Ashwin Prabaharan ’26
Chief Opinions Editor
In mid-January, I took a trip to Malaysia with my brother to visit my extended family. During a conversation with my grandfather, where I sought to learn more about my family’s history, he insisted that I read the works of the “Father of the Indian Constitution,” Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. His side of my family, having left South India in the mid-1800s to take up administrative positions in then-British Malaysia, was not entirely present for the rise of the independence, rationalist, and self-determination movements that would soon sweep across the subcontinent. He emphasized that Ambedkar ventured both in pen and action to create the ideal society in post-colonial India, and many of his ideas continue to live on in what is the largest democracy on Earth. He recommended I take up Annihilation of Caste to get a good grasp of what exactly Ambedkar aimed to effect and to understand the source of his perspectives. So I did just that.
Image Courtesy of Amazon
Annihilation of Caste was not created as a book or some other publication by Ambedkar. Its contents consist of Ambedkar’s undelivered speech to the Jat-Pat Todak Mandal or Society for the Break Up of Caste. Ambedkar was slated to deliver the President’s speech at the association’s conference in Lahore in 1936, but having been given an advanced copy of his speech, the conference’s organizing committee decided that its contents could fuel anti-Hindu sentiments and spark unrest from conservative Hindus in the region. As a result, Ambedkar felt it was necessary to publish his thoughts regardless of the speech’s deliverance. He then set out to publish 1500 copies of the speech, which became a wide hit and the brunt of great criticism among those who read it.
The speech sets out to lay the basic principles that underpin Ambedkar’s perspectives regarding the caste system and its persistence within Indian society. He argues that Hinduism, the religion of the majority on the subcontinent, inherently sustains the system and the oppression that comes from it. The social hierarchy created by the division of peoples based on their community clearly stems from the hierarchical nature of Hinduism itself. He asserts that oppression and negative identity perceptions are the direct result of the religion, and that to effect a truly egalitarian and progressive state, India must be prepared to relinquish the religion and the system that props it up. Ambedkar also takes notice of ancient texts and ideologies that the system is rooted in, arguing that oppression is inherent not only against those in lower communities but also against women as a collective group. It intrinsically assigns society a male-dominated structure that leaves women with no voice in any substantive matter. Speaking of independence and public movements, Ambedkar requires the elimination of the caste system to ensure that public opinion can be fostered without forcing people to relegate themselves back to their “communities,” being able to give rise to independent literature, and beliefs in things aside from those attached to one’s inherent identity.
Reading this speech was truly an experience, not only in the cultural but in the literary sense. Ambedkar, who attained degrees from the University of Bombay, London School of Economics, and Columbia University, is no stranger to the art of rhetoric and persuasion. The depth of his knowledge, whether it be the ancient Hindu scriptures of the Puranas or the ins and outs of socialist ideology, is unparalleled by his contemporaries. Ambedkar creates such a flow that gives the reader perspective on both the origins of his thoughts and the evidence he uses to rationalize them, taking us on an exuberant journey with his prose that matches the great philosophical writings we revere today. He tediously defines the caste system, its elements, and the attributes by which it stands in contemporary Indian society. Then, bit by bit like a puzzlemaster, he disassembles the structure, leaving bare for us the true nature of the system. We revert to an argument about each attribute, where his rhetorical abilities shine the brightest. He poses questions, some rhetorical and others probably answerable, to challenge the reader’s preconceived notions about the topic and force them to critically analyze what must be an integral component of their own identity. The challenge to the topic does not rest with the caste system, since Ambedkar manages to discuss how India, in the midst of constructing movements towards its independence, can only find the system to be a severe challenge to its ambitions. An egalitarian India that promises social justice, equality, and the freedom of expression, must rid itself of an ugly ancient trope that perpetually marginalizes itself, Ambedkar argues, and its destruction as a necessity will only grow to be self-evident as society progresses. A structural change is not enough, but rather it must be accompanied by normative, cultural, and religious reforms, all seeking to destroy this inherent and unchanging “truth” of Indian society.
If you are looking for an eccentric read and have a couple of hours to spare, I very much recommend Annihilation of Caste for your consideration. The speech means different things to people, but we do no harm in opening our minds to different perspectives about ancient debates, even if we do not have any personal connection to it. Ambedkar remains one of my most cherished authors as evidenced by my collection of his other works, and I hope this offers you a glimpse into another genre of writing you may have not glanced your sights over yet.
Copy Edited by Hannah Torrey
The Spire 