Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi is on every currency note because he is the ‘Father of India’. He enjoys the title ‘Mahatma’ for his immense contribution to so-called freedom struggle against British colonialism. The Congress party hitherto appropriated every social and economic sphere at the expense of other freedom fighters and hijacked the space for mostly worshipping ‘Mahatma’ Gandhi, in real, without following any ideals of Gandhism. The entitlement is unfair as it is intrinsically not in consensus with the scientific temperament and rationality. “What Congress and Gandhi have done to untouchables” — a book by the [real] ‘Mahatma’ Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar is quite sound enough to divulge the racistic and Brahminical cognition behind the Mahatma-ness of Mohandas Gandhi. In schools and elsewhere, the said book and also ‘Annihilation of Caste’ are not properly introduced. Thanks to the Gandhian and Hindutva propaganda machineries.
In his usual style of factual writing and empirical presentation, Dr Ambedkar has very pragmatically conducted an anatomy of Congress party’s mentality and approaches towards the depressed community aka ‘Dalit’ caste. Dr Ambedkar records the drama of Dalit politics unfolding in pre-independence India and verily exposes the resistance of Indian National Congress (INC) towards active political and social reforms meant to benefit the Untouchables, Atishudras or Dalits. Splendidly, Dr Ambedkar debunks Gandhi for his somersaults…especially regarding his position vis-à-vis the Untouchables.
Nevertheless, when Gandhi shamelessly defended the system of casteism and untouchability in his discourses with Dr Ambedkar, it is stunning to behold abhorrence and hatred for Gandhi emanating from Hindutva community. No doubt he has been concluded as ‘the most orthodox of orthodox Hindus’ in the said book. Towards the end of the book, Dr Ambedkar has reflected on the implications of ‘Gandhism’ and political dominance of the ‘elitist’ INC on the fate of the Untouchables in independent India, while pointing out the dangers of Gandhi’s deification.
Alas!
Gandhi was quite prone to narcissism and vanity, just like today’s PM of India. Gandhi had an army of followers but was badly defeated by the intellect of one-man army Dr Ambedkar. Unfortunately, the nibbi attitude (blackmailing) of Gandhi applied against Dr Ambedkar on 24th September 1932 in Poona should make any sane mind lose every iota of respect for Gandhi. The very famous Poona Pact, albeit not so popular today, was intended to establish a separate electorate channel for the Dalit community. Gandhi’s as usual ‘fast unto death’ policy pressurized Dr Ambedkar to give up. Gandhi believed that a separate electorate for the Dalits will dismantle the religion of Hinduism as he very much reasoned (on 14th August 1931) with Dr Ambedkar that untouchability cannot be separated from Hinduism because casteism is intrinsic to ‘sanatana dharma’. Take a look at the racistic conversation of Gandhi:
Mohandas Gandhi: “I understand that you have got some grievances against the Congress and me. I may tell you that I have been thinking over the problem of Untouchables ever since my school days — when you were not even born.”
Dr Ambedkar: “It is true, Mahatmaji, that you started to think about the problem of Untouchables before I was born. All old and elderly persons always like to emphasize the point of age.”
Mohandas Gandhi: “The Congress has spent not less than rupees twenty lakhs on the uplift of the Untouchables.”
Dr Ambedkar: “The Congress is not sincere about its professions. Had it been, it would have surely made the removal of Untouchability a condition, like the wearing of khaddar, for becoming a member of the Congress. No person who did not employ untouchable women or men in his house, or rear up an untouchable student, or take food at home with an untouchable student at least once a week, should have been allowed to be a member of the Congress. Had there been such a condition, you could have avoided the ridiculous sight where the President of the District Congress Committee was seen opposing the temple entry of the Untouchables. You might say that Congress lacked strength and therefore it was unwise to lay down such a condition. Then my point is that Congress cares more for strength than for principles. This is my charge against you and the Congress. You say the British Government does not show a change of heart. I also say that the Hindus have not shown a change of heart in regard to our problem, and so long as they remain adamant, we would believe neither the Congress nor the Hindus. We believe in self-help and self-respect.”
Mohandas Gandhi: “It is really surprising that men like you should offer opposition to me and to the Congress.”
Dr Ambedkar: “We are not prepared to have faith in great leaders and Mahatmas. Let me be brutally frank about it. History tells that Mahatmas, like fleeting phantoms, raise dust, but raise no level.”
The above discourse clearly depicts that it was Dr Ambedkar, not Gandhi, who was the real hero of depressed class. And, continues to be. Dr Ambedkar even favored urbanization as he realized that casteism stands very much rigid in the rural sphere, while Gandhi defended the rural lifestyle. There’s a dire need to shift the goal post in today’s epoch, especially when casteism or caste-based violence against women and untouchables have dramatically increased; to dismantle racism from India. Ambedkar Consciousness, not Gandhism, is a very important panacea required to critically examine the origin of caste and bigotry and simultaneously develop ‘rational thinking’ in every home.
From experimenting so-called celibacy sexual tests with his teenage grandnieces Abha and Manu to condescending the black communities in Africa, Gandhi was not ‘Mahatma’ at all. Little do we dare to question the credibility of the title ‘Mahatma’ for Mohandas Gandhi in so-called Independent India? Instead, India has to learn a courageous lesson from University of Ghana on how to dismantle the statue of Gandhi before the ‘masquerading’ Gandhism further normalizes untouchability in Indian societies.
