Revision summary
Gandhi treated untouchability as a moral sin to be cured by service and temple entry. He kept a reformed village and varna ideal. Ambedkar treated it as caste structure needing annihilation, rights, and exit options. Forms moved from satyagraha to parties, conversion, and the Constitution. Contemporary Dalit politics is largely Ambedkarite in perspective.
Model answer
Introduction
Gandhian and Ambedkarite struggles both named untouchability as a wound. They disagreed on what the wound was. Gandhi sought moral reform inside a reformed Hindu whole. Ambedkar sought annihilation of caste as a political structure of graded inequality.
Body
Gandhian form and perspective
- Harijan work, temple entry, and the spinning wheel treated untouchability as a sin of caste Hindus to be washed by service and self-purification.
- Village, trusteeship, and varna as occupational duty were kept as an ideal, so the aim was inclusion without destroying the social architecture.
- Champaran-style satyagraha trained moral pressure; the same method was turned to wells, roads, and temples.
Ambedkarite form and perspective
- Untouchability was not a blot on an otherwise good dharma. It was the underside of caste, reproduced by endogamy and sacred law.
- Forms shifted to separate electorates (then Poona Pact contest), conversion, labour and education, and constitutional rights.
- Annihilation of Caste demanded that the Hindu social order itself be confronted, not only its manners.
After Independence
- Gandhi’s idiom remains in campaigns of social harmony and some temple-entry rituals.
- Ambedkar’s idiom organises Dalit parties, Buddhist conversion, and rights litigation.
- The present struggle uses both streets and courts; the perspective that travels further in law is Ambedkarite.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD G[Gandhi Harijan reform] --> IN[Inclusion in Hindu whole] A[Ambedkar annihilation] --> RT[Rights conversion law] IN --> ST[Struggle against untouchability] RT --> ST
Conclusion
The change is from moral inclusion of Harijans into a purified Hindu village to a rights politics that treats caste as a structure to be broken. Forms moved from satyagraha and service to conversion, statute, and organised assertion.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Write a short note a changing means of production and increased rural poverty
Next question in the 2017 paper (Q1). View answer →
-
Did Gandhi deny equality?
He wanted civic equality and temple entry. He did not accept Ambedkar’s demolition of varna as the path.
-
Is the Ambedkarite struggle only electoral?
No. It is also conversion, literature, campus politics, and constitutional litigation.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2018 · Q1(b) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Give a critical analysis of Andre Beteille's study of Tanjore village. -
2018 · Q7(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 20 marks
Has caste system hindered democracy and adult franchise in India. Discuss. -
2017 · Q2(c) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
What are the changes in the cultural and structural aspects of the caste system since independence? -
2016 · Q2(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 20 marks
How has B.R. Ambedkar identified the features of caste system ? How is it different from the mainstream treatment of caste features ? -
2016 · Q2(b) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Discuss Andre Beteille account of the relationship between caste, class and power as a change from symmetrical to asymmetrical one. -
2015 · Q1(c) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Louis Dumont's perspective on Indian caste system -
2015 · Q2(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 20 marks
Is caste system changing, weakening or disintegrating in India? -
2015 · Q5(e) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
How far Srinivas Sanskritization is modernizing force or traditionalizing force in understanding the changes in caste system?
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2017 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Write a critique of the structural and functional perspective used by M.N. Srinivas in the understanding of Indian society
Perspectives on the study of Indian society
Srinivas studied India as an observed village structure, not a book of sacred rules. Function explained how custom held groups together. Desai’s class reading and Beteille’s disharmony expose the harmony bias. The village monograph cannot stand for mill, city, and tribe. Keep the field tools; refuse the closed-system claim.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2017 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Which is more significant, the principle of 'hierarchy' or the principal of difference; in inter caste relations in the present day ?
Perspectives on the study of Indian society
Hierarchy still ranks bodies through honour, endogamy, and atrocity. Difference organises caste as political identity and rights. Srinivas’s dominant caste already split ritual rank from local power. Beteille’s disharmony names equality as value beside ranked practice. Public life leans to difference; intimacy still leans to hierarchy.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2017 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
What are the distinct features of islam as practised in India, and how have they changed over time ?
Perspectives on the study of Indian society
Indian Islam is regional, often shrine-centred, and internally ranked. Minority status after Partition made community a political fact. Reform and print pushed scriptural uniformity against custom. Caste-like divisions and dargah practice persist. Change is toward a firmer boundary, not toward one identical piety.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.