The Times of India, 21 December 2009
What The Statues Say
by Badri Narayan
If you travel through Uttar Pradesh's kasbas, townships or cities like Lucknow and Allahabad, you might see some 20,000 Ambedkar statues. The vast and sprawling Ambedkar Park in Lucknow showcases tall statues of Ambedkar along with those of Kanshi Ram, Jyotiba Phule and Periyar. Most of these statues were erected during three tenures of the chief ministership of Mayawati (June 1995 to October 17, 1995, March 21, 1997 to September 20, 1997, and May 3, 2002 to August 26, 2003). After Mayawati came to power with a clear majority in 2007, construction of these statues gained momentum. Most of them were, and are, erected by the Bahujan Samaj Party government, with the aid of the development funds of several BSP ministers, MLAs and MPs. All this is being done in the name of fulfilling the dreams and missions of Ambedkar.
Strangely, Ambedkar who advocated struggles at the grassroots for the emancipation of Dalits was never in favour of erecting statues. In the initial days of his political career, Kanshi Ram also criticised Ambedkar's supporters in Maharashtra for betraying him by erecting his statues. He used to say that, in Maharashtra, Ambedkar's followers had killed his mission, message and dreams. He would ask, "What's the use of erecting statues, crows sit on these?" It is difficult to understand how the BSP founder later came to support the building of statues of Ambedkar, Mayawati as well as his own.
The dominant features of the Dalit emancipation movement that Indian society experienced were inspired by Ambedkar and led by Kanshi Ram. The movement developed in the form of a BSP upsurge. Kanshi Ram argued that the bahujan movement in UP was, in fact, the extension and flowering of the Dalit movement in Maharashtra. He even used to mix his own ideology with that of Ambedkar.
However, in the name of carrying forward the ideology of Ambedkar, the BSP in the past formed a government with the BJP, whose Hindutva ideology primarily strengthened Brahmanism. While Ambedkar favoured the abolition of the caste system in Indian society for Dalit emancipation, Kanshi Ram and Mayawati favoured the awakening of Dalit and backward identities in order to link these with the bahujan movement. Thus, in UP, to strengthen Ambedkar's vision, Kanshi Ram and Mayawati transformed his 'abolish caste system' slogan into a 'promote caste system' one.
So, while Ambedkar wanted it dismantled, the caste system was used by Kanshi Ram to polarise the Dalits instead. The latter's argument was that social polarisation based on the caste identities of Dalits and marginalised communities was meant to oppose and eventually demolish Brahmanical politics. Ambedkar laid emphasis on identity and the struggle for self-respect, locating Dalits in history. In contrast, Kanshi Ram mingled myth with history, popular culture with intellectualism. He used pragmatic wisdom (vyavaharic vivek) as the basis of his politics. In contrast, Ambedkar wanted to empower Dalits by building their intellectual capacities in order to ensure their political emancipation. His idea of emancipation was not memories or memorials.
The basic differences between Ambedkar and Kanshi Ram are latent in the development of their personalities and viewpoints. Ambedkar, who studied at Columbia University, was a modern and intellectual leader. Kanshi Ram, in contrast, belonged to a small village of Punjab, with a critical stance towards Marathi Dalit politics. He evolved as an excellent organiser of Dalit politics. Ambedkar believed Dalits couldn't be freed from Brahmanism within the Hindu fold. He, therefore, embraced Buddhism along with thousands of Dalits. Kanshi Ram and Mayawati held an opposed view on this subject, the main reason being not to alienate and anger the majority of Dalits who are part of popular sects of the Bhakti kaal (era of devotion) of the Hindus, like Kabirpanthi, Ravidasi, Satnami, Shivnarayani, etc. It was a wise political strategy, which was to both link them and carry forward the avowed mission.
If Ambedkar were around today, he might have paused and thought very deeply before forging alliances with the Hindutva forces. But Kanshi Ram was known to defend his political strategy without any scruples or qualms. He used to say, "If someone feels that this is opportunism, my answer is that if Brahmanism used it to strengthen itself, why i should not strengthen the Dalits treading the same path?"
Though Kanshi Ram criticised the Congress and the BJP for practising Brahmanism, he followed the path of these political parties. Ambedkar, on the other hand, favoured an alternative culture, religion and politics to assert Dalit rights; he held ideology and principles in high esteem. Kanshi Ram, by contrast, adopted pragmatic politics as a guide in the search for Dalit emancipation. He used to elaborate the differences between Ambedkar and himself by saying, "Ambedkar used to collect books, i collect people."
The difference between a thorough intellectual and a practical organiser is, therefore, pretty sharp. The statues in UP are a testimony to two very different political visions.
The writer is with G B Pant Social Science Institute, Allahabad.
|
