From Swadeshi To Swaraj: Nation, Economy, Territory in Colonial South Asia, 1870 To 1907

Society for Comparative Studies in Society and History
From Swadeshi to Swaraj: Nation, Economy, Territory in Colonial South Asia, 1870 to 1907 Author(s): Manu Goswami Source: Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 40, No. 4 (Oct., 1998), pp. 609-636 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/179304 . Accessed: 17/04/2013 16:27
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Cambridge University Press and Society for Comparative Studies in Society and History are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Comparative Studies in Society and History.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 202.41.10.30 on Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:27:10 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
From Swadeshito Swaraj:Nation, in Colonial Economy,Territory SouthAsia, 1870 to 1907

MANU GOSWAMI Universityof Chicago
THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF NATIONALISM
Our present historical moment is markedby a complex interlockingbetween of nationalisms.Contemporary processes of globalizationandthe proliferation of have attenuated the institutional processes globalization capacitiesof nationstates to regulate their national economies1 and challenged the spatial correspondence between nation, state, economy, culture, and people that has long defined the nation-state.2The inherited hyphenization of nation and state, forged duringthe late-nineteenth century,now appears"less as an icon of conthan an index of The increasingvisibility of the strains disjuncture."3 juncture in the union between nation and state has been matchedby a remarkable burst in analysesof nationalismandthe nation-state. In particular, the territorial bases of nationhoodhas emergedas a majortheme in studiesof nationalism.This essay seeks to extend and broadenthis line of enquirythroughan analysis of the historicalproductionof a nationalspace and economy in late nineteenthcentuof conceptionsof econry colonial India.My discussion of the nationalization omy and territoryat once engages with and departsfrom received approaches to nationalterritory. The importanceof territorial boundariesin the formationof nationalismand the nation-statehas long been recognizedin the vast literature on nationalism.4
This essay owes a great deal to the critical reflections of ArjunAppadurai,Neil Brenner,Moishe Postone andWilliamH. Sewell. I would also like to thankDipesh Chakrabarty, David Laitin,Gary with characteristic Herrigeland SusanneRudolphwho readthis manuscript acuityandinsight.The editorsof CSSH andtwo anonymousreviewersprovidedmanyhelpfulcommentsand suggestions. A version of this paperwas presentedat the CASPIC-MacArthur conferenceheld at the University of Chicago, on Nov 5-6, 1996. This researchwas madepossible by a CASPIC-MacArthur grant for 1995-96. 1 See Harvey (1989), Held (1990, 1995), Hirsch (1995), Sassen (1991, 1996). 2 See Agnew (1994), Appadurai(1996, 1997), Gupta and Ferguson (1992), Malkii (1992), Robertson(1992). 3 Appadurai(1996:39). 4 Hobsbawm(1990), Gellner (1983, 1994), Nair (1977), Seton-Watson(1977), Smith (1979). 0010-4175/98/4293-2403 $9.50 ? 1998Societyfor Comparative Studyof SocietyandHistory 609
6IO
MANU GOSWAMI
Recent studies of nationalismhave especially emphasizedthe territoriality of nationalimaginings.It is argued,for instance,thatthe formationof nationalism entails the organizationof political and culturalidentitieson a nationalterritorial scale.5 Relatedto this, many authorshave stressedthe role of cartographic in forgingan identitybetweennationand of nationalboundaries representations in and the various which nationalboundarieshelp establish difpeople ways ferencefromwithoutandidentitywithinan imaginednationalcommunity.6 Dein and these differences orientation common to conceptual spite interpretation, diverse analyses of nationalismis a focus on the discursiveeffects and meanof the These works have deepened our understanding ing of nationalterritory. which a establish an between identity practices help particular representational place and people. However,I shall suggest thatthis approachto nationalterritorialityis characterized by two significantdeficiencies. of nationalism have reflected a one-sided focus on the circuFirst, analyses of nationlation and effects of representations (such as maps and print-media) al territory. This schemaignores the social processes throughwhich a spatially bounded,self-enclosed nationalwhole is constituted.It also neglects the wider as social contentof nationalterritoriality. By conceptualizingnationalterritory a discursive formation,recent works leave aside the questionof how and why between peonationalistmovementsroutinelyclaim a spatialcorrespondence culture. This shall this set of issues and ple, economy, essay explore througha notions of a naon the constitution of focus late-nineteenth-century specific tional economy and territoryin colonial India. Througha detailed analysis of the nationalist argumentagainst colonialism and the swadeshi (indigenous movement,I shall directattentionto the progressivenaturalizamanufactures) I shall stressboth the comtion of the tie amongnation,economy,andterritory. of this and its dimensions process particularisticmanifestationsin parative colonial India. have failed to sitSecond, andmost crucially,studiesof nationalterritoriality uate the formationof particular nationalspaces withinthe historicalgeography of capitalistexpansion and the consolidationof the inter-statesystem. Lost in flows and relations this perspectiveis a recognitionof the ways transnational This neglect, which has been aptshape the formationof nationalterritoriality. ly describedas "methodologicalnationalism",is part and parcel of a broader centricbias withinthe social sciences.7Recentworksby social thenation-state orists have argued that the conflation of nation-stateand society is an entrenchedlegacy of late-nineteenth-century sociological and philosophicalparadigms.8According to these works, social-scientific analyses have tended to
5 Mann (1984, 1993), Sahlins (1978), Weber(1976). 6 Anderson(1991), Malkii (1992), Winichakul(1994). 7 Smith (1979:91) employs the termmethodologicalnationalismto referto widely held national territorial definitionsof society. 8 Agnew (1994), Amasson (1990), Giddens(1990), Taylor(1994), Wallerstein(1991).
SWADESHI
TO SWARAJ
IN COLONIAL
SOUTH
ASIA
6ii
for granttakethe existence of a spatiallyboundednationalsociety andterritory ed and have focused on institutionsand social relationsinternalto that society. In order to avoid the trap of "methodologicalnationalism,"studies of nacontext within and against which tionalism need to examine the transnational nationalisms were constituted. This methodnational and particular spaces for has force analyses of late-nineteenth-century particular ological injunction and colonial territorial nationalismthatwere forged in an era of unprecedented This that the historical selfessay suggests emergence, capitalist expansion. and trajectory of institutionalnationalismin colonial Indiawas understanding, inseparablytied to colonial spatialpracticesand capitalistexpansion. Specifically, I argue that the first sustained articulationsof nationalismin colonial delimitedeconomic SouthAsia crystallizedaroundthe notion of a territorially collective, a national economy duringthe 1870s and 1880s. I stress the close links between the colonial productionof India as a spatially delimited entity andthe formationof nationalimaginingsof Indiaas a nationaleconomic space. The notion of a spatially determinatenationaleconomy representedthe point of departurefor nationalistcritiquesof colonialism. It laid the foundationfor the nationalistprojectof developmentandshapedthe self-definitionof the postcolonial developmental state. Nationalists yoked together the demand for swaraj (self-rule, independence)with the developmentalideology of swadeshi This welding of swadeshiand swarajembodiedthe (indigenousmanufactures). contradictorycharacterof nationalism.On the one hand, nationalismsought in the universalistpromiseof nationaldevelopment.On the other participation hand, it simultaneously expressed unease with modernity in a territorially In what follows, I shall highlightthe ways this groundednativistparticularism. orientationpermeatedthe nationalistproject. contradictory This essay is organizedas follows. The first section briefly lays out the broad field within and against which anti-colonialnationalhistorical-geographical ism emerged. I shall identify and describe the ways in which colonial spatial practicesengenderednationalistimaginingsof Indiaas a boundednationaland economic space.The second section elaboratesthe nationalistargument against colonialism with referenceto the emergentconceptionof a territorially delimited nationaleconomy. For the purposesof this essay, I shall draw selectively upon exemplarynationalistwritings and practicesfrom the period from 1870 to 1907. The concluding section examines the dynamic interchangebetween the nationalist demand for swaraj and the swadeshi movement, paying particularattentionto the spatialpresuppositions of nationaldevelopmentalideology.
SPATIALIZATION TO NATIONAL AND SPACE NATIONALIZATION: FROM COLONIAL
The nationalistmovementdid not containwithinitself the principleof its emergence and organization.Specifically, nationalistimaginings of India as a spa-
612
MANU GOSWAMI
tially delimitednationaleconomic space emergedat the precisehistoricaljuncture after 1858 in which the colonial state and an increasinglyglobalized, imperialeconomy were simultaneouslyconsolidated.I shallbrieflydiscuss below the ways in which colonial socio-spatialpracticesspawnednationalistimaginand culture. ings of economy, territory, the last third of the nineteenthcentury,the institutionalstructureof During the colonial statewas expandedon an unprecedented scale. The post-1858 colonial state was the architectof distinctivelymodem forms of social, economic, and territorialclosure.9The progressive territorial"encaging"of social relations within a geographically delimited state structurewas effected in and These includedthe constitutionandregulation througha myriadof practices.10 of a centralizedmonetarysystem; the institutionof territoriallyuniform and standard taxation,tariffand custom policies; the institutionof a massive infrastructural web of railways and communicationtechnologies;the classification andhierarchical units;the developmentof orderingof administrative-territorial census and survey agencies that systematically surveyed, mapped and measuredboth land andpeople; the productionof built environmentsand architectural forms that made visible the presence of the colonial state; and complex bureaucracies orientedtowardsthe collection and assessmentof land revenue. Territorial consolidationinvolved the monopolizationof powers of rule by a single, centralauthorityand the creationof an externallyboundedeconomic, juridical,andpoliticalspace.The deepeningof the structural powersof the state was integrallylinked to broadershifts in the global, imperialeconomy. There were determinate links betweenthe post-1858 restructuring of the colonial state and the acceleratedintegrationof colonial SouthAsia into the world economy dominatedby metropolitan Britishcapital. Withinthe geographicterrain thatwould laterbecome India,the colonial production of space12entailedpracticesthatboth bound indigenoussociety within a territorialized and universalizedsocial relations.On the one particularity hand, there was an unprecedentedterritorialcentralizationof social relations with the formationof, for instance,an internallyunifiedmarket,a spatiallycentralizedmonetarysystem, and an integratedadministrative structure.'3In this forms emerged.These includedthe context, historicallynovel representational socio-encyclopedic annualMoral and MaterialProgressreportspublishedby the Indiaoffice in London;colonial departmental recordsthatcontainedmonth9 The rebellion of 1857-58 markeda violent interruption in colonial history. Colonial India of IndiaAct passedfrom the controlof the East IndiaCompanyto the crown.Withthe Government and Victoria'sproclamation of 1858, "India" was formallyincorporated into the Britishempire. 10 The term "encaging"is derivedfrom Mann (1993:61). 1 Bagchi (1972,1976, 1982), Bose (1990), Farnie (1979), Chaudhari(1968, 1978), de Cecco (1974), Habib(1985), Thorner(1950,1962), Latham(1978), Lehmann(1965), Saul (1960), Washbrook (1990). 12 See Lefebvre (1974-91) for the term "production of space." For excellent discussions of Lefebvre'swork, see Brenner(1997), Harvey(1989). 13 Bagchi (1976), Hurd(1975, 1983).
SWADESHI
TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA
613
ly statistics on population,prices, propertyvalues, bank assets, circulationof money,industrialoutput,railwaytraffic,importsandexportson a local, provincial and all-Indiabasis; and statisticsand census reportsbased spatiallyon the territorialreach of the colonial state within India.'4 These representational forms at once expressed and helped shape emergentconceptionsof a bounded territorial whole. On the other hand, the boundedeconomic and territorial whole of colonial India was insertedwithin the deterritorializing of the world market. dynamic As social historianshave shown, indigenous social groups were incorporated into the universalizedsocial relationsentailedin commodityproductionfor the world market.15 The productionof a territorially boundedeconomic space was embeddedwithin the global division of labourcenteredin emergentmetropolitan Britain. The spatial reorganizationof productionwas manifest, for inof colonial SouthAsia into a territorial unit for the stance,in the transformation of raw materials oil wheat, seeds, cotton, (tea, production jute, opium) and as a massive captive marketfor British manufactures. the mid-nineteenthcenBy colonial South Asia became the for British cotton market tury, single largest In it absorbed 31 the close of the nineteenthcen1860, and, goods. percent by of 50 Lancashire cotton textiles.16 tury percent Colonial socio-spatial restructuring was part of the late-nineteenth-century formationof a global space. The productionof a global space was rootedin the geographicalwidening and deepening of the world market,colonial territorial expansion, the institutionof communicationand infrastructural technologies, and the consolidationof an inter-statesystem. Henri Lefebvre has powerfully characterized the specific form of this global space as at once "global,hierarThis crucial insight about the complex and multichical, and fragmented."17 form characterof global space has substantialimplicationsfor understanding the formation and changing relations between colonial, national, and global space. During the late nineteenthcentury,globalizationand nationalistparticularization proceededin tandem;it was an age simultaneouslyof high imperialism and nationalism.18 Colonial territorial expansionandthe widening of capitalist relationstransformed the world in powerfullyenduringways. On the one hand, it was the source of unprecedented homogenization:an emergentworld marand communicationtechnologies ket, an interlinkednetworkof infrastructural
14 The colonial regimen of numbersand recordsis a growing focus of the revisionisthistoriographyof this period. See Appadurai(1993), Cohn (1990), Ludden(1993,1995), Pant (1987). 15 See Amin (1982), Bose (1993), Chakrabarty (1989), Haretty (1977), Guha (1963, 1985), Mukherjee(1985), Prakash(1990). 16 Chapman (1972, 52). Also see Chaudhari(1968), Farie (1979), Haretty (1972), Jenks (1963). 17 Lefebvre (1978 [1991]:282). 18 See Arrighi (1994), Hobsbawm (1989), Magdoff (1978), Mann (1993), Wallerstein(1972), Wolf (1982). By 1878, Europeannation-statesclaimed 67 percentof the world territory; by 1914, this figure had risen to 85 percent.See Magdoff (1978:35).
614
MANU
GOSWAMI
and socioeconomic and culturalinterconnectedness. On the other hand, there was a complementary trendtowardsfragmentation: the formationof spatially boundedstates,the rise of nationaliststruggleswithinmetropolitan Europeand its colonies and the intensificationof uneven geographicaldevelopment.The constitutionof mutuallyexclusive, spatiallyenclosed stateswas consubstantial with the transnationalization of social relations. It was duringthis period that the contradictionsof colonial versus national space became increasingly evident. The consolidation of the inter-state system as a nation-statesystem, the generalizationof the doctrine of selfand the progressivenaturalization of the tie between nationand determination, state dynamicallyreconfiguredthe discursive terrainof national imaginings. The demandfor an autonomouseconomy, culture,history,and the like could no longer be thoughtof, much less realized, outside the demandfor national self-determination. Nationalismshad to confronteitherexisting statestructures and seek their transformation or aspire to their own sovereign nationalstates. In eitherinstance,the spatialcorrespondence between a people, economy, culand state constituted the institutionalized ideal and horizon for ture, territory, In of collective the case struggle. specific late-nineteenth-century legitimate in not mereentaileda transformation SouthAsia, colonial spatialrestructuring the of identities and economic conditions but formation categorical conceply tions of territory, economy, and culture.The deepening of the infrastructural the field of subjecand territorial capacities of the colonial state transformed new and it offered because resources, practices, disciplines for the forgtivity colonial of a novel self. The of production space-the constitution political ing of rigidly markedexternaland internalboundaries,the formationof a territoriandinally definedinternalmarket,andthe institutionof novel communication frastructuraltechnologies-made possible emergent territoriallygrounded conceptionsof a nationaleconomy, culture,and identity.The territorialization of a circumscribed of social relationsfosteredthe appearance space wherein a or dwelt. The an a autochthonous nationality people, homogenouscollectivity, consolidationof the colonial state at once congealed colonial power territorial The nationalistcritique and triggeredan unintended process of nationalization. of colonialism,which I shall elaboratebelow, had its experientialbasis in colonial socio-spatialpractices.
THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF NATIONHOOD,
1870s-1880s
expansionof the coloDuringthe periodfrom 1850 to 1860, the infrastructural nial state and its increasinglyinvasive thrusthad met with a growing surge of and associationsthatopposed colonial sociocriticalpetitions,demonstrations spatialpractices.There were protestsagainst excessive land revenue charges, the recurrenceof famines, regressive urbanand municipaltaxation,discrimicommodities,and the controversialmorphology natorytariffsfor British-made of public projectssuch as railwaysthatwere orientedtowardsthe needs of the
SWADESHI
TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA
615
Britishimperialeconomy.19But these efforts were localized and disparate,unhitched to a largernationalistmovement. The broadcontoursof whatwas to remainthe dominantnationalistargument againstcolonialism emergedduringthe 1870s and 1880s. It was drivenby the claim of a common, territoriallydefined economic collective. Within institutional nationalism,the canonicalbearersof the emergentpolitical economy of nationhoodwere membersof a middle-class intelligentsia,most notablyDadDutt (1848-1909) andMahadev abhaiNaoroji(1825-1917), RomeshChunder and emGovind Ranade (1842-1901).20 Despite differencesin interpretation of shared a common nationalists these object analysis. They foearly phases, of the nation,its territorial cused on the accelerated"impoverishment" integration within a global world-systemdominatedby Britishcapital;andthey sought colonial to specify analyticallyand historicize the productionof a "dependent referred to the structural loThis first term, employedby Ranade, economy."21 cation of colonial India in the emergentglobal division of labor.India, he argued, had been transformedinto a "plantation,growing raw produce to be shippedby BritishAgents in Britishships, to be workedinto Fabricsby British skill andcapital,and to be re-exportedto the Dependencyby Britishmerchants to theircorresponding Britishfirms."22 Nationalistsragedagainstthe economic "drain" of the nation(as elaboratedby Naoroji)and colonial economic pracYet and "deindustrialization" tices of "ruralization" (as analyzedby Ranade).23 of of and thus were also convinced the universalist they promise development began the quest for a historicalaccountof the currentpredicament. Common to the work of these early nationalistswas a critique of the abrefrainwas stractionand ahistoricismof classical economic theory.A recurrent the incommensurabilityof extant economic theories and the socioeconomic condition of India. As a colonial economy, India was an historically distinct configurationwhere, as DadabhaiNaoroji argued,the "so-callednaturallaws of economy"were not operative.24In fact, Indiaexemplified the "pitilessperversion of economic laws by the bleeding to which it is subjected."25 By directingattentionto the productionof a colonial economy,Ranadedenaturalized the notion of a territorial division of labor:"Theorthodoxeconomists assign to the backwardtorridregions of Asia the duty of producingraw materialsand claim, for the advancedEuropeantemperatezone countries,the work of transport and manufactures,as a division of labor in production,which is fraught with the highest advantageto all andis, we aretold, a providentialdispensation Nationalistsevaluatedthe postuagainstwhich it would be foolish to rebel."26
19 See Mehrotra(1971). 20 Fordetailed (1968), Chandra (1972), descriptivehistoriesof these nationalists,see Ambirajan Dasgupta(1993), Ganguli (1977), Singh (1975), Spengler(1971), Mukherjee(1972). 21 Naoroji (1871 [1962]:192), Ranade(1880-1990:84). 22 Ranade(1893 [1990]:411). 23 Naoroji (1871 [1962]); Ranade(1892 [1990]:340).
24
Ibid., 191.
25 Ibid.
26 Ranade (1896:79-80).
616
MANU GOSWAMI
lates of classical economic theory with reference to colonial policies and stressed the gap between theory and practice.According to Ranade, the disjunctureof theory and practiceobtained"notin one, but all points, not in one hisplace or country,but all over the world, ... [it] distinguishescontemporary The doctrine of free for was identified as a trade, instance, self-serving tory."27 modality of British imperial dominationthat glossed over the steeply hierarof the imperialdivision of labor.The persistentlymercantilist chical structure of the were seen as a practicalrefutationof free tradeand metropolitan policies the tenorof this broadernalaissez-faireideologies.28Lala Murlidhar captured tionalist critiquein his 1891 addressto the IndianNational Congress (the institutionalform of nationalism): whichflooded India withEnglish-made I knowthatit waspure goods,and philanthropy if slowly,killedouteveryindigenous which,to faindustry-pure philanthropy surely, of revenue whichthe crores theimport duties andflungawaythree cilitate this,repealed rich paid, and to balancethis wickedsacrificeraisedthe Salt tax, whichthe poor fairplaybetween drains us.... FreeTrade, of freetrade nations, pay... .thephantasm India canthere be between Whatfairplayin trade howI hatethesham! impoverished withhighecoit is all in accordance ....No doubt andthebloated England? capitalist remember nomicscience,but,my friends, this-this, too, is starving yourbrethren.29 of classical economic theory,nationalistssoughta conAgainstthe abstractions ceptual frameworkthat was at once explicitly historicistand nationalist.They summonedthe analyticalandnormativecategoriesof a specificallynationaldevelopmentalistmodel to groundtheircritiqueof colonial rule and classical political economy.In this regard,they were, I shall suggest below, partof a broadformation. er transnational to note thatthe conceptualdiscovery of an internallydynamIt is important ic, spatiallyboundednationaleconomy was a broadernineteenth-century pheof the economy as a distinctsphereof sonomenon.The conceptualelaboration cial relations had begun during the eighteenth-centuryEnlightenment.As Susan Buck-Morssargues,this endeavorwas inseparablefrom the emergence of capitalism:"Theeconomy, when it was discovered, was alreadycapitalist, The concepso the descriptionof one entailed the descriptionof the other."30 tion of the economy as an autonomoussphereimbuedclassical economic theory. Here I want to directattentionto one crucialshift in the historyof the conceptual category of the economy. During the late nineteenth century, the The conception of the economy acquireda highly specific spatial referent.31
27 Ranade(1892 [1990]:326). 28 For an elaboration thatcolonial SouthAsia markedthe limits of the free trade of the argument and laissez-faire regime see Hobsbawm (1987:148), Gallagher and Robinson (1953), Taylor (1994:128), Haretty (1972). 29 IndianNationalCongressPapers,vol. 1 (1885-1900), 121, NationalArchivesof India[Hereafter,NAI]. 30 Buck-Morss(1995:439). Also see Polanyi (1957:11-30). 31 Agnew (1994:66-67), Bloom (1941), Mann (1993:299), Neff (1990:20-25).
SWADESHI TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA
617
economy was deemed coincidentwith the spatialboundariesof the modem territorial state. Friedrich List's work, Das Nationale System der Politischen Oekonomie(1841) exemplified the rise of historicistand nationalistschools of This workbecame a foundational text for anti-colonialnapolitical economy.32 tionalistsin SouthAsia. List's theoreticalframeworkshapedthe work of M. G. Ranade (1842 [1901]), G. V. Gokhale (1866 [1915]), and G. V. Joshi (1851 [1911]), as well as later works by the prominentswadeshi leaders and academics Benoy KumarSarkar(1887 [1949]) and Radhakamal Mukherjee(1889 [1968]). Nationalistsmobilized List's notion of a nationaleconomy as an ideal againstwhich they evaluatedthe hierarchiesof the imperialdivision of labor andcolonial economic practices.List's project,drivenby a commitmentto German nationalunification, was a response to the economic and political chalof lenge posed by Britain'sworld hegemony.In this respect,his reformulation classical political economy was anchoredin political concerns and structural conditionsthatwere remarkably similarto those of nationalistswithin colonial SouthAsia. List's work markeda historicallysignificantdeparture from the core spatial of classical economic Classical assumptions paradigms. politicaleconomy conceived the division of laborand marketsas abstractconfigurations with no specific spatial extension. In contrast, the central organizing category of List's framework was the putatively self-enclosed nation. The spatially bounded nationwas regardedas the sovereignsubjectof economic development.List indicted classical economic theory for its "rootless (bodenlosem) cosmopolitanism"and its exclusive focus on denationalized, profitmaximizingindividuals.33List's analyticalstrategywas one of unmasking: The regime of free trade was dismissed as a directexpressionof Britishnationaleconomic interest;and classical economic theory's stress on cosmopolitanismwas regardedas a ploy to retainBritain'seconomic and imperialhegemony.Classical economic theory, in List's view, ignoredthe fact that "betweeneach individualand entirehumanity stands the Nation".34 According to List, the "economy of the people (Volksoekonomie)" developed into the nationaleconomy (Nationaloekonomie) under specific historical-geographicalconditions.35At a certain historical threshold,which is conceived in both descriptiveand normativeterms,the Nationaloekonomie becomes spatially isomorphic with the Volksoekonomie.36 This "trueconceptionandreal character of Nationaloekonomie had eluded theorists because "for the distinct and definite term Nation men had everywhere substitutedthe general and vague term for society (Gesellschaft). "37 The na32 List (1841 [1910]) and the English translationList (1841[1910]). Also see Sporzluk'sanalysis (1988)of List and Marx. 33 List (1841 [1966]:174). For the precise Germanterms, see List (1841 [1910]:267). 34 Ibid. The Germanterms are from List (1841 [1910]:268). 35 Ibid., 196. The Germanterms are from List (1841 [1910]:290). 36 Ibid. 37 Ibid, 195. The Germantermsare from List (1841 [1910]:291).
6I8
MANU GOSWAMI
tion was a particular form of the broadertermfor socihistorical-geographical ety. Accordingto this formulation,the specificity of the nation lay in the spatial isomorphismbetween the nation and nationaleconomy. Both the posited territorial isomorphismof economy and nationand the fusion of the territorial state with capitalbecame defining themes of anti-colonialnationalism.38 List's developmentalschema held up a normativevision of a self-sufficient nationaleconomy protectedby tariffsand custombarriers from the world market. His reformulation of the core spatialassumptions of classical economic theof the modernterritorial state.The ory powerfullyexpresses the naturalization idea that society was spatially bounded within particularstate structuresassumed a self-evident status in late-nineteenth-century sociological and philoin as well as nationalist discourse.39In the late sophical paradigms emergent nineteenthcentury,the modernvision of the social world as constitutedby differentiatedspheres (culture/economy/politics)underwenta novel process of territorialization. This imaginationof the social world was increasinglynaturalized and nationalized. The constitution of a territorialstate-centeredconception of society and economy was groundedhistoricallyin the tensionbetweenthe territorialization of social relations within sharplydelineated,mutuallyexclusive spatial units thrustof capitalexpansion.As noted earlier,the conand the deterritorializing stitutionof a global space was rooted in the formationof a world market;the consolidation of an inter-state system through inter-imperialrivalry; and a dense, interlockingnetwork of socioeconomic and culturalflows. Processes of global restructuring were paralleledby a reciprocalexpansion of struggles to constitute autonomousnational societies and economies. Territorialstates such as Germany,Italy,Japan,the United States, and Russia, when confronted with the world-territorial and economic hegemony of imperialBritain,adopted roughly in tandem neo-mercantiliststrategies towards securing a stateprotected,nationaleconomic space.40The growing similarityduringthe second half of the nineteenth century between state institutional structures bases the inter-statesystem underscores the historicalandstructural throughout of this process.4' The profoundresonanceof List's developmentalideology in a range of European-metropolitan, peripheral42 (Japan, China, Korea) and colonial (SouthAsia) contexts needs to be situatedwithinthe global force field of the late-nineteenth-century era. In colonial India, nationalistsattemptedto navigate between what they in38 See Marx's (1844-45 [1975]:265-90) critiqueof List's nation-statecentrism. 39 Recent works have drawnattentionto the links between the developmentof the social sci-
ences and the nation-statecentrismof dominantsociological theories. See Arasson (1990), Agnew (1994), Giddens(1990), Wallerstein(1991). 40 See Arrighi(1994), Mann (1993), Tilly (1975, 1990), Hobsbawm(1989, 1990), Wallerstein (1972). 41 See Hobsbawm (1989), Mann (1993), Tilly (1975, 1990). 42 See Henderson (1983:26) for the influence of List in Japanand China.
SWADESHI
TO SWARAJ
IN COLONIAL
SOUTH
ASIA
619
dicted as the abstractionof classical political economy and the excessive materialismof colonial economic policies. Ranade,the chief exponentof List, announced this broadproblematicin his influentialessay entitled,Indian Political Economy.43 This task requireda frameworkthat graspedthe specificity of a "dependentcolonial economy" and inscribedat its conceptualcore the universal principleof nationality.Classical economic theory had, he argued,sysIts tematically privileged "individualinterests":It was too "economistic."44 centralassumptionof self-interested,disembodiedmonads"oughtto give way or at least be subordinated to the higher interestsand aspirations(of a people) if political economy is to be anythingmore than schoolmen's metaphysics."45 How, accordingto Ranade,was the individualismof classical economic theoindividualinterestshad to be subsumedand ry to be breached?Particularistic, rationalizedwith referenceto the largernationalwhole or the nation as general interest.The projectof bringingback the excised normativedimensionwithin classical economic theory took the form of an idealizing, nationalistpolitical economy. Akin to List, Ranade absolutized the nation as the singular subject-objectof political economy: "Individualinterests are not the center roundwhich the Theory should revolve ... the true center is the Body Politic of which that Individualis a member,and that Collective Defense and WellBeing, Social Educationand Discipline ... must be the center,if the Theoryis not to be merely Utopian."46 Accordingto this formulation,political economy should be renderedpragmatic.It ought to explicitly enable the universalfunction of nationaldevelopment.A proclamation of the IndianNationalCongress stated that "the industrialmovement is flowing deep, fraught with national ideals....Our industriesneed protection.But this governmentwill not grant them protection ... the time has come when the scatterednational impulses must be focused into an organicand organizedwhole for the promotionof our industries."47 The nationalistrethinkingof classical economic theorywas driven by the structuring motif of collective nationalownership.The nationaleconomy was conceived as the collective sacredpropertyof the imagined national community. Emblematicof this spatializedconceptionof a common economic collective was DadabhaiNaoroji'squasi-mercantilist formulationthatthe nationwas being drained.In 1871, Naorojiprovidedthe first estimatesof India'snationalincome.48His calculationswere based in parton an extendedcritiqueof official statisticalrecords(particularly the annualMoralandMaterialProgressreports). His figures tore apartofficial claims of materialprogressin an era beset with recurrent,devastating famines (from the late 1860s to 1900 the toll from famines was approximately15 million),49an exponentialrise in ruralindebt46 Ranade(1893 [1990]:336).
48
43 Ranade(1893 [1990]:322-50).
44 Ibid., 337.
45 Ranade(1881 [1990]:149-50).
47 IndianNationalCongress Papers,vol. 11 (1902), 44-45, NAI. Naoroji (1871 [1962]:283). 49 These calculationswere first done by Dutt (1900:188).
620
MANU GOSWAMI
edness, widening regional disparities, and "deepening impoverishment."50 Naoroji'sprotracted quarrelwith the colonial regime over the accuracyof official statisticsled him to develop and empiricallyresearchhis theory of the annual "bleedingdrain"of the nation. He estimatedthat the annualdrainof the nationalincome approximated 2,000 million pounds sterling. exAccordingto Naoroji,the drainof wealth to Britainincludedunrequited of coloremittances the officially publishedexport surpluses, ports thatbelied nial official salariesto Englandand the cost of the militaryestablishment,the debt incurredon capitalinvestmentsin public works, and the purchaseof manufacturesin Britain.51 Franklyregardedwithincolonial discourseas the cost of these annual"homecharges"soaredfrom 1875 to 1885 "civilizedgovernment," the with precipitousdropin world silverprices,the slumpof agricultural prices, and devastatingfamines.52The scale of the perverselynamed"homecharges" rule... was simply phenomenal.As GiovanniArrighinotes, "No territorialist ever beforeforciblyextractedin so shorta time so muchtribute-in laborpowresources,andin meansof payment-as the Britishstatedid in the er, in natural in the course of the late nineteenthcentury."53 Indiansub-continent Duringthe first thirteenyears of the colonial state'sformalassumptionof rule in 1858, accumulatedrevenueincreasedby 33 million to 55 million pounds a year, while the deficits from 1866 to 1870 alone, grew to 11.5 million pounds.54 Although of the nineteenthcenturywas with the its largestdeficit duringthe last quarter United States(50 million) andcontinentalEurope(45 million), Britain'slargest This surpluswas basedon the exsurpluswas with colonialIndia(60 million).55 in of and the of goods required importation manufactured products port primary withandinfrastructural of the extensivecommunication the institution complex in colonial India. Naoroji's work sought to establish this structureof British dominationbased upon the recycling of extractedtributewhich was pivotal to financialand militaryhegemony.56 of metropolitan the reproduction of the drain presupposedthe existence of a spatially deNaoroji's analysis of a nationaleconomy took the limited nationaleconomy. His representations form of an elaboratestatisticalandhistoricalanalysisof the drainfrom 1787 to the collective-originmyth of nationalism.In 1865. This analysis underpinned his most famous work, Poverty and Un-BritishRule in India (1871), Naoroji remarked: the invade do notmerely lend,butwiththeircapital theythemselves English capitalists owncountrymen, eaten is mostly of thecapital Theproduce and,afupbytheir country. Thepeopleof Inanddividends. of profits terthat, awaytherestin theshape theycarry
50 Naoroji (1871 [1962]:190). 51 Ibid. 52 De Cecco (1972), Jenks (1963), Saul (1960). 53 Arrighi(1994:54). 54 Jenks (1963:224). 55 Ingham(1984:123). 56 The large surplusesin the colonial Indianbalanceof paymentswas the source of the expansion of Britain's global capital accumulationregime and London's ascendance as the center of world finance. See Arrighi (1994), Bairoch (1993), Barrat-Brown (1974:133-6), Crouzet (1982:370), de Cecco (1984:29-38), Ingham(1984), Saul (1960:188-94).
621
dia do not derive the same benefit... The guaranteedrailways not only ate up everything in this manner,but compelled India to make up the guaranteedinterestalso from her produce.57
Nationalistsarticulated colonialism's threatfrom the perspectiveof a territoriof the national ally delimited economic collective. The deterritorialization economy was seen as the product of foreign intrusion,the encroachmentof "alien"capital. In other words, the economy was understoodas having exceeded its propernational-spatial boundariesand had to be re-territorialized. The draintheorywas popularizedin vernacular texts and newspapers,circulated by British and continentalsocialists, and soon became one of the most famous indictmentsof colonialismof the late nineteenthcentury.58 KarlMarxobserved that:
"whatthey (the British) take from them (Indians)annually in the form of rents, dividends for railways, pensions of militaryand civil service men ... without any equivalent returnand quite apartfrom whatthey appropriate to themselves annuallywithinIndia-speaking only of the value of commodities the Indians have gratuitouslyand annuallyto send over to England-amounts to more than the total sum of the income of 60 million agricultural and industriallabourersof India. This is a bleeding process with a vengeance!"59
The politically radicalimplicationsof the draintheory were not lost on the colonial regime.Nationalistswere chided,in officially commissionedrebuttals, for attemptingto deploy frameworksinadequateto what they deemed as the official memorandum particularistic specificity of India.A turn-of-the-century addressedto the provincialheads of the colonial territorial stateexpresses continuedanxietyover the nationalistanalysisof the drain(long afterits initialforDimulation)andthe colonial regime'sinvestmentin nativistparticularization. rected against the "literatemiddle classes engaged in seditiously propagating nationalistviews," the memorandum opens with a referenceto their "intellectual activities in the domainof history and economics."60It claimed:
that lessons drawnfrom the history of the West are misappliedto the presentcircumstances of India;the broadgeneralizationsof Europeanwriterson political science are stated withoutmention of theirimportant reservations;and natives, left withoutproper in the case of Switzerlandand Italy guidance,are led to believe thatwhat is appropriate must necessarily be good for India. In the region of economics the most mischievous doctrineis that which is based on the theory that India is drainedof her wealth by her connexion with GreatBritain.This belief is honestly held by growing numbers... .The GovernorGeneralin Council believes thatthe prevalenceof this idea has done incalculable mischief, andit behooves every officer of Government, andin particular those conNaoroji (1871 [1962]:201-2). Naoroji correspondedand worked with British socialist leader W.H. Hyndmanfor twenty years as well as with KarlKautsky.See NaorojiPapers,PrivateCollection, NAI. For moredetailed analyses of the "draindebate,"see Dasgupta(1993), Ganguli (1965), Mclane (1963), Mukherjee (1972). 59 Marx (1962:304). Also see Marx's (1975) analysis of the drainin Capital, vol. 111, ch. 35. 60 Home Proceedings(PoliticalA), March 1908, 42, NAI.
58
57
622
MANU GOSWAMI
nectedwitheducation, in support of it andto seize to studythearguments putforward of exposing theirfallacy.61 uponeveryopportunity The popularization of the drainthesis indicates the way the notion of India as a national entity was rendered self-evident. Nationalists articulatedthe specifically modem projectof societal unification(the unificationof a culture, form of history and territory)with referenceto the spatial scale and structural the colonial state. Historicallynovel was both the consumingfocus with societal unificationandthe spatialscale of its articulation. The nationalistcriticism of colonialism hinged upon a territorialized conceptionof an Indianeconomy, cultureandhistory.At issue for nationalistswas the spatialnon-correspondence In this Listianbetween the imaginednation'spolitical andeconomic structure. and economy the coincidence state, among nation, inspired argument, spatial was viewed as a normativeideal. This framingof nationalism'scritiqueof coloandreconfigured nialism exemplifies the way colonial space was appropriated as nationalspace. The nationalistclaim of a unifiedand spatiallydelimitedculture,history,and economy was also a self-conscious challenge to the colonial thesis of the "impossibility of India."This thesis maintainedthat the heterogeneityof indigeinto a unified and could not be translated nous society was non-transcendable of this thesis was the claim by JohnStrachey(the nation.A succinctformulation FinancialSecretaryduringthe 1880s): there is no, andnever about India-that Thisis thefirstandmostessential thingto learn to European of India, wasanIndia, orevenanycountry ideas,any according possessing, socialorreligious.... Thatmenof thePunjab, sortof unity, Bengal, physical, political, is should everfeel theybelongto one greatnation, andMadras, theUnited Provinces, impossible.62 The nationalist counter-responsestructureddebates, during the late 1880s, within the IndianNational Congress (INC). In 1890, PherozeshahMehta exclaimed: is concerned, we (theINC)havebeensuccessso faras thehistorical Indeed, argument Wehaveshownthatit is theywhodefy ful in turning thetablesuponouradversaries. till to makea beginning whentheytalkof waiting andmodernity thelessonsof history andallthequalifications withallthevirtues themasses of thepeoplearefullyequipped hassetin, whenwe should in facttill a millennium thecitizens of Utopia, whichadorn at all.63 suchinstitutions hardly require It is importantto recall that the IndianNational Congress, formally established in 1885, was a productof the tentativeandlimitedexperimentswith selfgovernmentfrom the late 1870s onwards.The dominantaddresseeof instituand tional nationalism,the colonial state, conditioned its self-understanding
Ibid., 44 62 Strachey(1888:5-7). 63 IndianNationalCongressPapers,vol. 1 (1890), 109, NAI.
61
623
The very particularities, for instance,which supposedlyrendered presentation. natives incapableof representing themselves were formulatedwithin the terms of the denied universalityof nationhood.In an addressto the IndianNational Congress,M.V. Bhide noted: I knowthatthere areamong ourcritics... whoproclaim withanairof superior wisdom thatIndia is buta geographical andthatthere is no Indian as such,but nation expression of racesandcreeds, whohaveno cohesion in them... herein thisgathonlya congerie fromthemostdistant Assam, eringwe haverepresentatives Bengal, provinces, Punjab, North Western ... butthewatchword of thesecongressmen is Inprovinces, Rajputana ... afterwards dia,Indians first,Hindus, Muhammadans, Parsees, Christian, Punjabees ... theaggregate of thosethatareresidents of oneterritory ... urged by likeimpulses to secure likerights andto be relieved of likeburdens.64 As noted earlier,the late-nineteenth-century colonial productionof India as a bounded,coherententity markedan epochal shift. Indiabecame both the unified object of colonial spatialand economic regulationand the basis for emergent nationalistimaginings.The above-citedpassage atteststo nationalistconstructionsof India as coextensive with the spatial boundariesof the colonial state. Furthermore, these boundarieswere associatedwith a homogenous colin defined economic, historical,and culturalterms and identifiedas a lectivity nation.The notion of a spatiallyboundednationwas the basis for the consolidation of such relatednotions as an Indianhistory,an Indianeconomy, an Indian people, and the like. Nationalismat once claimed and sought to establish an identitybetween people, nation,territory, history,culture,and economy. Groundedin social categories of the universal(nation,economy, state), nationalism couched its very claims to autonomy in a recognizably standard rhetoric.The nativismof such statementsas "westerninstitutionsand ideas are taintedat the root" did not negate the overarchingprogrammatic of development, of Indian industrialism. India could achieve what Satish Chandra Mukherjeein his 1901 essay on nationaldevelopmentcalled a "modernized, but ethical life."65The basic premise was that the eliminationof the colonial statewould enablethe realizationof a stableandan organicnationalwhole. Nationalism sought the guaranteeof modernityin the reconstituted particularism of the nation.
TERRITORIAL NATIVISM: SWADESHI AND SWARAJ, 1880 TO
1907
This emergentnationalistvision shaped,in a relationof reciprocaldetermination, the swadeshi movement of indigenous manufactures.The latter representedthe first systematiccampaignin colonial Indiato enlist the masses within the elite structure andorganization of institutional nationalism.The swadeshi movement assumed its radical,mass form only after 1905, following the con65 Dawn, Mukherjee(1900), 94, Nehru MemorialMuseum and Library(NMML).
64 Ibid. (1895), 173.
624
MANU GOSWAMI
tested spatialpartitioning of Bengal.66But the first swadeshiassociations,jourindustrial melas nals, (exhibitions),and key featuresof the movement'srepertoire were forged duringthe late nineteenthcentury. The broad socio-aesthetic complex of the movement's repertoireincluded the reconstitution of social tastefromManchester cloth to coarsehandloom,the of in commodities the social ostracismof conboycott foreign marketplaces; sumersof foreign goods, the valorizationof indigenoushandicraftsas the material symbol of historicalcontinuitywith the past glory of the nation, and the social scrutinyof consumptionpractices as indicatorsof authenticityand patriotism.In 1871, Naoroji had argued,"Wemay laugh at this attempt(singing of songs to preachthe discardingof foreign goods) as a futile attemptto shut out English machinemade, cheapergoods againsthandmadedearerones. But little do we thinkwhatthis movementis likely to grow into, andwhatnew phases it may take in time."67 In 1907, swadeshi was officially incorporated within the conceptualand ideological frameworkof the IndianNational Congress in the avowed objective of a swadeshi swaraj (nationalstate/government).68 Among the most popular and influential swadeshi texts was Sakharam Ganesh Deuskar's (1869-1912) work, Desher Katha (Story of the Nation), writtenin 1904. It summarizedthe work of M. G. Ranadeand D. Naoroji in a popularidiom and warnedin its concludingchapteragainstthe colonial state's "hypnoticconquest of the mind."69The colonial state proscribedthe text in 1910, butby thenit had sold over 15,000 copies, informedswadeshistreetplays and folk songs, and had assumedthe statusof mandatory readingfor an entire generationof swadeshi activists. Swadeshi practicesindicatehow persuasively,almost with the transparency of the self-evident,the conceptionof a common economic collective was popularized.As discussed earlier,the notion of a spatiallydiscretenationaleconowithin institutionalnationalism. my had the status of a rationaltransparency The social collective of Bharat (the dominantindigenous term for India) was were forged.By the turnof the templateon which popularswadeshirepertoires the century,this vision of the nation was radicalized and consolidated. The swadeshi movement accomplishedthe fusion of the abstractnotion of a comvision of the social body as mon economic collective with the particularized specifically Hindu (for a discussion of nationalistimaginingsof colonial India
66 For detailedaccountsof the Swadeshimovement duringthis period, see Bayly (1986), Guha
(1966), Mukherjee(1908). (1992), Sarkar(1973), Majumdar 67 Naoroji (1871 [1962]:207). 68 The specific resolutionon swadeshi issued by the IndianNational Congresscalled upon the "peopleof the countryto laborfor its success, by makingearnestefforts to promotethe growthof indigenousindustriesand to stimulatethe productionof indigenousarticlesby giving them preference over importedcommodities even at some sacrifice."See IndianNational Congress Papers, vol. II (1906), 85, NAI. 69 Deuskar(1904:ch. 10). A key work in nationalisteconomic history,Desher Katha included the decline of indigenousartisans,colonial practicesof dechapterson the plight of the peasantry, and a powerfulconcludingchapteron colonial hegemony. industrialization,
625
as Bharat and their long-term implications for Hindu-Muslimrelations, see Goswami [1998], especially chs. 8-12). Swadeshipracticessuch as the boycott of foreign productsand the fosteringof indigenouscapitalsought to securethe autonomy of the imagined national space of Bharat. This imagined national space was sacralizedand feminized as a Hindu deity. By the turnof the century, Bharat Mata (Mother India) became an ubiquitous figurative presence: and collective songs, novels, political writings, visual, iconic representations to the Hinduization and feminization of the body practicestestify progressive the of Bharat Commodities within sacred Mata were enpolitic. produced space dowed with a fetish value. Conceived as lying outsidethe orbitof everydayexwere invested with a transcendental nationalsigchange, home manufactures nificance.70In particular, handloomsbecame the concrete,materialsymbols of the imagined simplicity and purityof rurallife, of folklore, of a distinctiveIndian tradition,of forms of life regardedas outside the modern colonial era. Swadeshi both exalted an absolute space of nationalbelonging and expressed a mythical sense of historicaltime, mythic nationalorigins, and permanence. The particularized space of Bharatwas conceived as the purecontainerof a national culture,history,and economy. Swadeshi mappedunto the universalityof nationalimaginings the competing universalityof religious discourse. Swadeshi folk songs index the ways in which the colonial stateandthe worldmarketcame to be felt as a palpable,concrete presence in everyday social practices.The following popularsong from the 1870s is exemplary:
The weaver and the blacksmithare crying day and night. They cannotfind their food by plying theirtrade. Even threadsand needles come from distantshores. Even match-sticksare not producedin the country. Whetherin dressingthemselves or producingtheir domestic utensils or even in lighting their oil-lamps ... In nothing are the people independentof the foreign master... Swarmsof locust from a distantisland coming to these shores have eaten up all its solid grainsleaving only the chaff for the starvingchildrenof the soil.71
These songs were distinguishedby theirsacralizedand feminized construction of the nation:

We may be poor, we may be small, But we are a nationof seven crores (seventy million).... Defend your homes, protectyour shops, Don't let the grain from our barnsbe looted abroad. We will eat our own coarse grain and wear the rough,home-spuncloth, What do we care for lavenderand importedtrinkets? 70 See Bayly (1986:285-328) and Sarkar(1973). 71 This popularswadeshi song was composed by Babu ManmohanBose in the late 1870s. See Pal (1932:257).
626
MANU GOSWAMI Foreignersdrainaway our mother's(BharatMata's) milk, Will we simply standand watch?72
The swadeshiimaginarywas shot throughwith the slide from nationto Hindu deity.The highly ritualizedperformances accompanyingvows to the nation the that the notion of a common economic collective was renexemplify way dered both palpable and fundamentallyHindu. These vows were enacted by ceremonialbathingin the Ganges, the donning of native cloth, then the tying of symbolic braids or rakhis (which traditionallysignified kinship relations among Hindus) to signal the unbrokenunity of the nationalcollective forged throughthe consumptionof native goods.73The bodies of individualnationals became instantiations,as it were, of the body politic of BharatMata.A common aspect of everydaypracticeswas the interpenetration of swadeshi themes andreligiouspractices,particularly in annualHinduRamlilaprocessions.Colonial districtofficials in the United Provincesduringthis periodkept a stringent check on what were described as "clear innovations"in religious practices which were drivenby a "moreor less deliberateattemptto foster seditious and SeveralRamlilaprocessions,for instance,juxtaposedHindisloyal feelings."74 du deities with figuresandpicturesrepresenting Raniof Jhansi(associatedwith the 1857 rebellion),BharatMata,LokmanyaTilak,AurobindoGhose, and other swadeshi figures. Figuresof BharatMatawere, in severalcases, placed on a platformandparaded throughthe streetsof majortowns accompanied by shouts of Bharat Mata Ki Jai (hail to motherIndia).75 The specifically Hindu iconographyof nationalimaginingswas expressed, as well, in the coins circulatedin variousprovincesthatwere used as legal tender in swadeshishops andenterprises,as ornaments,as "charm lockets for sucThe cess," prizes within swadeshi schools, and nationalbadges of honour.76 frontof some of these coins were inscribedwith the words "SwadeshiNishka," a figure of Lakshmi(the Hindu goddess of wealth) and the inscriptionTat-sat Bharat (That is true, India). The year according to the Hindu calendarwas recordedon the back of the coins (Kali Yuga,5006).77 Moreover,Hindu caste prohibitionsand rituals were employed against those violating the socioeconomic sanctityof the nation.Methodsof ostracismassociatedwith the abrogation of jati (loosely, caste) injunctionswere deployed against consumers of British commodities.78Conflicting, multiple solidaritiesbased on caste, religion, regionaldifferencesand so forth,were progressivelyand violently sublimatedunderthe unifying rubricof an Indiannationality.Swadeshi's vision of a territorially fixed nationaleconomic collective was integrallylinked, then, to a culturaland political project of producinga homogenous and singularnationality.
72
Quotedin Bayly (1986:327). 73 For a detailed account, see Bayly (1986:311-2). 74 Home Proceedings(Political),August 1909, no. 14, NAI. 75 Ibid. 76 Home Proceedings(Political),August 1908, no. 8, NAI. 77 Ibid.
78 Guha (1992:69-120).
627
instance of a totalizing territorial nativism.In Swadeshi was a paradigmatic Nath Banerhis presidentialaddressto the IndianNationalCongress,Surendra jee asserted,"Wemustbe swadeshiin all things, swadeshiin ourthoughts ... in This vision challenged oureducationalmethodsandindustrial development."79 a purely economic reading of the swadeshi movement which was defined as "not merely an economic or a social or a political movement; but an all embracingmovement co-extensive with the entire circle of our nationallife, one in which are centeredthe many-sidedactivities of our growing community."80 Often expressed within the categories of high Brahminism,the motif of a national epiphanydominatedswadeshi discourse.In 1907, Bipan Chandra Pal, a of the Swadeshi movement argued: majorfigure is Nithiavastha Vichara "mine andnotmine," ThefirstthinginVedantic culture Vivaha, of theidealof Swaraj theself andthenotself. .. .Theveryfirstthingintheculture [selfself. thenational self andthatwhichis notthenational between rule]is discrimination andwhy?Because forovera to us onlyrecently Theideaof Swaraj hasbeenrevealed asPararashtra asa foreign we never looked theBritish 100years govgovernment upon ernment".81 It would be erroneousto conceive swadeshi's nativism as an atavistic upsurge of a reified traditionin the face of modernization.Rather,nationalism's must be situatedwithin a broaderunderstanding of the nativist particularism of The deterritorializing perceived decenteringdynamic capitalistexpansion. thrust of capitalism spawned nationalist territorialclosure and strategies of reterritorialization. While the swadeshi movement was particularistwithout (thatis, in relationto the colonial state and the world market),it understooditself as universalistwithinthe nationalspace of Bharat.It was believed thatwithin an absolute and sovereign space of nationnessinequalitiesand differences would eventually disappear.Pitched against what Pal identified as the "invasion of British capital"and what Ranade saw as the "foreignmerchantshand thatnow trafficksdirectwith ourproducersin the remotestvillages,"the movement sought to establish an autonomous, spatially fixed national economic complex.82 The spatialfetishism of swadeshi, manifestin the desire to constitutea sovereign space of nationness,only makes sense with reference to the perceived dynamicof colonial socioeconomic practices.The searchfor deterritorializing an authenticnationalcommunityand an absolute space of nationness(Bharat Mata)became more intense with the increasingrelativizationof particularistic communities and space. If processes of commodificationentailed the historically novel individualizationof social subjects as market participants,the swadeshi movement sought to reconstitutesocial subjects as concrete nationals. If the world market embodied the ultimate power of deterritorialization
79 Quotedin Mukherjee(1908:203).
81 82
80 Ibid. Home Proceedings(Public), December (1907), 282, NAI. Ibid., 274; Ranade(1890 [1990]:273).
628
MANU GOSWAMI
which underminedevery fixed social identity, swadeshi practices sought to reterritorializeidentities that had allegedly become disembedded from the imaginednationalwhole. In this view, individualidentitiesandpracticesshould be lodged withinthe imaginednationalspace of Bharat.Whatsuch a construction enabled was the conception of capitalism as an "outside"that impinged upon ratherthan constitutedand shapedfrom within. Yet the historicalemergence and formationof swadeshi atteststo the way this alleged 'outside' constructedand constituteda putativelyself-enclosed, sacral"inside." The attempted regulationof a nationaleconomic spherewas producedwithin and againstthe deterritorializing boundlessnessof the world market.As BiPal remarked: pan Chandra under is absolutely witha view to controlling Protection, impossible foreignmarkets, have some sort of circumstances. But we can, proby regulating consumption, present of consumption is the artsof industries; andtheregulation tectionfor ourindigenous thenational movement."83 thatunderlies economic boycott principle to doThe crucialpoint here concernsthe way the nationalist projectattempted In the of order to combat mesticatethe temporaldynamic capital. hegemonyof of indigeand delimitation the nationalists British capital, proposed protection nous capital within a national space. Condensedin Surendranath Banerjee's rhetorical by questionwas a core ideologicalimpulseof swadeshi:"Ifprotection legislative enactmentis impossible,may we not, by fiat of the nationalwill, afThe close relationford industriessuch protectionas may lie in our powers?"84 nationalist movement and between the indigenouscapitalhas, of course, ality The swadeshi movement been the subject of much historical scholarship.85 the Tata Industrial Steel Company for of the spurred establishment, instance, in the Bank of Baof and Canara Bank in the Bank India 1906, (TISCO) 1907, rodaand Punjaband Sind Bank in 1908, andthe CentralBankof Indiain 1911. swadeshiwas a moveradicalreformulation, laterconceptually DespiteGandhi's of capital,not its abolition. mentfor the nationalization Nationalism's aggressively developmentalistvision had profoundly statist nationalistdiscourse, the unconimplications.Within late-nineteenth-century Pal Forinstance,BipanChandra tested Otherof developmentwas "barbarism." declaredthat there could be no "going back to barbarism... that will not aid Institutional nationalismsoughtto securefor the anticipatnationalgrowth."86 ed Indiannation-statea niche in the world-historical dynamic of capitalistinThis developmentallogic, a productof the hierarchicalworld dustrialization. order of capital, privileged the moder form of the developmental national state. Only a centralized,developmentalstate was consideredadequateto the
83
84 IndianNational Congress Papers,vol. 11 (1902), 12, NAI. 85 Chatterjee(1986), Mclane (1963), Misra (1978), Sarkar(1983, 1985).
86
Home Proceedings(Public), December (1907), 259, NAI. Home Proceedings(Public), December (1907), 250, NAI.
629
task of regulatingand directingthe nationaleconomy and realizing the development of the national whole. The demand for an autonomousnational state thatwould fulfill the universallylegitimatepromise of developmentwas made and the by the IndianNationalCongresson the basis of "auniversalhumanity" concrete existence of a territorially delimited common economic collective.87 As stressed by Ranade, the anticipatedsovereign state was conceived as the "nationalorgan for taking care of nationalneeds."88 The broadnationalistarwas akin to later Gerschenkronian formulationsof late degument strikingly Pal that the nation's "late velopment. argued given entryinto the field of world an interventionist state competition," directlyenteringthe sphereof production as mobilizerand managerof nationalresourcescould alone lay the foundation for nationaldevelopment.89 The key constituentsof the post-colonial state's industrialization strategyimport substitution,mixed economy, and the privilege accorded to capitalintensive industries-were alreadypresent,in embryonicform, in the work of these early nationalists.In an 1890 addressthat inaugurated the institutionof industrial Ranade declared as a "civic virtue"the atindigenous enterprises, to labor and and tempt "organize capitalby co-operation, importfreely foreign skill andmachinery, till we learnourlessons properlyandneed no help... .This is the civic virtue we have to learn, and accordingas we learnit or spurnit we shall win or lose in the contest. I feel certainthatit will soon become the creed of the whole nation and ensure the permanenttriumphof the moder spiritin the ancientland."90 Nationaliststhus identifieda calibratedprocess of temporal displacement(protectionof infantindustries,long-termstateinvestmentsin and spatialconsolidation(the productionof a nationaleconominfrastructure) ic space) as the principalmodalities for securing economic growth. This developmental regime sought, in David Harvey's terms, to establish a national However,this "spatialfix" to the ruthlessandunstabledynamicof capitalism.91 Listian-influenced ran a developmentalparadigm up against seemingly intransigent paradox. National economies and developmental national states are deeply dependentupon the world marketandcapitalandtechnology flows that are paradigmatic of establishedboundaries.The swadeshi movetransgressors ment exemplifies the conflicts that beset nationalistattemptsto forge an absolute space of economic sovereignty. The vision of an autonomouspolity approximatedList's dream of a selfsufficient, national-territorial economy. Considerthe Listian overtones of Bipan ChandraPal's conceptualwelding of swaraj(self-rule) and swadeshi. What shallwe do themoment we haveswaraj ? Weshalldo whateverynation oralmost hasdoneunder thecircumstances under whichwe live now.Weshallimeverynation88 Ranade(1893 [1990]:344). 87 Ibid., 19:267. 89 For an elaborationof this argument,see Pal's speeches in Home Proceedings(Public), December (1907), 298, NAI. 90 Ranade(1890 [1990]:277-8). 91 Harvey (1982).
630
MANU GOSWAMI
tariffuponeveryinchof textilefabricthatcomes pose a heavyprohibitive protective fromManchester. Weshallimposea protective tariffuponeverybladeof prohibitive knifethatcomesfromLeedsandSheffield.92 Pal arguedthata "reconstructed Indianeconomy"would follow the "Indian genius and tradition" that "industrial developmentwould follow the course indicatedby ourpasthistoricaltradition, drawinspiration andstrengthfor guidance from our own Indianpast."93 This argumentechoed a broadernationalistfaith in the possibility of forging a unique and pacific pathof industrialization. Of particularimportance,in this regard,was Radhakamal Mukherjee'sinfluential delineationof an autonomousIndiandevelopmentaltrajectory: Oureconomic is as modem structure asthatof theWest, andit willpursue a lineof evolutionnottowards theso-called modemor Western buttowards a fuller industrialism, andmoredeterminate Indian economic order....Intheinterests notonlyof Indian culturebutalso of Universal Indiamusthaveherownindustrial life anddesHumanity, visionof Indiawill be the sorelyneeded corrective of therigid, tiny....The synthetic mechano-centric (of western industrialism).94 analytical, standpoint There was a fundamental tension in nationalistimaginingsas the productivist economic strategiesadvancedthreatened to undermine the assumed"synthetic" andorganiccharacter of India.On the one hand,nationalism pittedthe assumed of the Indian social collective "synthetic" organicunity againstthe "analytical, mechano-centric" character of Westernsociety.95 This fissureparallelsthe wellknown binarismbetween Gemeinschaftand Gesellschaft-the traditional,organically linked communityversus the alienatedsociety characterized by the dissolutionof all organiclinks. On the otherhand, nationalismsought capitalism without Gesellschaft,industrialdevelopmentwithout the attendantstructuraltensions.Thoughcriticalof whatRomeshDutt analyzedas the "ageof imperialism, the unending struggle for material interest, for conquests, annexations,extension of markets",nationalistsgroundedthe possibility of This weldingof swaraj swarajin the Listiandreamof a self-enclosedeconomy.96 with swadeshiwas the ideological core of late-nineteenth-century nationalism. The sovereignty of the future nation-state,as envisioned by nationalists, hinged upon its capacityas a developmentalvehicle for the nation.The develnationalistdiscoursepresagedboth the opmentalismof late-nineteenth-century conceptualframeworkof the IndianNational Congressparty's 1945 election manifestoandthe planningideologies of the post-colonialnationalstateduring the 1950s and 1960s.97The contemporary post-colonial nation-statebases its of a raandthe orchestration legitimacyon both democraticrepresentativeness
Home Proceedings(Public), December (1907), 273, NAI. 93 Ibid., 270. 94 Mukherjee(1915:462-3). 95 Ibid. 96 Dutt (1897:23). 97 The INC election manifestoof 1945 stated,"Themost vital and urgentof India'sproblemsis how to remove the curse of poverty and raise the standard of the masses.... The state must own or controlkey and basic industriesand services, mineralresources,railways,waterways,shipping, and othermeans of public transport. Currencyand exchange, bankingand insurance,must be regulatedin the nationalinterest."Quotedin Zaidi (1985:79-91).
92
631
tional plan of development.This doubled legitimacy, a productof the nationalist argument against colonialism, has had profoundly contradictoryand unstable implications.The imperativeof developing the social collective, rewhole, and the productivistagenda of state degarded as an undifferentiated has entailed the marginalizationof subaltern social velopmental agencies and the of swadeshipracticesevinced classes. However, groups popularization in a rangeof social, environmental,and subalternmovementshas also set limits from below on state developmentalschemes.98 In our currenthistoricalmoment,the increasinglyapparent challengesposed by globalizationto the presentIndiannation-stateand nationaleconomy have re-enforcedterritoriallygroundedassertions of nationalismtied to an exclusionary and violent Hindutva (Hindu Nationalist) ideology. Contemporary processes of globalizationhave also spurreda resurgenceof popularpractices andsocial movementsthatoppose transnational capitalandself-consciouslyinvoke the inheritedvision of a popularand sovereign nationaleconomic collective. The dual imperativeof swadeshi and swaraj,forged in the late nineteenth century,continuesto shapeongoing debatesaboutthe political economy of nationhood.
CONCLUSION: NATION, ECONOMY AND TERRITORY IN ANALYSES OF NATIONALISM
This essay has trackedthe intimatelinks between the colonial productionof a spatially delimited entity, India, and the emergence of nationalism.I have arof conceptionsof economy, territory, gued thatthe progressivenationalization and culture was tied to colonial territorialand capitalist expansion. It was against the perceived deterritorializing dynamic of colonial spatial and economic practices that nationalistssought to forge an absolute, sovereign space of national autonomy. By locating the nationalist welding of swadeshi and swarajin these broaderprocesses, I have sought to underscorethe close links between nationalizationand globalization.The deterritorializing dynamics of colonial practices and the reterritorializing strategies of nationalistpractices were intrinsicallyinterrelated moments. Finally,I have analyzedthe historicalco-constitutionof notions of a national economy, territory, and culture.It was duringthe late nineteenthcenturythat a specifically nationalmeaningwas assignedto territory, economy,andculture. The historicalconjunctionbetween the notion of a nationaleconomy and a national space suggests the limits of approachesthatview cultural,economic and political nationalismsas fundamentallycontrastiveand mutually exclusive. I want to suggest here the problematiccharacter of a prioriclassificationsof nationalismas eithercultural,economic, or political.This classificatorytypology informsboth generaltheoriesof nationalismandspecific analysesof Indiannationalism. By stressing the co-productionof these categories, this essay has
98 See Rudolphand Rudolph(1987), Omvedt(1993).
632
MANU GOSWAMI
sought to contest theories that refer unself-consciously to a national economy, culture, and territory. In my view, studies of nationalism should place in the foreground the historicity of these categories and specify their interrelatedness.
REFERENCES
Agnew, John. 1994. "TheTerritorial Trap:the geographicalassumptionsof international relationstheory." Review of InternationalPolitical Economy,1:1, 53-80. Ambirajan,S. 1968. Classical Political Economy and British Policy in India. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Amin, Shahid 1982. "Smallpeasantcommodityproductionandruralindebtedness:the cultureof sugarcanein easternUP, 1880-1920," in SubalternStudies, vol. 1, Ranajit Guha,ed. Delhi: OxfordUniversityPress. Anderson, Benedict. 1991. Imagined Communities:Reflections on the Origins and Spreadof Nationalism.London:Verso. in Orientalismand the Appadurai, Arjun.1993. "Numbersin the colonial imagination," Post-Colonial Predicament,CarolA. Breckenridge,ed. Philadelphia:University of PennsylvaniaPress. . 1996. Modernityat large: cultural dimensionsof globalization. Minneapolis: Universityof MinnesotaPress. . 1997. "Sovereigntywithoutterritoriality: notes for a postnationalgeography," in The Geographyof Identity,PatriciaYaegered. Ann Arbor:Universityof Michigan Press. . Arasson, Johann P. 1990. "Nationalism,Globalization and Modernity,"in Global Culture:Nationalism, Globalizationand Modernity,Mike Featherstone,ed. London:Sage. Century:Money,Power and the Origins Arrighi,Giovanni. 1994. TheLong Twentieth of Our Times.London:Verso. Bagchi, Amiya K. 1972. Private Investmentin India. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. in India in the nineteenthcentury:some theoreti. 1976. "De-industrialization cal implications." Journal of DevelopmentStudies, 12:2, 135-64. . 1982. The Political Economy of Underdevelopment. Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress. Bairoch, Paul. 1993. Economics and WorldHistory: Myths and Paradoxes. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press. dominationandthe small peasantry: Deccan districtsin Banaji,Jairus.1977. "Capitalist the late nineteenthcentury." Economicand Political Weekly, 12:33-34. PenMichael. 1974. The Economics of Imperialism.Harmondsworth: Barratt-Brown, guin Books. Bayly, Chris. 1986. "The origins of swadeshi:cloth and Indiansociety,"in The Social Life of Things: Commoditiesin Cultural Perspective, Arjun Appaduraied. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Bloom, Solomon. 1941. The Worldof Nations. New York:OxfordUniversityPress. Bose, Sugata. 1990. SouthAsia and WorldCapitalism.Delhi: OxfordUniversityPress. Henri Lefebvre's geographies Brenner,Neil. 1997. "Global,fragmented,hierarchical: of globalization."Public Culture,10:1, 134-69. Buck-Morss,Susan. 1995. "Envisioningcapital:political economy on display."Critical Inquiry,21:2, 434-67. Chakrabarty, Dipesh. 1989. RethinkingWorkingClass History: Bengal, 1890-1940. Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress..
SWADESHI
TO SWARAJ
IN COLONIAL
SOUTH
ASIA
633
andthe artificeof history:who speaksfor the 'Indian' . 1994. "Post-Coloniality pasts?,"in TheNew HistoricismReader,Aram H. Veeser,ed. London:Routledge Chandra, Bipan. 1972. The Rise and Growth of Economic Nationalism in India, 1880-1905. Delhi: Longman. Chapman,Stanley. 1972. The Cotton Industry in the Industrial Revolution. London: Macmillan. A DerivativeDisPartha. 1986. Nationalist Thoughtand the Colonial World: Chatterjee, course? Tokyo:Zed Books. ModK.N. 1968. "India'sinternational Chaudhari, economy in the nineteenthcentury." ern Asian Studies, 2:1. . 1978. Economy and Society: Essays in Indian Economic and Social History. Delhi: Longman. andobjectificationin SouthAsia," in An Cohn,Bernard.1990. "Census,social structure AnthropologistAmong the Historians and Other Essays. Delhi: Oxford University Press. . 1996. Colonialismand Its Forms of Knowledge.Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press. Cohn, Bernard;and Nicholas B Dirks. 1988. "Beyondthe fringe:the nation-state,colonialism andthe technologiesof power."Journalof HistoricalSociology, 1:2, 224-29. Crouzet,Francois. 1982. The VictorianEconomy.London:Methuen. Dasgupta,Ajit. 1993. A History of IndianEconomic Thought.London:Routledge. Datta, Bhabatosh. 1978. Indian Economic Thought: TwentiethCenturyPerspectives. Delhi: TataMcGrawHill. de Cecco, Michel. 1974. Money and Empire: The International Gold Standard, 1870-1914. Oxford:Blackwell. Dirks,Nicholas B. 1987. TheHollow Crown:Ethnohistory of an IndianKingdom.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press. . 1995. "Colonialismand Culture,"in Colonialism and Culture,Nicholas B. Dirks, ed. Ann Arbor:Universityof MichiganPress. Dutt, Romesh Chandra. 1897. England and India, 1785-1885. London: Chatto and Windus. . 1900. EconomicHistory of India, vols. 1 and 11. London:ChattoandWindus. Farie, D.A. 1979. The English CottonIndustryand the WorldMarket 1815-96. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. Gallagher,John; and Ronald Robinson. 1953. "The Imperialismof free trade."Economic HistoryReview,6:1, 1-15. Ganguli,B.N. 1977. IndianEconomic Thought:NineteenthCenturyPerspectives.Delhi: Gian. Gellner,Ernest. 1994. Encounterswith Nationalism.Blackwell: Oxford. . 1983. Nations and Nationalism.Ithaca:Cornell UniversityPress. and ConGiddens,Anthony.1990. CentralProblemsin Social Theory: Action,Structure tradictionin Social Analysis. Berkeley:University of CaliforniaPress. Goswami, Manu. 1998. "TheProductionof India:Colonialism,Nationalism,andTerritorial Nativism, 1870-1920." Chicago: Ph.D. disser., Departmentof Political Science, the University of Chicago. Guha, Ranajit. 1992. "Discipline and mobilize" in SubalternStudies, vol. VII, Partha Chatterjeeand Gyan Pandey,eds. Delhi: OxfordUniversity Press. - .1996 [1996]. A Rule of PropertyFor Bengal: An Essay on the Idea of Permanent Settlement.Durham:Duke UniversityPress. Gupta,Akhil; andJamesFerguson. 1992. "BeyondCulture:space, identityandthe politics of difference."CulturalAnthropology, 7:1, 6-23.
634
MANU GOSWAMI
Habib, Irfan. 1985. "Studying a colonial economy without perceiving colonialism." ModernAsian Studies, 19:3, 355-81. Haretty, Peter. 1977. Imperialismand Free Trade:Lancashireand India in the Mid NineteenthCentury. Manchester: ManchesterUniversityPress. An Enquiryinto the Origins of Harvey,David. 1990. The Conditionof Post-Modernity: CulturalChange. Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. . 1982. Limitsto Capital. Chicago:Midway Reprints. Held, David. 1995. Democracyand Global Order London:Polity Press. . 1990. "TheDecline of the Nation-State," in New Times:The ChangingFace of Politics in 1990s, Stuart Hall andMartin Jacques,eds. London:LawrenceandWishart. Henderson,William Otto. 1983. FriedrichList, Economistand Visionary,1789-1846. London:F. Cass. Reviewof InHirsch,Joachim.1995. "TheNation-state,GlobalizationandDemocracy." ternationalPolitical Economy,1:2, 267-84. Hobsbawm,Eric. 1990. Nations and Nationalism since 1780. Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress. .1987. TheAge of Empire:1875-1915. New York:Vintage. Hurd,John. 1983. "Railways,"in CambridgeEconomicHistory of India, DharmaKumar and MeghnadDesai, eds. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress. .1975. "Railwaysand the expansion of marketsin India, 1861-1921." Explorations in EconomicHistory, 12:3, 263-88. Ingham,Geoffrey .1984. CapitalismDivided: The City and Industryin British Social Development.New York:Schocken Books. Jenks, Leland. 1963. TheMigrationof British Capital to 1875. London:Alfred Knopf. Latham, A.J.H. 1978. The International Economy and the UnderdevelopedWorld, 1865-1914. New York:OxfordUniversityPress. Lefebvre, Henri. 1991 [1978].The Productionof Space. Cambridge,Mass: Blackwell. Britainandthe supplyof railwaylocomotives to India:A case Lehmann,F. 1965. "Great study of economic imperialism."Indian Economic and Social History Review, 2:4, 297-306. List, Friedrich.1966 [1841]. TheNational Systemof Political Economy.New York:Augustus Kelly. . 1910 [1841]. Das Nationale Systemder Politischen Oekonomie.Jena:Verlag von GustavFischer. Ludden, David. 1995. "India'sDevelopmentalRegime," in Colonialism and Culture, Nicholas B. Dirks, ed. Ann Arbor:Universityof MichiganPress. . 1993. "Worldeconomy and village India, 1600-1900," in South Asia and WorldCapitalism,SugataBose, ed. Delhi: OxfordUniversityPress. Magdoff, Harry.1978. Imperialism:From the ColonialAge to the Present. New York: MonthlyReview. Malkii, Lisa. 1992. "NationalGeographic:The Rooting of Peoples and the Territorialization of NationalIdentity."CulturalAnthropology, 7:1, 24-44. Mann, Michael. 1993. The Sources of Social Power, vol. 11. Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress. Marx, Karl. 1975 [1884]. Capital, vol. 111. Moscow: Foreign Language Publishing House. 1962 [1872]. On Colonialism.Moscow: ForeignLanguagePublishingHouse. 1975 [1857]. Grundrisse.New York:VintageBooks. 1975 [1844]. " Draftof an articleon FriedrichList's Das nationaleSystem Der Politischen Oekonomie,"in Collected Works, vol. 4. Moscow: ProgressPublishers. S.R. 1971. TheEmergenceof the IndianNation Congress.Delhi: Vikas PubMehrotra, lications.
SWADESHI
TO SWARAJ
IN COLONIAL
SOUTH
ASIA
635
Mukherjee,H. 1908. India's Fightfor Freedomor the SwadeshiMovement,1905-06. Calcutta. and agrarianchange in pre-indepenMukherjee,Mridula. 1985. "Commercialization dence Punjab,"in Essays on the Commercialization of IndianAgriculture,K.N. Raj, N. Bhattacharya, S.Guha,eds. Delhi: OxfordUniversityPress. Mukherjee,Radhakamal.1915. TheFoundationsof IndianEconomics.London:Longmans, Greenand Company. Mukherjee,T. 1972. "TheTheory of economic drain:the impact of British rule on the Indianeconomy, 1840-1900," in Economic Imperialism:A Book of Readings, K.N. Boulding and T. Mukherjee,eds. Ann Arbor:University of MichiganPress. Nairn,Tom. 1977. The Break-upof Britain. London:New Left Books. Naoroji,Dadabhai.1962 [1871]. Povertyand Un-BritishRule in India. Delhi: Government of India Publications. Neff, StephenC. 1990. FriendsBut No Allies: EconomicLiberalismand the Law of Nations. New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress. Nigam, Sanjay. 1990. " Disciplining and policing the criminalsby birth:the development of a disciplinarysystem, 1871-1900." IndianEconomicand Social HistoryReview, 27:3, 257-87. Omvedt, Gail. 1993. ReinventingRevolution:new social movementsand the socialist traditionin India. Armonk,N.Y: East Gate. Pal, Bipan Chandra.1932. Memories of My Life and Times.Calcutta:Moder Book Agency. Indian Pant, Rashmi. 1987. "The Cognitive status of caste in colonial ethnography." Economic and Social HistoryReview,24:2, 145-62. ThePolitical and Economic Originsof Polanyi, Karl. 1957. The Great Transformation: Our Times.Boston: Beacon Press. Prakash, Gyan. 1990. BondedHistories: Genealogies of LaborServitudein ColonialIndia. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Ranade,MahadevGovind. 1896. Essays on Indian Economics. Bombay: Thackerand Company. . 1900 [1881]. "Review of free tradeand English Commerce,"in Ranade'sEcoed. Delhi: Gian Publishers. nomic Writings,Bipan Chandra, . 1900 [1890]. "Industrial Conference,"in Ranade'sEconomic Writings,Bipan ed. Delhi: Gian Publishers. Chandra, Bi---. 1990 [1892]. "Indianpolitical economy,"in Ranade'sEconomic Writings, pan Chandra,ed. Delhi: Gian Publishers. and outlook on the same," .1990 [1893]. "Presentstate of Indianmanufactures ed. Delhi: Gian Publishers. in Ranade'sEconomic Writings, Bipan Chandra, Robertson, Ronald. 1992. Globalization: social theory and global culture. London: Sage. Rudolph, Susanne; and Lloyd Rudolph. 1987. In Pursuit of Lakshmi: The Political Economyof the Indian State. Bombay: OrientLongman. Sahlins, Peter. 1978. Boundaries: the making of France and Spain in the Pyrenees. Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress. Sarkar,Sumit. 1973. TheSwadeshiMovementin Bengal, 1903-08. Delhi: OxfordUniversity Press. . 1985. A Critiqueof Colonial India. Delhi: OxfordUniversityPress. Sassen, Sasskia. 1996. Losing Control?Sovereigntyin an age of Globalization.New York:ColumbiaUniversity Press. . 1991. The Global City.Princeton,N.J: PrincetonUniversityPress. Saul, S.B. 1960. Studies in British Overseas Trade,1870-1914. Liverpool:Liverpool University Press.
636
MANU GOSWAMI
Seton-Watson,Hugh. 1977. Nations and States. London:Methuen. Singh, V. B. 1975. FromNaorojito Nehru:Six Essays in IndianEconomicThought.Delhi: Macmillan. Smith, Anthony. 1979. Nationalist Movementsin the TwentiethCentury.Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. Spengler,Joseph. 1971. Indian Economic Thought.Durham:Duke UniversityPress. and Nationalism:FriedrichList and Karl Marx. Sporzluk,Roman. 1988. Communism New York:OxfordUniversityPress. Strachey,Vincent. 1888. India. London:Allen and Unwin. Taylor, Peter J. 1994. "The State as Container:territorialityin the modem worldsystem."Progress in HumanGeography,18:151-62. . 1975. TheFormationof National States in Western Europe.Princeton:Princeton UniversityPress. Thomer,Daniel. 1962. Landand Labourin India. Philadelphia: Universityof Pennsylvania Press. . 1950. Investmentin Empire.Philadelphia:University of PennsylvaniaPress. Tilly, Charles.1990. Coercion,Capitaland EuropeanStates,AD 990-1990. Blackwell: Oxford UniversityPress. Social Science. Cambridge: Wallerstein,Immanuel.1991. Unthinking Polity Press. . 1972. Mercantilismand the Consolidationof the European WorldEconomy, vol. 11 of the Modem WorldSystem.London. David. 1990. "SouthAsia, the worldsystem andworldcapitalism," in South Washbrook, Asia and WorldCapitalism,SugataBose, ed. Delhi: OxfordUniversityPress. Weber,Eugene. 1976. Peasants into Frenchmen:the modernizationof rural France, 1871-1914. Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress. Winichakul, Thongchai.1994. SiamMapped:a historyof thegeo-bodyof a nation.Honolulu: Universityof Hawaii. Wolf, Eric. 1982. Europeand the People Without History.Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress. Zaidi, A. M. 1985. A trystwith Destiny:A studyof EconomicPolicy Resolutionsof the Indian National Congress Passed during the Last One Hundred Years. Delhi: Prakashan.

From Swadeshi To Swaraj: Nation, Economy, Territory in Colonial South Asia, 1870 To 1907

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

From Swadeshi To Swaraj: Nation, Economy, Territory in Colonial South Asia, 1870 To 1907

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Society for Comparative Studies in Society and History

From Swadeshito Swaraj:Nation, in Colonial Economy,Territory SouthAsia, 1870 to 1907

THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF NATIONALISM

TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA

TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA

SWADESHI TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA

SWADESHI TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA

SWADESHI TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA

SWADESHI TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA

These songs were distinguishedby theirsacralizedand feminized construction of the nation:

SWADESHI TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA

SWADESHI TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA

SWADESHI TO SWARAJ IN COLONIAL SOUTH ASIA

You might also like