What were the main arguments on either side of the debate about how to relate to tribal communities?

The main arguments, on either side of the debate about relating to tribal communities, were led by the British administrator-anthropologists and the nationalists.

According to the British, the tribes of India were primitive people and had a different culture from the Hindus. They believed that the simple tribal people would suffer exploitation and cultural degradation at the hands of Hindu people who wanted the assimilation of tribal people with them. Thus, they needed to be protected by the state in order to safeguard their interests.

On the other hand, the nationalists, of whom G.S Ghurye was the most famous exponent, argued that the tribes of India were not backward, but had been interacting with the rest of Hindu society over a long period. The process of assimilation had been experienced by all the communities in India and the tribes were only a step behind in this process. According to nationalists, attempts to preserve tribal culture only contributed to their backwardness. They believed tribal society needed as much reform as Hindu society.

Thus, the main difference in both viewpoints was the perception about the impact of mainstream culture on tribes.