Search

In his 1936 essay "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction", Walter Benjamin establishes that it is the 'aestheticization of politics' or 'politicization of art' which streamlines the cultural discourse of a nation at a given moment. The present paper attempts to critically analyze the 'politics of visuality' vis-à-vis 'visuality of politics' as an elemental framework in the making of Indian national discourse. To understand or rationalize this elemental framework, the paper postulates its hypothesis, that the politicization of art is a valid inquiry into how a certain ideological discourse is pre-selected and pre-programmed with a certain grid of features and structures of perception. It is this ideological discourse that needs to be exposed through a visual text namely, Vijay Pawar's Bhim Garjana. This visual text broadly represents what Kancha Illaiah terms the Ambedkarite phase of Dalit history spanning over two decades - 1936-1956i. Bhim Garjana is an aesthetic artifact directed by a Dalit himself - an 'insider's'ii document on Ambedkar's life and philosophy. There have so far been three films on Ambedkar including Bhim Garjana, one directed by Jabbar Patel titled Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar (2000) and second by Anand Patwardha titled Jai Bhim Comrade (2011). All the visual texts though do not follow the definition of biopic strictly, but more or less, the paper places them in the category of biopics. Each text focuses on the life and struggle, both in historical and ideological terms, of Ambedkar. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Symbols play a significant role in politics and assertion. In India, different kinds of signs are used in Dalit assertions and politics. In his struggle for Dalits' rights, Dr. B R Ambedkar had employed different modes of verbal and non-verbal communication tools. He used various symbols to popularise his ideology and messages among his followers. Ambedkar's sense of clothing, Manu Smriti burning, and Buddha all had symbolic meanings. This paper, under the theoretical framework of semiotics, seeks to ascertain how these symbols helped Ambedkar to spread his ideas of Dalit emancipation and emerged as vital tools for Dalit rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

India's past is the history of the fight between upper and inferior castes for the long-long years ago. All kinds of problems among the humanity are the consequences of classified variation of 'Brahmanic social order'. The ancient Indian history is not only informative, but it throws abundant light on the happening of today. At that moment, there was the battle between higher castes (Savarnas) and the inferior castes. It has been going on continuously. It has assumed different names, shapes, and forms. In the Ancient period, Buddha was trying to solve these problems, but after the death of Buddha, Buddhism was decline, and Brahmanism has covered all the Buddhist achievements. In the modern era, Dr. Ambedkar has tried to solve this major issue, which was going in the Indian society. He was a social reformer, political leader and principal planner of the Indian Constitution. He extensively pointed out as much Babasaheb was an Indian economist, historian, jurist, philosopher, and politician. He was the precept architect of the Indian Constitution. Ambedkar is known as the pioneer of the renaissance of Buddhism in modern India. He wished social reformers to create public opinion to fight the uncultured inequalities in society. He has provided a very powerful force in giving energy to this movement. It was Ambedkar's efforts that, the movement for Buddhism gained energy in modern India. In addition, Ambedkar deserves unique credit for the renaissance of Buddhism in modern India. In this way, he has provided the main route to the renaissance of Buddhism in modern India. Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to Ambedkar's contribution to the renaissance of Buddhism in modern India. Consequently, this paper has been attempted to look at Ambedkar's contribution to the renaissance of Buddhism through detail analysis of his works. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper continues the commentary on Dr. B. R. Ambedkar’s posthumously published Philosophy of Hinduism. Utilizing resources from various modern continental European philosophers and social theorists, particularly of religion, we elaborate on several key passages within Ambedkar’s overall framework of analysis. The paper continues to explore how Ambedkar conceives relations between philosophy and religion, and how historical shifts in general human consciousness have occurred whereby altering both fields. At the core of his being, Ambedkar is concerned with a methodological justification that will enable him to venture into a penetrating critique of the immoral and amoral nature of Hinduism’s social system of caste. In Part I of the commentary, we followed Ambedkar until he arrived at the criteria of ‘justice’ and ‘utility’ to judge the status of Hinduism. He wanted to test whether this Eastern world religion, which descends from antiquity, meets those criteria, which shape the modern conception of religion. In Part II of this commentary, we expand further on Ambedkar’s thesis as to why Hinduism fails to meet the modern conception when those twin criteria are not met. This thought presupposes various underlying philosophical transformations of the relations of ‘God to man’, ‘Society to man’, and ‘man to man’ within which the Hindu-dominated Indian society forecloses the possibility of individual equality, freedom, and dignity. In making contributions to Ambedkar studies, the philosophy of religion, and political philosophies of justice, this paper sets up Part III of the commentary, which will examine Ambedkar’s actual engagement with the classics of Hinduism’s philosophy and thought in general. Ultimately, Ambedkar is undeterred in his original critique of the social and moral failures of the caste system, thereby intimating ambitious possibilities for its eventual eradication.

The present paper argues that the conceptualisation of notions like ‘dalit’ or ‘intracaste’ or ‘multiple’ patriarchies results from a misunderstanding of the concept brahmanical patriarchy. The category ‘dalit patriarchy’ is gaining popularity in academic and political discourse of contemporary India. It is introduced by Gopal Guru in his seminal essay ‘Dalit Women Talk Differently’ only to challenge patriarchal practices within ‘lower’ caste groups. But mainstream feminists of India attempted to propagate and proliferate this vague concept. They argue that dalit men, as a part of their exploitation by ‘upper’ caste, also face taunts regarding their masculinity which results in their aggressive behaviour on dalit women; which has been called as ‘dalit patriarchy’. The paper argues that conceptualisation of such notions yields no advancement in our endeavours toward a gender-just society, rather it is misleading. Evaluating articulations in mainstream Indian feminism, we need to think through: what effect does this have on our feminist struggle? what is at stake? what possibly can be a resolution? Thus, by exposing flaws about ‘dalit patriarchy’—including a detailed discussion on the empirical, theoretical, and logical shortcomings—this paper seeks to initiate a theoretical rethinking of feminist as well as dalit scholarship, with employment of analytical, hermeneutical and critical methods.

This paper offers a critical commentary of Ambedkar's posthumously published "The Philosophy of Hinduism," which was discovered shortly after his death. Given previous, considerable contributions in the fields of law, economics, political and social theory, the work appears to be the beginnings of what remains an incomplete treatise on a new area of investigation for Ambedkar. In this work, Ambedkar tackles the murky and opaque sub-field of philosophy, namely the philosophy of religion. This paper unpacks some of Ambedkar's key insights on the nature of the philosophy of religion to test what elements - considered from a philosophical point view - constitute a religion. Furthermore, given the historical paradigmatic shifts in the nature of religion from antiquity to modernity, Ambedkar identifies two conceptual revolutions from which he will introduce two criteria - utility and justice - to evaluate the nature of Hinduism as a religion. Given his life-long quest to understand Hinduism and caste, ultimately, Ambedkar's goal to overcome what he says is the systemic and structural inequality of caste in the Indian social order leads him to certain negative conclusions: namely whether Hinduism can be characterized as a religion if in fact modern religions must have a foundation in some intrinsic dimension of social justice. This paper constitutes Part I of a longer commentary. The aspiration is that a longer Part II will ultimately extend Ambedkar's philosophical investigation into new domains for which he did not have the opportunity to explore.

Copyright of Humania del Sur: Revista de Estudios Latinoamericanos, Africanos y Asiáticos is the property of Humania del Sur. Estudios Latinoamericanos Africanos y Asiaticos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper is devoted to analyse the selected poems by Marathi Dalit poets who incorporate frustration, depression, irritation, etc., in their poems as the emerging themes. The paper identifies how in post-Ambedkarian era, Dalits have tried to assert their identity in various quarters of life: politics, religion, education and economics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Jagjivan Ram (1908–1986) was, for more than four decades, the leading figure from India's Dalit communities in the Indian National Congress party. In this paper, I argue that the relationship between religion and politics in Jagjivan Ram's career needs to be reassessed. This is because the common perception of him as a secular politician has overlooked the role that his religious beliefs played in forming his political views. Instead, I argue that his faith in a Dalit Hindu poet-saint called Ravidās was fundamental to his political career. Acknowledging the role that religion played in Jagjivan Ram's life also allows us to situate discussions of his life in the context of contemporary debates about religion and politics. Jeffrey Haynes has suggested that these often now focus on whether religion is a cause of conflict or a path to the peaceful resolution of conflict. In this paper, I examine Jagjivan Ram's political life and his belief in the Ravidāsī religious tradition. Through this, I argue that Jagjivan Ram's career shows how political and religious beliefs led to him favoring a non-confrontational approach to conflict resolution in order to promote Dalit rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dr. Ambedkar is the establisher of a new society. He destroyed a society, which had been given important to inequality. He made the society to treat all men and women equally with respect. The lower class people of India enjoy a life of dignity and pride today because of him. Baba Sahib Ambedkar is the father of our constitution and not just a Dalit leader, but a national leader. The scholars argue that he is a leader to all worlds .The philosophies of Dr. Ambedkar are the hope and remedy for all the evil caused in the society. The Dalits have been facing pain and sufferings for a long period. The outcast people believe that the next era will be theirs and they wanted to discard all the evil forces, economic forces, political forces, religious forces, social cultural forces, and established Dalitism as the universal alternative. Dr. Ambedkar had clearly exposed the life style of Dalit to the world. He presented the Aryan invasion's impact on Dalit history. The declaration of Dr. Ambedkar era is the conscious and deliberate decision of the Dalits in India. It has the meaning that the Dalits too independently live in India. The paper evaluates that the Dr. Ambedkar as a multi-personal personality. It also examines his role as a social activist, humanist, Buddhist, and Dalit liberator. An understanding of the nature and scope of the caste system in India is needed for the comprehension of the social and political fabric of the country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of European Journal of Sociology is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This essay compares key essays on Buddhism by B.R. Ambedkar and Jürgen Habermas vis-à-vis the issue of Buddhism, wealth, and privilege, and the respective statements again to what the Buddha taught, from a Theravada perspective. In doing so, it can be seen that Buddhism does not indeed endorse privilege in this world—but what seems to be privilege and inherited wealth are actual merits from a former life. Since these come with their own dangers, viz. attachment and not putting wealth to good use, wealth may be nice but not more. That someone is better than someone else because of birth and inheritance rather than action is, however, established as completely non-Buddhist, again and again, even by the Buddha himself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dalit women in India suffer multilayered form of marginalization. They are discriminated not only based on their gender, but also because of their caste identity. This impacts their literacy, life expectancy, among other human indicators. Despite the emphasis on the intersectionality between caste and gender by Dr. BR Ambedkar and later by other social reformers like Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia, the mainstream movements have failed to provide a separate discourse on safeguarding the rights of Dalit women. The question of caste-based discrimination has by and large focused on the identity of a Dalit, irrespective of the gender, and the injustices inflicted on the social group as a whole. The upper caste led feminist discourse has been equally ignorant of the multiple oppressions faced by Dalit women. This paper deals with the critique of the Dalit movement as well as the feminist movement, and attempts to envision a broader global social justice by reading the ideas of Ambedkar and Lohia together.

Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar was a feminist at heart. Contrary to popular perception that he championed the cause of Dalits and dalit women, Babasaheb, as Ambedkar is fondly referred to, worked as a socio-political advocate for Dalit as well as upper caste Indian women concomitantly. In his quest to ensure freedom, equality, and individuality of Indian women, he resorted to the legalized mechanism and proposed sweeping constitutional provisions, famous as the Hindu code Bill, placing women at par with men in matters of inheritance and allowing them freedom to marry outside their caste. Contemplating the predicament and marginalized position of Indian women, he posited that caste and gender are intertwined. To maintain the system of caste, endogamy is a necessary condition that has an immense bearing on women. The imposition of endogamy was made compulsory by the Brahminical hierarchy, which was endorsed by Hindu religious scriptures to ensure women’s sustained subjectivity within the same caste groups or varnas. Ironically, the Bill, in Ambedkar’s own words was ‘killed and died unused and unsung’ following which he resigned from then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s cabinet in 1951 but the same bill was passed as four different bills between 1955 and 1956 during Nehru’s second term as prime minister (Elancheran, 2018). Unfortunately, Ambedkar’s contribution to the Indian women’s struggle has not been given its due. This paper attempts to explode the myth of the golden age of Indian womanhood and critiques the role of women reformist organizations in nineteenth century India as well as Ambedkar’s yeoman service to Indian women that has largely remained unacknowledged in public discourse. Key Words: Ambedkar, Hindu Code Bill, Manusmriti, Indian Women, Dalit Women, Indian Feminism, Caste, Patriarchy

Organization of space in a modern urban locale is apparently secular and unmotivated by any divine or religious principal. Yet it always functions on the basis of exclusion. Simultaneously the dread of the excluded returns to haunt the stability of the city structures its organization of space. In this paper we shall see how the pre-modern system of Casteism has similarities with as well as difference from the modern democratic system of governance across the world and its distinct form of abandonment. It shall also be suggested how abandonment becomes an indispensable technique through which a governmental apparatus comes into existence both in pre-modern Caste Society in the Indian subcontinent and in modern democracy. This work shall focus on the Bengali Dalit author Manoranjan Byapari, belonging to Namashudra(Dalit) subcaste in Bengal, in order to show how autobiographical form of writing resurfaces the quintessential question of caste, pushed back in modern normative arrangement of space.

Bhimayana: Experiences of Untouchability by Srividya Natarajan and S .Anand reveals the bitter truth of casteism as prevalent in Indian society. Through the use of graphic novel format and reviving the traditional Gond art form, the text not only verbalizes the experience of Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, a major activist who battled against the various modes of oppression and aggression faced by the Dalit community, but also opens up the untouchable's experiences of existence for the naïve readers. This essay shows how Bhimayana uses a multimodal structure to create a post colonial literacy about caste and caste based marginalizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The work of B. R. Ambedkar has spurred scholars and experts to rethink traditional assessments of both the secularization process and the relationship between religious and secular domains. Two generations ago, Ambedkar evoked conversion to Navayana Buddhism as an alternative to hierarchically ordered caste-based society. Through his landmark essay The Buddha and His Dhamma, he questioned studies on Dalit communities that saw them as trying to define their inner life solely as either a negative or mirror image of the standards set by caste-based norms. In the effort to retrieve the autonomy of the Dalit subject, Ambedkar brought to the forefront of his work that conversion was not simply opposition to the power structure of caste society but also meant to overthrow the false ideals that had historically distorted and degraded the Dalit self. The paper addresses some of the methodological questions in political philosophy and historiography that arise in Ambedkar’s thought regarding the analytical categories related to conversion. It begins with a provocation in its juxtaposition of categories from two different discourses: “subalternity” as a relational position in conceptualizing power and “post-secularism” as persistence or resurgence of religious beliefs or practices in the present. It then turns to examine the concept of “subalternity” to show whether it is a relevant lens to understand Dalit subjectivity and agency today. The paper argues that Ambedkar views conversion as a historical process turning away from a status of subalternity, or practices of exclusions, towards becoming individuals with agency, potentially full members of a political community. It also critically examines Ambedkar’s interpretation of Buddhist ethics as an intervention in the analysis of subalternity, showing that the religious ideology of dharma structures the caste order based on discrimination and exclusion. While displacing the explanatory principle of ritual hierarchy that unites Hindu society, Ambedkar addresses the egalitarian imaginary of modern politics that gives us an account of action based on democratic contest and resistance. The paper also explains why the move from Hinduism to Buddhist ethics by Ambedkar can, I argue, be constitutive of a post-secular ethic. Emotion and knowledge are not separate in Ambedkar’s social epistemology, but they draw heavily on the social transformation and importance of religion in people’s inner lives, which went along with conversion.

This paper sketches the history of a cultural and artistic music category called Bhim Geet (or Bheem Geet), songs to Bhimrao Ambedkar, principal redactor of the Indian Constitution and political hero of the Dalits. By examining this aesthetic construct and its social milieu, we trace back and uncover through the lens of music and artistic performances some of the tensions and stakes the Dalits were up against in Maharashtra from a cultural point of view. What does it entail to sing caste struggles in contemporary India? What does emancipation mean for Dalits, both culturally and aesthetically? Ambedkar’s caste conversion to Buddhism in Nagpur in 1956 is now a relatively well-known episode of India’s postcolonial history. It is less known how the ex-Mahar caste, alternately called Buddhists, neo-Buddhists or Ambedkarites, have reconstructed themselves from an inseparably aesthetic and social point of view. We intend to address this lack and show how circulating cultural practices have enabled the construction of a subaltern kind of nationalism. These practices have also made possible legalist dissent through musical narratives widely influenced by Muslim poetry and musical forms, such as Qawwali, although Hindu devotional styles more commonly found in bhajan and kirtan, which are widespread musical genres in India and beyond, have also had an impact. A small fieldwork video accompanies this article and begins by proposing a few sonic examples to its readers to illustrate this significant variation and pool of influences within the category of Bhim Geet.

This contribution brings to our attention a Dalit (‘untouchable’) protest movement against caste violence (the 2006 Khairlanji massacre). Although anger is supposedly an emotion used in an open and demonstrative manner by the powerful as a means to enact their domination, the Dalit movement engaged in acts of ‘emotion work’ that upset such a social mapping of emotions. The paper engages critically with the sterile and biased concept of ‘axiological neutrality’ and advocates instead the heuristic possibilities enabled by the ethnographers’ personal exposure to the emotion work performed by social movements. The protest’s ideological stance illustrates the politically marginalised Dalits’ appropriation of democratic conceptions through the language of injustice and outrage. Two different sets of actors involved in the protest are distinguished: human rights and progressive activists of the peasant NGO movement on the one hand, and the local anti-caste movement of Dalits on the other. The distinct kinds of emotion work each set of actors performed, and the framing of the massacre as an outrage to moral values, highlights how, in the mobilisation for Dalit rights, the popular language of communal outrage and the language of democratic rights articulate with and support one another.