Three distinct Gandhis emerged during India’s freedom struggle:

• The Gandhi of South Africa, who developed satyagraha and shaped his personality fighting racist laws like the Asiatic Registration Act.

• The second Gandhi, crystallized during the 1919–21 Non-Cooperation Movement in India, applying lessons from South Africa on a wider scale and involving both Hindus and Muslims, notably shifting the struggle to rural villages.

• The third Gandhi emerged after the Non-Cooperation Movement withdrawal (post-Chauri Chaura 1922), shaped by complex socio-political changes including Muslim political assertion and Dalit leadership under B.R. Ambedkar.

The Non-Cooperation Movement’s strength lay in Hindu-Muslim amity and the shift of the nationalist movement’s center of gravity to the villages instead of urban centers.

The Congress became ideologically fractured over time, with divisions between followers of Gandhi and others, highlighted by the 1939 Tripuri Congress where Subhas Chandra Bose defeated the official candidate, exposing rivalry between left and right wings.

Gandhi faced peculiar circumstances losing some organizational control but later regained it with right-wing support, which gradually distanced itself from him as independence neared.

Gandhi’s vocabulary and precepts evolved, especially post-1930–34 Civil Disobedience Movement, reflecting changes in imperial power and his interactions with colleagues holding contrary views.

Gandhi regularly negotiated with ruling authorities and engaged in dialogues with critics who challenged his conceptual framework against India’s complex socio-economic reality.

The chapter focuses on critiques of Gandhi by three major intellectuals:

• M.N. Roy (Marxist critique)

• Rabindranath Tagore (creative, indigenous and Western-influenced critique)

• B.R. Ambedkar (focus on distributive justice and Dalit rights).

These critiques were theoretically significant and influenced Gandhi dialectically, sometimes transforming his ideas, resulting in a blueprint for future India that reflected multiple authentic influences.

The chapter excludes detailed discussion on M.A. Jinnah’s critique because of extensive existing literature and the political nature of his activism, which culminated in the partition of India.

The context of 19th and 20th-century socio-economic and political processes deeply influenced the political ideas of Gandhi, Roy, Tagore, and Ambedkar.

Gandhi’s model gained currency both as a nationalist political mobilization strategy and as a blueprint for India’s future.

Roy, Tagore, and Ambedkar formulated their critiques in contrast and juxtaposition with Gandhi’s ideas, with Gandhi broadly setting the nationalist discourse.

Although Roy, Tagore, and Ambedkar articulated different ideological voices, their critiques were largely theoretical because none matched Gandhi’s organic involvement in the nationalist movement.

Gandhi’s unique strength was his ability to lead the nation using a model based on his practical political experience.

The discussion aims to:
a) Highlight distinctive issues in the Gandhi critiques dialogue.
b) Identify the conceptual basis of arguments both defending and opposing Gandhi.