Differentiate Moderate Nationalism from Extremist/Militant Nationalism in terms of their objectives and means.

Moderate Nationalism (1885-1905)

Moderate nationalists, largely represented by leaders like Dadabhai Naoroji, Surendranath Banerjee, and Gopal Krishna Gokhale, believed in constitutional methods and gradual reforms. They aimed to achieve self-governance within the British Empire, not complete independence.

• Objectives: Primarily focused on administrative, economic, and political reforms. They demanded Indian representation in legislative councils, civil service reforms, and reduction of land revenue. They advocated for separation of powers and greater Indian participation in governance.
• Means: Employed peaceful and constitutional methods such as petitions, memoranda, public meetings, and press campaigns. They believed in dialogue and persuasion, appealing to British public opinion and the fairness of the British government.
• Socio-Economic Vision: Advocated for economic development through industrialization and improved agricultural practices. They sought to address poverty and unemployment through education and social reforms.
• Organizational Structure: Primarily operated through the Indian National Congress (INC), established in 1885, which served as a platform for dialogue and deliberation.

Extremist/Militant Nationalism (1905-1917)

The Extremist/Militant phase, spearheaded by leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, Lala Lajpat Rai (the ‘Lal-Bal-Pal’ trio), and Aurobindo Ghosh, emerged as a response to the perceived failures of Moderate methods and the growing frustration with British policies, particularly after the Partition of Bengal in 1905.

• Objectives: Demanded Swaraj (self-rule) as the ultimate goal. They rejected the idea of remaining within the British Empire and advocated for complete independence. They also emphasized the importance of national unity and self-reliance.
• Means: Advocated for more assertive methods, including boycotts of foreign goods (Swadeshi), promotion of indigenous industries, and national education. Some extremists even advocated for passive resistance and, in rare cases, revolutionary violence.
• Socio-Economic Vision: Emphasized self-sufficiency and economic independence. They promoted indigenous industries and challenged the economic exploitation of India by the British. They also sought to revive Indian culture and traditions.
• Organizational Structure: While still participating in the INC, Extremists formed their own groups and organizations, such as the Anushilan Samiti and the Jugantar, to promote their ideology and activities.

Comparative Analysis

Feature	Moderate Nationalism	Extremist/Militant Nationalism
Political Goal	Self-governance within the British Empire	Complete Independence (Swaraj)
Methods	Petitions, memoranda, public meetings, press campaigns	Boycotts, Swadeshi, National Education, Passive Resistance, (rarely) Revolutionary Violence
Approach to British Rule	Belief in British justice and fairness; appeal to British public opinion	Rejection of British rule; emphasis on national self-reliance
Mass Mobilization	Limited mass mobilization; focused on educated elite	Wider mass mobilization; appealed to all sections of society
Leadership	Dadabhai Naoroji, Surendranath Banerjee, Gopal Krishna Gokhale	Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, Lala Lajpat Rai, Aurobindo Ghosh
Impact of Partition of Bengal (1905)	Initially, focused on petitioning against the partition	Fueled the extremist movement; sparked widespread protests and the Swadeshi movement

The shift from Moderate to Extremist nationalism was influenced by several factors, including the failure of Moderate methods to achieve substantial reforms, the growing economic hardship faced by Indians, the impact of events like the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905) which demonstrated the possibility of defeating a European power, and the repressive policies of the British government.