AI-generated practice question — model-generated for extra practice, not a previous-year CBSE board question.
The Congress's reasoning was partially justified but ultimately flawed.
Evidence supporting the fear: Business groups like Purshottamdas Thakurdas and G. D. Birla actively supported the Civil Disobedience Movement — giving financial assistance, refusing to buy or sell imported goods, and forming bodies like FICCI (1927). They saw swaraj as freedom from colonial trade restrictions. Including workers' demands could have threatened industrialists and caused them to withdraw this crucial support.
However, the reasoning was not fully justified: Business groups were already losing enthusiasm after the Round Table Conference failure. They grew worried about militant activities, business disruption, and growing socialist influence in Congress — factors unrelated to workers' demands. Their support was never unconditional.
Furthermore, by excluding workers' demands, Congress alienated a large section of the population, meaning the "unity" it preserved was narrow and incomplete. Workers participated only in limited ways and in select regions like Nagpur.
Thus, Congress prioritised elite unity over genuine mass unity, which weakened rather than strengthened the movement in the long run.
Source: Chapter 2, Section 3.2 – How Participants saw the Movement
---
Examiners look for: (1) a clear stand on whether the reasoning was justified, (2) specific evidence from business groups' behaviour (FICCI, Birla, financial help, boycott of imports), and (3) a counter-argument showing the limitations of Congress's logic. Avoid vague generalisations — name the industrialists and organisations mentioned in the textbook. The conclusion should tie back to the question about "anti-imperial unity."