Remembering Ambedkar

By Dr. Mrs Vishiesh Verma

We should have magic in our words and music in our hearts to speak about Dr.Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, the architect of India's constitution, whose Jayanti falls on April 14. He once said that,"Everyone has got a certain basic being and basic identity. One must try to throw that basic being of his into the functions that one performs. Then those functions get glorified and enhanced". He has proved true to his words.

Born in 1891, in poor Mahar community of Maharashtra as the 14th child, he rose above the circumstances of his birth and achieved a level of success that would have been spectacular for a child with no privilege. No doubt the support of enlightened chief of society like Gaekwad of Baroda helped Ambedkar, yet the contribution of his indomitable will and courage is undeniable. He was one of the earliest Indian students in the United States and earned multiple doctorates from Columbia University and University of London in Economics, Political Science and Law. He was admitted to the bar in London, became chairman of the Drafting committee to draft Constitution of free India. Besides he became the first Law Minister of free India, in spite of the fact he didn't belong to congress. The successful functioning of the constitution during the last decades, owe a lot to the vision and foresight of Dr. Ambedkar. The fact that the constitutional mechanism all over the developing world has not registered success to the extent India has achieved proves beyond doubt the sagacity of the architect of the constitution.

Ambedkar was a more ardent supporter of strong centre than Rajendra Prasad, Patel or Nehru. He held that a strong centre was for him a matter of "great admiration, respect and refuge". What he wished to convey was that the scheduled castes, the schedule tribes, the OBCs, women in one word all the oppressed needed a strong centre. An heir to millennia of discrimination in India he suffered humiliations from time to time at every walk of life. In the school he was ill treated by his classmates and by the teachers. Being shudra he was not allowed to study Sanskrit as a subject. In the office his subordinates declined to show him any courtesy. Peons even declined to serve him a glass of water. He had a good cause to feel enraged, for what he all along with his depressed fellow humans had suffered at the hands of high caste Hindus. He rejected the patronizing Gandhian approach to Untouchability and had made a bone fire of Manusmiriti, the code of conduct. He advocated separate electorate for the effective representation of untouchables. But whenever there was a conflict between his ideas and objectives with the overall national interest, it was the latter that prevailed.

Ambedkar was greatly wounded at heart to see the conditions of his community. His main agenda was annihilation of caste. He was the organic Dalit leader thinker and fighter who gave 'Dalits' a religious, cultural and political identity. He convinced the constituent Assembly that it was not enough to abolish untouchability, what was needed to undo millennia of discrimination and exploitation was a system of affirmative action to uplift the oppressed including reservations of jobs in civil services, schools and universities. There are no two opinions that Ambedkar is the only national leader revered by Dalits at every corner of our land. His posthumous political importance is obvious to any observer of Indian Scene. Down to centuries the resistance to caste has taken many forms in India, but without any disrespect to anybody it is fair to say that in terms of ultimate impact the greatest of all opponents of caste has been of Dr. Ambedkar.

He was a self made man in profoundest sense of that term. Even his name was his own creation. He took the name of his village, Ambavada as Maharashtrian Brahmins did. Born in Hindu Scheduled Caste, got converted as Buddhist with thousands of his Followers. Ambedkar was a man of many fields: a lawyer, an economist, a constitutionalist, a religious and social theorist etc. He had uncompromising quest for knowledge, devotion to truth, and wonderful confidence in his own mental powers. When he died aged only 65, he had accumulated a set of distinction few have matched; only one remained. In belated recognition of that omission, he was conferred posthumously in 1990, the highest award his country has to offer - the Bharat Ratna. Ambedkar made profound studies of scriptures and gave a sociological explanation to the problems of untouchability in contrast to divine origin theory, which provided it sacramental legitimacy. He never rejected the role of religion in society. For him religion was an essential instrument of the society for the up liftment of the people. In line with the Buddha's teachings he believed that religion must come to terms with reason, morality and fundamental traits of liberty, equality and fraternity. He was instrumental in having enshrined these principles in the constitution of India.

Ambedkar's though was permeated with Universal humanism and was opposed to anything that stood against man's freedom. In a talk given to Voice of America he insisted that - roots of democracy are to be sought in social relationships in terms of associated life between the people who form the society. For him political democracy is not an end in itself but the means to achieve social and economic ideals in Society.

(The writer is a Former Reader Coordinator of University of Jammu)

The challenge of diversity

By Eduardo Falerio

Cultural diversity is a fact of modern life and it exists now in practically all countries of the world. In addition to conventional elements such as race, religion and language, cultural diversity is accentuated by new factors including globalization, the breakdown of the traditional moral consensus, the emphasis on individual choice regarding issues like the place of religion in public life, family discipline, relations between parents and children and other aspects of life today.

Cultural diversity is at the root of most conflicts, tensions and uncertainties in the contemporary world. Some have attributed the present "international insecurity" to the Clash of Civilizations whilst others advocate dialogue of religions and cultures to prevent such conflicts and bitterness. In 2001, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Global Agenda for Dialogue among Civilizations and the Unesco endorsed the International Declaration on Cultural Diversity.

A common assumption inspires both covenants. A multicultural society needs to find ways and means to accommodate diversity without loosing its cohesiveness and unity. Two approaches are rejected. Assimilation which requires minorities to abandon their own distinctive institutions, cultures and values to merge into the prevailing culture is to be avoided. This way is sociologically unlikely to succeed and is morally untenable in view of people's deep adherence to normative values such as religion. Similarly, unbounded multiculturalism which entails giving up the concept of shared values and identity in order to privilege ethnic and religious differences presuming that a nation can be replaced by a number of diverse minorities is unacceptable. Such a course of action usually results in undemocratic backlash, support for extremist parties, populist leaders and anti-minority policies. It is morally unjustified as it does not accept the values and institutions upheld by society at large. Regions that break away from democratic societies hoping to achieve a larger measure of self-government are not likely to enhance self-government and may rather weaken it.

Cultural pluralism values diversity and implements policies of inclusion that cater to the requirements of all groups. The sensitivities of the minorities as well as of the majority need attention. Fundamental rights and fundamental freedoms of all are to be protected. The rights of the weaker sections are particularly important in a society that respects cultural pluralism.

Intercultural dialogue is necessary both at the national and at the global levels so that contentious issues are resolved amicably. The more a nation harmonizes differences at home the greater is its ability to contribute to dialogue at the international level. Stronger the cooperation and goodwill among nations lesser the need to spend huge resources on arms and military strategies.

Education has a crucial role to play in providing ethical and spiritual value systems that facilitate understanding of other cultures and civilizations. The Unesco Constitution begins with the words "Since wars begin in the minds of men it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed". Education ought to promote tolerance, respect for diversity and friendship among peoples and nations. Educational institutions must be provided with a learning environment which contributes to tolerance, understanding and respect for diversity. They should be protected from teachings that promote extremism, intolerance and violence.

India is home to diverse languages, religions, races and lifestyles. It is a vast country where questions of unity and diversity interplay. Yet, India emerges with an excellent record at managing diversity. This makes it possible to survive as a nation and to move ahead as the largest democracy in the world. The Constitution of India ensures that all citizens have equal rights and should have an equal opportunity. In particular, the principle of secularism enshrined in our Constitution is the best method to accommodate religious diversity and could be emulated across the globe. In a multicultural society, the State cannot be identified with any religious or cultural group and it should either be neutral or even handed in its approach to all such groups. Unity in diversity is the highest possible civilizational attainment. It is made possible through respect for choice in an atmosphere of mutual trust.

(The writer is a former Union Minister and presently holds a Cabinet Minister rank in the Government of Goa. This article is based on his inaugural address to the International Conference "Cultural Diversity: Convergences and Divergences" at the Goa University recently)