Why do people criticize Sardar Patel

Why did MK Gandhi prefer Nehru as Prime Minister and not Sardar Patel?

There were some practical and some psychological reasons for Gandhi's weakness for Nehru.

Nehru had wanted to give Mahatma his trust fund and live a simple life. This was a purely emotional decision. Gandhi, who lost his beloved father at a young age, was deeply touched by the mutual love between father and son. When Motilal died he said, "His love for India was part of his love for his son." The Nehru family, while never adopting the Gandhian ideology, felt that they needed to be freed from their materialistic lifestyle in order to be mystically merged with the silent and suffering masses. After losing his ancestral wealth instead of taking money from Dalmia or one of the other wealthy industrialists, Nehru made himself independent by writing books. This significantly increased his standing with people like Birla and Bajaj. Gandhi could see that the Nehrus were putting money in motion rather than serving as a drain. In addition, the Nehru family showed unity - even if Motilal and Jawaharlal disagreed, they maintained their decency. In contrast, Patel and his older brother often disagreed - the latter preferred Bose to Gandhi's faction in Bengal.

Nehru had good relations with Atlee and later Mountbatten, but did not take an independent line on this basis - this strengthened Gandhi's hand. It made sense that Nehru was a senior prime minister (especially since he was a Hindi / Urdu spokesman from the "heartland" and his family had the support of UP-Rafi Ahmed Kidwai's brightest Muslim politician) while Patel was the big stick . However, Patel could not control Liaqat because the clever young aristocrat had put the Muslim officials on one side and used his position as a financial member to cripple the administration - this made partition inevitable.

Nehru preferred to negotiate with strong regional leaders, Patel was more autocratic - circumstances were such that Nehru's "big picture" romance was what powerful regional satraps would tolerate. In fact, in 1946 most people thought India was a loose federation. The Chief Minister of Bombay or Madras would have more power than the Prime Minister in Delhi. Partition and linguistic reorganization spoke against it.

Nehru's tilt to the left was of course very important to Gandhi, who changed his mind about Bose and the INs very dramatically in 1942. Unlike Patel, Nehru wasn't a great organizer, but he was managed quite easily by his officials. Its profound defeatism regarding. India's chance for progress made him a grumpy but sure guardian of Gandhi's legacy of stupidity, hunger, and strange problems with sex.