Revision summary
Gandhi treats individuality as moral self-rule, the root of progress, not as market isolation. The modern state, allied to industrial civilisation, takes over conscience and livelihood and turns persons into administered subjects. Hind Swaraj and the ideal of enlightened anarchy prefer a transformed, decentralised order to a powerful machine of good. Satyagraha, ahimsa, spinning, and panchayats are methods for growing individuals who can resist unjust law. Ambedkar’s caution that the state may still be needed against caste must qualify any simple anti-statism drawn from the quotation.
Model answer
Introduction
Mahatma Gandhi wrote that the state does the greatest harm to mankind by destroying individuality, which lies at the root of all progress. The sentence is not an anarchist postcard. It is a moral theory of freedom. Individuality here is swaraj: self-rule of the person, without which collective swaraj is only a change of masters.
Body
What individuality means for Gandhi
Gandhi’s person is a moral agent who must answer for means as well as ends. Ruskin, Thoreau, and Tolstoy stand behind this. The individual experiments with truth. Progress is the growth of that capacity, not the growth of railways, armaments, or a census of subjects. When the modern state — with its police, professions, and “civilisation” that Hind Swaraj (1909) indicts — takes over conscience, hygiene, and livelihood, the person becomes a cog. Hobbes’s mortal god is, for Gandhi, a spiritual disaster even when it is efficient.
Individuality is not Mill’s aesthetic eccentricity alone, and it is not possessive individualism. It is the courage to say no to unjust law, and the discipline to purify oneself before demanding that the world change. That is why fasting, spinning, and jail-going are political methods. They produce individuals who cannot be fully administered.
How the state destroys it
A centralised state claims a monopoly of violence and of welfare. It professionalises politics. It conscripts. It may even do good — plague control, famine codes — while teaching dependence. Gandhi feared Western industrial civilisation as a partner of this state: wants multiply, character thins, and the village republic dies. He therefore preferred enlightened anarchy as an ideal, and a minimally violent, highly decentralised order as a practical approximation: panchayats, trusteeship, bread labour.
He was not blind to order. Some state remains among imperfect people. The hierarchy of values is the point: when the state becomes the principal agent of progress, it has already destroyed the root of progress.
Political implication
- Satyagraha is individuality in public: suffering binds the state without matching its force. Ahimsa keeps the opponent’s individuality intact. Ambedkar warned that saintly anti-statism can leave caste untouched. That criticism must sit here. Gandhi still names a pathology: the moral person absorbed into party, plan, and police.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD S[Modern state] --> D[Destroys individuality] I[Individuality] --> SW[Swaraj as self-rule] SW --> P[Progress] R[Remedy] --> SA[Satyagraha] R --> V[Village republic] R --> M[Minimal violence]
Conclusion
Gandhi’s charge is that the modern state kills the moral individual on whom progress depends. Swaraj is self-rule before it is a constitution. The remedy is decentralisation, satyagraha, and a severe limit on what the state may do in the name of the people. The warning remains, even where a constitutional state is still needed to protect those whom village custom would crush.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Explain how the slogan 'the personal is political' addresses the issue of women's oppression and discrimination?
Next question in the 2025 paper (Q3). View answer →
-
Was Gandhi an anarchist?
He named enlightened anarchy as the ideal and feared the state, yet he worked with and toward political institutions. The practical programme is radical decentralisation, not a cult of chaos.
-
How does this differ from Mill’s individuality?
Mill defends experiments in living under a liberal state. Gandhi suspects that very state and ties individuality to self-limitation, non-violence, and village swaraj.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2025 · Q1(a) · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Explain the Philosophical approach to the study of Political theory -
2025 · Q1(b) · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Write a note on the relation between equality and liberty from the multi-cultural perspective -
2025 · Q1(c) · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Explain the Macpherson's view on power -
2025 · Q1(d) · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Mention the difference between Italian and German brands of fascism -
2025 · Q2(b) · PSIR GS 1 · 15 marks
Karl Popper presents a defence of the open society against its enemies. Elaborate -
2025 · Q3(a) · PSIR GS 1 · 20 marks
Provide a comparative analysis of behavioural and institutional approach to the study of Political theory -
2025 · Q3(c) · PSIR GS 1 · 15 marks
Explain how the slogan 'the personal is political' addresses the issue of women's oppression and discrimination? -
2025 · Q8(a) · PSIR GS 1 · 20 marks
The decision to conduct Population Census-2027 has reopened the debate on consultation in India. Discuss its various aspects
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2025 · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Explain the Philosophical approach to the study of Political theory
Political Theory
The philosophical approach treats political theory as reasoned inquiry into meaning, right, and the good regime. It defines concepts such as the state, obligation, and justice, and tests them against rival claims. Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, and Rawls are central practitioners of this method. Strauss, Oakeshott, Berlin, and Arendt show that texts and categories still organise modern debate. The approach is not a substitute for behavioural data or institutional history, but it supplies questions that measurement cannot invent.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2025 · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Write a note on the relation between equality and liberty from the multi-cultural perspective
Political Theory
Liberty is non-arbitrary space of action; equality is the claim that this space belongs to every person. Mill and Berlin warn that liberty can be crushed in the name of a single real self or a uniform good. Taylor, Kymlicka, and Parekh show that recognition and group-differentiated rights can be liberal tools in diverse societies. Uniform rules may still silence minorities; group vetoes may still silence women and dissenters inside a community. The Indian Constitution already pairs equal citizenship with cultural rights, which is the practical form of this relation.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2025 · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Explain the Macpherson's view on power
Political Theory
Macpherson read Hobbes and Locke as theorists of possessive individualism: the person as owner of capacities in a market society. The liberal state in that reading mainly protects property and contract. He then distinguished extractive power, which takes benefit from others, from developmental power, which is the ability to unfold human capacities. Democracy should be judged by equal developmental power, not only by elections or negative liberty. The argument retrieves an ethical liberalism and a non-authoritarian Marxism against a thin competitive elite model of democracy.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.