After coming across various critiques of Gandhi and by Gandhi in the past few weeks, the mind wonders if I could unlearn what I have learnt till now. Should I change my perspective altogether or accept the existence of multiple perspectives or simply give into the simplicity of ignorance and indifference towards the so called father of the nation. I feel perplexed and drained by the amount of literature that has been written by Gandhi and even larger amounts that have been written as criticism to the former. Finally, I choose to interrogate my own learning and perspective from whatever history of the country I have been taught till now.
One cannot close a speech on Gandhi without highlighting his efforts to abolish untouchability from the Hindu society. Living in a city, I do not come across this abhorring practice on a day to day basis. At the same time I am aware of its prevalence in the interiors of India even today. I am curious to know whether the efforts of Gandhi have actually affected the practice of untouchability and reduced it to an extent in modern India or it is a byproduct of globalization. On this discourse, I would refer to the differences in the approach of the other pioneer of Dalit rights and the drafter of our constitution, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar. It is important to study and highlight the different approaches followed by Gandhi and Ambedkar and their motives behind them on the issue of caste system in India. After reading D.R. Nagraj’s essay – ‘Self- purification vs. Self- respect: On the Roots of the Dalit Movement’, I would proceed to comment on the relevance of these ideas in contemporary India. The concept of inequality itself is a modern philosophy. There are many examples in Hindu scriptures which believe in inequality as well as various humanitarian values including universalism, brotherhood, non violence etc.
The gist of the main argument is structured below. I may or may not touch upon all the information which I have collected through research till now in the term paper.
Main Argument - Why Gandhi was against untouchability but at the same time he supported Varnashram practices among Hindus? By supporting this he was supporting Hindu traditional practices at the same time when he was against inequality which was caused by untouchability in that particular system. He tried to save Hinduism? Or he feared that untouchables will leave Hinduism which will in turn lead to the distortion of Hindu varna system. Gandhi never supported centralization of power including the concept of state. He believed that there should be decentralization of power and village should be part of decision making process.
Whereas, Ambedkar, a western educated scholar, described caste as a symbol of power as well as Hinduism in the name of inequality and the village as the centre of exploitation. Ambedkar described village is a place where upper castes make decisions by suppressing Dalits and untouchables in the country.

Points of discussion-
1. While studying in London, student of law why Gandhi chooses Hinduism as a tool of mobilizing people. Why he never supported or tried to find a way in a legal framework to solve the problem of untouchability in country. ( Pune pact)
2. Ambedkar and Gandhi debate on untouchability. Gandhi adopted method of non violence as the spirit of his independence movement. While doing this, he was able to capture the mindset of the Indian population. His life style showed that he was the leader of oppressed but he may have been fearful when it comes to Hinduism. Ambedkar was able to understand that these exploitative practices are happening since centuries and Gandhi is trying to redefine it in cultural framework. He believed that Gandhi is pampering it and giving it space to flourish with his argument- that the mindset of the higher caste will change towards untouchability and that is what is called the welfare approach. Ambedkar challenged Gandhi while saying many mahatma came many will come but untouchables of India will remain untouchables. He said, “I was born a Hindu. I couldn’t help it, but I solemnly assure you that I will not die a Hindu.”
3. Ambedkar even said that the notion of caste exist in each and every section of Indian society. He took example of matang and mahar communities of Maharashtra. He told that mahar believed they are higher than mating but both are untouchables according to Hindu varnashram. There is a contradiction here. The reservation in India is on the basis of caste or tribal identity. If Ambedkar believed in caste less society then why he tried to incorporate reservation in the caste framework?
In an attempt to discuss all these questions in the present context the aspect of globalization has to be taken into account. Whether globalization is supporting untouchability or giving space to Dalit to overcome such exploitative practices which existed earlier. What are the status Of Dalit movements today who believed in Ambedkar ideology? At the same time congress party which came into public space through Gandhi are they working on his approach or not? Whether both, Ambedkar and Gandhi, loose the battle to caste system in present times or is there a learning to carry forward?