ഗാന്ധിയും ഇന്ത്യൻ ദേശീയതയും : Prof. Sunil P Ilayidom 

Gandhi is a very communal and casteist minded cunning Hindu. His ideology is no different from the ideology of Savarkar or Gowalkar. After independence, he wanted to create a same India as that of the India of Hindutva people -- a bmn savarna ruled India . But Dr Ambedkar frustrated his ideas and plans.

@@vineethjoshy4819 Gandhi and Savarkar are 2 poles of Indian politics... No comparison at all... Gandhi was even ready to give power to jinnah and league to avoid partition...

@@AparnaNandanan Gandhi made the offer knowing fully well that nobody in the Congress would be agree to that idea. That is why Jinnah himself called him a cunning Hindu. The idea of Gandhi of a self ruling free India is an India of ancient times where the bmns and savarnas ruled. He simply brushed aside the untouchables and their demands as of no great significance or importance but who existed merely to serve the bmn savarnas. He supported the caste system and claimed that it was the strength of India -- a country who fell an easy prey to all invaders !!! Savarkar excluded Muslims, Christians and of course , OBC , SC and STs were already subjugated since 2000 years. So there is no need to mention them. But the aim of the bmns like Savarkar, Golwalkar, Hegdewar, Moonje, Godse, Tilak was an India where the bmns and some savarnas would rule according to their whims and fancies. You can also include in this list most of the congressmen like Gandhi, Patel etc. But Dr Ambedkar stood like a rock between them. Of course , the British who brought in many reforms in India knew the evils of caste system as they had ruled India for 200 years, were sympathetic to the plight of the untouchables and knew very well knew what their future would be in a free India, gave full support to Dr Ambedkar and the untouchables. When they gave a separate electorate to the untouchables, Gandhi alleged that this would divide the Hindu society. As if it is not already divided. Imagine Gandhi alleged that if the dalits went out and voted for their own representatives on a single day, it would divide the Indian society. And he went on a fast unto death. When both Dr Ambedkar and the British did not bother about this fast, and as he was on the verge of death, Gandhi who was only putting on a drama and who did not want to die, immediately signed the Poona Pact and thus saved himself. That is the greatness of Gandhi !!! This was for this reason that the congress let loose the propaganda that the British resorted to divide and rule policy which everyone in the country believe and say blindly without questioning. And this same British was responsible for the grouping of all regions from Kashmir to Kanyakumar, Gujarat to Nagaland into one artificial country called India. And thus we are being ruled by north Indians !!

@@vineethjoshy4819 "I however wish to take this opportunity of conveying to you my appreciation of the work you are doing in the field of social reform. If the untouchables are to be part and parcel of Hindu society, then it is not enough to remove untouchability; for that matter you must destroy chaturvarnya, I am glad that you are one of the very few who have realised this.”This was the words of Ambedkar to Savarkar... And Savarkar never excluded christians or muslims not even sc st or obc... Savarkar wanted hindus and muslims live under same constitution .... From Ambedkar 's book 'Pakistan or Partition of India' 'Mr. Savarkar on the other hand insists that, although there are two nations in India, India shall not be divided into two parts, one for Muslims and the other for the Hindus ; that the two nations shall dwell in one country and shall live under the mantle of one single constitution " In the same book Ambedkar says "Wherever there is the rule of Islam, there is his own country. In other words, Islam can never allow a true Muslim to adopt India as his motherland and regard a Hindu as his kith and kin. That is probably the reason why Maulana Mahomed Ali, a great Indian but a true Muslim, preferred to be buried in Jerusalem rather than in India." It is the Semitic religionists, especially islamists seperate(excludes) themselves from Indian identity... Not Savarkar... Ambedkar also has same opinion..

@@AparnaNandanan : If everything was perfect in Hinduism for Ambedkar, then why did her refuse to die as a Hindu and adopted Buddhism? It is not my intention to discuss the views of Ambedkar about Savarkar or research on the points of views of Savarkar here. The views and opinions of people change over a period of time and their opinions do not remain constant. Over a period of time, and it is 75 years since independence, what is of utmost importance is reality. And the reality is that there is not a single Muslim MP in the ruling party BJP. And Muslims constitute 14% of the population. “Mr. Savarkar on the other hand insists that, although there are two nations in India, India shall not be divided into two parts.” Which nation is he talking about and what is that nation? If he meant India, then it is a totally erroneous notion. There was never a country or nation called India till August 1947. Till then what existed was BRITISH INDIA. That is a “India” that the British created by subjugating all the native rulers and bringing them under his domain. That British India cannot be claimed as the nation of a Hindu or a Musilm or a Brahmin or a Bania. If the wonderful leaders then had realized this fact, there would not had been any blood shedding. The leaders were determined to preserve British India as India. For what purpose? Instead of two or three countries as present today, there should have been a dozen countries to reflect true democracy and for efficient administration for the welfare of the people instead of one big unmanageable nation to satisfy the ego of some politicians. There was a muted demand for Dravidsthan. But it was too muted to be taken seriously. Mountbatten wanted to create a separate country of Bengal comprising West Bengal and Bangladesh. It was opposed by Nehru. But Nehru wanted to create NWFP as a country since Congress was not strong there. Punjab should had been set aside as a separate country but this was opposed by the first defence minister Baldev Singh. And the idea of the bmns since the beginning of the 20th century when it was certain that the British would be leaving soon was to create his old Vedic country to be ruled according to Manusmrithi. And he wanted it to be Akhand Bharat. That is an area comprising Afghanistan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka and Burma!!!!!!! And in this country , non Hindus are to be second class citizens subjugated to the whims and fancies of the Hindus - read Bmns and Savarnas. And of course, the avarnas and the untouchables were already second and third class citizens according to the biggest constitution of bmns - Rig Veda. That is why almost all the founders of Hindutva organization are bmns like Savarkar, Golwalkar, Hegdewar, Shyam Prased Mukherjee etc etc etc. But the India of 20th century was not his ancient India which he had invaded. He had to reckon with an enlightened mass of untouchables led by Dr Ambedkar.