indians would not work in the plantations, and labour was badly needed, the unhappy people of Africa were captured in horrible man-hunts and sent across the seas in a manner the cruelty of which is almost beyond belief. These African Negroes were taken to the southern States—Virginia, Carolina and Georgia—and made to work in gangs on the large plantations, chiefly of tobacco.

  America Breaks away

  In the northern States conditions were different. The old Puritan traditions brought over by the Pilgrim Fathers in the Mayflower still flourished. There were compact farms, and no such huge plantations as in the south. Slaves, or large numbers of workers, were not needed for these farms. As there was no lack of new land, every person tended to become his own master by having his own farm. So a feeling of equality grew among the settlers.

  Thus we find two economic systems growing up in these colonies, one in the north based on small farms and some notions of equality, the other in the south based on large plantations and slavery. The Red Indian had no place in either of these. So these people, who were the original inhabitants of the continent, were pressed back slowly to the west. This process was made easier by the quarrels and divisions among the Red Indians themselves.

  The English King and many big landowners in England had large interests in these colonies, especially in the south. They tried to exploit them as much as possible. After the Seven Years’ War a special effort was made to get money out of the American colonies. The English Parliament, dominated as it was by landow
ners, was willing enough to exploit the colonies, and it backed the King. Taxation was imposed and restrictions on trade. You will remember that in India also at this time an intensive exploitation was begun by the British in Bengal, and all manner of obstacles were put in the way of Indian trade.

  The colonists objected to these restrictions and to the new taxation, but the English Government felt strong and confident after their victory in the Seven Years’ War and cared little for their objections. The Seven Years’ War had, however, taught the colonists many things also. People from different colonies or States met each other and got to know each other. They fought with regular English troops against the French troops, and so became familiar with fighting and the ghastly game of war. So, on their side also, the colonists were in no mood to submit to what they considered an injustice and a wrong to them.

  Matters came to a head in 1773, when the British Government sought to force the East India Company’s tea on them. Many of the rich people in England held shares in the East India Company, and were thus interested in its fortunes. The government was under their influence, and probably the members of the government themselves were interested in the East Indian trade. So the government tried to encourage the business of the East India Company by making it easy for it to take its tea to America and sell it there. But this caused injury to the local colonial tea trade, and was much resented. It was decided therefore to boycott this foreign tea. In December 1773, when an attempt was made to land the East India Company’s tea at Boston, this was resisted. Some of the colonists disguised themselves as Red Indians, went on board the cargo-vessels and threw the tea overboard. This was done publicly before a large sympathetic crowd. It was a challenge which led to war between the rebellious colonies and England.

  History never repeats itself exactly, and yet it is strange how near it comes to it sometimes. This incident of throwing overboard of the tea at Boston in 1773 has become very famous. It is called the “Boston tea-party”. When Bapu, two and a half years ago, started his salt campaign and the great march to Dandi, and the salt raids, many people in America thought of their “Boston tea-party” and compared the new “salt-party” to it. But of course there was a great deal of difference between the two.

  A year and a half later, in 1775, war began between England and her American colonies. What were the colonies fighting for? Not independence, not to cut away from England. Even when fighting had begun and blood had been shed on both sides, the leaders of the colonists continued to address George III of England as their “Most Gracious Sovereign” and to consider themselves as his faithful subjects. It is most interesting to notice this, as you will find the same thing happening often enough. In Holland, Philip II of Spain was called sovereign, although bitter warfare was being carried on against his armies. It was only after many years of fighting that Holland was forced to declare her independence. In India, after many years of doubt and hesitation, and dallying with the idea of Dominion Status and the like, our National Congress declared, on the 1st January, 1930, in favour of independence. Even now there are some people who seem to be afraid of the idea of independence and talk of Dominion rule in India. But history teaches us, and the examples of Holland and America made it clear enough, that the end of such a struggle can only be independence.

  In 1774, a little before war began between the colonies and England, Washington stated that no thinking man in all North America desired independence. And yet Washington was to be the first president of the American Republic! In 1774, after the war had begun, forty-six leading members of the Colonial Congress addressed King George III as his faithful subjects and pleaded for peace and the cessation of the “effusion of blood”. They were ardently desirous of restoring harmony and goodwill between England and her American children. All they ask for is some kind of Dominion government, and they declare, in Washington’s words, that no thinking man wanted independence. This was called the “Olive Branch Petition”.

  But in less than two years twenty-five of the signatories of this petition had signed another document—the Declaration of Independence.

  So the colonies did not begin fighting for the sake of independence. Their grievances were taxation and restrictions on trade. They denied the right of the British Parliament to tax them against their will. “No taxation without representation” was their famous cry, and they were not represented in the British Parliament.

  The colonists had no army, but they had a vast country to retire and fall back upon whenever necessary. They built up an army, and Washington ultimately became their Commander-in-Chief. They had a few successes and, thinking perhaps that the time was a favourable one for a fling at the old enemy, England, France joined the colonies. Spain also declared war against England. The odds were against England now, but the war dragged on for many years. In 1776 came the famous “Declaration of Independence” of the colonies. In 1782 the war ended, and the Peace of Paris between the warring countries was signed in 1783.

  So the thirteen American colonies became an independent republic— the United States of America as they were called. But for a long time each State was jealous of the others and considered itself more or less independent. Only gradually came the feeling of a common nationality. It was a vast country, continually spreading westwards. It was the first great republic of the modern world—tiny Switzerland being the only other real republic at the time. Holland, although republican, was controlled by the aristocracy. England was not only a monarchy, but its Parliament was in the hands of the small rich landowning class. So the United States Republic was a new kind of country. It had no past, as the countries of Europe and Asia had. It had no relics of feudalism, except in the plantation system and slavery in the south. It had no hereditary nobility. The bourgeoisie or middle class had thus few obstacles to its growth, and it grew rapidly. Its population at the time of the War of Independence was less than 4,000,000. Two years ago, in 1930, it was nearly 123,000,000.

  George Washington became the first president of the United States. He was a great landowner from the State of Virginia. Other great men of this period who are considered the founders of the republic are Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, Adams and James Madison. Benjamin Franklin was an especially distinguished man, and was a great scientist. By flying boys’ kites he showed that the lightning in the clouds was the same thing as electricity.

  The Declaration of Independence of 1776 stated that “all men are born equal”. This is hardly a correct statement, if analysed, for some are weak and some are strong, some are more intelligent and capable than others. But the idea behind the statement is clear enough and praiseworthy. The colonists wanted to get rid of the feudal inequalities of Europe. That in itself was a very great advance. Probably many of the framers of the Declaration of Independence were influenced by the philosophers and thinkers of eighteenth-century France, from Voltaire and Rousseau onwards.

  “All men are born equal”—and yet there was the poor Negro, a slave with few rights! What of him? How did he fit in with the constitution? He did not fit in, and he has not yet fitted in. Many years later there was a bitter civil war between the northern and southern States, and as a result slavery was abolished. But the Negro problem still continues in America.

  100

  The Fall of the Bastille

  October 7, 1932

  We have now considered very briefly two of the revolutions of the eighteenth century. In this letter I shall tell you something of the third revolution—the French Revolution. Of the three this one in France created the most stir. The Industrial Revolution, which began in England, was a vastly important one, but it crept on gradually and was almost unnoticed by most people. Few realized at the time its real significance. The French Revolution, on the other hand, burst suddenly on an astonished Europe, like a thunderbolt. Europe was still under a host of monarchs and emperors. The ancient Holy Roman Empire had long ceased to function, but it still existed on paper and its ghost cast a long shadow
over Europe. In this world of kings and emperors and courts and palaces, there came, out of the depths of the common people, this strange and terrifying creature, which paid no attention to moss-grown custom or privilege, and which hurled a king from his throne and threatened others with a like fate. Is it surprising that the kings and all the privileged people of Europe trembled before this revolt of the masses, whom they had so long ignored and crushed?

  The French Revolution burst like a volcano. And yet revolutions and volcanoes do not break out suddenly without reason or long evolution. We see the sudden burst and are surprised; but underneath the surface of the earth many forces play against each other for long ages, and the fires gather together, till the crust on the surface can hold them down no longer, and they burst forth in mighty flames shooting up to the sky, and molten lava rolls down the mountainside. Even so the forces that ultimately break out in revolution play for long under the surface of society. Water boils when you heat it; but you know that it has reached boiling point only after getting hotter and hotter.

  Ideas and economic conditions make revolutions. Foolish people in authority, blind to everything that does not fit in with their ideas, imagine that revolutions are caused by agitators. Agitators are people who are discontented with existing conditions and desire a change and work for it. Every revolutionary period has its full supply of them; they are themselves the outcome of the ferment and dissatisfaction that exist. But tens and hundreds of thousands of people do not move to action merely at the bidding of an agitator. Most people desire security above everything; they do not want to risk losing what they have got. But when economic conditions are such that their day-today suffering grows and life becomes almost an intolerable burden, then even the weak are prepared to take risks. It is then that they listen to the voice of the agitator who seems to show them a way out of their misery.