Comment on the controversies surrounding the origin of the Indian National Congress.

1. Introduction:

The origin of the Indian National Congress (INC), founded in 1885, has been a subject of historical debates and controversies. The formation of the INC played a crucial role in shaping India's political landscape and its eventual struggle for independence. However, differing perspectives and interpretations regarding its inception have led to controversies and debates among historians.

2. Formation and the Role of A.O. Hume:

The Indian National Congress was officially founded on December 28, 1885, during a session in Bombay attended by prominent leaders from various parts of India. The then Retired Civil Services officer, Allan Octavian Hume, is often credited with playing a key role in its formation. Hume, who was sympathetic to Indian grievances and sought a platform for political dialogue, facilitated the gathering of prominent leaders. He became the General Secretary of the INC in its initial years.

3. The Safety Valve Theory:

One controversy surrounding the origin of the INC revolves around the "Safety Valve Theory." This theory suggests that the British, particularly A.O. Hume, encouraged the formation of the Congress as a safety valve to release the mounting pressure of Indian discontent and channel it into a constitutional and moderate platform. The idea was to provide a vent for political expression that did not pose a direct threat to British colonial rule.

Historians like Rajat Kanta Ray and Subhas Chandra Bose criticized this theory, arguing that it undermined the genuine grievances and political aspirations of Indians. They contended that the INC evolved as a result of indigenous political developments and the aspirations of Indian leaders, rather than being a calculated move by the British.

4. The Role of Dadabhai Naoroji and Womesh Chunder Bonnerjee:

Dadabhai Naoroji, known as the "Grand Old Man of India," was the first president of the INC in 1885. Womesh Chunder Bonnerjee served as its first session president. The controversies surround the role and intentions of these early leaders. While some argue that Naoroji's presidency symbolized the INC's commitment to seeking constitutional means for political representation, others suggest that it was a calculated move to maintain a moderate façade acceptable to the British authorities.

5. The Moderates vs Extremists Divide:

The early years of the INC witnessed a division between the Moderates and the Extremists within the organization. The Moderates, led by leaders like Gopal Krishna Gokhale and Dadabhai Naoroji, advocated constitutional methods, reforms, and collaboration with the British for political concessions. In contrast, the Extremists, led by leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, and Lala Lajpat Rai, were more radical, calling for swaraj (self-rule) and adopting more assertive means.

This internal division has led to controversies about the original vision and objectives of the INC. Some argue that the Moderates' early dominance aligns with the safety valve theory, while others contend that the internal debates reflected the diverse political perspectives and strategies within the Indian nationalist movement.

6. The Genuine Indigenous Movement:

Another perspective emphasizes the genuine indigenous character of the INC, highlighting that its formation responded to the pressing need for a united political platform to address Indian grievances. Leaders like Womesh Chunder Bonnerjee and Dinshaw Wacha, instrumental in the INC's early years, were committed to seeking constitutional means for addressing social, economic, and political issues.

7. The INC as a Dynamic and Evolving Entity:

It is crucial to recognize that the INC was not a static entity with a fixed origin. Instead, it evolved over time in response to changing political dynamics, leaders, and external circumstances. Its early years laid the foundation for a political organization that would play a pivotal role in India's struggle for independence.

8. Conclusion:

In conclusion, the controversies surrounding the origin of the Indian National Congress highlight the complex and multifaceted nature of India's political history. The INC's formation was influenced by a combination of indigenous aspirations, political strategies, and the socio-political context of the time. While the safety valve theory underscores the role of British officials like A.O. Hume, alternative perspectives emphasize the genuine indigenous character of the INC and its evolution as a dynamic political entity. Understanding these controversies enriches our understanding of the complexities surrounding India's path to independence.