On Ambedkar and 'The Annihilation of Caste'

(Also see my longer essay, Ambedkar in the Indian Imagination, a version of which also appeared in The Caravan)

In the story of modern India, as any schoolkid will confirm, the anti-colonial struggle looms large. Almost all national heroes are men associated with it. To what extent is this because the Congress, which led the anti-colonial movement, ruled in the decades that followed? Why do mainstream histories — by Indians and, for their own reasons, even by the British — give political emancipation most of the air time and lionize Gandhi and Nehru at the expense of others? From what perspective does it seem that no other movements of significance were afoot besides anti-colonialism, no other heroes?

Notably, Ambedkar, who didn't quite participate in the anti-colonial struggle — focusing instead on the emancipation of the "depressed classes" — was sidelined for decades. At best, he received grudging respect as the architect of the Constitution, arguably one of the smaller and least subversive parts of his legacy. Was this dimunition because Ambedkar was openly combative and critical of both Gandhi and Nehru, attacked Hinduism's most sacred scriptures and age-old practices, converted to Buddhism, and became a trenchant spokesman of the oppressed castes? Did that made it easy for the defensive Hindu elites to pigeonhole him as a partisan man of his people, rather than a revolutionary social thinker? Was this because the dominant castes and their intellectuals had not done even the minimal soul-searching necessary to embrace Ambedkar's most profound and radical ideas? Indeed, why is it that far more upper caste Indians have read works by Gandhi, Nehru, and Tagore, but almost nothing by Ambedkar? Do non-Dalits have little to gain from reading Ambedkar? Meanwhile, his bold and subversive analyses continue to inspire countless lower-caste activists and writers, who continue to goad Brahminical India towards a long overdue reckoning with its past and its heroes.

According to historian Perry Anderson, Ambedkar was "intellectually head and shoulders above most of the Congress leaders". The fact is that Ambedkar, uniquely among the major national figures, not only overcame enormous personal odds, he also developed a pioneering critique of Indian society based on the Enlightenment ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity. Indeed, he was far more modern than even Nehru. This aspect of Ambedkar — rooted in a scrupulously reasoned, secular and radical egalitarianism, coupled with bracing civil rights talk of social justice and human dignity — is unprecedented among Indian leaders and it still hasn't received its due in mainstream scholarship.

For a good introduction to Ambedkar's mind, few documents will surpass The Annihilation of Caste. Originally written in 1936, it was meant to be a speech that was never delivered — the reasons for which appear in the prologue. This reprint in 1944 is accompanied by a critique by Gandhi, followed by Ambedkar's brilliant rejoinder. Read it and realize why perhaps more than any other leader of modern India, Ambedkar remains relevant to every dream of a just, modern, liberal, secular, humane, and democratic society in India. 

Comments

[Manjunath]

I seriously doubt if India will ever be a just, modern, liberal, secular, humane, and democratic society. We as a society are too inward looking. For us reformation means returning to our old value system. And there in lies the fallacy.

[yayaver]

Namit Sir,

Long back, I was reading a book named "Sanskriti ke Char Adhyaya" by Ramdhari Singh Dinkar. There was one sentence that left a permanent mark on my mind. Hindus are operational conservative in nature while they talk too much as theoretical liberal.

Its so hard to change views in Indian society and conditions around us. Political and economic changes seems easy in comparison for socially inclusive movements. A country that does even understand merit, how will be able to respect equality. Dr. Ambedkar is huge figure who has given quantum push to our society in reformation.

[Anand Manikutty]

I read the whole thing. Ambedkar comes across as a smart, well-educated guy but, like Obama, full of bad ideas.

[Namit]

Anand, like what? If you don't mind, please mention at least three of his ideas that you consider bad. I ask because I'm curious what you'd consider bad, not because I think he never had a bad idea. Thanks.

[Anand Manikutty]

Hi Namit, no man but a fool ever wrote but for money.

[Harbans Lal Badhan]

"The Untouchables (Dalits) of India want economic, social, political, religious and educational equality in Society, not in the eyes of God"
(Harbans Lal Badhan)

[Suraj]

Anand Manikutty..what exactky do you mean ?

[Harbans Ll Badhan]

Ambedkar means revolution. Revolution means Ambedkar.