Satyagraha, a philosophy of nonviolent resistance developed by Mahatma Gandhi, played a crucial role in India's struggle for independence from British rule. It relied on nonviolent protest and civil disobedience to demand rights and justice. Here's an explanation of how it helped achieve independence:
-
Nonviolent Resistance: Satyagraha emphasized nonviolent methods, which not only garnered moral high ground but also attracted widespread sympathy both nationally and internationally. The peaceful protests showcased the righteousness of the Indian cause, making it difficult for the British to justify their violent crackdowns.
-
International Attention: The nonviolent protests and the brutal suppression of these movements by the British drew international attention. Global awareness of the Indian independence movement increased, leading to greater international support for India’s cause. Images and stories of suffering under colonial rule helped garner sympathy and advocacy from global audiences.
-
Mobilization of Masses: Satyagraha was effective in mobilizing large sections of Indian society, including various ethnic, religious, and social groups. This broad-based engagement created a united front against British rule, increasing the pressure on the colonial government to negotiate.
-
Undermining British Legitimacy: The strategy of noncooperation and civil disobedience challenged the legitimacy and authority of British rule. By withdrawing cooperation from the colonial administration—such as boycotting British goods and institutions—Indians directly undermined British governance.
-
Negotiation and Reform: The sustained pressure from nonviolent movements forced the British to reconsider their approach to governance in India. The negotiations that ensued were influenced by the visibility of the nonviolent resistance and the growing demand for independence.
In summary, the nonviolent aspects of satyagraha created international support and goodwill for India's independence movement, while the noncooperative elements shook the foundations of British authority in India.
Given the responses you listed, the second response, "The noncooperative elements of satyagraha had little impact, but the nonviolent elements created international support after violent responses from the British," captures the essence and effects of satyagraha quite well. However, it slightly downplays the impact of noncooperation. A more accurate choice would likely point to the significant effects of both components, i.e., both the nonviolent and noncooperative elements led to international support and ultimately contributed to independence.