Chapter-III

SOCIAL AND POLITICAL IDEAS OF DR. B R AMBEDKAR

3.1 Introduction

Social and political philosophies deals with human actions and they are grounded at
social level enquiries towards explaining and interpreting social facts, provide the
1
critique of the explanations and interpretations •

Political thought is the sum total of ideas on matters relating to politics, state and
government as expressed by the thinkers. It is historical in nature because it is
described as history. It aims to analyze, examine and evaluate issues that have
2
universal concern and are of interest to the thinkers •

Political ideology explains our social reality, interprets it in a certain way, evolves a
set of interrelated principles, contests the nature of the political system and prescribes
appropriate action. Thus, political ideas are explanatory or interpretative as well as
normative 3 .

Political ideas are related to politics but they are also related to the history. Thus,
understanding political ideas in its historical context is essential to understand the
same in real sense. Political ideas of a thinker emerge after taking into account the
age of his times and thus political philosophy of a thinker can only be understood in
its historical context. A text without a context is a structure without a base and thus
Machiavelli is better understood in the context of renaissance, Hobbes and Locke in
the background of English Civil War and Marx in the light of growing capitalism of
western society4 •

50
Political ideas thrive on political issues of contemporary society. Such issues can be
'Social Justice', 'Feminism', 'Cultural identities', 'Environmentalism' etc 5 . In order
to develop a framework for understanding political ideas, understanding essential
ingredients of political thoughts would be of great help. Political thought is about
politics in so far as it makes it as its subject matter, it is history in so far as it
represents an age, it is theory so far as it examines on the concepts it works on and it
is philosophy in so far as it speculates on political terms and categories. 6

Bhargava and Acharya (2008) described 'Liberty, Equality, Justice, Rights,

Democracy, Citizenship, State, Gender, Civil society' as the concepts of political
theory and 'Liberalism, Socialism, Nationalism' as political ideologies, 'Secularism,
Affirmative action' as the political arguments 7•

Social philosophy encompasses political philosophy also. The issues which are taken
up for study in political philosophy can fall within the scope of social philosophy. For
example, such concepts as state, nation, sovereignty, authority, government, justice
and rights, which are studied in the domain of political philosophy, are also found to
be discussed in the context of social philosophy. However, some of the concepts like
nature of human actions, values, social facts, social laws and social explanations are
not generally discussed in the field of political philosophy. However, the distinction
between the scope of social philosophy and that of political philosophy is more a
matter of convention than a matter of rigorous definition8 .

3.2 B. R. Ambedkar: His Social Ideas

As discussed in the previous chapter, Ambedkar's life was shaped and influenced by
his bitter and degrading personal experiences as untouchables. It was this which led
him to search of the origin of untouchability. His quest of knowing the roots of social
evils can be seen in his writings of "The Untouchables", ''The Shudra, Who were they
and how they come to be the fourth varna of Indo-Aryan society", "Caste in India, its
mechanism, genesis and development" , "Hindu Social Order: Its essential
principles", "Philosophy of Hinduism" and 'Annihilation of Caste". His social ideas
were shaped during his formative years and matured in his later stages of life but it

51
remained focus on the desire for the uplift of the down-trodden, which found
expression in all his social ideas.

3.2.1 Explaining and Interpreting Existing Social Order

Ambedkar made a comprehensive enquiry about the then existing Hindu social order
and argued that the 'Hindu Social Order' had the sanction of Hindu religion. In his
works that included "Philosophy of Hinduism", "Hindu Social Order; Its essential
principles" and "Annihilation of Caste", he attempted at explaining, interpreting and
criticizing the Hindu Social Order and came up with his own normative ideas of an
alternative system of society which was to be based on justice. 9 •

For Ambedkar, the existing social order was formed on the basis of Hindu religious
norms and these were deeply rooted in the system of Hindu Chaturvarna (or four
classes). In his essay "Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles", he mentioned that
human rights did not find any place in the social order and the social order was based
primarily on class or varna and not on individuals. He explained that originally there
were four varnas: "Brahmins (Priest)", "Khastriya (Warriors)", "Vaishyas (Traders)"
and "Shudras (Servants)", later untouchables were added as the fifth class
(Panchama) 10 • However, he maintained that the social order was not limited to five
divisions only; these got further divided into sub-class or sub-castes resulting into
hundreds and thousands of them.

In the same essay he analysed the position of an individual in relation to the society
and stated that:

"The unit of Hindu society is not the individual Brahmin or the individual
Khastriya or the individual Shudra or the individual Panchama. Even the family
is not regarded by the Hindu Social Order as the unit of society except for the
purpose of marriage and inheritance. The unit of Hindu society is the class or
/1,
varna.

52
 From the above position of individual m the Hindu society, he forwarded his
argument that:

" ... there is no room for individual merit and no consideration of individual
justice. If the individual has a privilege it is not because it is due to him
personally. The privilege goes with the class and if he is found to enjoy it, it is
because he belongs to that class. Contra wise, if an individual is suffering from a
wrong, it is not because by his conduct he deserves it. The disability is the
disability imposed upon the class and if he is found to be labouring under it, it is
because he belongs to that class". 12

While summarizing the centrality ofthe philosophy of Hinduism, Ambedkar observed

that the Hindu Social Order neither put "Society at centre' nor it accepted 'individual
at centre' and thus the Hindu social order failed the test of either justice or utility. He
commented that:

"The centre of the ideal (of Hindu social order) is neither individual nor society, It
is a class, it is a class of supermen called Brahmins .... It holds that to be right and
good the act must serve the interest of a class of supermen, namely the Brahmin.
Anything which serves the interest of this class is alone entitled to be called
d /3 ..
goo.

His writings and speeches revealed that he listed three basic principles on which the
existing social order was grounded upon.
Ambedkar' also examined the religious texts to understand the reason behind class
division and he found that the class system was able to survive so long because of
religious sanctity. According to religious texts, different classes 'were created from
the different parts of the Divine body' and thus 'it must be Divine will that they
14
should remain separate and distinct' • He was also of the view that in such a social
framework there was no distinction between legal and moral aspects of the society
and thus what was treated morally as right and good, there was legal sanction for that
too 15 •

The first principle was the 'principle of graded inequality', this principle, the
fundamental one, divided the society both vertically and horizontally. As per this

53
principle the society was made hierarchical with Brahmins occupying the top rank
followed by Khastriya, Vaishya, Shudra and Ati-Shudra or Untouchables. The
principle of gradation had spirituaL moral and legal sanction and thus there was no
sphere of life which was not regulated by this principle. He also observed that this
principle had encompassed human lite in all spheres including social, political and
economic realm 16 .

He commented that:

"Nowhere has society consecrated its occupations- the ways of getting a living
Economic activitv has always remained outside the sanctity of religion. Feudalism
with its gradation. lt'ilh its lords, villains and serfs, was purely social in character.
There was nothing scared about it. The Hindus are only people in the world whose
social relations are consecrated by religion and made scared, eternal and
17
inviolate " .

Graded inequality was also accompanied by hierarchical and graded entitlements to

various rights to different classes. The entitlements increased in ascending order from
Untouchables to Brahmins. In this hierarchical arrangement, rights and privileges of
one class became disabilities or denial of rights to the lower class particularly for
18
untouchables •

Thorat (2008) described it as the phenomenon of 'fixation of rights' where it left no

scope of individual capabilities, choices and inclinations. In other societies, economic
stratifications existed but there was freedom to move from one occupation to another.
Such free mobility prevented social isolation and exclusion. Prevention of such
19
mobility hindered establishment of a free social order .

The second principle that Ambedkar put forward in. interpreting Hindu Social Order
was that the varnas were based on occupations and since the varnas had Divine
sanction, each class has to follow the work assigned to his or her class. Individuals
had no choice to change his occupation and punishments were given for violating the
20
principle of occupation •

54
The caste system provided the mechanism to maintain the order of the society through
social and economic penalties. The instruments of social and economic boycott were
the main forms of penalties laid down against violating the codes of the system 21 •

Since, a shudra could not undertake jobs other than serving higher castes; the upward
mobility in social and economic realm was severely restricted. Finally, he observed
that the assignment of class was not based on individual merit, it was decided by
22
birth •

Denial of equal access to education is another core feature of the caste system. In
Arnbedkar's view, the concept of formal education in Hindu social order was quite
narrow. Formal education was confin~~Ltothe study of religious scriptures like Veda
in schools which were established for this purpose. The state never held itself
responsible for opening establishments for study of arts and sciences that concerns life
of merchants and artesian. In the absence of a formal educational system, each class
managed to transmit its progeny the ways of doing things it was traditionally engaged
in doing. Thus, illiteracy became an inherent part of the class or caste system.
Fixation of rights within a class and graded inequality resulted in denial of rights to
education and opportunities to develop human capabilities23 .

In this context, Ambedkar criticised Manu saying that: 'Manu is the only divine law
giver who has denied the common man the right to knowledge' 24 •

Thus, these thlee principles completely disregard individual's ability or merit and thus
exhibit an 'unjust' society where mobility is severely restricted in all spheres of
human life. Such a society, Ambedkar argued can not be an 'ideal society' and thus he
felt that the existing social order needs attention. He not only suggested the total
annihilation of caste or caste based society, his point of contention was to form an
25
'ideal or just society that would be classless or casteless' .

55
Ambedkar' s vision of a just society was based on two essential principles:

"The first is that the individual is an end in itself and the aim and object of the
society is the growth of the individual and the development of his personality.
Society is not above the individual and if the individual has to subordinate himself
to society, it is because such subordination is for his betterment and only to the
extent necessary. The second essential is that the terms associated life between the
members of society must be regarded by the consideration founded on liberty,
equality and fraternity. 26 "

Here one can find the paradigm shift in his vision of an ideal society. Whereas in the
prevailing society, there was no place of individual's merit, Ambedkar advocated for
a society where individual was the prime concern. Moreover, there was a marked
deviation in the concept of relationship among individuals. Whereas, in the existing
society, the relationships were fixed or pre-determined and based on class, in his
'ideal society' he argued that these relationships ought to be based on liberty, equality
and fraternity.

Ambedkar wanted to justify the order of any society based on 'the test of justice' and
'the test of utility'. It was this judgemental analysis that led him to discard the then
contemporary Hindu society. In his essay "Philosophy of Hinduism", he stated that
'the norm or' the criterion for judging right and wrong in the modern society is justice"
and justice 'is simply another name for liberty, equality and fraternity' 27 .

In his essay on the "Hindu Social Order: Its Essential Principles", he has divided
liberty into two categories namely 'civil liberty' and 'political liberty'. The first
category, 'civil liberty' according to Ambedkar referred to three basic liberties: liberty
of movement, liberty of speech (including liberty of thought, reading and discussion)
and liberty of action. The second category, 'political liberty' consisted the right of the
individual to share in the framing of laws and in the making and unmaking of
governments28 .

56
However as per Ambedkar liberty must be accompanied by three social conditions:
social equality, economic equality and education for all. All these liberties were
restricted to a particular class in the Hindu social order and thus a new social order
was needed for human liberty29 .

While acknowledging the fact that all human beings might not be equal with regard to
physical strength, in material wealth or mental capacity, but still human beings
possessed in degree and kind fundamental characteristics that was common to
humanity. Emphasis must be placed on the term 'moral' because no rational
component of moral equality was ever disputed. While explaining the importance of
moral equality, Ambedkar explained:

"Why is Equality essential? The best exposition of the subject is by Prof Beard in
his essay on 'Freedom in Political Thought' and I shall do no more than quote him.
Says Prof Beard: - ' ... It (moral equality) is asserted against inequalities in
physical strength. talents, industry, and wealth. It denied that superior physical
strength has a moral right to kill, eat, or oppress human beings merely because it is
superior. To talents and wealth, the ideal of moral equality makes a similar denial
ofright. And indeed few can imagine themselves to have superior physical strength;
talents and wealth will withhold from inferiors all moral rights. In such
circumstances government and wealth would go to superior physical strength;
while virtue and talents would serve the brute man, as accomplished Greek slaves
served the whims, passions and desires to Roman conquerors. When the last bitter
word of criticism has been uttered against the ideal of moral equality, there
remains' something in it which all, except things, must accept and in practice do
accept, despite their sheers and protests. A society without any respect for human
personalities is a band ofrobbers ·. "30

In his essay on "Philosophy of Hinduism", Ambedkar explained the meanmg of

'fraternity'. He said:

"There are two factors prevalent in Society. Individualism and Fraternity.

fraternity is another name for fellow feeling. II consists in a sentiment which leads
an individual to identify himself with the goods of others whereby the good of

57
 others becomes to him a thinK naturally and necessarily to be attended to like any
of the physical conditions of our existence. Jl"

In his other essay on "The Hindu Social Order: Its Essential Principles", while
discussing as one of the key essentials of a just society or free society for a free social
order, he stated:

"Fraternity is the name for the disposition of an individual to treat men as the
object of reverence and love and desire to be in unity with the fellow beings.
Fraternity strengthens socialites and gives to each individual a stringer personal
interest in practically consulting the welfare of others. 32 "

In his essay, "Annihilation of Casre''-, he-eommented:

"An ideal society should be mobile, should be full of channels for conveying a
change taking place in one part to other parts. In an ideal society there should be
many interests consciously communicated and shared. There should be varied and
free points of contact with other modes of association. In other words there must be
social endosmosis. 33 "

3.2.3 Prescriptions for Forming a .Just Society

Ambedkar's interpretation of the Hindu social order as a system of governance in

general was based on three inter-related elements: Unequal and hierarchical division
of social and economic rights across classes; fixed rights in a particular class and
sustainability of such system through instruments of social and economic penalties
and moral and legal justifications with Divine sanction34 . Varna system or class
system was the basis of contemporary Hindu social order and he believed that it was
the very system of class division which was responsible for all the evils of the society.

On the other hand, he had a clear vision of an ideal or just society based on liberty,
equality and fraternity. Since, the contemporary caste based society had religious

58
sanction in it thus making it infallible; it would not be possible to break caste without
annihilating the religious notions on what the caste system was founded 35 •

He classified social reforms into various categories. Of which he felt that religious
reforms are difficult to bring forth. He stated:

"Social reforms fall into different species. There is a species of reform, which does
not relate to the religious notion ofpeople but is purely secular in character. There is
also a species of reform, which relates to the religious notions of people. Of such a
species of reform, there are two varieties. In one, the reform accords with the
principles of the religion and merely invites people, who have departed from it, to
revert to them and to follow them. The second is a reform which not only touches the
religious principles but is diametrically opposed to those principles and invites
people to depart from and to discard their authority and to act contrary to those
. . Ies. ,j()
prmczp

Thus, Ambedkar wanted to formulate a new doctrinal basis for Hindu religion in
consonance with liberty, equality and fraternity. He stressed on a paradigm shift in
interpretation of religious texts and considerable scrapping and chipping off the ore
they contain, which were instrumental in formulating principles against fraternity or
fellow feelings 37 .

In this context, Ambedkar gave examples of Sikh and Muslim religions and advocated
the principle of 'associated mode of life' as the basis for establishment of a just
society. As pet him, the contemporary Hindu social order denied three basic rights:
'physical weapon' (by denying right of military service), 'political weapon' (denial of
political power to protect them) and 'moral weapon' (denial of right to get
educated)38 .

Ambedkar then proceeded arguing that in order to make available these three rights to
the people of depressed class, a new social order based on justice would be necessary.
For the establishment of such a new social order, a complete change in the
fundamental notions of life would also be necessary. He looked into the three
practical possibilities for the same: 'Annihilation of caste system', 'introduction of

59
inter-caste dining' and 'inter-caste marriage' 39 ' 40 • He himself attended such dinners
and marriages whenever he got an opportunity 41 •

About inter-caste marriage, he said:

"Fusion of blood can alone create the feeling of being kith and kin and unless this feeling
of kinship, of being kindered, becomes paramount, the separatist feeling- the feeling of
being aliens, created by Caste will not vanish. Among the Hindu, inter-marriage must
necessarily be a factor of greater force in social life that it need be in the life of non-
Hindu. Where society is already well-knit by other ties, marriage is an ordinary incident
of life. But where society cut asunder marriage as a binding force becomes a matter of
urgent necessity. The real remedy for breaking caste is inert-marriage. Nothing else will
,./£
serve as the soIvent oif caste.

Ambedkar was a practical reformer who after taking stock of the whole situation
came to the conclusion that very little could be achieved in the practical field in the
effort of abolition of caste system. Since, the high caste Hindus, especially the
Brahmins did not stand to gain from such efforts but much to loose, the remedies
would elicit little or no result. Under this circumstance, he argued that it would be
necessary for the Depressed Classes to empower and emancipate themselves through
. 43
vanous means. .

Proposing a more practical approach he stated:

"The depressed classes (shoul3) think that the surest way of their elevation lies in
higher education, higher employment and better ways of earning a living. Once
they become well placed in the scheme of social life, the would become respectable
and once they become respectable, the religious outlook of the orthodox is sure to
undergo changes and if this did not happen it could do no injury to their material
interests. ..-1-1

Ambedkar prescribed three pronged approach for social upliftment of Depressed

Class. He suggested that 'education, organization and agitation' were the key
elements needed for the same. Ambedkar believed that the mental lethargy, the
reconciliation with social norms and satisfaction from present were the impediments

60
in the mind of the depressed class from being emancipated and empowered. Thus, he
stated that the social evils could be destroyed through knowle{}ge and education could
be the only means to achieve it. Education might not destroy the class system but it
might help to dissolve the boundaries of caste and class in the lower strata of Indian
society. Besides, formal educations, he also put equal emphasis on informal education
as a prime enablers for drive against caste and untouchability45 •

3.3 B. R Ambedkar: His Political Ideas

Ambedkar's political philosophy was closely related to the most immediate and
accumulated issues of human)ife and essentially in accordance with the fact of
society. 46 Thus, in order to understand political ideas of Ambedkar, it would be
necessary to understand his thoughts about interrelations of State, Government,
Society and Individuals. It would also be necessary to deliberate about the concepts,
ideologies of political theory and political arguments as put forward by Ambedkar.

3.3.11deas on State, Government, Rights and Democracy

Ambedkar was a great admirer of Parliamentary system of Government. According to

him, there are three inherent characteristics of the system. Firstly, free and fair
elections from time to time. Secondly, in the form of government no single individual
can presume the authority that he knows everything and that he can make the laws
and carry the government. The laws are to be made by the representatives of the
people. Finally, the elected representatives, the legislatures and ministers must have
the confidence of the people renewed in themselves at given periodicit/ 7 .

However, he was aware ofthe pitfalls ofthe Parliamentary democracy. Parliamentary

democracy, Ambedkar wrote, made not even a nodding acquaintance with economic
equality. "It failed to realize the significance of equality and did not even endeavour
to strike a balance between liberty and equality, with the result the liberty swallowed
equality and thus left a progeny of inequalities "48.

61
However, Ambedkar saw no alternative to political democracy and therefore firmly
believed in it as an appropriate form ofpolitical organization, but at the same time he
emphasised the need to strengthen the social and economic foundation tor a smooth
functioning of democracy, which he saw as the tissues and fibres of political
democracy by making socialism as a part of the constitution. Thus, his concept of
state socialism is constitutional state socialism with parliamentary democracy. He
therefore advocated for a political-economic framework, namely, constitutional state
socialism with parliamentary democracy. This combination was necessary to ensure
that social and economic organizations would be more egalitarian and consequently,
the parliamentary democracy would become more meaningful to the under
..1eged49 .
pnv1

He wanted people to develop democracy as a state of mind, a style of social life

which assured them work and security, proper facility for education and human rights
for all. Volunteerism claimed an important place in Ambedkar's concept of
democracy. The state should not have any control on every aspect of human life. He
said that no law should be made abridging the freedom of speech, of the press, of
association and of assembly except for consideration of public order and morality. He
stressed upon the need of all kinds of freedom so that people may keep themselves in
larger liberty.

According to Ambedkar, political democracy is based on four premises: i) individual

is an end in himself, ii) individual has certain inalienable rights which must be
'
guaranteed to him constitutionally, iii) individual shall not be required to forego any
of his constitutional rights as a condition precedent to the receipt of a privilege, iv)
state shall not delegate power to individual to govern others.

Ambedkar believed firmly in the idea that democracy requires the functioning of a
moral order of the society. He felt that democracy can not be achieved through free
government or enacting laws only because there are vast sphere of social life where
50
laws could only become success ifthe society has enough moral,ity to do so .

Speaking about Democracy for India, he stated that (1938):

62
 ''I am no believer in democracy as an ideal to be pursued in all circumstances and
all times. In this country we have a democracy but it is a democracy which has
ceased to exercise its intelligence. It has bound itself hand and foot to one
organization and only one. It is not prepared to sit in judgement over the doings or
the thinking of this organization. I consider it the greatest malaise. a disease and a
sickness. It has affected all our people. Democracy must learn that its safety lies in
having more than one opinion regarding the solution of a particular problem, and
in order that people may be ready to advice with their opinion, democracy must
learn to give a respectful hearing to all who are worth listening to. "51

Ambedkar subscribed to a political order informed with rights, democracy and

socialism. He employed socialism to critique an order based merely on rights, while
socialism without a commitment to rights would tend to authoritarianism. A good
society can not be but democracy- a democracy informed with rights and socialism.
In constructing the relation across them Ambedkar laid great stress on human agency
and a strong state 52 .

Ambedkar favoured the functional theory of the state. He accepted the notion of the
state as a legal and constitutional creature. He also held a general view that the state is
not only the source of law but also a creature of law. The state was a legal and
constitutional system that represented the principle of equality. As a liberal he
believed that the individual was ·the unit of political process however, he himself
contradicted by saying that the significant unit in any society is not the individual but
the group. For instance his advocacy of communal representation and reservation was
in principle a negation of the notion of the individual as the basic unit of political
system. He holds the liberal notion of the state where the state represents the
collective will ofthe society through law and hence becomes legitimized53 .

Ambedkar envisaged the state as a very important organisation as it discharges

various important functions which are important for the civilised and democratic life
of the citizens in a society where lawlessness and disorder prevail. The aims of state
organization are many and varied. First of all, it is to maintain the right to every
subject to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness and to free speech and free exercise of
religion. The second function is to remove social, political and economic inequality
by providing better opportunities to the under privileged classes. Here the state

63
becomes positive organization for the protection of the downtrodden. Thirdly, the
state is to make possible for every subject enjoyment of freedom from want and fear.
Lastly, it has to provide against internal disorder and external aggression54•

Ambedkar's political thought is essentially in accord with the facts ofthe society. He
did not consider the state to be an isolated and self-sustaining entity. He related it
with voluntary organization where there exist inter-relation between man, society and
state. To him true freedom of human being is not merely political; it is also social,
economic, intellectual and spiritual. He endeavoured to reach balance between the
central authority of state and the liberty of the individual. He regarded state as a
means to establish good relations between man and man, society and societies. The
state is not an end by itself, b11tit is a means for furtherance of human ends in the
interests of better future society.

Ambedkar' s idea of a federal state attaches more importance to institutional means

for the solution of human affairs. It has adopted a middle way between centralization
and decentralization of power and authority for the reasons that - 'there is a clear
division of government power between the centre and state governments, each
government is independent of the other in its own field and the constitution
established an independent judiciary to settle disputes between the union and the
states with respect to the divisions of power'. His concept of federalism means the
state is a federation in normalcy but unitary in emergency. 55

Despite his emphasis on legal remedies, Ambedkar was conscious that rights are not
protected by law alone but by the moral and social conscience of society. If social
conscience is such that it is prepared to recognise the rights which law chooses to
enact, right will be safe and secure. But it the Fundamental Rights are opposed by the
community, no Law, no Parliament and no Judiciary can guarantee them in real sense
56
ofthe world .

.
He maintained that even then the state is not above the societl 7• In his opinion, state
is not an isolated self-sufficient entity in fact he relates state to the voluntary
organization. He did not regard state as an organism like Green, Hegel and Rousseau.
He accepted the state as a human organization and because it was human

64
organization, it had to serve the interests of man and society as a servant and not as a
master. He had reasons to believe the inter-relatedness of man, society and state 58 .

To Ambedkar, any scheme of political relationship must take into consideration the
basic plan of social relation. The social structure has a profound effect on the political
structure. In his opinion man is behind all the laws of human society. To Ambedkar
society is more important than the state. The state is duty bound to provide protection
against internal disorder and foreign aggression. He did not consider state to be
absolute. He said that no state is ever a single society and inclusive and permitting
body of thought and action. He wanted that a state should be stable and the people
should abide by the laws it makes for the well-being of the society. To him
government is based on obedience to authority, a willingness on part of his people to
obey the authority of state is an important factor 59 .

He commented:

''In creating, moulding. expanding and knitting together political communities, what
is more important than force is obedience. The willingness to obey and comply with
the sanctions of a government depends upon certain psychological attributes of the
individual citizens and groups. 60 "

To Ambedkar Law is not only a legal function, it also regulates the life of whole
society and nation. Law keeps within limits all men irrespective of caste, colour and
creed. All citizens should be equal before law and possess equal civic rights. His faith
in individual liberty and dignity leads him to the rule of law. He preferred law to
ensure that citizen is not deprived of life, liberty and property without due process of
61
law and to ensure that no one is denied jurisdiction for equal protection under law .

According to him there existed in Indian society a tendency to subordinate the

individual to the claims of group and caste. Freedom was curtailed by both the society
and state, though some individuals on the basis of their group or caste prestige were
free to express their opinion. To him state would continue to co-exist along with
individuals, groups or society and it should play an important role in establishing
good relations between man and man, society and society. The state is not an end in
itself, but only a means for furtherance of human ends to create a better future

65
society. He wanted the central government to act as a powerful curb on the provincial
majority to safeguard the minorities from the tyranny of the majority. State exists
only to prevent injustice, tyranny and oppression and he prescribes that no state
should invade the fundamental rights of man. He feels the need of constitutional
morality. 62

Ambedkar regarded rights as natural and inherent in the individual. He had a strong
faith in the separation of the government's power and of the allocation of functions to
various departments. He built his theory of social and political organization around
his central concept of the individual and his rights. To him, the state exists only to
prevent injustice, tyranny and oppression. The state has to serve the people. He
wanted that no state should violate--thefundamental rights of man. He opposed to all
kinds of discrimination on the ground of race, caste and creed. He held that society
can do nothing without some organized power. He stressed the need not only of a
constitutionalism in its formal basis, but also of constitutional morality and some
conventions for the practical success of a constitution, He wished a good, moral
government to protect the rights of the people in all their legitimate functions, He
fought for the rights and rebelled against communal absolutism 63 •

Ambedkar wanted that both government and state must be organized on human
considerations so that humanity may not suffer long. He believed in rejuvenation of
social ideals and political values. His actions were characterised by a sincerity of
purpose and a sense of responsibility, a concern for human welfare which constitute
the essence ~f his democratic Government and state. He believed in the value and
64
worth of individual in society, the touchstone of all true functions of the state •

Ambedkar was a practical politician regarding the relations between society,

government and state. His approach was realistic and based on practical politics. To
him, the state and government become intelligible concepts only in relation to the
actual condition of the society. A state should protect its citizens against external
aggression, maintain law and order against internal disturbance and guarantee to its
subjects minimum standards of administration and welfare65 .

66
Ambedkar believed that nobody can redress the grievances of Depressed Class nor
could they remove it themselves unless they get political power in their hand. He
further suggested that in the government, the men in power will not be afraid to
amend the social and economic code of life which is the necessity of the hour. Such
kind of government can be formed only through the Swaraj government66 .

To Ambedkar, an individual is an end in itself. An individual has certain inalienable

rights which must be guaranteed to him by the Constitution. He further added that the
individual shall not be required to relinquish any of his constitutional rights as a
condition-precedent to the receipt of a privilege. The state shall not delegate powers
to private persons to govern others. However, to Ambedkar, rights are nothing if they
are not accompanied by remedies. He criticised those constitutional lawyers who
assumed that 'the enactment of Fundamental Rights is enough to safeguard their
liberty and nothing more is called for." Remedies against invasion of Fundamental
67
Rights are needed and must be provided into the constitution, he argued .

68
He argued that democracy cannot be achieved without State Socialism • He
advocated for a secular state, with liberty of conscience and belief to all people and
religious toleration69 .

Like Utilitarian thinkers who justify the existence of state based on the principle of
utility on its citizen, Ambedkar forwarded similar view. He advocated that the
purpose of the state is to promote general welfare. The state, he regarded, is a
necessary institution to safeguard the individuals and general security of individuals
in a society. Stability of state is, therefore, essential to secure liberty of an individual
in a society. He also emphasised the role of constitution for redress of public
• 70
gnevances .

3.3.2 Ideas on Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, Social Justice and Civil Society

Ambedkar believed that a well-structured social order is the necessary condition for a
democratic free state. The purpose of the state, as appears to Ambedkar, is to lay
'stress upon the idea that every individual should aim to promote happiness.' He felt

67
that social well being would be the final outcome of the Government and these could
be measured by degree of fostering of virtue and intelligence at all levels of
individuals 71 .

He summarised the delivery mechanism of justice stating that 'in fact social justice is
the end, judicial justice is the means, the legislative and executive operations are
human engineering and together the three branches of government have to work in
the country so that the constitution may fulfil its purpose.' 72

Ambedkar's ideas on justice are closely linked up with his concept of democracy both
as a form of government and a "mode of associated life". He considered democracy
as 'a historical movement'. He defined democracy as a form and method of
government whereby revolutionary changes in the economic and social life of the
people are brought about without bloodshed. In other words to him democracy was a
way of life and a political method for ensuring justice for all.

Ambedkar also rejected Gandhi's Sarvodaya theory of social justice which associated
both religion and the welfare of citizens. Whereas Gandhi took Varnashrama
Vyavastha as the natural principle of a society, Ambedkar rejected the principle as it
was based on the help of God in sustaining the spirit of the social justice and it
justified the doctrine of social inequality as God's will. He could not believe the
efficacy of any system that has no relevance to the welfare of the Depressed
Classes 73 .

In order to form an ideal society, Ambedkar recognised the two essential principles:
the first being that Individual is the final end. For this the aim of society should
support growth of an individual and development of his personality. The society
should not be above the individual and if in any case the individual has to subordinate
himself to society, it should be for his betterment or due to necessity. The next
principle is that all members in society must be treated on liberty, equality and
4
fraternit/ •

Individual, as per Ambedkar, is politically constituted as a creature of the society

whom society has structurally slotted it in a group. Liberty and Equality are ensured

68
through the laws that are to be given not only to the isolated, atomistic individual but
also to the socially operative groups, whether caste or classes. To him an ideal society
is the one where difference in groups is abolished and individuals are made to relate
to the state in an authentic manner so that there real worth is not negated or distorted
through unjust mediation. Unlike Marx, Ambedkar did not see the possibility of
statelessness, he advocated castelessness in society 75 •

Ambedkar is also one of the proponents of social justice in Modern India. He tried to
achieve social justice and social democracy in terms of 'one man-one value'. He
treated social justice as a true basis for patriotism and nationalism. He did not accept
the theories of social justice as propounded by the Varna System, the Aristotelian
Order, Plato's scheme andQandhian Sarvodya order and not even the proletarian
socialism ofMarx 76 .

The contents of Ambedkar's concept of social justice included unity and equality of
all human beings, equal worth of men and women, respect. His view on social justice
was to remove man made inequalities of all shape through law, morality and public
• 77
conscience .

Analysis of the writings of Ambedkar on the issue of social justice reveals that that
78
most of his writings basically revolve around the establishment of an 'ideal society' ,

a 'casteless society' 79 or a society based on the 'principle ofjustice' 80 .

Liberty as a· concept has been vi~wed variously by thinkers in various stages of the
history of political thought. The term closest to Liberty in the Indian tradition is
'mukti ', understood either as renunciation or as deliverance from the chain or
rebi1ihs; the initial understanding of mukti did not refer to freedom from social
restrictions. Ideas of modern liberty entered colonial India through three different
routes- colonial legal arrangements accompanied by tacit understandings of rights and
freedom of individuals, institutional spread of western style education and intellectual
influence of western social thinking. In western India, thinkers from lower caste
groups began to use the ideas of social freedom to attack caste hierarchy, notably
Jyotiba Phule and later B R Ambedkar81 •

69
The concept of equality lies at the heart of nonnative political theory. However, the
idea of equality can not be separated from parallel accounts of liberty, justice, rights
and democracy, which are influenced and inspired by the concept of equality.
Although, the concept of equality and politics of egalitarianism have justified the idea
of a welfare state, the political struggles of identity groups are creating a new political
phenomenon. The struggles for greater equality by women, dalits, and minorities are
a pointer to the continuing relevance of the bases of the social equalitl 2•

Ambedkar was of the view that the criterion for judging right and wrong in the
modern society is justice and justice according to him is another name for Liberty,
Equality and Fraternity 83 . While discussing the meaning of Liberty he said that it
should include social equality, economiG equality and there must be knowledge
(education) made available to all. All these social conditions were restricted to a
particular class in the old social order but form an important part in the new social
order84 .

Regarding equality he emphasised on the term moral equality as it asserts in ethical

value, belief t~ be sustained and recognition of rights to be respected. As a 'society
without any self respect for human personalities is a band of robbers. Regarding
Fraternity he said that it strengthens socialites and gives to each individual a stronger
personal interest in practically consulting the welfare of others 85 .

The society as defined by him is more of a fundamental category in which both

Politics and Economics intersected. According to him society was a collection of
group entities, organically structured within and related to each other. The survival
and progress of society was structurally dependent on the nature and function of
theses entities. His liberal predilections re-appear when he argues that a class society
was ipso facto superior to a caste society as the latter brought stagnation, hierarchy
and inequity. The class society opened up historical possibilities in the direction of
greater liberty and equalitl 6 .

Ambedkar rejected the Marxian methods for ending the exploitation of the
untouchables. He regarded Marxist way of life as inferior to the Buddhist way. He
admitted that economic factor play an important role in human relations but not to the

70
extent to which Ma:rx accepts 87 • According to him, Marx's philosophy was satisfying
philosophy to the lower order; it was a direction not a dogma. 88 He also opposed the
concept of totalitarianism of Marx as he preferred in a balance between the
organizing power of the state and the deriving force of the free individuals89 •

Ambedkar's conception of freedom and justice is derived from the liberal version and
tradition. The issue of human rights form the central basis of his own construction of
'freedom' and 'justice'. The figure of human rights is pre-eminent in many a text of
Ambedkar's writings and speeches. But, given the horrible context of destitution,
deprivation and disadvantage systematically haunting the depressed classes and given
the context of a colonial state, Ambedkar thinking about justice, freedom and rights
can be termed asinnovativeandremarkable,~~-··

Ambedkar concept of justice and equality can not be branded as Fabian or Marxian or
Gandhian in nature. It was developed around those remedial measures which he
thought essential for social reconstruction and vitalization of the Hindu society as also
for the upliftment of the untouchables. One may notice that he derived his ideas from
many sources notably the French Revolution, Declaration of the Rights of Man,
Fourteenth Amendment of the American Constitution, Marxist and Buddhist
egalitarian thought.

Ambedkar, throughout his entire articulation, sought to accord primary position to the
civil society which he believed to be at the centre stage for ensuring justice and
building a 'just society' based on equality and freedom . To Ambedkar, rights did not
appear as "constraints and limits on the power of the state, rather, they emerge as
legal entitlements casting corresponding obligations on the members of civil society.
Ambedkar's strategy for essential justice was to innovate jural relations. According to
him the state has a power coupled with duty to which the rights of the depressed
classes correspond. 91

71
3.3.3 Normative Ideas, Political Ideologies, Political arguments: B.R.
Ambedkar's Construction

The memorandum presented to the Constituent Assembly by Ambedkar could be

termed as a small constitution for the protection of common citizenry and attempted
to established Social Democracy and State Socialism. Ambedkar suggested dual
strategy for adopting 'Inclusive Policy' referring to it as 'Safeguards against
Economic Exploitation' and 'Safeguards against Social Discrimination and
Isolation'. Ambedkar suggested separate remeaies againsfsoCial discrimination and
remedies against economic exploitation. Number of measures is suggested as
remedies against social discrimination, the focus of which is equal participation in
multiple spheres. As a re_Il1~~~~~~i~~!_!con~l11i~ ~~ploitati()n he proposed to adopt
state socialism as a policy of the state as a general solution to the problem of
economic exploitation92 •

So far as the role of the state as a political organisation is concerned, a great similarity
of attitude exists between Ambedkar and John Rawls ( 1921-2002 ). As they held the
view that the state has a positive role in providing justice for every body in the
society. Since there may be wide variations in the position or status of different
sections of the people, it becomes imperative on the part of the state to make
reasonable classification for providing justice to the people in the most disadvantaged
strata of the society. Actually, this is the basic foundation of 'positive discrimination'
or 'affirmative action'. Moreover what Rawls has advocated as the concept of
'distributive' justice', can be very well inferred from the theoretical position that
Ambedkar developed in relation to his concept of Justice.

Ambedkar wanted education to disseminate among poor and underprivileged people.

He was conscious about the backwardness of the underprivileged in the matter of
education. For him, the primary aim of education was to initiate the citizen into the
life of a larger community and to realise his potential as a citizen. He laid greater
emphasis on practical education and economic opportunity than on the adult
franchise. He wanted to solve the problem of education through Governmental efforts
and agencies 93 . He wanted to portray State and Government as agencies entrusted for
social change, economic change and also to protect the Depressed Class and

72
suppressed minorities from the tyranny and opposition of a communal majority. Only
94
then, he felt, the democracy, not only in form, but also in spirit can be realised .

Ambedkar was not a purely speculative and idealistic political philosopher, in the
conventional sense, like Plato and Aristotle. Nevertheless, he developed his own
social and political ideas, which were deeply rooted in real human problems and
issues, and vital human affairs. His political philosophy attempted to bridge the gulf
between theory and practice, materialism and spiritualism. Out of his sense of
dejection with the inhuman treatment meted out to his community by the caste
Hindus, his mission for the total emancipation of the underprivileged classes from the
clutches of the privileged, his total engagement with the predicament of Indian
society, evolved Ambedkar's political ideolog/5•

Ambedkar placed man at the central position in his scheme of an egalitarian society
and a democratic frame. To him,

"The soul of democracy is the doctrine of one man, one value; unfortunately,
democracy has attempted to give effect to this doctrine only so far as the political
structure was concerned, it has left the economic structure to take the shape given
to it by those who are in the position to mould it. Time has come to take a bold step
and define both the eco structure as well as the political structure by the law of the
Constitution. 96 "

The problem of discriminated groups was twofold to Ambedkar. He identified lack of

access to economic resources like agricultural land, business and services,
employment, education as the first problem to discriminated class. He related the
continuation of discrimination in contemporary society as the second issue. Since, the
problem is two fold, he suggested dual solution: one set of remedies for compensation
of historical denial of economic rights in present and second set of remedies to
provide safeguards against discrimination in present97 .

For overall development of discriminated groups, m addition to reservation,

Ambedkar suggested suitable political arid economic system to remove structural
inequalities. He suggested a more radical remedy of equalization in the form of state

73
socialism in agricuiture and industry to protect the qeprived groups against economic
exploitation. He observed:

"The main purpose behind this clause is to pitt an obligation on the state to plan the
economic life of the people on the lines which would lead to highest point of
productivity without closing every avenue to the private sector and provide for
equitable distribution of wealth. The plan set out in the clause proposed state
ownership in agriculture with collectivlsed method of cultivation and a modified form
of State socialism in the field ofindttstry It places squarely on the shoulders of the
state the obligation to supply capital necessary .fiJr agriculture as well as for
. d ustry ,<)!<.
m

Ambedkar reiterated his postrl:orrtnaTtlie problems ofunderprivileged are rooted in

the historical denial of basic human rights to them. Thus, he grounded the
justification of remedies of the same in the framework of socialism and assertion of
principles of equality in the political framework. In the context of untouchables, he
adopted phased interventions. His initial efforts involved creating awareness among
the British regarding the status of untouchables and demand for citizenship rights. In
the second phase, he attempted assertion of rights with wide description and
explanations in terms of political representations. In the third phase, extension of
representation and participation in the sphere of education and employment can be
seen. Finally, in fourth phase, he advocated a general framework for constitution
based on principles of non-discrimination, legal safeguard, and responsibility of state
to protect un?erprivileged and to take measures for their upliftment99 .

Ambedkar's 'Inclusive Policy' for upliftment of underprivileged has four

components, which include creating an egalitarian economic structure which will
provide a base for equal economic and social opportunities for the discriminated
groups of the society, equal opportunity policy in terms of reservation for the
discriminated groups with adequate legal safeguards against discriminations,
participation of the discriminated groups in the governance through fair share in the
legislature, executive and administration and finally putting responsibility on state to
undertake such policies with a clear provision in the constitution and other statuary
forms 100 •

74
Ambedkar realised that Indian Social Order does not provide 'liberty, equality and
fraternity' to all. The Indian Social Order. as per him, was based on graded inequality
embodying deference upwards and contempt downwards. Such a consciousness is not
merely extremely regulative but is deeply internalised. Socio-economic relations are
deeply influenced by it. The constitutional and legal order and organised power of the
state can provide measures to get ride such situation, however, he felt that any long
term transformations can only be through social arrangements. Therefore, he
advocated interventions in personal codes, spreading of educations and eventually
principles of Buddhism tot.

Ambedkar visualised thatpoliticaLpower was the key to social progress of under

privileged class. His concept of power is related to two major aspects: descriptive and
normative. Ambedkar held the normative aspect to be very important in the process of
human emancipation. He followed the normative aspects throughout his life. He
imagined or positively identified comprehensive ideals like freedom, justice and
equality with institutional arrangements like representative democracy with majority
vote. He inv~sted considerable faith in these institutional arrangements as a
mechanism to empower the under privileged. In the context of the then contemporary
society, he appreciated that human empowerment would depend on the development
of political practices, institutions arid belief 02 .

3.4 Summary' and Conclusion

Ambedkar himself experienced humiliation and alienation during his childhood,

schooling age and the age of youth. He faced many problems and hurdles in his life.
He matured as a revolutionary against the contemporary social order and decided to
fight against the prevailing caste rigidity in order to secure social justice and equality.
Ambedkar strove to change the Indian social structure which was governed by the
caste system and its rigid code of behaviour like endogamy and servitude of shudras
and untouchables. He wanted to dissolve the system through assimilation and
integration and thus he pleaded for inter-caste marriages in order to achieve unity,
fraternity, social solidarity and national integration.

75
Ambedkar sought to solve the problem of social disharmony through socio-economic
upliftment of Depressed Class. He wanted to incorporate legal safeguards in the
Constitution of India and to bring regulatory reforms to bring equalities and to pave
way for positive discriminations towards depressed classes including women. He was
concerned about the inhuman and subservient position of Hindu women as a result of
the inequalities ordained in the religious texts. He urged for a common code for the
Hindu Community that would do away with the rules of Hindu law which were
scattered in innumerable decisions of various High courts. His vision of common
Hindu code was that it would enable inter-caste marriage, monogamy, and ensure
economic rights to women through property rights. Through this common code,
Ambedkar aimed at raising the status of Hindu women and preventing injustices
inflicted on her. He also emphasized that in a secular state religion should not be
allowed to govern all human activities and that personal laws should be divorced
from religion 103 •

According to Ambedkar, the Hindu social order is the root cause of various social
evils perpetuated in various forms in the Indian society, For him, Hinduism is
responsible for the abominable conditions of the down-trodden, especially of lower
caste and women. The inequality in Hinduism is a religious doctrine adopted and
conscientiously preached as a sacred dogma. The triumphant Brahmanism began its
onslaught on both shudra and women in pursuit of the ideal of servility. He blamed
Manu for treating women in more or less similar way as the shudra. Apart from
restricting her from studying the Veda, Manu also prevented women ffom making
104
sacrifices •

Ambedkar' s VISion of a just society was based upon three universal principles:
Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, The united name for these trinity principles he used
is 'justice'. In order to establish such a society, he favoured democracy. According to
him:

"Democracy was not a form ofa government; it was essentially a form ofa society.
It may not be necessary for a democratic society to he marked by unity, by
community ofpurpose, by loyalty to public endv and hy mutuality of sympathy. But

76
 it does unmistakably involve two things. The first is an attitude of mind. an attitude
of respect and equality towards their fellows. The second is a social organization
free from rigid social barriers. "1" 5

At the time of adoption of the Constitution of India on 261h January 1950, he

elaborated the form of social and political democracy through the following
statement:

"We must make our political democracy a social democracy as well. Political
democracy can not last unless there lies at the base of it, social democracy. What
does social democracy mean? It means a way of life which recognises liberty,
equality and fraternity as the principles of life. These principles of liberty, equality
and fraternity are not to!Jetrea_tet!_ms_gpgr_qte items in a trinity. They form a union
of trinity in the sense that to divorce on from other is to defeat the very purpose of
..J /(){)"
uemocracy.

He further argued in the same statement that on the social plane, the Indian society
was based on the principle of graded inequality and on the economic plane, the wealth
was inequitably distributed. Thus, while in politics, Indian people might get equality,
but in social and economic life, the inequality would continue. If such situation
continued, the contradiction would blow up the structure of political democracy as
wellio7.

While he continued on with unceasing zeal his efforts to adequate legal safeguards for
depressed classes, he did forget the fact that unless the affected people must engage
themselves in the same war, the desired outcome could never be realised. He did not
assume the role of their political leader; he was a leader in their social life as well. He
tried to infuse not only in men but also women a new sense of self-respect instead of
being reconciled with the social norms. He urged them to observe cleanliness, to send
08
their children to school and told them to live with self-dignity and self-resped .

Individual freedom and common good are the dearest and the most precious things in
Ambedkar's social and political ideas. To him social and political ideas embody
social dynamism, because man is a political animal and a social being,

77
He attempted to bring modern philosophical thought to solve the political ills of men.
He believed that what is political ideal for most Indians will become a social ideal for
all. In his philosophy, he gave the highest place to fraternity. His political philosophy
has a deep faith in fundamental human rights, in the equal rights of men and women,
in the dignity of the individual, in the social and economic justice, in the promotion of
social progress and better standards of life with peace and security in all spheres of
human life. His political ideas are synthesis of idealism and realism, empiricism and
rationalism, naturalism and humanism, materialism and spiritualism, individualism
109
and socialism •

In his social and political ideas, Arnbedkar stood for equalityand justice in the realm
of social, economic and political arena. He remarked that justice had always evoked
ideas of equality, of proportion, of compensation. Equity signifies equality. Rules and
regulations, right and righteousness are concerned with equality in value. If all men
are equal, then all men are of the same essence, and the common essence entitles
them of the same fundamental rights and equal liberty. It is in this spirit, he wanted
. hts o f women 110 .
ng

Ambedkar can be designated as a normative political theorist. A normative political

theorist begins with assumptions that most people can endorse easily. Once, these
111
assumptions are accepted, the thinker starts dealing with more contentious issues •

He wanted a' society that is sufficiently honest and open minded to recognize its
problems, sufficiently creative to conceive new solutions and to put them into
112
effect . Society shall protect the individual's human right. Defining the relationship
between an individual and society, he said:

"What should be the relation between a man and society? The modern social
philosophers have postulated three answers to this question. Some have said that the
ultimate goal of society is to achieve happiness for individuals. Some say the society
exists for development for inherent qualities and energies of man and help him to
develop himself However, some claim that the chief object of social organization is
not the development or happiness of the individual but the creation of an ideal

78
 society. The concept of Hindu religion is however very dif.forent from all these
concepts. There is no place for an individual in Hindu religion. The Hindu religion is
constituted on a class concept. The Hindu religion does not teach how an individual
should behave with another individual. A religion which does not recognise the
individual is not personally acceptable to me. Although society is necessary for the
individual, mere social welfare can not be the ultimate goal of religion According to
me individual welfare and progress (individual development) should be the real aim
of the religion. Although the individual is the part of the society, the relation with
society is not like the body and ils argansTorJhe c~rt and ils wheels.... unlike the
drop of water that merges its existence with the ocean in which it drops, man does
not loose his entity in the society in which he lives. Man's life is independent he is
born not for the service of the society but for his self-development. For this reason
alone, in developed counlde_S_j]ll£1lUlll--CanJWI-enslave another. A religion in which
an individual has no importance is not acceptable to me. The basic idea underlying a
religion is to create an atmosphere for the spiritual development of an individual. If
this is agreed upon it is clear that you can not develop yourself at all in the
Hinduism. Three factors are required for the uplifi of an individual; they are
sympathy. equality and liberty. "11 3

To Ambedkar society is an organization based on some human attitudes. It has certain

essentials which contribute to form a real society. He holds that men do not become a
society by living in physical proximity any more than a man ceases to be a member of
a society by living so many miles away from other men. To Ambedkar men constitute
a society because they have things they possess in common. The soul of his ideal
society is socia~ conscience 1
14
•

Ambedkar can be viewed as a synthesizer of many Indian trends of social and

political ideas: Justice, Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, casteless-classless society etc.
His life and struggle can be seen as the protest against the caste ridden, highly
regimented Hindu society and to him this was the source of all injustices,
discrimination and social exclusion.

79
 Notes and Reference

1
Chattopadhya, D P. 1989. Social and Political Philosophy: Some Aspects. In Chattopadhya
, D P. (ed.) Essays in Social and Political Philosophy. New Delhi: Indian Council of
Philosophical Research & Allied Publishers, p.4.
2
Arora, N D., Awasthy, S S. 2008. Political Theory and Political Thought. New Delhi: Har
Anand Publications Pvt. Limited, pp.72-73.
3
Acharya, A. 2008. Liberalism. In Bhargava, R., Acharya, A. (ed.) Political Theory: An
Introduction. New Delhi: Pearson Longman, p.237.
4
Arora, N D., Awasthy, S S. 2008. Political Themy and Political Thought. op. cit., pp.74-75.
5
For details see Miller, D. (ed.) 1987. The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political thought.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
6
Arora, N D., Awasthy, S S. 2008. Political Theory and Political Thought. op. cit., pp.68-72.
7
Details f~r this aspect can be had from, Bhargava R, Acharya A. (ed.) 2008. Political
Theory: An Introduction. New Delhi: Pearson Longman.
8
Chattopadhya, D P. 1989. Social and Political Philosophy: Some Aspects. In Chattopadhya
, D P. (ed.) Essays in Social and Political Philosophy. op.cit., p.4.
9
Massey, James. 2005. Dr. Ambedkar's vision of a just society. In Mohd. Shabbir, (ed.)
Ambedkar on Law, Constiution and Social Justice. New Delhi : Rawat Publication, pp.\53-
155.
10
Ambedkar, 8 R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In Dr. Babasaheb
Ambedkar Writings and Speeches. (hereafter referred as B.A.W.S) Bombay: Education
Department, Government of Maharastra, Vol.3, pp.99-I 06.
II Ibid. p.99.
12
Ibid. pp.99-1 00.
13
Ibid. p.72. ·
14
Ibid. p.IOO.
15
Thorat, S., Kumar, N. 2008. B R Ambedkar: Perspectives on Social Exclusion and Inclusive
Policies. New Delhi: Oxford, p.9.
16
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In B.A. W.S. Vol.3,
op.cit., p. Ill .
17
Ibid. pp.l29.
18
Thorat, S., Kumar, N. 2008. B R Ambedkar: Perspectives on Social Exclusion and Inclusive
Policies. op.cit., pp.4-5.
19
Ibid. p.4.
20
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In B.A. W.S. Vol.3,
op.cit., pp.lll-113.

80
21
Thorat, S., Kumar, N. 2008. B R Ambedkar: Perspectives on Social Exclusion and Inclusive
Policies. Op.cit., p. 7.
22
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In B.A. WS. Vol.3,
op.cit., pp.ll3-115.
23
Thorat, S., Kumar, N. 2008. B R Ambedkar: Perspectives on Social Exclusion and Inclusive
Policies. op.cit., p.6.
24
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In B.A. WS. Vol.3,
op.cit., p.43.
25
Massey, James. 2005. Dr. Ambedkar's vision of a just society. In Mohd, Shabbir. (ed.)
Ambedkar on Law, Constitution and Social Justice. op.cit., p.l58.
26
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In B.A.WS. Vol.3,
op.cit., p.95.
27
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. Philosophy of Hinduism. In B.A.WS. Vol.3, op.cit., p.95 and p.22.
28
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In B.A. WS. Vol.3,
op.cit., p. 98.
29
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. Philosophy of Hinduism. fn B.A. WS. Vol.3, op.cit., pp.38-39.
30
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In B.A. WS. VoiJ,
op.cit., pp. 96-97.
31
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. Philosophy ofHinduism. In B.A.W.S. Vol.3, op.cit., p.44.
32
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In B.A. W.S. Vol.3,
op.cit., pp.97-98.
33
Ambedkar, B R. 1989. Annihilation of Caste. In B.A. WS. Vol.!, p.57.
34
Thorat, S., Kumar, N. 2008. B R Ambedkar: Perspectives on Social Exclusion and Inclusive
Policies. op.cit., p.7.
35
Ambedkar, B. R. 1989. Annihilation ofCaste. fn B.A.WS. Vol.l, p.27.
36
Ambedkar, B. R. Annihilation ofCaste. available at http://ambedkarquotes.wordpress.com
accessed on 06.06.2007.
37
Massey, James. 2005. Dr. Ambedkar's vision of a just society. In Mohd. Shabbir (ed.)
Ambedkar on Law. Constitution and Social Justice. op.cit., p. I 64.
38
Ambedkar, B R. 1989. Annihilation of Caste. In B.A. W.S. Vol.l, p.63.
39
Massey, James. 2005. Dr. Ambedkar's vision of a just society. In Mohd. Shabbir (ed.)
Ambedkar on Law, Constitution and Social Justice. op.cit., p.l64.
40
Bharill, Chandra. I 977. Social and Political Ideas of B R Ambedkar. Jaipur: Aalekh
Publishers, pp.202-203.
41
Ibid. p.219.
42
Ambedkar, B R. 1989. Annihilation ofCaste. In B.A.W.S. Vol.!, p.67.

81
43
Bharill, Chandra. 1977. Social and Political Ideas of B R Ambedkar. op.cit., p.213.
44
Ambedkar B R. 1946. What Congress and Gandhi Have Done to the Untouchables.
Bombay: Thakar and Co. Ltd. p.ll 0.
45
Bharill, Chandra. 1977. Social and Political Ideas of B R Ambedkar. op.cit., pp. 213-216.
46
For details, see Jatava, D.R. 2001. Introduction. In Political Philosophy of B.R Ambedkar.
New Delhi: National Publishing.
47
Bharill, Chandra. 1977. Social and Political Ideas of B R Ambedkar. op.cit., p.l84.
48
B.A.W.S. 1979. Vol.l, p. 428.
49
Thorat S, Aryama. (ed.) 2007. Ambedkar in Retro:,pect: Essays on economics, politics and
society. New Delhi: Rawat Publications, p.16.
50
Bharill, Chandra. 1977. Social and Political Ideas of B R Ambedkar. op.cit., p.190.
51
Ambedkar, B R. Speech. Times of India, 4 1h January, 1938.
52
Rodrigues, V. 2007. Good society : Rights, democracy and socialism. In Thorat S,
Aryama. (ed.) Ambedkar in Retrospect: Essays on economics, politics and society. New
Delhi: Rawat Publications, p. i 44.
53
Patii.Y.T. (ed.) 1995. Studies in Ambedkar. Delhi: Devika publications, pp.9-11.
54
Ambedkar, B R. 194 7. State and Minorities, What are their rights and how to secure them
in the free Constitution of India. Bombay: Thacker & Co Limited, p.3.
55
Bharathi, K, S. 1956. The Political Thought of Ambedkar. In Encyclopedia of Eminent
Thinkers. Vol.IX, New Delhi: Concept Publishing, p.75.
56
Bharill, Chandra. 1977. Social and Political Ideas of B R Ambedkar. op.cit., p.200.
57
Ibid. p.196.
58
Barathi, K, S. 1956. The Political Thought of Ambedkar. In Encyclopedia of Eminent
Thinkers. Vol.IX, op.cit., p.74.
59
P. Sanjay, Jaideva, P. 2004. Encyclopaedia of Dalit in India, Leader. Yoi.IY, Delhi: Kalpaz
Publication, pp.51-56.
60
Ambedkar, B R. 1946. Pakistan or the Partition of India. Bombay: Thacker & Co. Limited,
p.293.
61
Ambedkar, B R. 1947. State and Minorities, What are their rights and how to secure them
in the .free constitution of India. Bombay:Thacker and Co. Limited, p.9.
62
P Sanjay, Jaideva P. 2004. Encyclopaedia of Dalit in India, Leader. Yoi.IY, op.cit., pp.58-
65.
63
Bharathi K S. 1956. The Political Thought of Ambedkar. In Encyclopedia of Eminent
Thinkers. Vol.IX, op.cit., p.76.
64
Ibid. p.84.
65
Ibid. p.75.

82
66
Chandra Ramesh, Mitra, Sangh. 2003. The Ambedkar Era. N. Delhi: Commonwealth
publishers, p.290.
67
Bharill, Chandra. 1977. Social and Political Ideas of B R Ambedkar. op.cit., p.l99.
68
Chandra Ramesh, Mitra Sangh. 2003. The Ambedkar Era. New Delhi: Commonwealth.
p.294.
69
Bharill, Chandra. 1977. Social and Political Ideas ofB R Ambedkar. op.cit., p.200.
70
Gautam, M. L. 2005. Constitution, Law, Social Justice. In Mohd. Shabbir (ed.) Ambedkar
on Law, Constitution and Social Justic_e. ()p.cit., pp.l82-183.
71
Ibid. p.l83.
72
lyer, V. R. K. 1979. The judicial system: Has it a Functional Future in our Constitutional
Order. Civil and military Law Journal. Voi.J 5. p. 169.
For details see, Jatava DR. 1998. BR J\f!lbed~~r:_StiJclYin Society and Politics. New Delhi
73

: Narendra Publishing House.

74
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In B.A. WS. Vol.3,
op.cit., p.95.
75
Patii.V.T. (ed.). 1995. Studies in Ambedkar. Delhi: Devika publications, p. I I.
76
For more information see, Jatav, D R. 1988. Social Justice in India. Place: INA Shree
Publishers.
77
Purohit B R, Joshi Sandeep. (eds.) 2003. Social Justice in India. New Delhi: Rawat
Publication. p. I 89.
78
Ambedkar, B R. 1989. Annihilation ofCaste. In B.A.WS. Vol.l, p.57.
79
Ibid. p.80.
80
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. Philosophy of Hinduism. In B.A. W.S. Vol.3, op.cit., p.25.
81
Srianjani, V. 2008. Liberty. In Bhargava R, Acharya A. (ed.) Political Theory: An
Introduction. 'New Delhi: Pearson Longman, p.54.
82
Acharya A. 2008. Equality. In Bhargava R, Acharya A. (ed.) Political Theory: An
Introduction. op.cit., pp.58-73.
83
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. Philosophy of Hinduism. In B.A. W.S. Vol.3, op.cit., pp.22-25.
84
Ibid. pp. 38-39.
85
Ambedkar, B R. 1987. The Hindu Social Order: Its essential principles. In B.A. W.S. Vol.3,
op.cit., pp. 96-97.
86
Patii.V.T. (ed.) 1995.StudiesinAmbedkar. op.cit., pp.6-7.
87
Vidyasagar I.S. 2005. Concept of Humanism of Dr Ambedkar. Jaipur: ABO Publishers,
p.122.
88
Keer Dhananjay. I 971. Dr Ambedkar-Life and Mission. Bombay: Popular Prakashan,
p.391.

83
89
P Sanjay, Jaideva P. 2004. Encyclopaedia of Dalit in India, Leader. Voi.IV, op.cit., pp.58-
65.
90
Upendra, Baxi. 2000. Emancipation as justice: Legacy and Vision of Dr. Ambedkar. In
Yadav, K C. (ed.) From Periphery to Centre stage: Ambedkar, Ambedkarism and Dalit
Future. New Delhi: Manohar, p.69.
91
Ibid. p.69.
92
Thorat S, Kumar N. 2008. B R Ambedkar: Perspectives on Social Exclusion and Inclusive
Policies. op.cit., p.34.
Bharathi, K, S. 1956. The P~titi~~l Th~ught of Ambedkar. In Encyclopedia of Eminent
93

Thinkers. Vol.IX, op.cit., p.84.

94
Bharill, Chandra. 1977. Social and Political Ideas of B R Ambedkar. op.cit., p.20 I.
95
For details see, Chandrakant D, Shivakeri. 2004. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's Political Philosophy.
New Delhi: Anmol Publishers.
96
Ambedkar, B .R. 194 7. State and Minorities, What are their rights and how to secure them
in the free Consitituion ofIndia. op.cit., p.44.
97
Thorat S, Kumar N. 2008. B R Ambedkar: Perspectives on Social Exclusion and Inclusive
Policies. op.cit., p.34.
98
B.A.W.S. 1989. Vol.I. p.408.
99
Thorat S, Kumar N. (eds.) 2008. B R Ambedkar: Perspectives on Social Exclusion and
Inclusive Policies. op.cit., p.40.
100
Ibid. p.52.
101
Rodrigues V. 2007. Good society: Rights, democracy and socialism. In Thorat S, Aryama
(ed.) Ambedkar in Retrospect: Essays on economics, politics and society. New Delhi: Rawat
Publications, p. 146.
102
Gopal, Guru, 2007. Concept of PotiticatPower. In Thorat S, Aryama (ed.) Ambedkar in
Retrospect: Essays on economics, politics and society. op cit., p.l56.
103
Constituent Assembly Debates. 1948. Vol. VII. pp.550-552.
104
B.A.W.S. 1987. Voi-UI. pp.316-319.
105
Ambedkar, B R. 1989. Ranade, Gandhi and Jinnah. In B.A. W.S. Vol- I. p.222.
106
Constituent Assembly Debates Book No-5. Vol-XL. p.979.
107
Massey, James. 2005. Dr. Ambedkar's vision of a just society. In Mohd. Shabbir. (ed.)
Ambedkar on Law, Constitution and Social Justice. op. cit., p.l69.
Bharill, Chandra. 1977. Social and Political Ide~s of B R Ambedkar. op.cit., p.219.
108

109
Barathi, K S. 1956. The Political Thought of Ainbedkar. In Encyclopedia of Eminent
Thinkers. Voi.IX, op.cit., p.96.
110
Arora N D, Awasthy S S. 2008. Political Theory and Political Thought. op. cit., p.403.

84
111
Bhargava, R. 2008. Why do we need Political theory. In Bhargava R, Acharya A. (ed.)
Political Theory: An Introduction. New Delhi: Pearson Longman, p.30.
112
Chitkara, M.G. 2002. Dr. Ambedkar & Social Justice. New Delhi: A.P.H publishing
Corporation, p.3.
113
B.A.WS. 2003. Vol.l7, Part-III. pp.l22-123.
114
P Sanjay, Jaideva P. 2004. Encyclopaedia of Dalit in India, Leader. Yoi.IY, op.cit., p.46.

85