1. Assertion (A): The effect of labour participation in the Indian nationalist upsurge of the early 1930 s was weak. 2. Reason (R): The labour leaders considered the ideology of Indian National Congress as bourgeois and reactionary.

1. Assertion (A) states that the effect of labour participation in the Indian nationalist upsurge of the early 1930s (coinciding with the Civil Disobedience Movement) was weak. This is generally considered true. While there were strikes and worker involvement in some areas (e.g., Sholapur, Bombay), overall participation by organized industrial labour was limited compared to other phases or other sections of society. 2. Reason (R) states that labour leaders considered the ideology of the Indian National Congress as bourgeois and reactionary. This reflects the viewpoint of a significant section of the organized labour movement, particularly those influenced by communist and socialist ideologies, who were critical of the Congress's perceived pro-capitalist stance and its approach to class issues. This criticism and ideological difference contributed to the limited alignment between the mainstream Congress movement and parts of the organized labour movement. 3. Therefore, both A and R are individually true, and R provides a valid explanation for the weak labour participation (A) in the Congress-led upsurge.