Gandhi knew that India would need a strong state which can pass laws and implement them effectively. Creation of a strong state requires mobilizing masses on grounds other than offered by the standards of development, i.e., on grounds other than class interests. And it is here that Gandhi erred. After all, why did Gandhi support Khilafat movement when he was aware that the common Muslims of India did not at all know about Khalifa or could not even identify Turkey on the world map? Gandhi wanted to create a strong nation and a strong state of all Indians that could solve the economic, religious and social problems of Indian people. For him this was part of a larger strategy to involve masses in freedom struggle irrespective of caste, religion and nationality. A serious study of Hind Swaraj shows that he used every opportunity that identity politics offered for anti-colonial struggle. For political reasons he also accepted the principle of reservation for depressed classes though he tried to clean it from particularistic and divisive tendencies, as much as possible. One may argue that Gandhi understood the limitations of the identity oriented approach but he strongly felt that modernization has to be fought on terms exterior to its own standards. He could not have fought modernization with the tools of economic development and economic equality. If one examines closely, Gandhi worked at two levels. At one level he worked with the resource of soul force and generated opinion in favor of non-violence, trusteeship and voluntarism, and at the other level, he supported the legal means of achieving Sarvodaya and Swaraj. There is no simple way in which we can counter the growing appeal of modernization, equality, or alternatively, the appeal of Marxism. Creation of a desired state requires mobilizing masses on grounds other than standards internal to development, i.e., on grounds other than class interests though there is a real danger that this mobilization may produce a variety of Fascism. In this context, some people may view that Gandhi’s participation in Khilafat movement was greatly responsible for creating an environment for Muslim nationalism leading to formation of Pakistan? No wonder, in practice, everyone supported the competitive model of modernization and evoked cooperation and holism only with respect to problems of those outside the mainstream – women, minorities, the poor, and the untouchables. The Marxists may say that the traditionalists did this deliberately so that the weaker sections are not attracted towards radical and subversive ideas. It may be noted that some of the best advocates of tradition, like M. K. Gandhi and Romain Rollan carried serious doubts in their mind about model of Swaraj and rejection of everything Western. To me this illustrates the dilemma of traditional critique of modernity.