PoV of Leaders- Dr BR Ambedkar
(Delhi)
BR Ambedkar was born in a very remote village, cut off from the main cities.
Belonging from the dalit-class, he faced severe discrimination growing up. He wasn't even allowed to study on the benches, and was forced to sit on the ground in a corner.
His experiences led him to be extremely hard working, to prove everyone wrong. And, it also made him resentful and biased.
Believing that the Congress party was a Brahmin dominated party, he joined the BJS party.
He worked with the party to remove caste based discrimination, like every member cleaning the streets, the toilets, everyone sitting on the same ground while eating in the Party sessions, etc.
But, the moment he decided to demand for a separate electorate for Dalits, he was kicked out of the party, because he violated the party's basic rule.
'Everyone is equal. Our goal is to make our children free, well-fed, and united. Follow the Will of Fire.'
He violated the 'united' rule.
This made him further resentful, and when the BJS party was banned as Satyankar was arrested, he got more attention for his cause.
He finally had to concede the demand for separate electorate, and settle for reservation in the Puna Pact due to Gandhiji's political pressure.
After the ban on BJS was lifted, he started working with it to uplift the dalits, and he was then re-accepted into the party.
When the time came for making the constitution, he again had many differences with the party. When the draft for the constitution was presented, and he mentioned a total of 22.5%(7.5 for STs, 15% for STs) reservation for lower castes and tribes in government companies, schools and colleges, Satyankar started scolded him as if Ambedkar was lower than him.
"Ambedkar ji, really? Reverse Casteism? Aren't you anti-casteism? I didn't expect this from you.
And what's with the law of SC/ST act? Why should anyone be arrested without evidence? Are you sure you are lawyer?"
"What do you mean? Us dalit people deserve it for the discrimination we have to go through for centuries."
"All Hindus have been also facing discrimination for centuries, including Dalits, Brahmins, everyone. Treated as second class people in their own country. Why don't you put 75% reservation then? What's the logic behind selective reservation?"
"Hindus weren't discriminated. How can the population of 75% be discriminated against!?"
"The same way a 2% British population ruled us. Numbers don't mean anything when the oppressor is ready to go at any lengths. Does Jizya ring a bell? Does Johar ring a bell? Tell me the reason why one community should get special treatment when the others shouldn't?
Discrimination that Hindus faced doesn't mean that they will get extra benefit over Muslims. The same way, with whom you call dalits wouldn't get special treatment.
How do you define Dalit? Your surname is Ambedkar, and you suffered Casteist discrimination. This doesn't mean that another person with the surname Ambedkar suffered like you living somewhere else.
Alright, I will tell everyone present in the parliament. Until I am alive, I wouldn't let our country to turn more communal than it already is. India will be a meritocracy as it always have been.
A slave from Africa became a Sultan in India.
No matter how hard your condition is, this doesn't mean that you have right over something that someone else who worked hard equally to you."
"You wouldn't understand! Have you ever faced such discrimination!?"
"Who says I didn't? Tell me why I gave up my surname?"
"No reason. You are an upper caste Hindu. You have no reason to give up your surname."
"And... the source of that information?"
"...It was in the newspapers."
"And who had the control over newspapers?"
"Britishers..."
"Look, I understand where you are coming from, but our goal is to REMOVE casteism, not INTRODUCE another set of casteism.
Let's say that we hypothetically apply your suggestions. What will happen?
First of all, the more privileged people from the so-called lower caste will take up all the benefits of the reservation. Nalanda is only one university. If you reserve 22.5% of the seats, they will be able to enter the college with much less marks.
Let's say out of 100 marks, one general person needs 90 marks. But, if another person, just because he was born from a certain so-called caste, will get admission at 60 marks, what will happen?
As if our society isn't already cruel to them, they will actively start hating them.
The surnames you have presented will get the reservations. Then another community will claim that they are also discriminated against. Also give us reservation.
And we have lakhs of different communities. At some point or another, at one place or another, every community faced, and is facing discrimination.
Vegetarians discriminate against non-vegetarians. Will a reservation bill for reserving the number of restaurants in a place for non-vegetarians will also come?
I can go on and on about why your idea is dangerous to the whole country.
Let's talk about the SC/ST law you described. What if you have personal enemity with me, so you threw a SC/ST case at me. And you have no evidence, and I am now arrested. Just because you have enemity with me, and we have disagreements.
Do you see any problem with it or not?"
"Then what do YOU think will be the best for uplifting the Dalits!? How will YOU make sure that everyone is treated equally!? And we don't have to suffer!?"
"That's simple actually. Oldies like us are stubborn in our ways. We won't change our perception of the world and be flexible after we have decided in our mind that it is the only way.
Like Congress party was set in its way that only giving Muslim League what it wants to stop the genocide they were committing.
But, do you know what other choices could be made? Reveal the truth about its connection with British. Hindu Mahasabha wanted Indians to participate in WW2 for preparation of armed rebellion.
But, Muslim League was very vocal about genocide of Hindus and a separate country to be carved out of our land. Congress had better reach in Western India than us, they could have done a better job and have the Muslim League executed for being a traitor."
"And that will lead to more genocide."
At that, Satyankar looked like he caught Ambedkar in his trap.
"Another option would have been to not support them from the start. Gandhiji started Khilafat movement, and that led to the most Hindu-Muslim divide in the country. If you want Hindu-Muslim to be united, you don't promote one community over the other.
Look what happened?
And you are committing the same mistake as Gandhiji, whom you don't like much. You are giving a community power over the other. What you are suggesting is a surefire way for the casteism to become more rigid, brutal and our society more divided than it already is.
So, what should be done? It is undeniable that discrimination is persistent. There are villages where one community isn't allowed to drink water from the same well. People don't want to marry outside of their community.
As you have already stated many times, Inter-caste marriage can be a way. But it has many problems.
How will the marriage conducted? Arranged marriage? Or should I say, forcing two people to marry each other just because they are born in certain families?
No. It will take too much time. It is neither efficient, nor effective on a large scale. The only thing we can do is educate our next generation about what is right and what is wrong.
Changes in societies like these take time. And only children are willing to change.
In a way, children are more mature and smarter than us. No matter what I tell you, you wouldn't change your views, will you, Ambedkar ji? The negativity and resentment are hard to let go.
Even I wouldn't let go of the resentment I have against British, no matter how hard I try.
I am set in my thinking, you are set in your thinking.
Not everyone can be Gautam Buddh afterall."
Ambedkar looked utterly humiliated in the parliament as the deafening silence descended. Before he said,
"If you are so against my thinking, why did you didn't kick me out of your party? Why did you give me the job of preparing the draft?"
"Because I don't want a bunch of yes-people in the party that I founded. What will happen if the whole party is dependent on my ideology? Won't it lead to a disaster sooner or later? Those who don't change and don't evolve are left behind in a regressive state.
And I need to convince every section of the society about what is good, and what is bad. In long term.
Our goal right now is to build a stable base. What you are suggesting is a crack in the base, which will lead to the whole building collapsing.
Remember one rule of justice. You can have a a thousand people that didn't get justice, but a law of justice shouldn't be useful to punish an innocent person."
It was evident that there was friction between the two, but he was still made the Union Minister of Social Reforms. And he was responsible for making sure that the kids in the schools weren't discriminated in the cleaning and other duties.
But it was very obvious that it is very hard to be able to determine whether the kids are treated equally or not. It's not like there are cameras everywhere.
As Ambedkar was mulling over how keeping track of all incidents with cameras is impossible, he realised something.
'We can't keep track just within the small number of schools we have currently. So how will we determine if a person really abused a Dalit behind closed doors without cameras?'
It was then he realised about the reason he was made the minister in this field. He has been mostly a politician advocating the rights of Dalits. But now, he actually has to be an executive and think twice before any word and action.
While he still found Satyankar to be barely tolerable, he accepted that he was partially in the wrong at that time. Though he still believed in reservation in all stages of society, instead of just in legislative seats. And the 10% cap should be removed.
Though he was in favour of it being only applicable for one generation, and not their descendants.