Essay One for Hi 264

Topic 1: Comparing and Contrasting the Indian Nationalist Movement to the Japanese Nationalist Movement

Violence marks the difference between India and Japan in their respective nationalist movements; India was more violent than Japan in the creation of its national identity. This conclusion goes against shallow consideration because India is known for Mohandas Gandhi, who in turn was famous for his philosophy of nonviolence. Gandhi's focus on nonviolence can be contrasted with Japan's nationalist figure Fukuzawa Yukichi who makes little mention of violence at all: he did not have to mention violence because violence was not an issue. While Japan's wars in the early 20th century are violent, they do not necessarily mark that of a nation struggling for identity; whereas the connection between a national identity crisis and violence is recognizable in India's conflicts.

India had several major and minor conflicts which were violent. The definitive creation of contemporary India was the partition of Pakistan from the larger “British India” when India got rid of British rule in 1947. The nationalist leader of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, was reacting to the “late 1930's mounting communal violence” between Muslims and Hindus when forming his decision to advocate partition. But even the first attempts by India to establish itself as a nation in the Great Revolt from 1857-1858 were violent uprisings. It was under these circumstances that the British thought that the British East India company could no longer govern the Indians, and that because of the violence the Indians were too uncivilized to govern themselves (Jinnah, “Speech to the Muslim League” and class notes).

It is essential to view both the violent start of the Indian Nationalist movement and the violent definitive end to the movement as events leading to nationalist identity because such incidents are vacant in Japanese nationalist history. Two modern wars that Japan engaged in after the Meiji Restoration (1850-1858) were the successful Sino-Japanese War (1895) and the successful Russo-Japanese War (1905). If one considers the Meiji restoration as the consummation of national identity, these two major conflicts of the new Japanese nation happened after the Japanese national identity was established. Thus the national identity had already formed when the conflicts happened, and these wars do not represent a nationalist movement marred by violence. Perhaps the Japanese wars could not have been initiated and successfully managed without such a unified national identity (class notes).

Gandhi and Fukuzawa Yukichi's respective stances show how violence marks the difference between the two movements. For India, Gandhi’s movement was summed up in the word “satygraha,” or nonviolence. Passive resistance was integral to Gandhi's philosophy, whereupon he urged protesting laws by “personal suffering” and “sacrifice of self.” These tactics mean to disobey laws and accept consequences without violence. Had every Indian known not to use force or violence, then Gandhi would not have to advocate such philosophy in his writings. The British government was not Gandhi's target audience, and so Gandhi was specifically telling the Indians to passively resist, and practice non-violence (The article that Gandhi originally printed the article in was censured by the British government). Thus, we may conclude that violence was enough of an issue that Gandhi would advocate its opposite (Gandhi, “Hindi Swaraj”).

The Indian nationalist movement contrasts markedly with Fukuzawa in the Japanese movement, which did not have the same acknowledged factor of violence in his work. Fukuzawa argued for a break from China and Korea, considering them to be backward; but this act was not passive resistance because it was more more like letting go of Asia. The break did not have to be peaceful because it was a formation of identity based on the conflict of traditions and not physical friction. Fukuzawa did not seem to take the matter to be of urgent seriousness when he wrote that Japan's position next to China “is not different from the case of a righteous man living in a neighborhood known for foolishness.” He said, “What must we do today? We do not have time to wait for the enlightenment of our neighbors [China and Korea] so that we can work together toward the development of Asia. It is better for us to leave the ranks of Asian nations and cast our lot with civilized nations of the West” (Fukuzawa, Good-bye to Asia). Violence wasn't enough of an issue to mention, and Fukuzawa simply advocated education programs in order to make a clean break from China and Korea.

Gender issues further solidify the theme of greater violence in the Indian movement compared to the Japanese movement. In the case of Japan, there was a massive migration of women from the country farms to the cities, such as Nagasaki. This parallels the exodus of thousands of Hindu women escaping Pakistan after the announcement of the partition in 1947. This is the end of the similarities, however, because Japanese women had hopes of better lives as they had left their brutal farms. The Hindu women abused during their exodus were not as fortunate, as they were subjected to violent antagonism from Muslim populations (Mikiso Hane, Peasants, Rebels, and Outcastes and R. Menon and K. Bhasin, Borders and Boundaries: Women in India’s Partition, with class notes).



T.A.'s grade & notes

Picture of Kapil Vasudev
Kapil Vasudev
Wednesday, 14 October 2009, 01:40 PM

Grade: 70.00 / 100.00
Please submit the honor statement by email in order to receive credit for this assignment.

Please see the following comments for your midterm essay. Feel free to contact me with any questions you may have. Before doing so, please review the "Approaches to learning and grading" page in the Course Information section of the website.

Introduction
Introduction attempts to provide some key points of discussion that will be later addressed, but is unclearly written. Thesis is adequate in form, if not substance.

Use of Evidence
Makes use of the readings, though the entire argument seems to be based off a misreading of Fukuzawa and drawing strange conclusions from the comparison of Fukuzawa to Gandhi. Draws simplistic and inaccurate conclusions from Hane and Menon/Bhasin readings. Does not utilize India (1) material at all.

Original Ideas and Command of Historical Context
Does not discuss how the Meiji Restoration created Japanese national identity; simply states that it did. Does not consider the various Japanese wars as part of the development of national identity or indicative of anything regarding the nature of that development. Glosses over the development in Jinnah's decision to advocate two-nations. Does not analyze role of women in creation of nationalism. Does not discuss issue of tradition vs. modernity. DRA adds: Jake, I'm sorry, but this essay makes no sense at all. Please see me.

Writing Mechanics
Does not have a conclusion. Makes some poor word choices (vacant rather than absent or missing). Some awkward sentences and phrases.