Why were Jyoti Rao Phule and Ramaswamy Naicker critical of the national movement? Did their criticism help the national struggle in any way?
Jyoti Rao Phule and Ramaswamy Naicker were critical of the national movement as they could barely see any difference between the preachers of anti-colonialism and the colonial masters. Both, according to them, were outsiders and had used power for subjugating and oppressing the indigenous people.
(i) Jyoti Rao Phule was critical of the anti-colonial nationalism that was preached by upper-castes leaders. He wanted Indians to know that the unity between high and low in entire country was only way they could progress.
(ii) Ramaswamy Naicker also became critical of the national movement when as member of the Congress he attended a feast organized by the nationalists. He found the seating arrangement followed by caste distinctions. He left in disgust. He founded the Self Respect Movement for untouchables.
Hence, their assertions helped national struggles as they continued beyond the colonial period and are still going over the years. Their ideas were respected at many places and people united for a stronger national movement. The forceful speeches, writings and movements of lower-caste leaders did lead to rethinking and some self-criticism among upper-caste nationalism leaders.