There are no breaking news at the moment

The nation concept is 18th century phenomenon. The ‘state’ and ‘nation’ are not synonimous terms. According to one definition, “ the state is a political and geopolitical entity, while the nation is a cultural and ethnic one.’ Thus, nation has a racial tone. But not all accept this definition. Some say it consists of merger of state and nation.

Dr.Ambedkar on Nation: What Dr.Ambedkar warns is about forming India into a nation. While submitting the Constitution he had said about his concept of  Nation’ in  his speech of 25th November 1949.

Said he, “I am of the opinion that in believing that we are a nation we are cherishing a great delusion. How can people divided into several thousands of castes be a nation? The sooner we realise that we are not as yet a nation in the social and psychological sense of the word, the better for us. For then only we shall realise the necessity of becoming a nation and seriously think of way and means of realising the goal. The castes are anti- national. In the first place because they bring about separation in social life.They are anti-national also because they generate jealousy and antipathy between caste and caste.”

Dr. Ambedkar thus, had in his mind even at the event of submitting the Constitution the importance of ‘Annihilation of caste’ for making India a nation. Mahatma Jotirao Phuley also said that, From selfish religion of Aryans Arya Brahmins consider Shudras as lowly, unworthy and unmindful Shudras consider Mahars and Mahars consider Mangs as lowly, unworthy and cunning Arya Bhats have created hiatus among them and creating  bars for inter dining and inter caste marriages.and that created differnt behavioual pattern, differing cultuarl traits among them  how can such divided peole form a Nation? ^ (Mahatma Phuley Samagra Vangmaya, (Marathi) Govt. of Maharashtra publication) (p.407),

This shows how both Fuley and Dr. Ambedkar were giving importance to Nation and to the annihilation of caste. Dr. Ambedkar also reminds us about the cultural control of the governing class i.e. Brahmins in his treatise, ‘What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables’  Says he, “The governing class in India consists principally of the Brahmins” (p.204). The tests for this he gives are,” First is the sentiments of the people and second is the control of administration.(p.205). That means upholders and creators of the caste system are the governing class. This situation even today remains a fact. The protectors of caste system V.D.Savarkar and M.S. Golwalkar of Hindu Mahasabha and RSS chiefs propagate and hold that caste system is the bane of Hindu Nation. Savarkar goes so far that where there is no chautrvarnya it is a ‘Mlechha Desha’ and RSS or Golwalkar identifies that caste system is the essential factor of Hindu nation. They also say that India is already a Hindu nation. We are reminded here that this very class is the governing class which control the sentiments of the people or they have cultural contro over the people of this country.

Dr. Ambedkar called Hinduism a fascist ideology.  He says, “Hinduism is a political ideology of the same character as the fascist and or Nazi ideology and is thoroughly anti-democratic. If Hinduism is let loose- which is what Hindu majority means – it will prove a menace to the growth of others who are outside Hinduism and are opposed to Hinduism. This is not the point of view of Muslims alone. It is also the point of view of the Depressed classes and also of the non-Brahmins. (Source Material on Dr. Ambedkar, Vol 1,p.241, Govt. Maharashtra publication) That means he was of the view that the governing class was fascist which class is Brahmins.This governing class is for Hindu Nation. Dr Ambedkar clearly points that Hindu nation is fascist and sufferers are Muslims.Christians, Dalits, Adivasis and OBCs.

Constitution: A written constitution is essentially a basic expression of the ideas and organisation of a government that is formally presented in one document. It provides organizational frame work for the government. It defines the functions legislature, executive and judiciary, their inter relationship, restrictions on their authority etc.(Evolution and philosophy behind the Indian Constitution, by Madbhushi Sridhar)

Dr. Ambedkar was clear when he submitted the constitution that the problem of making a nation remains as it was. The opponents of his egalitarian society differentiate between state and the nation. In the Indian context Hindu nationalists say nation is above the state, i.e. government is secondary to the nation. Golwalkar in his book, ‘We or our nationhood defined’ says “ Do we strive to make our ‘nation’ indepedent and glorious, or merely to create a state with certain political and economic powers centralised in other hands than those of our present rulers?” further he says, “We stand for national regeneration and not for that haphazard bundle of political rights-the state.(p.3)

RSS or Golwalkar are opposed to the constitution. According to them it is for managing a State constitution and not a national constitution. Opposed to Dr. Ambedkar’s ideology of casteless society. RSS is all for maintaining the caste system. It is a ethnic nation and RSS thinks Brahmin centric society is Hindu nation.

Hindu nation concept is a racial one. In his book ‘We or Our Nationhood Defined’ overall domination of Brahmins or Aryans is what Golwalkar meant Hindu Nation. He considered such aspects as Race, Language, Culture and Religion in the context of Aryans only. In his ‘Foreword’ M.S. Aney, ex-Governor and a Congressman then, corroborrating Golwalkars theory says, ‘The state is an essentially political unity while the nationality is primarily cultural and incidentally political’ . (P. 18)

They stand for nation means their control or have domination over the country, i.e. geographical entity is under their control. They are culturally superior or they say, because people are under the influence of Brahmanic or Vedic culture. Even the Indian State i.e. government of India follows Brahmanic culture. It respects Vedas, Ramayana, Gita more than any scripture. The state respects Sanskrit language the most. No other language has such respect as Sanskrit. There are Sanskrit Universities all over India for a few hundred Sanskrit learning people.

State of Bahujans: The subjugation, exploitation and suppression of Bahujans will not stop unless the Bahujan are freed from the thraldom of Hindu-Rashtra. Economic exploitation, poverty is an outcome of Hindu Rashtra. The Hindu Rashtra means a secondary status to all the Bahujans i.e.non-Brahmins in social, religious, cultural, political aspects besides making them refugees in all respects. They became rootless in their own motherland and they have been denied self-respect and made them dumb. They have been lowered below the animals.Their economic situation has been reduced to such a level that, the vast majority of them remain in a state of perpetual toiling. Their culture, education have been completely destroyed. They are made to feel that, they are unworthy of living a life of normal human being.

The Bahujans got the trickling benefit of Muslim and British rules. But no sooner did the Aryans realized that the hold on their ‘Nation’ is loosening they masterminded infighting among aboriginals and also against the Muslims and Britishers. The British and Muslim rules were humane in the sense that they did not upheld caste hierarchy or untouchability and awakening the indigenous people thereby diminishing Brahmanical hold on them. As a result the indigenous people started gradually acquiring strength to assert themselves and revolt. Before they could muster adequate strength to do so, these conspirers defeated them. Muslims gone, Britishers gone, and again the inhuman Brahminical system started gaining strength.

During the British rule many among Bahujans became revolutionary. British extended support and hence the anger of Brahminical forces grew manifold. It is during this time, they wore many garbs and ensured that no revolutionary group emerges to oppose the Brahminical system. To prevent the spreading of revolting spirit in the masses some among Brahmins embraced socialism, some communism etc. Thus, all the genuine revolutionaries in the masses were suppressed. In the name of independence, the struggle against Britishers was a fight against the awakening of the indigenous people. The revolt of 1857 was a battle of independence for Brahmin leaders like Tilak and Savarkar but to Bahujan thinker like Phule it was a counter revolutionary act of Brahmins. The British rulers suppressed 1857 mutiny but also stopped the reforms that were against the Brahminic system. In a way, it was the success of the reactionary Brahmanic forces. Since then, Brahminical battle of independence got momentum and it culminated into the climax of their victory in 1947.

New avenues: British rule was not directly exploitative for the Bahujans, masses. On the contrary, Britishers opened up new avenues for Bahujans. During their regime, the revolutionary work of Jotirao Phule, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, Chhatrapati Shahu, Periyar Ramsami blossomed or broadened and realization of human rights dawned. Many new avenues were opened up for the Bahujans.

After independence Brahmanism started dominating even in the government machinery and state politics. Indian state under British was liberal in the social context. It had stopped many a Brahmanic laws and introduced equality before law, stopped ‘Sati’ practice, child marriage. The state did not encouraged untouchability or caste hierarchy as was the case during Brahmin rule, for example Peshwa (Brahmin) rule in Western Maharashtra.

Hindu Mahasabha – R.S.S.

Side by side Hindu Mahasabha, R.S.S. continued their spade work in religious, cultural and social fields. The media under Brahmins became more proactive and it started defaming the non-Brahmin leaders. By defaming them by gossips and by rumour spreading they have curtailed the influence of non-Brahmins.

On the other hand, social revolutionary movements throughout India were becoming less and less effective. Even the Congress party started this game. Satyashodhak movement of Maharashtra or Dravid movement of RSS or Golwalkar are opposed to the constitution. According to them it is for managing a State constitution and not a national constitution. Opposed to Dr. Ambedkar’s ideology of casteless society. RSS is all for maintaining the caste system. It is a ethnic nation and RSS thinks Brahmin centric society is Hindu nation.

Hindu nation concept is a racial one. In his book ‘We or Our Nationhood Defined’ overall domination of Brahmins or Aryans is what Golwalkar meant Hindu Nation. He considered such aspects as Race, Language, Culture and Religion in the context of Aryans only. In his ‘Foreword’ M.S. Aney, ex-Governor and a Congressman then, corroborrating Golwalkars theory says, ‘The state is an essentially political unity while the nationality is primarily cultural and incidentally political’ . (P. 18)

They stand for nation means their control or have domination over the country, i.e. geographical entity is under their control. They are culturally superior or they say, because people are under the influence of Brahmanic or Vedic culture. Even the Indian State i.e. government of India follows Brahmanic culture. It respects Vedas, Ramayana, Gita more than any scripture. The state respects Sanskrit language the most. No other language has such respect as Sanskrit. There are Sanskrit Universities all over India for a few hundred Sanskrit learning people.

State of Bahujans: The subjugation, exploitation and suppression of Bahujans will not stop unless the Bahujan are freed from the thraldom of Hindu-Rashtra. Economic exploitation, poverty is an outcome of Hindu Rashtra. The Hindu Rashtra means a secondary status to all the Bahujans i.e.non-Brahmins in social, religious, cultural, political aspects besides making them refugees in all respects. They became rootless in their own motherland and they have been denied self-respect and made them dumb. They have been lowered below the animals.Their economic situation has been reduced to such a level that, the vast majority of them remain in a state of perpetual toiling. Their culture, education have been completely destroyed. They are made to feel that, they are unworthy of living a life of normal human being.

The Bahujans got the trickling benefit of Muslim and British rules. But no sooner did the Aryans realized that the hold on their ‘Nation’ is loosening they masterminded infighting among aboriginals and also against the Muslims and Britishers. The British and Muslim rules were humane in the sense that they did not upheld caste hierarchy or untouchability and awakening the indigenous people thereby diminishing Brahmanical hold on them. As a result the indigenous people started gradually acquiring strength to assert themselves and revolt. Before they could muster adequate strength to do so, these conspirors defeated them. Muslims gone, Britishers gone, and again the inhuman Brahminical system started gaining strength.

During the British rule many among Bahujans became revolutionary. British extended support and hence the anger of Brahminical forces grew manifold. It is during this time, they wore many garbs and ensured that no revolutionary group emerges to oppose the Brahminical system. To prevent the spreading of revolting spirit in the masses some among Brahmins embraced socialism, some communism etc. Thus, all the genuine revolutionaries in the masses were suppressed. In the name of independence, the struggle against Britishers was a fight against the awakening of the indigenous people. The revolt of 1857 was a battle of independence for Brahmin leaders like Tilak and Savarkar but to Bahujan thinker like Phule it was a counter revolutionary act of Brahmins. The British rulers suppressed 1857 mutiny but also stopped the reforms that were against the Brahminic system. In a way, it was the success of the reactionary Brahmanic forces. Since then, Brahminical battle of independence got momentum and it culminated into the climax of their victory in 1947.

New avenues: British rule was not directly exploitative for the Bahujans, masses. On the contrary, Britishers opened up new avenues for Bahujans. During their regime, the revolutionary work of Jotirao Phule, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, Chhatrapati Shahu, Periyar Ramsami blossomed or broadened and realization of human rights dawned. Many new avenues were opened up for the Bahujans.

After independence Brahmanism started dominating even in the government machinery and state politics. Indian state under British was liberal in the social context. It had stopped many a Brahmanic laws and introduced equality before law, stopped ‘Sati’ practice, child marriage. The state did not encouraged untouchability or caste hierarchy as was the case during Brahmin rule, for example Peshwa (Brahmin) rule in Western Maharashtra.

Hindu Mahasabha – R.S.S.

Side by side Hindu Mahasabha, R.S.S. continued their spade work in religious, cultural and social fields. The media under Brahmins became more proactive and it started defaming the non-Brahmin leaders. By defaming them by gossips and by rumour spreading they have curtailed the influence of non-Brahmins.

On the other hand, social revolutionary movements throughout India were becoming less and less effective. Even the Congress party started this game. Satyashodhak movement of Maharashtra or Dravidian movement of south India started losing to the Brahmanic onslaught. Dr. Ambedkar could not take anti-Brahmin stand as comprehensively as he wanted. He had to dilute his views becuse of pressure from upper castes.

The ideology of Hindu Rashtra was known to all the Brahmin leaders belonging to different parties. R.S.S. started moulding Brahmin leaders across the parties. Right from Congress to Communists. S.A. Dange’s political guru was none-other than B.G. Tilak and the same Tilak was also an inspiration for R.S.S., Hindu Mahasabha. Brahmin conspiracy of Hindu Rashtra was far from reaching to the non-Brahmin leaders because they were engrossed more in politics than in any other fields, exception is of Dr. Ambedkar and Periyar Ramasami. Thus, the culmination of British state, into Hindu state is a reality. Hindu state is part of the Hindu nation. The grip of the R.S.S. combine is growing and thereby Brahmin supremacy is also growing. That means Hindu Nation is growing. All others are declining because of absence of alternate National or systemic agenda.

For National Alternative :

Those who control the people through their culture also control the leaders be they of any political or social organization. Cultural control is not a work of a single personality; it is the work of the class. Dr. Ambedkar called such a class as a governing class. He says, the class, which controls the sentiments of the people, is the governing class.  (What congress and Gandhi have done to the untouchable – Dr. Ambedkar)?

In India cultural control is of the Hindus and this Hindu culture is the creation of Brahmins. They have killed the egalitarian Indus culture and later Buddhist culture. They have also made ineffective the impact of Islamic or British egalitarian ethos and made them enemical in the eyes of the masses.

Today, Bahujans are mesmerized by oceanic hold of Brahmanic culture. So, in this scenario when even the ruling person professing un-Hindu cultural values has to submit to he Hindu culture because this person can not take a place of governing class, for example if a Dalit or BC, Muslim person becomes a head of the state, he/she can not change the cultural mainstream. The ruling personality can only introduce certain welfare measures, that too, economic ones. If he/she tries to counter the established culture he or she will be either dethroned or made ineffective or purchased. (V.P. Singh or Mayawati were or are only governing persons.) They can not make their class or caste a governing class.

In a democracy and particularly, in India mainstream culture is Brahmanic. Hence, unless there is strong Bahujan cultural movement (that includes religion, language, media etc.) the non-Brahmin governing person can not bring even cultural democracy. He can not challenge Brahmanic cultural hegemony.

The persons belonging to governing class sometimes may not be the governing person. But that class wields such a power that even governing person of opposite view has to bow before the cultural governing class. So, in respect of cultural aspects the governing class defeats the governing person of alien cultural values.

Creating Egalitarian Nation:

So the ‘state’ has to obey the nation i.e. the governing class, which controls culture, language, media and who has imposed social or racial superionly.

Thus, the governance of the ‘state’ is under the governing class and not under the governing personality. As long as there is no cultural democracy, as long as there is no share of or importance of different religious, cultural and social groups, castes in the cultural field of the nation there is no escape from the hegemony of the governing class and in India it is the Brahmins.

So, the need to day is to create an alternate nation of Bahujans i.e. of all religions, of all castes and of women. Today, in India except Brahmins no caste is a governing class taking into consideration all the aspects that make a nation.

This will be a real rainbow nation, the complete nation. Today, only saffron is the dominant colour in the national spectrum. Because, Brahmins have craftily endeavored for centuries. They acted like one enitity unlike Bahujans who act in diverse, dividing ways. Their ways are divided and hence means are divided, politics is divided. Division is their identity. Unity, multiplicity is Brahmanic identity.

The task of building an alternative nation seems to be Himalayan and it is quite natural also. And so instead of going for this enormous task people are sticking to what they are doing, thinking. But their work will not take them to tackle this enormity of building a nation. And to add to this, people become egocentric about their own work. And this very ego make the persons or groups to limit themselves in specific fields. These people then do not pay any attention or show any appreciation for the people or the goups.

There are many a sincere thinkers in many social groups and political parties, who want a comprehensive

change or a systemic change. But, get stuck as they underestimate themselves to take up this task of building an alternate nation. Mahatma Fule’s and Dr. B.Ambedkar’s ultimate goal was to build an alternative system and today we need their thoughts for our movement if we have to fight the Hindu Nation and want to create our own nation. Then it is of no use just worshiping leaders.

When we have new challenges, new problems in our path we have to face them, overpower them by ourselves. Today’s Hindu Rashtra is totally different from what it was in the 19th century. There has been such a tremendous growth in the Aryan system or governance that we might even feel that it is not possible to get ourselves freed from the clutches of the Hindu system. We might even think that the day to day life here has been overpowered by them.

To fulfill our dreams we would have to tread the path shown by our leaders in terms of humanity and attacks on Brahminic religion and culture. Actually, the lessons they have taught us are so powerful and concrete that it is an ideal platform to take off, to excel from. With the help of this strong base created by our guiding leaders we have to take upon us the task of building the system of their dreams. Just by praising our heroes or by just adoring them we cannot move forward. The system which we plan to counter, uses it’s own planning and strategy. We have to find an alternative to this system. The task of finding an alternative lies with us. To fulfil this task we have the treasures of thoughts of our thinkers but for each and every new problem they will not help us. So, now it is necessary that we ourselves have to create new avenues, new strategies.

We all are working in divided, different groups. Because of this we could only understand and value only a fraction of the thoughts given by our leaders. We follow our leaders according to our abilities, our worth and do not follow their thoughts completely. If this is the case then how we would be able to fight and defeat our enemies completely? The division in our movements gets projected as a divide in the thoughts of our great leaders. This separation is due to the lack of abilities in us. Do we fight for our leaders, organization or party or do we fight the system because we have an alternative for Hindu Nation or the Brahmin system?

Caste Groups :

We have created different caste organizations. The respective caste gets organized from such efforts. But, if we have to go beyond this and if we want to fight the policy which has enslaved all the castes then we have to work side by side for building of an alternative system-nation. We can not move towards our aim if we keep on working separately or keep on fighting among ourselves. For building an alternative Nation we all will have to first unite, work together as a family. One single caste would never be able to fight the Hindu system, which is working for Hindu Rashtra, there is not a single party or a group worthy enough to face this task. Politics is important but it could never be the only alternative. Thus, for this we would have to create a new alternative. And for this we will have to shed away our ego and thus ultimately shed away our incompleteness.  Those who work selfishly for gaining fame, power; they are of no use in this task.

What should we do?

1) Make our movements realize higher, bigger national aims.

2) All the activists, their groups should be united and to unite them for one bigger aim is a process which should start with deep study and thinking.

3) We will not succeed in our aim if we keep on working on one specific line like economic problems, social problems, cultural problems, literary problems etc. These all factors will have to be combined for the ultimate national aim.

4) An organization is more important than a leader, society is more important than an organization and a national aim is the most important of all.

5) Men and women are equally important for a society. If we strongly oppose the caste system but give a secondary treatment to women in our homes then we would falter from our aim. People working for a Hindu Nation give woman a secondary status.

6) Those who have understood this National aim should volunteer for this noble work and start contacting and convincing people for building an alternative nation.

Nagesh Chaudhari is editor of Marathi fortnightly, Bahujan Sangharsh, Nagpur

 

One Comment

  1. Pingback: Red News | Protestation