All about the revised Green India Mission to increase forest cover, address climate change
International Yoga Day: Why is it hard to pinpoint the origin of yoga?
QA::Why Madhya Pradesh CM's wish to count snakes and rear king cobras is unfeasible
What new Registration Bill says, why it was introduced
As the nation prepares to mark the 135th birth anniversary of Dr B R Ambedkar on Monday, his grandson and Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi (VBA) chief Prakash Ambedkar discussed the legacy of the architect of the Constitution, his continuing relevance, and the challenge of casteism. The VBA chief also throws light on Dr Ambedkar’s contributions and the Opposition INDIA narrative of “Save the Constitution” that had dented the BJP in the Lok Sabha elections last year.
The BJP-led NDA formed the government at the Centre as well as in Maharashtra, but I do not believe that the mandate was based on “Save the Constitution” plank alone. There were multiple factors, of which the Opposition’s failure was the most important one. The BJP’s victories cannot be construed as a verdict on “Save the Constitution”.
Swearing by the Constitution and working in accordance with its basic principles — equality, brotherhood, and freedom of speech — are not the same.
The BJP and the RSS harbour a long-term agenda to alter the Constitution to push their Hindu Rashtra agenda and get rid of the reservation system. It is not only about reservation but a larger ideological issue that poses a threat to their (BJP’s) Hindutva forces. Sooner or later, they will challenge it. In this sense, I think Dr Ambedkar becomes more relevant today in the battle to uphold the Constitution in letter and spirit.
He strongly advocated parliamentary democracy and firmly believed that all policy decisions should be the outcome of debates and discussions in Parliament. He said Parliament must be the main body responsible for evolving economic policies. Dr Ambedkar envisaged a Parliament-controlled economy in which states play a major role. He wanted the economy to promote social justice and equal opportunities.
He was also not against the private sector. On the contrary, he supported industrialisation to ensure masses are not totally dependent on agriculture. However, he cautioned against capitalism.
Today, we have a functional Parliament, but are all economic decisions taken there? Currently, those in power make decisions on an ad-hoc basis to favour a handful of corporates, while bypassing the parliamentary system.
It is not about a particular dispensation or political party. Had those in power adhered to a Parliament-controlled economic policy, the questions of creating new industrial power centres or allegations of favouritism could have been avoided.
The larger question one needs to ask is whether the economic model has helped uplift the masses. Has it helped address the burning issue of unemployment, and to what extent has the common man’s livelihood been enhanced? These are fundamental principles on which the success of the parliamentary systems needs to be assessed.
His role in the uplift of the downtrodden, the oppressed, and poor Dalits was the greatest contribution in bringing about social transformation. While doing so, he wanted to see a society which would not engage in caste and class-based discrimination. While physical discrimination may not be evident, mental barriers have not been broken yet. Casteism is real even today and is deep-rooted among people. It is a challenge for the next generation to get rid of this discrimination. Hence, Dr Ambedkar’s works become all the more relevant now.
