Ideological Differences and Similarities between Gandhi and Ambedkar

Gandhi	B.R. Ambedkar
Principal architect of the Indian freedom struggle.	Principal architect of the Constitution of independent Indi
Burning of foreign cloth	Burning of Manusmriti
- Foreign cloth and Manusmriti represented the bondage and slavery for India. - Pinch of salt from the ocean, and a drop of water from the Mahad tank were acts of political catharsis and social philosophy.
Believed that freedom was never to be bestowed but to be wrested from the authority by the people who desire it	Expected bestowing of freedom by the imperial rulers
Differed over the nature and scope of democracy as a method of government
Gandhi had very little respect for the parliamentary system of governance	Ambedkar advocated parliamentary system of government for independent India
Gandhi believed that democracy tends to get converted into mass democracy with a propensity for domination by leaders	Ambedkar was inclined towards mass democracy as it could act as a pressure on the government with the advancement of the oppressed people.
Political and social activist
No rigidities of ideology or principles except the uncompromising notion of non-violence	Certain principles which were very rigid
Tried to put forward simple practical alternatives to the political streams of the twentieth century like liberalism, communism and fascism.	Natural inclination for liberal ideology and desired institutional framework and structures.
Gandhian politics tried to show the aspect of Indian unity.	Ambedkar’s politics tended to highlight the aspect of Indian disunity
In Hind Swaraj, Gandhi tries to prove that India has always been a nation prior to the beginning of the imperial rule and it was the British rule who broke this cultural unity	Believed in the notion that Indian unity was the by-product of the legal system introduced by the imperial state.
‘Gramraj’ was ‘Ramraj’ and real independence for Indians	The status-quoist nature of the Indian villages denied equality and fraternity and also liberty. He believe, ‘Gramraj’ would continue the social hierarchy based on discrimination and inequality.
- Idea of the use of compulsion or force for social integration as well as social reforms was negated by Ambedkar, idea of proper education to make the individual desire for change, reform and integration, stance views of two leaders were the same. - Views of two leaders were also differ context of development for deprived classes
Gandhi named the depressed classes and the untouchables as 'Harijan'	Ambedkar denounced it as a clever scheme, Depressed Classes League was renamed as Harijan Sevak Sangh (by Gandhi). Ambedkar left the organisation by claiming that for Gandhi removal of untouchability was only a platform, not a sincere programme
Gandhi held that caste system in Hinduism has nothing to do with religious precepts and spirituality. For Gandhi, caste and varna are different, and caste is perversive degeneration.	- Centre of religion must be between man and man, and not between man and God alone, as preached by Gandhi. - Ambedkar too wanted to cast away the evil practices prevalent in Hinduism in an attempt to reform and reconstruct, rather than destroy it fully. - later phase of his life, he left Hinduism, denouncing it as an entity which couldn’t be reformed. - Ambedkar denounced the Vedas and other Hindu scriptures. - Believed that the Hindu scriptures do not lend themselves to a unified and coherent understanding, and reflect strong contradictions within and across sects. - Caste system and untouchability were the manifestations of the Hindu religious scriptures
Endorsed the idea of freedom of religion, but never approved a separation of politics and religion.	Believed in freedom of religion, free citizenship and separation of State and religion.
Religion as an agent of social change was well accepted by both leaders. Both denounced in theory and thinking anything that either decried or diminished the role of religion in the life of an individual or in the life of society.
- Believed in limited sovereign power of the State. - Absolute sovereign power of the State would annihilate the spirit and personality of an individual. - Believe least governance being the best governance.	Envisaged limited sovereign power of the State, limited authority for the government, legal sovereign power should be limited and people should be the ultimate sovereign
Notions of violence and non-violence got differing explanations from Gandhi and Ambedkar
Gandhi never made such a distinction and was an avowed opponent of violence of any kind.	Ambedkar held absolute non-violence as an end and relative violence as a means
Gandhian perception it was purity of means that determined the end.	Ambedkar believed in purity of ends and justified means as just when the ends were just.
Gandhi and Ambedkar differed greatly in their views concerning mechanisation of production and utilisation of heavy machinery.
Gandhi was apprehensive about the de-humanising impact of mechanisation and held it responsible for the creation as well as sustaining of exploitative socio economic orders in the world	- Ambedkar, attributed the evil effect of machinery to wrong social organisations that gave sanctity to private property and the pursuit of personal gains. - Ambedkar was of the firm belief that machinery and modern civilisation were of benefit to all, and held that the slogan of a democratic society must be machinery and more machinery, civilisation and more civilisation
Idea of social transformation through democratic and peaceful means got support from Ambedkar as well as Gandhi
Gandhi, he wanted to solve the problem of social disharmony and disintegration through peaceful rehabilitation of the oppressed classes.	Ambedkar desisted from pleading a blunt destruction of the social order, however, evil it was.
Gandhi spoke in plain local vernacular.	Ambedkar spoke in English.
Disobey the law to make the law more just was a Gandhian principle: outward manifestations were non-cooperation, hartal, satyagraha and civil disobedience.	Ambedkar was more inclined towards the observance of law and constitutionality in the political process.
View on untouchables
Gandhi viewed the untouchables as an integral part of the Hindu whole.	Ambedkar had an ambivalent stand on the issue, religious minority and not a part of the Hindu community, and preferred to call them a 'political minority' or 'minority by force'
- Untouchability was one of the many problems confronted by Indian society. - Gandhi was more concerned with the problem in its contemporary situation.	- Untouchability was the major problem that captured his sole attention. - Made an exhaustive study of the problem from its the historical angle
- Gandhi treated untouchability as a moral stigma and wanted it to be erased by acts of atonement. - Little use of legal/constitutional modes	Wanted to solve the problem of untouchability through laws and constitutional methods