Social Science (087) — AI-generated practice question

Rich Peasants: Wealthy peasant communities like the Patidars of Gujarat and Jats of UP enthusiastically joined the Civil Disobedience Movement because falling prices during trade depression wiped out their cash income, making it impossible to pay colonial revenue demands. For them, swaraj meant reduction of revenue rates. However, when the movement was called off in 1931 without revenue revision, they felt deeply betrayed. When the movement relaunched in 1932, many refused to participate.

Industrial Workers: Workers largely stayed aloof from the movement. As industrialists drew closer to the Congress, workers distanced themselves. The Congress refused to include workers' demands — like better wages and conditions — fearing this would alienate industrialists. Some workers selectively participated (e.g., Nagpur region, Chotanagpur tin mine workers), but they were not actively mobilised.

Limitations Revealed: These differences exposed a fundamental contradiction in Congress strategy — it tried to unite industrialists and workers, rich peasants and poor tenants simultaneously. By prioritising anti-imperial unity, it suppressed class-based grievances, causing participation to remain incomplete and conditional rather than sustained.

Source: How Participants saw the Movement, Chapter 2

---

• Examiners expect both groups addressed separately with specific reasons, then a concluding analytical point on Congress's limitations.
• Key facts to include: Patidars/Jats, trade depression, revenue demand (rich peasants); workers staying aloof, Congress protecting industrialist interests (workers).
• The "limitation" point earns analysis marks — show the contradiction in Congress's balancing act.
• Avoid padding; stick to cause → action → outcome for each group.