Colonial rule, European education and Christian missionary activities had led to some lower-caste assertions in the late 19th century, resulting in the emergence of two distinct responses바카라”a reformist approach by those belonging to the upper castes, trying to integrate the Dalits into the social system, and a confrontationist approach by those belonging to the lower castes to claim what they thought was rightfully theirs. Gandhi and Ambedkar belonged to these two different streams, respectively.
Gandhi바카라™s mission was to unite all sections of Indian society, irrespective of class, caste, or religion. He wanted to transform India바카라™s internal societal struggle into cooperation between antagonistic entities. But by the early 1920s, what would workers, farmers and Dalits gain if they were to be ruled by wealthy, upper-caste Hindus in place of the colonial rulers became a dominant question.
This is where Gandhi and Ambedkar stood in conflict. Ambedkar saw no hope for Dalit liberation without 바카라˜political separation from the Hindus바카라™. He told Gandhi that he had no homeland and therefore patriotism, that he was not bothered about 바카라˜India,바카라™ where Dalits바카라™ basic rights were routinely trampled. Gandhi, while agreeing that the honour of Hinduism could not be saved 바카라˜without eradicating untouchability root and branch바카라™ and ensuring the treatment of untouchables on par with caste Hindus in every respect, considered the idea of Dalit political separation from Hinduism 바카라˜suicidal바카라™ for the national movement. Nevertheless, Ambedkar바카라™s activism in the late 1920s prompted Gandhi to prioritise the Dalit question and launch his own Harijan movement in the early 1930s.
(This appeared in the print as 'Ambedkar and Gandhi')
