From Ambedkar to Thakkar and Beyond: Towards a Genealogy of Our Activisms

Author(s): R. Srivatsan
Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 43, No. 39 (Sep. 27 - Oct. 3, 2008), pp. 96-102
Published by: Economic and Political Weekly
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40278006 .
Accessed: 15/10/2014 03:02
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Economic and Political Weekly.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 14.139.86.166 on Wed, 15 Oct 2014 03:02:08 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
From Ambedkar to Thakkar and
Beyond:
Towards a
Genealogy
of Our Activisms
R SRIVATSAN
This
paper
draws on a letter B R Ambedkar wrote in
1932,
that was addressed to A V
Thakkar, secretary
of the
Anti-Untouchability League
in order to
bring
out the
implications
for
present day
activism in dalit
struggles.
The letter itself was a discussion of alternative ideas on
how to work for the welfare of the
"Depressed
Classes"
and makes a
critique
of the Gandhian
programme.
The
paper attempts
an
understanding
at the
present
historical
juncture
of the structure of Ambedkar's
political thought
as it
emerges
in the
logic
of
Depressed
Classes activism and its structural strain
against
the Marxist
position.
I would like to thank
Deeptha
Achar and
Shivaji
Panikkar for
providing
me with an
opportunity
to do a
preliminary presentation
of this letter in
the Art and Activism Seminar, Baroda, 2004.
A
slightly
edited version
of this
essay
is due to
appear
in the
forthcoming
volume of
essays
that
emerged
in that seminar. This
independent essay
was written in the
context of a PhD dissertation on the nationalist
concept
of Seva,
at
the Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad,
in affiliation
with Dr B R Ambedkar
Open University, Hyderabad.
I am
grateful
to
K
Satyanarayana
for his comments that have
strengthened
the
paper
and
given
it
greater depth.
I thank Madhava Prasad
sincerely
for his
provocative
and constructive critical comments which (as usual) forced
me to
say things
a little more
rigorously
than in the first instance.
R Srivatsan
(r.srivars@gmai7.com)
works on
development
initiatives at
the Anveshi Research Centre for Women's
Studies, Hyderabad.
attempt
in this
paper
to draw out the
implications
of a minor
document from the
writings
of the freedom movement in a
manner that is alive to that context and at the same time
useful to our
thinking today.
This
seemingly
innocuous text is a
letter
proposing
a
programme
of action for the
Anti-Untouchability
League (aul),
written
by
B R Ambedkar in
1932,
and addressed
to A V
Thakkar, secretary
of that
organisation.1
Ambedkar's
argument
in this letter is not a
polemic, though
he did
indulge
often in
polemic
with dramatic effect. It is rather a
fiercely
focused discussion of ideas about how to work for the welfare of
the
Depressed
Classes and social reform.2
Through
this discus-
sion,
Ambedkar
provides
a
critique
of the Gandhian activist
pro-
gramme
and structure. The document
provides
us with some of
Ambedkar's most
profound
and
enduring insights regarding
the
structure of caste
oppression,
the
politics
of the
oppressed,
and
the
scope
of social activism.
I had
originally
titled this
essay
Towards a
Preliminary
Gene-
alogy
of Our Activism' to
suggest
that this
"genealogy"
of activism
was
proposed
as a future
programme
to be undertaken
by me,
and that Ambedkar's letter is a vehicle for
my proposal.3 Through
the
process
of
reading,
I now think that it is Ambedkar who
sketches the
genealogy
of nationalist
voluntary
activism in this
letter, critically tracing
its descent in caste-Hindu
thought
through
his'
proposal
for a different
programme.
The activism he
criticises is
Gandhian,
and I will
primarily
focus on this
aspect.
Alongside,
I will also use Ambedkar's
complex understanding
of
the
struggle against
caste
oppression
as a
viewing platform
to
examine Marxist
thought
and
practice
in the Indian context. To
this
end,
I will read this letter as if he is
addressing
Marxism
too,
even
though
his
writings
on Marxism
only appear
after the
1950s,
and his earliest written reference to socialism and communism
perhaps
come four
years
after this letter in 'Annihilation of
Caste'.4
My reading
of Ambedkar's letter will stress the structural
aspects
of his
thought-in-praxis
that
complicates
Marxism as we
know
it,
rather than dwell on his
explicit
criticisms of Marxism.
These have been dealt with at
length by
the writers
cited, among
many
others.
My reading
of this letter is not
unprecedented.
Gail Omvedt
has dealt in detail with the same letter in her recent
biography
of
Ambedkar.5 Given the focus of her work in that
book,
she has
read the letter as
expressing
a more
progressive
view than Gan-
dhi's and has narrated the
history
of how it was smothered to
Ambedkar's
dismay
and defeat (in
that
particular
battle).
While
Omvedt's
reading
is almost
entirely
valid and
acceptable
from
my
perspective,
what I want to do here is to read this letter with less
96
September 27, 2008 0DE3 Economic & Political weekly
This content downloaded from 14.139.86.166 on Wed, 15 Oct 2014 03:02:08 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

- - =

=

- SPECIAL ARTICLE
of a
straightforward historical/biographical
intent. I
want, rather,
to
attempt understanding
for our
present juncture
the structure
of Ambedkar's
political thought
as it
emerges
in the
logic
of
Depressed
Classes
activism,
in
implicit
criticism of the Gandhian
position
and its structural strain
against
the Marxist one. It is
within this view that I will read his letter in a
way
that will be
significantly
ahistorical.
Some
"straightforward history"
will situate the letter and its
contents for the reader who is unaware of the
background.
Gandhi
started the
Anti-Untouchability League
in
1932
after the Poona
Pact resolved the crisis of his fast unto death. Gandhi had under-
taken this fast in
protest against Ramsay
Macdonald's Communal
Award which had
provided
a
separate
electorate to the
Depressed
Classes,
thus
removing
them from the Hindu fold. The idea
behind the aul was to extend in a
logical
manner Gandhi's
constructive
strategy
of
demonstrating
that the
Congress
and its
penumbra organisations provided
an
increasingly deep political
representation
for the
people
of India as a whole.6 It was felt that
the untouchables alienated from the
Congress by
Ambedkar's
crisis-provoking
interventions had to be won back to the fold of
the nationalists. Gandhi's bitter battles with Ambedkar in con-
nection with the Yeravada fast found some reconciliation in
Ambedkar and his
Depressed
Classes
colleagues
Rao Bahadur
Srinivasan and Rao Bahadur M C
Rajah agreeing
to
join
as
part
of the
eight
member aul board. G D Birla was
president
and
A V Thakkar of the Servants of India
Society (and
Gandhi's life-
long companion)
was elected
secretary.
Ambedkar's letter dated November
14, 1932
was written to
place
his views before the aul board for their
consideration,
on
route to London. I would like to
imagine
that the all too brief
peace
at
sea,
and the distanced view of the
battleground, gave
Ambedkar moments of reflection that
shaped
the
magnificence
and
generosity
of his
writing
in this letter.
Two Methods of
'Uplift'
Ambedkar starts his
argument by outlining
two
ways
of
thinking
about the causes of social
suffering
and the methods of
uplift
that
flow
logically
out of each of these
ways
of
thinking.
The first
way
thinks that a
person
who
belongs
to the
Depressed
Classes suffers
because of some
failing
in his
"personal
conduct". Ambedkar's
critical use of the term
personal
conduct is
noteworthy:
If he is
suffering
from want and
misery
it is because he is vicious and
sinful.
Starting
from this
hypothesis
this school of social workers con-
centrates all its efforts and its resources on
fostering personal
virtue
by adopting
a
programme
which includes items such as
temperance,
gymnasium, cooperation, libraries, schools, etc,
which are calculated
to make the individual a better and virtuous individual (ibid: 134).7
The second
way suggests
that if a
person
suffers from want
and
misery,
it is because his environment is adverse. Ambedkar
professes
this second
way
and asserts that it is the task of social
work to lift the
Depressed
Classes as a whole and not
just
a few
individuals,
as the first
way
would. This task would be to
change
the environment in which the
Depressed
Classes lived in
society.
Since the aul came into
being
to lift the
Depressed
Classes as a
whole,
it would be a wasteful
dissipation
of
energy
to focus on
individual
uplift.
This
opening argument
is
significant. Firstly, though
it
does not name
Gandhi,
it
targets
his
approach
to service com-
prehensively. Secondly,
as we shall
see,
the criticism
provides
a
valid
perspective
to evaluate
many
future versions of
voluntary
activism and service that are with us
today.
In
Gandhi,
viciousness
or sinfulness is a matter of
past
incarnations of the individual
-
his
present suffering
is due to his
past
sins.
However,
the
kinds of intervention
described,
and their focus on individual
conduct,
i
e, "temperance, gymnasium, cooperation, libraries,
schools, etc", point
to the new avatars of the Gandhian mode
of intervention that dominate
many
of our activist efforts. In
fact,
we need to
pay special
attention to those
holy
cows of our
own
developmental activism,
i
e,
libraries and schools here.
The
library
and
school,
when used as an instrument to
improve
the individual conduct of the "sinful wretch"8 from the
Depressed Classes,
is as much an
object
of criticism as is the
attempt
at
promoting temperance, vegetarianism, praying
to
Ram,
and other Gandhian methods of
"uplift".
Thus Ambedkar
criticises a social reform or welfare initiative that moulds the
conduct of an individual from the
Depressed
Classes as if it
was that conduct which was flawed and needed
improvement,
without
fighting
the social
oppression
that is the root cause of
the
problem.
What then does the second method that tries to
improve
the
social environment
imply?
Civic
Rights/Civil
War/Crisis of Belief
The most
important step
of the
aul,
in Ambedkar's
pursuit
of the
second
path,
would be a
campaign
to secure "civil"
rights.
It is
interesting
that while the
heading
of this section
says
civil
rights,
the text uses the word "civic
rights"
or
"rights
of a civic nature"
on three occasions and never uses the word civil. The Shorter
Oxford
Dictionary gives
the
primary
definition of civil as
belong-
ing
to
citizens,
while civic is defined as
pertaining
to citizens.
What
belongs
to a citizen almost with the force of a
possession,
i
e, civility,
is described in the
dictionary
as an orderliness of
life,
well-governedness
in civil
society, politeness
of
address, privacy,
legal right,
etc. In stark contrast,
the attribute of a citizen that
pertains
to his character as the civic comes from corona civica a
crown of oak leaves and acorns bestowed
upon
one that saved a
fellow-citizen in war. It is an oath of
allegiance
to the new order
of
things,
demanded from citizens in the French Revolution.9 The
shift in the
usage
from "civil" in the
heading,
to "civic" in the
text,
marks the shift from a
politics
of civil
society
to a
specific
kind of
revolutionary politics.
Such a
programme
if carried into the
villages
will
bring
about the nec-
essary
social revolution in Hindu
Society,
without which it will never
be
possible
for the
Depressed
Classes to
get equal
social status... First of
all,
there will be riots between the
Depressed
Classes and the Caste
Hindus which will result in
breaking
heads and in criminal
prosecu-
tions of one side or the other (letter regarding AUL, p 135).
What are these
rights,
the defence of which
may
confer the
corona civica?
They
are
precisely
the
rights
of
entry
to
schools,
public places, public transport,
etc.
Entry
to school as a civic
right
has a desirable connotation that is different from that of an
instrument to
improve
the conduct of the sinner. Here education
Economic &Political weekly OQQ9 September 27, 2008 97
This content downloaded from 14.139.86.166 on Wed, 15 Oct 2014 03:02:08 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SPECIAL ARTICLE
=
~^- rzzz:
==-
--.==h===f^- =.-l-z=r===

^=
is a
general programme
of intellectual
growth,
not a method of
improvement premised
on the individual's flaw.
There would be
many
obstacles to such a
campaign
to secure
civic
rights,
the first
being
the
magistracy
and the
police
who
would ensure that the
dignity
of the caste
Hindus,
even if
they
were
guilty,
was
upheld against
the
Depressed
Classes. The second
deadly
obstacle would be a social
boycott,
which would harass
the
Depressed Classes,
throw out them of
jobs
and starve them.
But this trauma was inevitable in
pursuit
of the
goal,
and the aul
would need to have an
army
of activists in the rural
parts
to
sup-
port
and
encourage
the
Depressed
Classes to
fight
their battles.
The reason
why
this
campaign
was
necessary
in
spite
of blood-
shed, according
to
Ambedkar,
was its dramatic effectiveness in
forcing
the caste Hindu to think about his
everyday
conduct. The
caste Hindu will never think about his habitual
practices
of
op-
pression
unless a crisis forces him.
Preaching
and other
easy op-
tions of
converting
the Hindu
opinion through
rational ideas will
fail because
"they
do not
compel thought,
for
they
do not
produce
a crisis" (ibid: 136). Thus,
the most
important
lesson Ambedkar
teaches us about activism for social
justice
is that it must
produce
a crisis in order to
force thought.
The other
aspect
of Ambedkar's formulation is the
way
in
which he
imagines
revolution for the
Depressed
Classes in the
context of this letter. The caste battles are not to consume the
whole of
society
in
flames, they
also do not
attempt
the over-
throw of the
oppressor
-
they
are acute
(in
the medical sense of
short and intense) engagements
that force a dominant commu-
nity
to think about its
practices.
The
assumption
behind this im-
agination
of the revolution is that while there are a
large
number
of
thoughtless
and violent followers of the dominant
tradition,
there is also a
significant part
of the dominant
group
that can be
forced
by
a critical situation to see reason and
enlightenment
over the issue of caste. The
change
in the social environment
sought by
Ambedkar
through
the aul activism was to come about
by
a shift in the dominant consensus.10
Against
an Economics of Caste
Oppression
The next
step
that the aul would have to undertake would be
a
struggle
to
bring
about an
equality
of
opportunity
for the
Depressed
Classes. The "bar-sinister"
operates against
them in
rural
self-employment (they
are not
permitted
to sell
vegetables,
milk, eggs
or butter in order to earn a
living), government employ-
ment (where they
do not even
get
the
posts
of
messengers),
and in
urban
private industry (where they
are
employed
in the most
menial
jobs, being
thrown out at the
slightest
hint of business
adversity). Focusing
on the cotton
spinning
and
weaving industry,
Ambedkar describes how the
Depressed
Classes
employees
never
rise to the
highest rung,
are discriminated
against
in distribution
of raw material for
piece
work even
among women,
where the
Naikins
give
all the raw materials to caste Hindu
women, leaving
the women of the
Depressed
Classes to face their
hunger.
The
aul,
in this environment,
would have to work to create
public
opinion against
such
practices
and establish bureaus to deal with
this kind of
inequality.
Much can be done
by private
firms and
companies managed by
Hindus
by extending
their
patronage
to the
Depressed
Classes and
employing
them in their offices in various
grades
and
occupations
suited to the
capacities
of the
applicants (ibid: 138).
The current debate
among
dalit intellectuals about reserva-
tions in
private industry
echoes the
political
assertion made here.
However,
the
optimism
Ambedkar shows in his
expectation
from
caste Hindu
industrialists,
which seems
misplaced
in
today's
context,
has also to be
explained against
the miserable
employ-
ment context of the textile mills he himself describes.
Why
does
he think such a drastic shift in
employer opinion
and action is
possible
when the
reality
in that era was so stark?
The contradiction Ambedkar describes here is a caste contra-
diction within the same
working
class.11 He does not seek a
Marxian
metahistory
of class
struggle
and ultimate
goal
of com-
munism to
ground
the
proposed initiative;
that
is,
there is no
pro-
posal
for a base of class
inequalities
that
gives
rise to a
super-
structural effect of caste
struggle.12
He focuses on the
directly
observable caste contradiction between the caste Hindu and
Depressed
Classes. The
struggle
takes on an
immediate, percep-
tible
meaning,
and
provides
a
specific logic
of
finding
allies that
is based on the
singular
character of caste
oppression. Thus,
it is
possible
for Ambedkar to
hope
to find caste Hindu allies
among
the
managers
of
industry
who
may help
in the annihilation of
caste. In this
hope,
Ambedkar seems to
depend
on the inherent
rationality
of
industry
that will drive it to find the most suitable
candidates for
jobs,
in "various
grades
and
occupations
suited to
the
capacities
of
applicants" regardless of
caste.13 It would seem
that this
reasoning
is a valid one for industries
seeking good
em-
ployees
even
today.
On the other
hand,
the same caste contradic-
tion would divide the
potential Depressed
Classes
employees
and
actual caste Hindu ones as it did then.
This
single-minded
focus on caste
oppression
alone is a well
thought
out
policy
for
Ambedkar,
who in another less amiable
context, responded
to A V Thakkar's sarcastic
description
of him
as "the
doughty champion
of the
oppressed, depressed
and
exploited",14
in the
following
vein
Mr Thakkar has
sought
to
give point
to his criticism
by calling
me a
"doughty champion
of the
oppressed
and
depressed".
Let me tell Mr
Thakkar that I have never claimed to be a universal leader of
suffering
humanity.
The
problem
of the untouchables is
quite enough
for
my
slender
strength,
and I should be
quite happy
if I could
successfully
rescue the untouchables from his clutches and those of Mr Gandhi.15
Ambedkar's
logic
of focused
support
to one issue is
again
seen
in the
strategy
he
proposes
in his
1945 speech
on "Communal
Deadlock and the
Way
to Solve It".
There,
Ambedkar formulated
a
system
of reservations in
parliamentary representation
that
would ensure that no
minority
would face the
oppressive
hegemony
of
majoritarian
Hinduism. At the same
time,
no
single
minority
would have to
try
to find a theoretical
rationality
that
would cover all the
specific oppressions
faced
by
all the minorities.
Thus,
with an intuitive
pragmatism,
he
rejects
a
single
over-
arching
battle
against oppression
theorised
according
to one
"primary
contradiction". He
prefers
to find
conjunctural part-
ners to
struggle alongside
the
Depressed
Classes
against
the
single
source (i e,
caste Hinduism)
of different kinds of contra-
diction and different forms of
oppression.
Even if there is one
dominant
oppressor,
the
oppressed
are divided and differentiated
98
September 27, 2008 Q2S9 Economic & Political weekly
This content downloaded from 14.139.86.166 on Wed, 15 Oct 2014 03:02:08 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
- -
-
*
SPECIAL ARTICLE
by
the structural
logic
of caste Hindu
oppression
in the Indian
context. We
may
deduce here that the result of the
struggle
against
caste Hindu
oppression,
even if
successful,
is not a Uto-
pian community
free of all
struggle,
but
clearly
another set of
struggles
that arise in that
emergent
situation in
ways
that can-
not be theorised
today.
Thus,
while the first
step
of a
campaign
for civic
rights
is
theorised in a
way
that
problematises
the
Congress-Gandhian
concept
of service to the
untouchables,
the second
step
to
fight
for
equality
of
opportunity problematises
for us the Marxian
concept
of class
struggle,
and forms of activism based on this
concept.
The
important thing
about this criticism those of us
with a Marxist habit must understand is this. The
logic
of a con-
tradiction and the
language
of a
struggle against oppression
have to be born of the
experience
of the
oppressed.
Ambedkar's
position may
be read as
arguing
that there is no use in
trying
to
achieve an
understanding
of
oppression according
to a
category
(of class) which calls for a
reasoning beyond
the
strong experi-
ence of caste
oppression.16
The
analysis
of forces in a
struggle,
if
democratic,
must arise
organically
from the consciousness of
the
oppressed. Any attempt
to short-circuit this consciousness
of the
oppressed
with
ready-made
formulae of universal
history
will
regress
to an authoritarianism that undercuts the
experi-
ential basis of the
struggle.
This is
why
the
struggle against
caste
oppression
even
today
must be a dalit
struggle,
and not an
upper-caste agenda.
Sharing
a Meal, Shaping
a
Community
The next
paradox
Ambedkar
poses
for us in his
conceptualisation
of
struggle
is his
proposal
for
inter-dining
between caste-Hindus
and the
Depressed Classes,
...to dissolve the nausea which the touchables feel towards the Un-
touchables,
and which is the reason
why
the two sections have re-
mained so
apart
as to constitute
separate
and distinct entities (From
the letter
regarding AUL, p 138).
Ambedkar
argues
that
only
a common
cycle
of
participation
in
a
way
of life can overcome the
strangeness
one feels for the other.
Social
unity,
"which we are all
striving
after" will come
only
with
understanding
and a sense of
bonding
that arise in an associated
way
of life. In one of those rare instances when Ambedkar refers
to Gandhi as
"Mahatma",
he
says
that in those 10
days
when the
Mahatma undertook the fast that shook the
nation, many
of the
caste Hindus
employers
broke rules of
untouchability
and frater-
nised with the untouchables. This led to caste Hindu servants
striking
work. Instead of
pushing
ahead with their
programme
of fraternisation,
the
employers capitulated
to
orthodoxy
and
abandoned their newfound
friendship. Ruing
the existence of
such "fair weather friends",
Ambedkar
argues
that the aul should
work to
strengthen sympathisers
so that
they
are
ready
to
fight
alongside
the
Depressed
Classes
against
the forces of
orthodoxy.
Trust in the caste Hindu will come
only
when he is
ready
to
shed blood for the
Depressed Classes,
as the whites of the north
in the United States did
against
their own
kin,
the whites of the
south "for the
emancipation
of the
Negro". Sympathy
and trust
are
reciprocal. However,
it is
important
to note that Ambedkar's
example
is not a
simple espousal
of the "American
way".
In the
American civil
war,
it was the whites who
fought
each other
over the issue of
"Negro slavery".
In Ambedkar's
programme,
the
Depressed
Classes will assert themselves and
wage
the
primary
struggle
-
the caste Hindu
sympathisers
are mere
supporters
and
fellows-in-battle.
Thus in the same
argument,
Ambedkar runs
together
both a
reference to
revolutionary
violence on the one
hand,
and a
plea
to
the
employer
to
put
into
practice
a
programme
of
change
that
will affect the caste Hindu servant's behaviour on the other. The
attack here is on our
understanding
of how a
community works,
how Ambedkar thinks for and about the
Depressed Classes,
their
political condition,
and what
justice
consists of. It would be worth
exploring
each of these
aspects
in some detail:
The first
point
to note is the
complexity
of Ambedkar's
concept
of
community (or
of a
group
or class as
such)
-
it is
necessary
to set aside all
imaginary
communities that find
peaceful
coexistence or are
uniformly
structured classes in
their
loves, understandings
and
antagonisms. Thus,
we need to
recognise
that communities are
richly
textured in their levels of
oppressiveness, irrationality
and
sophistication.
While it
may
be
necessary
at one
place
in a
given period
to break caste Hindu
heads in a
pitched battle,
it
may
be
equally necessary
at another
place,
in the same
period,
to dine with the caste Hindu and
get
used to him while he
gets
used to us. It is
necessary
to work dif-
ferent
aspects
of the
community (or class,
or caste) against
the
other, exploit
the failure of the
logic
of
community,
force its
inconsistency,
in order to
bring
about a
change
in its structure. It
is
plain
that such a
process
cannot
provide
a final resolution to
the caste
question
-
only continuing
battle. This is far from both
a Gandhian
imagination
of
'Ramarajya',
and from a
Hegelian/
Marxist dialectical resolution of class contradiction.17 The
Ambedkarite model of
community
is one that is
put constantly
under
stress, working
it
apart
and
together
in a
jerky,
malfunc-
tioning, slowly improving, always provisional unity.
The second
point
to note is that in Ambedkar's
conception,
the
oppressed
do not think themselves as
victims,
nor do
they hunger
for world
transforming
state
power.
He
suggests
that the
Depressed
Classes
recognise
the contours of their
oppression
and
will
fight actively
to overcome it to the extent
they
feel
necessary.
The structure of
oppression,
like that of
comradeship
in battle
does not follow
geometric
lines and rectilinear
perspectives;
therefore,
a
uniform, high
modernist
approach
to
oppression
will
not serve the
purpose.
On the other
hand,
it is
necessary
to re-
frain from
seeing
the
Depressed
Classes as
passive recipients
of
pity
and
alms,
in the
way
the Gandhian
programme
did.
The third
noteworthy point
is the
suggestion
that the demand
for
justice
in the face of untold
oppression
will be a demand for
blood.
Anything
like a "Truth and Reconciliation Commission"
which listens to the victim and
compensates
him in a
simple way
without
punishing
the
oppressor
will not be
enough
in
itself,
even
though
it
may
be
part
of the whole
process.
At the same
time that bloodshed is not an
apocalyptic
river of
revenge
-
there will be different levels of battle
against oppression
which
will be
conjunctural, contradictory
and
multiple.
Justice demands
respect,
not
only sympathy.
It
requires love,
which will arise both
through
the crisis of bloodshed and
through
acts of
courage
and
Economic & Political weekly GCE3 September 27, 2008 99
This content downloaded from 14.139.86.166 on Wed, 15 Oct 2014 03:02:08 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SPECIAL ARTICLE
=-
~

^eeeeeeeel =i=^=
-==-
-==
-====
generosity
that
go beyond
the
imagination
of bloodshed. This
follows from the
complex,
multilevelled
logic
of the
way
in
which a caste-ridden
community,
which is
trying
to become a
nation,
will have to work.
Activism Born of Love, Not
Pity
If the activists of the aul have to
fight alongside
the
oppressed,
they
will have to be
people
who love the
oppressed,
and are not
"fighting" mainly
for financial consideration. "Hire
purchase"
of
Depressed
Classes activism
by organisations
who are also en-
gaged
in several other
programmes
is to be eschewed because
love for the
Depressed
Classes cannot be
purchased
on hire. Ac-
tivists will have to be
disciplined
to have a
single-minded
devo-
tion to the
problem,
"narrow-minded and enthusiastic about their
cause" (From letter
regarding aul, p 139).
Such activists will best
be found
among
the
Depressed
Classes themselves.
I do not
suggest
that there are not scoundrels
among
the
Depressed
Classes who have not made social service their last
refuge.
But
largely
speaking, you
can be more sure that a worker drawn from the
Depressed
Classes will
regard
the work as love's labour
-
a
thing
which
is so essential to the success of the
Anti-Untouchability League.
Thus, again, through
his
explicit advocacy
of
Depressed
Classes
activists,
Ambedkar
clearly
shows his assessment of the limita-
tions and limits of caste Hindu activism. Ambedkar reiterates in
his
closing
-lines the need for love to
bring together,
however
doubtfully
and
provisionally,
the national
community.
The touchables and the untouchables cannot be held
together
by
law
-
certainly
not
by any
electoral law
substituting joint
elec-
torates for
separate
electorates. The
only thing
that can hold
them
together
is love. Outside the
family justice
alone in
my opin-
ion can
open
the
possibility
of
love,
and it should be the
duty
of
the
Anti-Untouchability League
to see that the touchable
does,
or
failing
that is made to
do, justice
to the Untouchable (ibid: 140).
What
Happened,
Then?
Given the
powerful
criticism of the structure of nationalist
activism in his
letter,
we
may guess
that Ambedkar did not feel
too
upset
when there was no
response
from Thakkar,
even
thought
he did
express
rhetorical
surprise
in his
retrospective
narration (ibid: 140).
In
complete
contradiction to his recommend-
ations,
the aul had decided to
adopt
the method of
"peaceful
persuasion",
eschew force and the creation of
crises,
avoid refer-
ence to
inter-dining
and
intermarriage,
and
adopt
constructive
work of
uplifting
the Untouchables. Meanwhile,
Gandhi
began
to
call Untouchables
Harijans.18
He renamed the
organisation
the
Harijan
Sevak
Sangh (hss),
after a discussion of terms in
193419
To add insult to
injury,
the
organisation
decided not to
permit
membership
of
Harijans,
even
though
the
original
central board
of
eight
members had once had three untouchable leaders. Thus
the
aul, through
its
renaming
as the hss reverted to its
genea-
logical
descent
-
it
began functioning
as a caste Hindu
organisa-
tion
seeking
salvation for its members' souls
by offering repent-
ance for the sins of
untouchability
committed
by
Hinduism in
history.
The
irony
of this
'prayaschitta'
for the caste Hindu soul
was that it was to be achieved
through
the
purification
of the
physical body
and moral fibre of the
Harijan!
The aul/hss thus
sacrificed what Ambedkar felt was an invaluable
concept
of
service to
improve
the environment of Untouchable life at the
altar of the constructive
programme
that was central to the caste
Hindu nationalist
strategy.
Perhaps
most
importantly,
Ambedkar's
strategic
move of writ-
ing
this letter forced the aul to unmask its
agenda
and show the
caste Hindu
hegemony
it stood for and
expose
its limitations.
The aul could have
responded positively
to Ambedkar's
letter,
in
which
case,
the historical situation would be
altogether
different
today.
The fact that it did
not,
does not belittle Amkedkar's at-
tempt
at critical retrieval. Herein lies the last lesson Ambedkar
teaches us in this letter. In an activist
struggle,
he did what he
implied
should be done in his
writing,
and that is not to abandon
hope
of
support
from
any quarter,
however
unlikely.
Partners in
struggle may
make
strange
bedfellows. The
logic
of an
oppressed
minority's struggle
that is
taking place
on the
ground may
not be
reduced to a
simple political
and ethical calculus of comrades
and class enemies.20 It calls for strenuous efforts at
working
counter-hegemonic
consensus with all
parties
who share related
positions,
until such time that these
hopes
are belied.
However,
that alliance should be on terms that
affirm
the
oppressed
minor-
ity's implicit perspective
of the
struggle.
It is this call to collective
self-assertion that becomes the critical
differentiating principle
of the term "dalit"
(which
arises in the same
period),
from the
term
"Harijan",
which connotes a
passive,
once
sinful,
individual
to be redeemed
by upper
caste benevolence.
What Then Do We Make of All This?
The first
question
to be addressed is how far can a letter
outlining
a social service
programme
be theoretical? Is it valid for
my analysis
to attribute this
top heavy
theoretical and
philosophical
intention
to such a slender text?
My
answer is that insofar as Ambedkar,
an
exceptionally sharp
theoretician of caste and at the same time
one of the most
powerful
activists India has
produced,
was
thrown in the middle of events that had enormous theoretical
and
practical significance,
it is
logical
to assume that even his
simple
activist communications were driven
by
a broader
concep-
tual framework. It becomes
necessary
to make this
assumption
in
reading
this letter
given
the
scope
of the
specific struggle
within
which Ambedkar framed
it,
and
given
the fact that he was mount-
ing
an
increasingly systematic
and radical
critique
of
Gandhi,
Congress
and caste Hinduism. At the same
time,
this
conceptual
framework evolved and transformed its
underpinnings
under the
inexorable
pressure
of the
political
battles he
fought. Through
Economic&PoliticalwEEKLY
available at
Dey
& Bose
Magazine Agent
P.O. Beldubi, Dadpur
Howrah 711 322
West
Bengal
Ph: 22198749
100 September 27, 2008 GEZS3 Economic & Political weekly
This content downloaded from 14.139.86.166 on Wed, 15 Oct 2014 03:02:08 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
- SPECIAL ARTICLE
all
this,
Ambedkar
practised fully
what he found to be a residual
fire in
Marxism,
"small but still
very important"
and that is "the
function of
philosophy
is to reconstruct the world and not to
waste its time in
explaining
the
origin
of the world".21 For this
reason,
I would
argue,
Ambedkar's theoretical reflection is
rarely
oriented towards an abstract
diagnosis
and
prescription
for a universal
problem
-
it is
always
a
perpetually sharpening
"theoretico-pragmatic"
instrument
geared
to the here and now
of activist work.
This
reading
of Ambedkar's
political thinking
is based on a
snapshot
view
provided by
one letter written in a
specific
his-
torical context of activism.
My attempt
has been to draw out the
implications
of the letter for the different kinds of activism that
we inherit. This has
necessarily
entailed
sketching
a
positive
out-
line of how Ambedkar viewed
Depressed
Classes activism in that
moment.
However,
this
positive
outline is not a
theory
of dalit
activism as it
emerges
and evolves
historically
in his
writings
and
in
post
Ambedkarite
practice.22
This exercise
clearly
demands a
depth
of
primary
and
secondary scholarship
that is
beyond
the
scope
of this
essay.
Given these structural
limitations,
some con-
cluding
cautions about
categorising
"Ambedkarism" as it
emerges
in this letter are in order:23
(i) Even as this
stage
of Ambedkarism
problematises
Gandhian
welfare
activism,
it
accepts
the notion of welfare and
provides
it
with a transactional content of
great dignity,
(ii)
Even as it
problematises Marxism,
it takes on board a
practice
of
revolutionary
violence where needed and
couples
it with a whole
spectrum
of activism
ranging
from this violence at
one
end,
to
strategically planned expressions
of love at the other,
(iii)
While there is
undeniably
an element of
pluralism
in
Ambedkar,
the element in his
thought
which
goes beyond civility
to strife confounds our
understanding
of
pluralism
which is
essentially
a non-violent civil societal
process
of collective
bargaining
and
negotiating
for
political goods,
(iv)
It is also not
possible
to
incorporate
Ambedkar's counter-
hegemonic strategy
in Ernesto Laclau's
concept
of
hegemony
as socialist
strategy
without
introducing
a
texture,
detail
and
range
of activism that exceed the
scope
of Laclau's
abstract formulations. In
addition,
Ambedkar's
insights
on the
strategy
of
struggle
are more incisive than
anything
Laclau
has formulated.
(v) While Ambedkar's
working philosophy
is
essentially
a
prag-
matism I would hesitate to reduce it to
any simple application
of
Dewey's thinking, given
Ambedkar's demonstrated habit of
completely reworking
the terrain on which a
concept
is
originally
proposed.
(vi)
Whichever
philosophical
element it takes on
board, changes
or
rejects,
it is clear that Ambedkar stresses the self-assertion of
dalit consciousness
through
the
perspective
and structure of
activism he
proposes.
It is this that differentiates and makes
specific
the
Ambedkarite,
dalit
agenda today.
The most
important thing
to be remembered here is that
the
specific
content of his
programme
reflects an evaluation
of the condition of the
Depressed
Classes at that
point
in
history
as much as it reflects Ambedkar's choice of
political strategy
in that context. In fact this evaluation and choice are inter-
woven
inextricably.
If we have to draw on his
thinking,
we
will have to construct it anew for our
situation,
to deal with our
impasses.
This construction will
surely put
our
ingenuity
and
analytical understanding
to test. What do we make of
Ambedkar's
legacy
of dalit activism? How then do we construct
our
Enlightenment?
24
notes
i I will henceforth refer to this letter as the "letter
regarding
AUL". See
pp 134-40,
Dr Babasaheb
Ambedkar, Writings
and
Speeches:
Vol 9 edited
by
Vasant Moon (Education Department,
Govern-
ment of Maharashtra, Bombay, 1991).
The entire
Chapter
V in which the letter
appears,
'A Political
Charity
-
Congress
Plan to Kill
by
Kindness* is a
resource of value to activists and theorists inter-
ested in issues of welfare and social reform.
2 In this
essay
I will use the term "unrouchables" and
"Depressed
Classes" more or less
interchangeably.
3
The term
genealogy,
which I have used in the
title, put
in
quotation
marks in this sentence and
in italics in the next sentence, is from Michel
Foucault,
a thinker from another milieu, whose
theoretical work establishes interesting
conver-
gences (though certainly
not identical
thought
processes)
with this letter. To make it
absolutely
clear, my point
is not to
say
that Ambedkar is
Foucauldian, or that Foucault is an Ambedkarite!
I am
just trying
to illuminate each with the work
and
thought
of the other. I will
bridge
these
convergences
with footnotes at relevant
points
in this
essay. Genealogy, according
to Foucault is
an effective
history (or similarly
functional
description)
of a dominant, morally
unassailable
concept
or
practice
from a critical
perspective
subjecting
the
underlying
ethical values to a
thorough
revaluation. "It will
uproot
traditional
foundations and
relentlessly disrupt
its
pretended
continuity.
This is because
knowledge
is not
meant for
understanding.
It is meant for
cutting."
See Michel Foucault, 'Nietzsche, Genealogy,
History'
in Aesthetics: Essential Works
of
Foucault
i954-i84,Vol 2, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1994.
4 See 'Annihilation of Caste', Writings
and
Speeches:
Vol 1, pp 27-96.
The
dating
of his
major
texts
is based on Anand Teltumbde's
diary
of
impor-
tant life events in his invaluable CD
e-compen-
dium of B R Ambedkar's
writings.
See also,
Valerian
Rodriques (ed), The Essential
Writings
of
B R Ambedkar, Oxford
University Press, Delhi,
2002, Introduction for a useful
background
and
rough chronology.
In the broad historical context of Ambedkar's let-
ter we discuss here, we
may
note in
passing
that
the Communist
Party
of India has two dates of
origin.
One was started after the Indian National
Congress Kanpur
session in 1926, by
S A
Dange,
Singaravelu Chettiyar
and others. The other
was started in Tashkent in
1924 by
M N
Roy,
Muzzafar Ahmed and their
colleagues. Thus,
there was a Marxist historical context in India
when Ambedkar wrote this letter in 1932.
This
historical context in
Depressed
Classes discourse
is described in detail
by
Gail Omvedt, Ambedkar:
Towards an
Enlightened India, Penguin Books,
New Delhi, 2004. Omvedt
argues
that class radi-
calism and Marxism were
part
of the milieu of
dalit
thinking
even in the 1930s (see chapter
titled
"Against Capitalism
and Brahmanism'
Years of Class Radicalism'). Anand Teltumbde,
"Ambedkar' in and for the Post-Ambedkar Dalit
Movement', paper presented
in the seminar on
the Post-Ambedkar Dalit Movement, dept
of
political science, University
of Pune, March 27-29,
1997,
Usha
Wagh, Pune, 1997, argues
that it
is reasonable to assume that Ambedkar was
familiar with Marxism from his
early days
in
Columbia, since his course work included a
study
of Marxism, and his
guide
Edward
Seligman
was conversant with the materialist
conception
of
history.
5 See her discussion in Omvedt
op cit, pp 49-51.
6 It was this use of the AUL as an
organ
of construc-
tive
activity
rather than service as he understood
it that led to Ambedkar's disillusionment with
Congress
and Gandhi, leading
to the text that
begins
with those words.
7 This term "conduct" is used
by
Foucault in a
similar
way.
Power for Foucault is the conduct
of conduct. See his The
Subject
and Power' in
H L
Dreyfus
and P Rabinow, Michel Foucault:
Beyond
Structuralism and Hermeneutics, The
Harvester Press, Sussex, 1982, pp 219-21.
8 "Sinful wretch" is bechara, or even
paap
bechara
as
they
would
say
in
Hyderabadi.
Similar terms in
common use would be
ayyo paavam
in Tamil
ipaapam
in
Telugu).
9 See
p 342, Shorter
Oxford Dictionary,
Oxford
University Press, London, 1973.
10 In this context, it is
important
to note that
Gandhian activism
operated
with a Janus (dou-
ble) face:
Against
the British Communal Award,
his fast
provoked
an immense moral crisis not
least for Ambedkar himself, and in the face of
Hindu
opinion,
it
sought rational, peaceful
consensus for
improvement
of conditions of the
untouchables, who Gandhi
begins
to call the
"Harijans".
It is
precisely
at the
receiving
end of
this
"peaceful" oppression
of the Gandhi
Congress
Economic apolitical weekly ODES September 27, 2008
101
This content downloaded from 14.139.86.166 on Wed, 15 Oct 2014 03:02:08 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SPECIAL ARTICLE =e======eeee===^ ^eeeefeeeeeee --eeeeeep ^eee

tzeeee,
=====
combine that Ambedkar
gives up
this
position
on
changing
the dominant consensus within
Hinduism and calls for the annihilation of caste.
Tracing
the
growth
of Ambedkar's
revolutionary
agenda
calls for a different project
with more
detailed
analysis
of the relevant texts and their
context.
11 See "Annihilation...", where Ambedkar
argues
that the caste
system
is not
only
a division of
labour, but a division of labourers, p 47.
12 See ibid, where he
argues
that
That economic
power
is the only
kind of
power
no student of human
society
can
accept.
That the
social status of an individual
by
itself often
becomes a source of
power
and
authority
is
made clear
by
the
sway
which the Mahatmas
have held over the common man.
Why
do
millionaires in India
obey penniless
Sadhus and
Fakirs?
Why
do millions of
paupers
in India sell
their
trifling
trinkets which constitute their
only
wealth and
go
to Benares and Mecca? That
religion
is the source of
power
is illustrated
by
the
history
of India where the
priest
holds a
sway
over the common man often
greater
than the
magistrate
and where
everything,
even such
things
as strikes and elections, so
easily
take
a
religious
turn and can so
easily
be
given
a
religious
twist
(p44)-
13 See ibid, where Ambedkar
argues
about the
dynamism
of
industry
and the need for an
open
channel of movement so that
people
can survive
(pp 47-48).
14 A V
Thakkar, Letter to editor, Times
of India,
Poona, May 12, 1945 (issue dated
May 17, 1945)-
The context was Ambedkar's famous
speech
on
the "Communal Deadlock and the
Way
to Solve
It", delivered to the Scheduled Castes Federation
in that month.
15
B R Ambedkar, Letter to Editor, Times
of India,
Bombay, May 17, 1945 (issue dated
May 18, 1945),
emphasis
added. See Michel Foucault, Power/
Knowledge:
Selected Interviews and Other
Writings
1972-1977, Colin Gordon (ed), Pantheon Books,
New York, 1980, pp 126-27 in
chapter
Truth and
Power' for a discussion of the difference between
the
specific
intellectual and the universal intel-
lectual (or leader, as Ambedkar
says here).
Though
the issue in Foucault is
posed
from the
1960s
onwards in the context of scientific knowl-
edges,
the
differentiating concept
of the
specific
intellectual is useful to
gain
some
insight
into
Ambedkar's intuitive adherence to the
problems
of the untouchables. This focus of Ambedkar's
intervention
may again
be understood in
Foucault's terms as a
genealogy
that is, "the un-
ion of erudite
knowledge
and local
memory
which allows us to establish a historical knowl-
edge
of
struggles
and to make use of this knowl-
edge tactically today", p 83.
16
Again,
'Annihilation..'
provides
us with the an-
chorage
for the
deeper
theoretical
point
we are
trying
to make. In that
speech/essay,
Ambedkar
argues
that the
logic
of economic
oppression
will
not hold because
people
find
religion
a source of
power,
and therefore a socialist of India must deal
with the issue of caste either before or after the
revolution.
17
It is useful to look
up
this
point
about the dialectic
in Foucault's 'Power and
Strategies'
in Power/
Knowledge,
see
pp 143-45.
18 Omvedt discusses this
point
in her account. See
Omvedt
op cit, p 50.
19
It was called Service to the Untouchables
Society
in an interim
period,
and C
Rajagopalachari
ob-
jected
to this term
saying
that
by doing
service to
the untouchables, they
would be
perpetuating
the
experience
of
untouchability
while the
purpose
was to eliminate it. It was then that the name
Harijan
Sevak
Sangh
was
proposed
and found
acceptable.
See The Collected Works
of
Mahatma
Gandhi, Compact Disc, National Book Trust,
Delhi, 2000, Vol 58, pp 58, 155, 473 for the dis-
cussion
regarding
the name. Gandhi's letter to
Birla
(p 58) suggests
a name which is
slightly
modified, in that "Sevak"
replaces
"Seva" in the
final version.
20
Again,
Foucault
provides
us with a useful
per-
spective
to understand the
practical struggles
and
the
primacy
of their demand in Ambedkar's
politi-
cal
philosophy
and the
importance
of construct-
ing theory
not as a
system
of
analysis according
to
universal
parameters,
but as a toolkit that ex-
plores "(i). . .the
logic
of the
specificity power
rela-
tions and the
struggles
around them; (ii) ...This
investigation
can
only
be carried out
step by step
on the basis of reflection (which will
necessarily
be historical in some of its
aspects)
on
given
situa-
tions." See
Power/Knowledge, pp 143-45.
21 B R Ambedkar, 'Buddha or Karl Marx', Speeches
and
Writings:
Vol
3, p 444.
22 This is
surely
the task and
privilege
of the dalit
activist-intellectual before whom one must stand
aside in
respect.
23 These cautions are formulated in extreme short-
hand
given
the limitation of
space.
24 The reference is to Michel Foucault,
'What Is En-
lightenment?'
in Paul Rabinow (ed), Ethics: The
Essential Works Vol 1, Penguin, Harmondsworth,
1994.
In this
essay
Foucault overturns the
gener-
ally accepted meaning
of
Enlightenment
as a uni-
versal
good
to which the world would and must
progress,
into a
problematisation
of a
dangerous
modernity
that would have to be
negotiated
through
the use of
exceptional
wisdom.
Green Left
Weekly
Australiais most
widely
read left
newspaper
BBBBBBBBBH
Subscription
rates:
*6 months
(22 issues)
$A82.50
($A110
outside
Asia-Pacific)
*12 months
(44 issues)
$A148.50
($A198
outside
Asia-Pacific)
Pay by cheque/money
order/credit card
Phone: 612 9690 1230 Fax: 612 9690 1381
Mail: PO Box 394, Broadway NSW, Australia,
2007
Email:
subscriptions@greenleft.org.au
1(J2
.September 27, 2008 CEE3 Economic & PolctiLiil wi.i.Ki.y
This content downloaded from 14.139.86.166 on Wed, 15 Oct 2014 03:02:08 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions