Citing an example of French Revolution and also Emperor Ashoka’s Budhist revolution,
Dr. Ambedkar said:
“History bears the proposition that, all the political revolutions were preceded by social and cultural revolutions”.
Taking cue from it, BAMCEF was conceived for preparing ground for the socio-cultural revolution and later political revolution. But leaving the first process midway, Kanshi Ram changed the track to form BSP, a political party. It was done even at the cost of sacrificing BAMCEF and declaring it a shadow organization.
SC Ambedkar turns Republican Ambedkar: To get satisfactory answers one needs to compare Kanshi Ram’s modus operandi with that of Babasaheb. After conceptualizing the Republican Party of India (RPI), Dr. Ambedkar decided to unite all the like-minded people. During the 1952 elections, the socialists in Bombay had betrayed the Scheduled Castes Federation by not voting for it. Yet he did seek support of Brahmanvadi socialists, to create an alternative to the Congress, the original Brahmin party of India. He even asked Nehru at a Shivaji Park public meeting on 25-11-1951 to quit Congress for India’s progress and prosperity.
Politics is a game of numbers and in 1956 mostly the Mahars of Maharashtra, who embraced Budhism, were a minority. The challenge confronting Babasaheb was restoring the past glory of Budhist India by making it a religion of majority (Bahujan). Hence it became imperative to denounce religious minoritism and embark on social majoritism. The RPI was conceived to realize this dream. Hence on April 13, 1956 Dr. Ambedkar asserted that he would cease to be a member of Scheduled Caste Federation (SCF).
Who compelled Dr. Ambedkar to form SCF: Babasaheb’s thinking could be very well gauged in the Independent Labor Party (ILP) founded in 1936. He believed in bahujanwad hence he was striving to expand his political sphere for creating a political majority. But the Congress was bent upon forcing him to be in communal minority. In the ILP, Brahmins sensed a threat to their Congress. Hence, they played a mischief by confining him to be the leader of SCs. A leader of toiling masses, labour etc. is not entitled to represent the SCs alone. The treacherous Congress won and Dr. Ambedkar was forced to retreat by dissolving ILP. But when he formed SCF, he was branded a casteist by the same Brahmins. Thus, his every effort to form a communal majority was thwarted by the enemy.
To put an end to it, converting the Untouchables to their original religion and then initiating a united political action was a part of his socio-cultural revolution. Although the 1956 revolution was very significant it was a beginning as the seeds of cultural rejuvenation were just sown but it had not even sprouted. Hence when his own turn to translate socio-cultural revolution came, he did not wait till the communal majority of Budhists was created for political reforms. Entrusting this responsibility to Bhartiya Bouddha Mahasabha, he wanted to concentrate on empowering the Bahujans politically – meaning creating a political majority through RPI.
Intellectuals are not dogmatic: Offering an alternative to the Congress, his concern was making RPI the party of the majority (the Bahujans: the toiling masses comprising the SCs, tribals and the OBCs) so that they get a congenial situation to live with dignity and peace. That was why Dr. Ambedkar did not emphasize only on the socio-cultural revolution. It does not mean he went back.
Launching a social-cultural revolution in so short period is no joke. Hence, he decided to polarize the Indian polity into two: the oppressed and the oppressors. As a result, Dr. Ambedkar did not mind erasing the line which he wanted to draw between social revolution and political revolution.
Gloomy situation made gloomier by BAMCEF: It is highly difficult job to draw a line between socio- cultural revolution and political revolution. It is for the leaders of revolution to gauge the prevailing situation and decide. Budha’s revolution helped Chandragupta Maurya and Ashoka, ascended the throne of Magadha. But even at that time the process of religious revolution was not complete. Had it been so, Brihadrath Maurya’s murder by his Brahmin commander, Pushyamitra Sunga, would not have ended the Maurya rule and launched a counter-revolution.
Engels said unless you remove the veneer on the social relations, a revolt against them won’t be possible (Fredrick Engels, Farmers War in Germany, Progress Publishers, 1974, p.12). Babasaheb after embracing Budhism wanted to remove the veneer of social relations created by Brahminism by uniting the oppressed politically as well as socially. But he could not due to his death and his selfish lieutenants in Maharashtra.
Kanshi Ram left RPI and gave impetus to the limping movement. He created BAMCEF, then DS-4 and finally BSP. He knew he had just begun the process of uniting the SC/ST/OBCs who are all Bahujans and yet remained alpajans (minority) as the chaturvarna divided them. It may require hundreds of years to develop a sense of Bahujan solidarity among them. Hence, Kanshi Ram left halfway the social awakening and unilaterally decided to plunge into political action. It invited the displeasure of his colleagues who felt cheated.
RPI interested only in Mahars: Removing the veneer on social relations in India is an uphill task. Soon after Babasaheb’s death his close lieutenants in Maharashtra began sabotaging the movement by co- opting with Brahminical Congress forcing Kanshi Ram to stress the importance of strengthening non-political roots. He also wanted to set an example of Bahujan Samaj what Dr. Ambedkar wanted to organize as Republicans. He worked in RPI for three years but got disillusioned as it concentrated mostly on Mahars. Even to this day the various factions of Samata Sainik Dal, claiming to be a sister organization of RPI, were boasting of the greatness of Mahars forcing the atishudra and shudras to keep off the Mahars thereby helping Brahminism. Khairlanji massacre is evidence for this descending degree of contempt towards atishudras. Even after 53 years of the 1956 revolution, the continuance of Budhist ghettoism under the banner of SC/ST organizations is a testimony.
Cementing the fractured socio-cultural identity: So much so the oppressed cannot take direct action due to these fractured socio-cultural identities. The remedy lies in Ambedkar’s bid to unite shudras and to fight Brahminism. He wanted to do it under RPI but his lieutenants failed. Kanshi Ram revived it in the name of Bahujans. Babasaheb knew that India is a nation and every Jati being a nation “within the nation”. After 12 years of work, Kanshi Ram plunged into parliamentary politics
Babasaheb died a sad man. But even after his death, efforts were made to push the caravan back by co- opting with the ruling class. The RPI Wales became servants of the Congress Party. In such a gloomy political situation BSP instilled hope among the SC/ ST/OBCs (the Bahujans).
Kanshi Ram was fully aware of his limitations but in his lifetime, he gave concrete shape to the Republican movement by renaming it as Bahujan and subsequently elevating to the third position from nowhere. This is not an ordinary task. If we ignore the dynamism of the social movement, we would get entangled in arguments over the precedence of socio- cultural to political revolution, as stated by Dr. Ambedkar. The society is constantly changing and both the processes influence each other. Hence the call “Socio-cultural revolution and political revolution should go hand in hand”, would continue to prove true as long as the struggle against Brahminism continues.
