Revolutionism in JNU Could Harm the Cause of Ambedkarite Bahujans
“Men are mortal. So are ideas. An idea needs propagation as much as a plant needs watering. Otherwise both will wither and die.”
∼ B.R. Ambedkar
Soon, on April 14, we will be celebrating the 127th birth anniversary of B.R. Ambedkar. Like every year, this day will bring a wave of joy and hope to a huge number of people in this country. Like every year, Ambedkar Jayanti will be celebrated by hoards of people who pay their respect to the architect of the Indian constitution and the “mooknayak” of the depressed classes.
Babasaheb is fondly remembered for securing our fundamental rights, especially by the Bahujan classes who can now get educated and lead dignified lives thanks to him. But in the contemporary scenario, these hard-earned rights are slowly being taken away from them. The basic nature of education in this country is changing through multiple attacks, be it the dilution of reservation policies in institutes, seat-cuts, fund cuts and the termination of scholarships in higher education institutions, emergency situations and shutdown sine die in university campuses, or the dilution of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act.
The situation of Bahujans is not only made worse by the oppressive government and its supremacist ideologies, it is further aggravated by revolutionist movements which claim to fight this oppression. Using Ambedkar’s language, the term ‘revolutionist’ refers to those who hold the glamour of a revolution more sacred than the primary concern of annihilating suffering.
In an editorial in Bahishkrut Bharat dated October 4, 1929, Ambedkar makes a sharp distinction between the revolutionist movements led by communists and indigenous workers’ movements. Our objective in writing this essay and translating this important editorial is to highlight this difference, especially in light of such movements in Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). As students of JNU who witness such radical revolutionism every semester, we feel an urgency to address the current situation of crisis from an Ambedkarite point of view. Not dismissing the transformative nature of JNU’s political legacy, we are nonetheless critical of it and the lack of Ambedkarite ideology in it.
In the last few years, there has been a growing intervention of Ambedkarite politics in the national political scenario. Those who had earlier tagged Ambedkar as ‘anti-national’, ‘British stooge’, ‘petty bourgeois’, ‘revisionist’, ‘elitist-capitalist’ etc. have now started appropriating him, but only in terms of using his name, not his ideology. In JNU’s context too, we observe the same, wherein his name is taken but his methods of emancipation and transformation are not. The spontaneous forms of protest like strikes, hunger strikes, lockdowns and sloganeering are endlessly glorified, while giving less importance to Ambedkarite forms of protest which include legal, cultural, academic and religious acts.
This causes an imbalance and creates a dismissive attitude towards the latter, especially among newer students. Such spontaneous outbursts of revolutionism favoured by communist leaders was criticised by Ambedkar in this editorial for its lack of sensitivity to the present sufferings of workers. It is no secret that the communist leadership in this country is solely in the hands of the upper-castes/classes. In the name of “principled politics”, leaders from privileged classes take stances that adversely affect the marginalised sections that they claim to be fighting for. They appear to be ignorant of their privilege, of being able to protest without the care of repercussions or shouldering responsibilities. This comes from the lack of lived experience of being from a community that is underprivileged and historically oppressed.
On the one hand, JNU is being bombarded by new policies of compulsory attendance, seat cuts, 100% viva weightage, blotched reservation policies, lack of transparency in admission results etc., but on the other hand, it is also being paralysed by student agitations in the name of gender and social justice which are disrupting classes, official work, applications for stipends and so on. Already administrative policies are making it difficult for Bahujans to secure admissions in higher educational institutions; on top of that, the revolutionists are making it difficult for those Bahujans already pursuing higher education to complete their courses.
This is very clearly the result of the spontaneous and radical nature of the protests propagated by the communists, which especially attracts new political activists with its glamour. It can be observed that the majority of students joining such protests with fervour tend to lose the passion by their PhD, and this cycle is continued every year by new students who are attracted to the utopia of communism.
B.R. Ambedkar. Credit: Wikimedia Commons
There is rage against the current administration that has resulted in frequent protests by student activists. At such a time, spontaneous outbursts by fresh activists seem to contribute to the ritualistic nature of revolutionism, a good example of which can be seen at the School of Arts and Aesthetics. It can be observed that while the number of protesting students at other schools and centres dwindle by the day and face backlash from non-participants, the revolutionists at the School of Arts and Aesthetics not only stay steadfast but also outsource activists to other schools to keep the revolutionistic spirit high. This is not to be mistaken for overwhelming support from the students at the School of Arts and Aesthetics, but rather as an example of the overpowering nature of revolutionist radicals.
Being a largely elite school, the leadership of this movement has been in the hands of English-speaking, assertive and argumentative peers who have no doubt that their chosen path of revolutionism is universally acceptable and solely effective for transformative action. The tendency of the privileged to be the “voice of the subaltern” often overpowers the already-oppressed masses. It is nonetheless also the folly of Bahujans, who get intimidated and easily compliant to the method chosen by the privileged revolutionists, even though they are largely disillusioned by it.
It can be observed that there is a general tendency amongst revolutionists to legitimise students’ movements by giving the analogy of workers’ movements. But there is a distinction between the nature of a workers’ movement and the revolutionist movement, as explained in detail by Ambedkar, their differences being sharpened by their respective methods. He strongly criticises the method which seeks to cripple in the name of cure and does not take the current welfare of the oppressed into account.
In these times, when all factions of society have appropriated Babasaheb for selfish gains, it is necessary and urgent to throw some light on his ideas, in order to define what the Ambedkarite movement was and is. The true Ambedkarite movement and ideology have the pragmatic power to transform society, as history has proved.
This year, we commemorate the great mind by celebrating his emancipatory ideas and bringing forth his views that have been hidden by the limitations of language. Samata Prakashan, Nagpur, has compiled the tabloids and editorials of Ambedkar so that his vision of Prabuddha Bharat becomes clearer to the newer generations. While talking about the significance of the articles in Bahishkrut Bharat, the editor Pradeep Gaikwad states, “In these few editions (of Bahishkrut Bharat), the foundations of the Ambedkarite ideology have been laid. Without its investigation, the study of Ambedkarite ideology and movement is not possible.” The English translation of an editorial by Ambedkar illustrates the point about revolutionists in JNU that we have tried to make.
Vruttant and Krittika are PhD researchers in JNU, New Delhi.
This article went live on April tenth, two thousand eighteen, at zero minutes past eight in the morning.The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
