Gandhi: Your assessment of his character & contribution to winning Indian Independence?

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,648
New Delhi, India
#41
Rajeev, you missed that Patel was a Bar-at-Law from the Honorable Middle Temple. Did Gandhi know that Patel would die in three years after independence? He should have left the selection of the Prime Minsiter to the Parliament. There must have been a reason why Patel could have got more votes. Gandhi had no business to interfere. But he was influenced by looks and pedigree and as a result India had to suffer a dynasty.
 
Likes: Rajeev
Oct 2015
1,132
India
#42
Rajeev, you missed that Patel was a Bar-at-Law from the Honorable Middle Temple. Did Gandhi know that Patel would die in three years after independence? He should have left the selection of the Prime Minsiter to the Parliament. There must have been a reason why Patel could have got more votes. Gandhi had no business to interfere. But he was influenced by looks and pedigree and as a result India had to suffer a dynasty.
Oh yes, I erred regarding his education. Patel studied law at MIddle Temple, UK, as you have mentioned.

Not only that, Patel earned and from the saving, at the age of 36 years, he financed his studies in England. He was a successful lawyer as well. On the contrary, Nehru's education was paid for by his father Motilal and Nehru did not do well as a lawyer either.
 
Nov 2014
483
India
#44
Like Valenceband said, the difference is in ways one wants to achieve this. Even if Ambedkar had not asked his followers to change their religion, caste differences were/are bound to disappear in the course of time. It is a part of the Indian Constitution and there is a strong law against it. What did change for those people? The word lower castes has been replaced by Buddhists. Other than that there is no change in their status.

Who kills the lower castes? Brahmins do not do it. Mostly, it is the 'Other Backward Castes', who are in competition with the lower castes for political power, who exploit them at the village level. Why blame the Upper castes for it? Reservations based on castes entrenched caste system in India. It should have been based on economic condition of the person. The advantages are with the lower castes, the lower the better. What advantages do the Upper Castes have other than being refused in education and jobs even when they may be better qualified. And does it help the poor? No. The creamy layer now stands at Rs.10 lacs/year (Creamy layer: above which the reservations do not apply). The real poor people cannot even dream of such income (Rupees 83,333 per month). And remember, there are many ways in which the income can be concealed.

IMHO, the Caste System will not change till the government continues to recognizes castes officially, as it does now. On one hand, you recognize castes and on the other you want the differences to be eradicated. That is unworkable, that is ironic. The current system has not helped the poor people in the last 70 years. And, Inshallah, I am sure, Modi and Shah will be able to do it before their term expires.
To begin with Ambedkar was not a leftist. He wanted reservation not for economic up-lifting of the untouchables, but for social and political reasons. I do not think Ambedkar would have approved of reservation on the basis of economic backwardness. Now we have reservations for the politically powerful and at the village level politically ruling other backward castes. OBC's are the very castes that crush the dalith communities at the village level in India. What a farce the reservation has become within couple of generations and we are complaining of caste system.

Caste system was not created by any one. When tribes were molded on the template of varna of Manu, castes were the result. I like to call castes as metropolitanised tribes. Caste discrimination is bad, but caste itself is not such a bad idea. It allows groups to retain distinct cultures within the same geographic area. Though, there is no reason to maintain a severe form of genetic isolation (which is not healthy). Genetically it can be a bit more fluid. Culturally it is a good thing to maintain different cultures for multi-cultural ism. I do not thick culture is a fixed entity over time or geography, even within a specific caste. It keeps on changing over time and geography. But it is good to have some form of castes for the sake of multi-cultural ism. That is the ancient Hindu solution for multi-cultural ism - not perfect. We do need to think of an alternative. This is the only major disagreement I have with Ambedkar's thinking, i.e. total rejection of caste system.

By the by, what is the solution of Abrahamic religions? Alla-hu-Akbar and lone wolfs?
 
Likes: Aupmanyav

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,648
New Delhi, India
#45
I agree that assimilation of castes may have been the main target of Ambedkar but he was not unaware of the economic conditions of caste and tribes. After all, the Constitution, in which he was one of the major contributor, accepted reservations (affirmative action).
 

Similar History Discussions