Answer:

Introduction:

The Indian freedom struggle wasn’t just a fight against colonialism but also a struggle to envision a new socio-political order for a free India. Two stalwarts of this era, Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, while converging on the aim of achieving freedom, often diverged in their vision of the constitutional framework for India. Both had deep concerns about India’s social fabric but had different approaches towards addressing them.

Body:

Difference in Visions:

• Nature of the State:
  • Gandhi: He envisioned a decentralized polity with the village being the primary unit of governance (Gram Swaraj). Gandhi believed that true democracy could be realized when power was vested in the smallest unit.
  • Ambedkar: He believed in a strong central authority to ensure that socio-economic rights and the abolition of caste-based inequalities were enforced. Ambedkar was wary of local majoritarianism, especially in villages that harbored deeply entrenched caste prejudices.
• Social Justice and Caste:
  • Gandhi: He aimed at social transformation through moral persuasion. He believed in the upliftment of the ‘Harijans’ by changing the hearts of the upper-caste Hindus. His ‘Harijan’ campaigns were part of this effort.
  • Ambedkar: Having experienced caste discrimination firsthand, Ambedkar was of the view that legislative actions and rights were necessary to obliterate caste inequalities. He was instrumental in framing laws that provided for reservations for the socially and educationally backward classes.
• Economy:
  • Gandhi: He favored a trusteeship model where businesses act as trustees of society’s wealth. He was also a proponent of self-reliance, especially in the rural economy, and emphasized the importance of handicrafts and small industries.
  • Ambedkar: He envisioned a robust economic framework which would address both, industrial growth and agrarian reform. He advocated for the State’s intervention in major sectors of the economy to ensure equitable distribution of resources.

Ideas of Gandhi for the Modern Constitution:

• Decentralization of Power: 
  • In the age of growing urbanization, empowering local bodies, both in urban and rural areas, can ensure that governance is more responsive and adaptive to local needs.
• Trusteeship Model: 
  • In today’s era of corporates and multinational conglomerates, the principle of trusteeship can be a solution to the growing economic disparity. 
  • Corporates can be entrusted with the responsibility of societal welfare and sustainable development.
• Promotion of Handicrafts and Small Industries: 
  • In light of the ‘Make in India’ initiative, Gandhi’s emphasis on indigenous industries and handicrafts can be a boon for sustainable and local development, generating employment and preserving cultural heritage.

Conclusion:

While Gandhi and Ambedkar differed in their visions, both aimed at creating an equitable society free from the shackles of prejudice, discrimination, and poverty. In the modern context, while Dr. Ambedkar’s principles are enshrined in the Indian Constitution, Gandhi’s principles remain ever relevant and can guide us in addressing contemporary challenges. Both visionaries, with their unique approaches, have left an indelible mark on India’s socio-political fabric. Incorporating Gandhi’s ideas into the modern constitution can further strengthen India’s commitment to a decentralized, equitable, and sustainable democracy.