17-6-2020
AMBEDKAR-GANDHIJI-MARXISM DEBATE
a) Ambedkar was first and foremost, a strict
constitutional democrat who was uncompromising on the rule of Law. Yes. He drafted the 'Fundamental Rights and guiding principles of the Indian Constitution.
b) He was sympathetic to Industrial working class and trade union movements . He was a Democratic Socialist. Yes.
c) He shared the vision of Unified India and a firm opponent of language-based sub-nationalism. He was all for Hindi as a national language and English also for non-hindi people.
d) He was a great admirer of Sanskrit as the mother of all the Indian languages ( perhaps except Thamizh )like the great reformer of Kerala Sri.Narayana Guru.
e) He welcomed , reluctantly , the partition of the country, so that the country can make progress in industry,secularism , education and indices of social well-being.
He felt that Partition was better than perpetual postponement of Freedom . ( In this, he was with Communist party and the majority of Indian National Congress and Nehruji)
f) He chose Buddhism and not either Christianity or Islam as he felt that Buddhism has all the fine values rather than Manudharma Hinduism. and rooted in the soil of our motherland. Nothing wrong there and like Jainism is the religion that grew in Indian National soil. Ramachandran is right in saying that during the reign of Asoka, the
state policy was guided by Buddhism and Jainism and not by Manu dharma Sastram. It was the rule of Pushya Mitra Sunga in Gangetic plain that brought back Manuvaadhins. as
he rightly points out.
True. However, we had a great kingdom of SATHAVAHANA DYNASTY ( from 200 BC to 200 AD ) in all the states like
ANDHRA, karnataka, MAHARASHTRA, Madhyapradesh and orissa)
Four hundred years of prosperous, cultured and peaceful reign, in which Vedhic RITUALISM, Buddhism and JAINISM coexisted peacefully. It corresponded to SANGAM PERIOD IN TAMILNADU ( including Keralam)
-----------------------------------------
From 1915 to 1950, those 35 years were inter-war years and turbulent. Of all the National leaders of those years, it was Jawaharlal Nehru only, who had the required International perspective. Nehruji was more a Leninist and even a Stalin admirer , than a democratic socialist. But his personal charisma and popularity , enabled him to take India along his planned path of development without renouncing the most democrartic election process in the whole world!
. Planning commission, Heavy industries in Public sector , land reforms, giant irrigation projects, Development of Electrical power schemes and Nuclear power, establishment of top-class R and D educational institutions , and many more.
He had declared these as objectives of the freedom movement as early as 1930. at Karachi session of Indian National Congress. His choice of Mixed Economy, ( commanding heights of economy in public sector ) was inspired by Franklin Roosvelt.
He was partly inspired by Five year plans of Stalin Era as well as New Deal by President FDR ( Franklin D Roosvelt of USA ) . Jawaharlal's Damodar Valley Corporation was partly inspired by Roosvelt's Tennessee Valley Authority.
Jawaharlal. was very much aware of Neo-colonialist direction of USA so very early but admired FDR too.
----------------
We got independence in 1947, and it is 2020 now.
Seventy years have gone and roughly THREE generations.
So many changes have happened in the International Political, Economic and Social areas. much more so, after the collapse of Soviet Union in 1990.
In the present scenario, it is meaningless to keep on harping on Ambedkar vs Gandhiji controversy.
Both were great and Gandhiji did more to rouse the people against the injustice of untouchability than Ambedkar himself, all
over India.
Yet , all of them , have failed partly. not totally. No body can deny that the Depressed classes have gained in Education and economic status compared to what they were hundred years ago.
While Gandhiji's Temple Entry movement did rouse the conscience of caste Hindus, Ambedkar's solution as inter-caste marriage is a failure.
The root cause of misery of Schedules castes is economical. in class terms they are still the Landless Labour working class in Agriculture all over India especially the plains of Punjab, UP, Bihar, Bengal, Andhra, Tamilnadu , Karnataka and Gujarath. It is only the tribal majority states like Jaarkhand and North East, and Chattisgarh that are different.
The greatest IDEOLOGICAL failure has been that of communists.
There are certain special factors.
a) The SC population is a minority in almost all the STATES, districts,taluks, panchayaths
b) They are mostly landless agricultural labourers and very poor peasants
c) As they are a minority ( 15% only) in every place, the present election system ( not based on proportional representation) gives them a few seats in legislatures only by compromising with their class enemies.
d) No body can deny that the old style zamindarism and landlordism is dead now. Land reform measures have created Kulak class all over India. The kULAKS have caste solidarity with the poor and landless labour in
every area with their own caste brethern. In this situation, only such SC leaders can get into legislatures with the support of Kulak leaders of BC communities.
This has been brilliantly analysed by Com.B.T.Ramadive in 1946 itself!
The communist parties have miserably failed in chalking out a plan of agricultural reform , which can break the hold of Kulaks on the poor peasants and landless labour of their own castes. SC liberation depends on breakup of BC solidarity on caste basis.
This must be done NOT by fanning caste hatred but by patient and prolonged propaganda and organization of landless and poor peasants on CLASS basis and not CASTE basis.
The only ideologue who gave that perspective was Jawaharlal Nehru. Even now, it is not too late. The communists and pro-dalith liberals should solidly align themselves with the pro-dalith anti-imperialist Congrees
leaders and fight the battle on Class terms and not on caste terms.
All the other things are irrelevant.
Surprisingly, It was our beloved Dr.Abdul Kalaam, who gave a great solution and target.
Basing himself on the experience of Milk Cooperative of Amul and Anand of Dr.KURIEN, he suggested forming Agricultural co-operatives exclusively for the Landless agricultural labour and maximum help from Govt for making them viable and self-reliant.
He never used casteist or Marxist jargon but like Nehruji, clearly pin-pointed the key issue of SC misery.
-----------------------------------
Here are a few concrete steps.
1) Solidarity of SC and communists with Indian National Congress and close co-operation not with kulaks and lumpen-capialists but with progressive sections.
Has not Mayavathi's BSP enabled BJP to come to power again and again ? by splitting the anti-BJP votes?
2) Fight for special dual- representaion as demanded by Dr.Ambedkar reserved constituencies in all the elections ( be it Parliament or State or local body )
3) Take up the PURA scheme of Dr.Kalaam ( Providing Urban facilities for Rural areas) .
Spreading out the population and industrial,
employment, educational and medical facilities in all the 37 districts of Tamilnad and making every taluk headquarter easily accessible to rural people is urgent necessity.
The present problem of COVID virus , is mainly caused by high population density whether in Chennai, or Mumabi or in western countries like USA ( Newyork).
We must strike a balance between too remote rural areas and giant urban habitations.
See how the Racial problem in USA is still raging!
It is primarily economical.
Class issues are fundamental. The Communists are right in their diagnosis of SC problem but hampered by the constraints of 'winner-takes-all' election compulsions.
The solution is to form a huge anti- Nazi front from the top , in the middle and mostly at bottom
' Dogma is worse than cowdung'.
Was not Lenin criticized for his New ECONOMIC POLICY?
======================================
g) AMBEDKAR was influenced more by John Dewey of USA (PRAGMATISM) than by Harold J.Laski of London School of Economics. ( Labour party of Britain) though he was a
student in London School of Economics.
In all these he was much, much closer to Jawaharlal Nehru. It may be noted that Jawaharlal Nehru also opposed
Gandhiji on many points. and Ambedkar could have Contributed much more if he had been patient and supported
Jawaharlal Nehru in his continuous confrontation with Right-wing anti-socialist forces in the garb of Gandhians
inside the Congress party.
It is not correct to portray Gandhiji as part of
Sanathanist group. As early as in 1914, it was Gandhiji, who insisted on Hindu-Muslim unity and total eradication of
Untouchability. in the Nagpur special session of Indian ational Congress. ( as acknowledged by COM.B.T.RANADIVE )
------------------------