Towards an inclusive India

Ambedkar's vision has revolutionised the socio-political atmosphere of modern India bringing a sea of change in the perception of democracy. Unlike the traditional thinkers, Ambedkar redefined 'democracy not merely as a form of government but as a mode of associated living, and an attitude of respect and reverence towards fellowmen. To him, fraternity is the foundation and social endosmosis is the character of democracy. He was first to discover that social inequalities disallow economic freedom and mobility to a majority of Indian people and they are eternal; not just because they are endemic to caste system but because caste is the base of India's economy sanctified by religion, unlike other societies in the world. Contrary to communists, Ambedkar viewed class as only the next door neighbour of caste.

With the Constitution, the beginning of a new India was heralded which was radically opposed to caste-ridden traditional society. Though discrimination on the grounds of caste was prohibited, soon it was realised that it alone was not good enough to uplift the excluded people of India. Affirmative action was approved as policy under Article 16 (4). The provision 'for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State' has a scope wide enough to accommodate all the socially deprived classes apart from Dalits and Tribes. And 'Backward class' as Ambedkar stated in the House, 'is what the State says it is'. The job of identifying a backward class is entrusted to the Backward Class Commission constituted under Art. 340. It's remarkable that the Constitution does not mention any caste in particular, barring the general reference to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under Articles 341 and 342 to be notified by the President. However, the entitlement is only under the sole criteria of 'Backward Class Citizen' whether one is from SC, ST or OBC. Ironically and naturally, 'caste' became the only practical criteria for identification of backwardness.

Ambedkar, a statesman, dreamt of India as a nation with liberty, equality, and fraternity, but found the caste system as a strong impediment on the path. He prophetically cautioned that 'political power in India had long been the monopoly of a few, while the many are not only beasts of burden but also beasts of prey. But these downtrodden had now become impatient to govern themselves'. Urge for self-realisation in the downtrodden classes must not be allowed to devolve into a class struggle or class war. To avoid this, the establishment of equality and fraternity was necessary." Such an appeal from an iconic leader of struggle for equality could never end up as a voice in the wilderness. Excluded classes, overlapping castes, soon realised that they did not receive their due share in the new democratic power structure, be it in the sphere of politics, professions or services; and what followed was a massive social awakening which has impacted the nature of politics in the country. 'Social engineering' has become a common phrase in Indian politics.

India's caste society couldn't prove a fertile ground for 'Class Struggle' of Marxism while Gandhism, proved no more than a romanticised justification of caste society of India. Nehru's socialism was a mixture of Gandhian ethics and Marxian economics. All the three shied away from questioning the basic roots of injustice - the caste system. Ambedkar fearlessly condemned not only the institution of caste but also the religion that sanctified such irrational undemocratic institutions. He believed in democratic socialism aimed at nation building by empowering and mainstreaming the millions of victims of caste society - an ideology unheard before in the traditional India of inequalities. He profoundly observed that 'while reason may mitigate the conflict it can never obviate the necessity of such a conflict of interest' between few dominant classes and the vast majority of dominated. He expounded that 'what makes one interest dominant over another is power. That being so, power is needed to destroy power.' Hence his emphasis on political empowerment of the weaker sections.

Surprisingly and contrary to a fallacious conclusion of many, Ambedkar's call was not restricted to or monopolised by Dalits, it crossed the divides and appealed to the majority of other 'lower castes' of Hindu social hierarchy – the backward classes in Mandal's language, or for a sociologist, the occupational castes of Indian economy; shepherds, blacksmiths, washermen, barbers, weavers, potters, fishermen, and agricultural communities. History was made when Mandal Commission recommendations were translated into action by central legislation. Ambedkarism was seen paving way for an inclusive and enlightened India.

Ambedkar, however, never could have possibly visualised that the logical culmination of the struggle for equality one day would be a constitutional arrangement of reservations up to fifty per cent in jobs and educational institutions. But far from sounding sinister, it is only a natural course of state action in order to compensate the historical injustice perpetrated against not only the Dalits, but also the majority of Shudras's – the fourth 'Varna' of Manu's Social hierarchy, and mainstream them. The political economy of India, which is still predominantly controlled by the institution of caste, long shut the doors on these excluded masses. Only the state sector could come to their rescue. Some states have provided reservations for minorities too. New demands for reservation are arising from various castes/classes across the country. The prospects are unknown though, the message is loud and clear; a challenge to the traditional power structure and a struggle for empowerment.

Now Parliament has passed a bill on reservations in favour of the economically backward too, of course, the Savarns - the upper castes. Though eyebrows were raised, this should not, however, be viewed as anti-thesis of Ambedkar's ideology, for his philosophy is secular in spirit and his vision inclusive in content. It is aimed at nation building wherein fraternity is the foundation. Leaving political and legal ramifications aside, wider affirmative action towards more inclusion is not unjustified. Or else one day in future, today's 'Sawarns' may end up as depressed classes and agitate for reverse discrimination.

Social inequalities are a threat to nationhood. Ambedkar emphatically said that 'to leave inequality between class and class, between sex and sex, untouched and to go on passing legislation relating to economic problems is to make a farce of our Constitution and to build a palace on a dung heap'. Ambedkar's vision has acquired greater relevance today since more than economic development, social equilibrium with inclusive progress is seen as essential for the survival of India as a nation. It is remarkable that all political parties, including the Rightists, now openly claim to adhere to Ambedkar's ideology. This is Ambedkarism in its full bloom. The journey from Homo Hierarchicus to Homo Equalis has begun!

(The author is a senior Bureaucrat of Chhattisgarh. The views expressed are strictly personal)