I've prepared a simple diagram to illustrate how one's views about the state affects the kind of government we want, as well as the electoral system (in case we prefer democracy to monarchy).
[Click for larger image. The associated PPT)
You might be surprised to note that I have put Gandhi along with Hobbes and Chanakya, on the right extreme.
That is because he wanted self-governing villages. Hobbes's strong state defends us from each other (and invaders), but otherwise leaves us alone.
So also Gandhi's Ram Rajya needs a a strong king to defend borders, leaving the villages alone. A Ram is needed, a king who understands the Mahabharata's message. In Ramayana Ram is not a socialist maniac, and does not intervene unnecessarily; just assures justice.
Ram ran a tight ship; a minimalist state. He fought evil and was known as a man of great integrity. That is ALL that a king must do.
Democracy was NEVER Gandhi's ideal, Ram Rajya was.
Democracy was, instead, Nehru's ideal. Nehru came to it from well to the left of John Stuart Mill – through a Fabian socialist model. To him democracy was a tool for legitimising all-encompassing, maximalist state. The state would achieve commanding heights. In his democratic society, liberty would be lost entirely. We would become minions of the state.
Gandhi and Nehru were poles apart!
If you found this post useful, then consider subscribing to my blog by email: