UPSC MainsPOLITICAL-SCIENCE-INTERANATIONAL-RELATIONS-PAPER-I201115 Marks150 Words
हिंदी में पढ़ें
Q4.

Views of Gandhi and Ambedkar on 'social justice'

How to Approach

This question requires a comparative analysis of Gandhi and Ambedkar’s perspectives on social justice. The answer should highlight their differing approaches stemming from their backgrounds and philosophies. Focus on their views on caste, inequality, and the methods to achieve social justice. Structure the answer by first briefly introducing their core philosophies, then comparing their views on caste, economic justice, and political representation, and finally, highlighting their legacies. A balanced approach acknowledging both their contributions and limitations is crucial.

Model Answer

0 min read

Introduction

Social justice, at its core, aims to create a society where all individuals have equal rights, opportunities, and access to resources, irrespective of their social background. Both Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar were pivotal figures in India’s struggle for independence and deeply concerned with achieving social justice, yet their approaches differed significantly. Gandhi, rooted in a Hindu revivalist perspective, advocated for the upliftment of the ‘Harijans’ within the existing social framework, while Ambedkar, having personally experienced the horrors of caste discrimination, championed radical social transformation and the dismantling of the caste system. Understanding their contrasting visions is crucial for comprehending the complexities of social justice in India.

Gandhi’s Perspective on Social Justice

Gandhi believed in the inherent goodness of all religions and advocated for a harmonious society based on Sarvodaya – the welfare of all. He viewed caste as a flawed social order but not inherently evil, believing it could be reformed through love, persuasion, and self-suffering. His approach to addressing untouchability focused on changing the hearts and minds of caste Hindus, coining the term ‘Harijan’ (children of God) to denote the untouchables.

  • Emphasis on Moral Reform: Gandhi believed that social justice could be achieved through individual moral transformation and voluntary cooperation.
  • Village Swaraj: He envisioned a decentralized, self-sufficient village economy as the foundation for social and economic justice.
  • Trusteeship: Gandhi advocated for the concept of trusteeship, where the wealthy would hold their possessions in trust for the benefit of society.

Ambedkar’s Perspective on Social Justice

Ambedkar’s understanding of social justice was shaped by his lived experience of caste-based discrimination. He viewed caste as a deeply entrenched system of social hierarchy and exploitation that could not be reformed from within. He advocated for the complete annihilation of caste and believed that political rights were fundamental to achieving social justice.

  • Annihilation of Caste: Ambedkar argued that caste must be abolished, not merely reformed, as it was inherently oppressive.
  • Political Representation: He strongly advocated for reserved seats for marginalized communities in legislatures and government jobs to ensure their political empowerment.
  • Economic Justice: Ambedkar believed that economic equality was essential for social justice and advocated for state intervention to redistribute wealth and resources.

Comparative Analysis

Aspect Gandhi’s View Ambedkar’s View
Caste System Flawed but reformable Inherently oppressive, needs annihilation
Method of Change Moral persuasion, self-suffering Political mobilization, legal reforms
Focus Changing hearts and minds Securing political and economic rights
Approach to Untouchability Upliftment of ‘Harijans’ within the system Dismantling the system itself

Differing Views on Safeguards

While both advocated for the upliftment of the marginalized, their approaches to safeguards differed. Gandhi was wary of separate electorates, fearing they would further fragment society. He preferred joint electorates with reserved seats. Ambedkar, however, initially advocated for separate electorates for depressed classes, believing it was the only way to ensure their effective representation. He later accepted the Poona Pact (1932) which provided for reserved seats in provincial legislatures, but remained skeptical about its long-term effectiveness.

Legacies and Contemporary Relevance

Gandhi’s emphasis on moral reform and non-violence continues to inspire social movements. However, his approach to caste has been criticized for being paternalistic and failing to address the structural inequalities inherent in the system. Ambedkar’s legacy lies in his articulation of the plight of the marginalized and his advocacy for their political and economic empowerment. His ideas continue to inform affirmative action policies and social justice movements in India today. The ongoing debates surrounding reservation policies and social inclusion reflect the enduring relevance of their contrasting perspectives.

Conclusion

Both Gandhi and Ambedkar made significant contributions to the discourse on social justice in India, albeit through divergent paths. Gandhi’s emphasis on moral transformation and Sarvodaya offered a vision of inclusive society, while Ambedkar’s radical critique of caste and advocacy for political rights provided a framework for challenging systemic oppression. A comprehensive approach to social justice in contemporary India requires integrating the ethical concerns of Gandhi with the structural analysis and political activism championed by Ambedkar.

Answer Length

This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.

Additional Resources

Key Definitions

Sarvodaya
A socio-political philosophy propounded by Gandhi, meaning "the welfare of all," emphasizing the upliftment of all sections of society, particularly the marginalized.
Poona Pact
An agreement signed in 1932 between Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, which reserved seats for the Depressed Classes (Dalits) in the provincial legislatures, but abandoned the demand for separate electorates.

Key Statistics

As per the Socio Economic and Caste Census (SECC) 2011, approximately 23.26% of the Indian population belongs to Scheduled Castes (SCs).

Source: Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India (Knowledge cutoff: 2024)

According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data, crimes against Scheduled Castes increased by 9.4% in 2022 compared to 2021.

Source: NCRB, Government of India (Knowledge cutoff: 2024)

Examples

The Dalit Panther Movement

Inspired by the Black Panther movement in the US, the Dalit Panther movement (1972) was a militant organization that fought for the rights of Dalits and challenged the existing social order, reflecting Ambedkar’s emphasis on self-assertion and political mobilization.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did Ambedkar initially advocate for separate electorates?

Ambedkar believed that separate electorates were necessary to ensure that marginalized communities could elect representatives who would genuinely represent their interests, free from the influence of caste Hindus.

Topics Covered

Indian PoliticsSocial JusticeCaste SystemSocial ReformPolitical Thought