Ambedkar and Gandhi on Caste Electorate

Context: The ideological clash between Gandhi and Ambedkar regarding separate electorates for Scheduled Castes (SC) illustrates their differing visions for caste reform and political representation in pre-independence India.

Gandhi’s Perspective

• Early Views: Initially, Gandhi held traditional Hindu views on caste, endorsing social segregation and promoting caste duties. He opposed practices like interdining and inter-caste marriage.
• Evolution on Untouchability: Over time, he renounced untouchability, advocating for the dignity and rights of those marginalized, whom he referred to as “Harijans” (children of God).

Integrating Caste for National Strength:

• Unity among Hindus: Gandhi believed that a united Hindu community was crucial for India’s independence, viewing internal divisions as detrimental.
• Opposition to Separate Electorates: He argued that separate electorates for Scheduled Castes would divide Hindu society and weaken the anti-colonial struggle, fearing it would play into British “divide and rule” tactics.
• Integration Advocacy: Gandhi promoted the integration of lower castes into mainstream Hindu society and called for the abolition of untouchability.
• Moral Leadership: He positioned himself as a moral figure, using non-violence and self-sacrifice to inspire unity among castes.
• Universal Rights: He asserted that the rights of lower castes should align with the broader objective of national unity.
• Hunger Strike: In September 1932, Gandhi undertook a hunger strike in Yerawada Jail to protest the proposal for separate electorates.

Ambedkar’s Perspective

• Need for Political Representation: Ambedkar contended that separate electorates were vital for meaningful political representation, enabling Scheduled Castes to elect their own leaders.
• Addressing Injustice: He viewed separate electorates as a means to rectify historical injustices and empower marginalized communities.
• Protection from Majority Domination: Ambedkar argued that separate electorates would safeguard the interests of Scheduled Castes against the “tyranny of the majority.”
• Affirmative Action: He saw them as a form of affirmative action to enhance the political influence of lower castes.
• Catalyst for Social Change: Ambedkar believed that political empowerment could lead to broader social change, aiding the struggle against caste discrimination and promoting equality.

Poona Pact

• Background and Negotiation: The Poona Pact arose from the conflict between Gandhi and Ambedkar over separate electorates, following Gandhi’s hunger strike in 1932.
• Replacement of Separate Electorates: It replaced the demand for separate electorates with reserved seats for Scheduled Castes in legislative bodies, allowing participation in joint electorates.
• Reserved Seats: The pact guaranteed a specific number of reserved seats for Scheduled Castes in provincial legislatures, improving their political representation.
• Influence of Gandhi: Gandhi’s fast exerted moral pressure on Ambedkar to compromise.
• Ambedkar’s Reluctance: Although he agreed to the pact, Ambedkar viewed it as a concession that did not fully address caste oppression and remained skeptical about its effectiveness.
• Long-term Impact: The Poona Pact laid the foundation for India’s reservation system, influencing policies aimed at uplifting Scheduled Castes and fueling ongoing discussions about representation and equality.