Beyond Annihilation of Castes

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

In October 1956 Baba Saheb Ambedkar made a historic visit to Kathmandu to participate in the World Buddhist Congress, as he was deeply interested in the growth of Buddhism in the entire subcontinent. Dr Ambedkar had by that time embraced Buddhism in Nagpur along with half a million of his followers on October 14^th, 1956.  Dr Ambedkar had finished his magnum opus ‘Buddha and His Dhamma’ and it reflected his thoughts and vision for society. It is important that we revisit the important point raised by Dr Ambedkar in the greater interest of freedom of choice and human rights.

It is a greater pleasure for me to speak on the historic day of April 14^th here in Kathmandu. Truly historical because Ambedkar belong to the world and he deserve a place among the high echelons of world philosophers, thinkers and social revolutionaries. Yes, for millions of Dalits in India, he is their ‘father’ and ‘guide’ and definitely they would not like him to be used by any one else. There are two roles of Baba Saheb Ambedkar unambiguously. One, as an emancipator of Dalits in India and other as a political philosopher who was a humanist and thorough democrat all his life and believed in core values of humanism which are quintessential for survival of the world today that Buddha espoused over 2550 years ago.

Ambedkar is an international icon of human rights of the depressed and isolated yet his vision remains inclusive of all as he never ever believed in politics of retribution. Scholars have written a lot about whether he was against Marx or communism but Ambedkar was unambiguous about his faith in Buddha. It is important to understand what exactly Ambedkar wanted and why his perception and philosophy could become the ideology of human rights of 21^st century.

Let me be clear here that Ambedkar never supported the idea of ‘controlling’ political ideologies and freedom of expression. He stood for the rights of absolute freedom of expression to the extent of even challenging the ‘Shastras’. Those who have seen his argument over ‘caste system’ with Gandhi will vouch how he demolished Gandhi with his argumentative skills and evidence based support.

Ambedkar never accepted the supremacy of the authority of Shastras while Gandhi said Shastras are written and dictated by God and those who do not believe in them are not Sanatan Dharmis. In his Harijan, Gandhi defend the Varnashram dharma and unsuccessfully try to differentiate between Caste and Varna. Quoted eloquently by Dr Ambedkar, Gandhi writes :

Caste has nothing to do with religion. It is a custom whose origin I do not know and do not need to know for the satisfaction of my spiritual hunger. But I do know that it is harmful both to spiritualand national growth. Varna and Ashrama are institutions which have nothing to do with castes .The law of Varna teaches us that we have each one of us to earn our bread by following the ancestral calling. it defines not our rights but our duties. It necessarily has reference to callings that are conducive to the welfare of humanity and to no other. It also follows that there is no calling too low and none too high. Ail are good, lawful and absolutely equal in status. The callings of a Brahmin— spiritual teacher—-and a scavenger are equal, and their due performance carries equalmerit before God and at one time seems to have carried identical reward before man. Both were entitled to their livelihood and no more. Indeed one traces even now in the villages the faint lines of this healthy operation of the law. Living in Segaon with its population of 600, I do not find a great disparity between the earnings of different tradesmen including Brahmins. I find too that real Brahmins are to be found even in these degenerate days who are living on alms freely given to them and are giving freely of what they have of spiritual treasures. It would be wrong and improper to judge the law of Varna by its caricature in the lives of men who profess to belong to a Varna, whilst they openly commit a breach of its only operative rule. Arrogation of a superior status by and of the Varna over another is a denial of the law. And there is nothing in the law of Varna to warrant a belief in untouchability. (The essence of Hinduism is contained in its enunciation of one and only God as Truth and its bold acceptance of Ahimsa as the law of the human family.):

(Text from Annihilation of Castes : Ambedkar Gandhi debate)

Ambedkar had mentioned that there are definitely good things in Shastras but if there are things which are against human rights and common goods of the people and which violate the principle of equality then we must abrogate them, delete them. Gandhi retorted to this with his typical style that Shastras are written by Gods and human beings have no right to amend it. In the modern day, such diktats are heard in the Islamic world who use every Quranic injunction whenever they want to dominate the minorities and women’s right. Caste are powerful bodies, autonomous and Hinduism is nothing but a ‘collection’ of castes, said Dr Ambedkar.

‘Whether the Hindu religion was or was not a missionary religion has been a controversial issue. Some hold the view that it was never a missionary religion. Others hold that it was. That the Hindu religion was once a missionary religion must be admitted. It could not have spread over the face of India, if it was not a missionary religion. That today it is not a missionary religion is also a fact which must be accepted. The question therefore is not whether or not the Hindu religion was a missionary religion. The real question is why did the Hindu religion cease to be a missionary religion ? My answer is this. Hindu religion ceased to be a missionary religion when the Caste System grew up among the Hindus. Caste is inconsistent with conversion. Inculcation of beliefs and dogmas is not the only problem that is involved in conversion. To find a place for the convert in the social life of the community is another and a much more important problem that arises in connection with conversion. That problem is where to place the convert, in what caste ? It is a problem which must baffle every Hindu wishing to make aliens converts to his religion. Unlike the club the membership of a caste is not open to all and sundry. The law of caste confines its membership to person born in the caste. Castes are autonomous and there is no authority anywhere to compel a caste to admit a new-comer to its social life. Hindu Society being a collection of castes and each caste being a close corporation there is no place for a convert. Thus it is the caste which has prevented the Hindus from expanding and from absorbing other religious communities. So long as caste remain, Hindu religion cannot be made a missionary religion and Shudhi will be both a folly and a futility.’

In India there have been lots of discussion about who can speak about Ambedkar and who owns him. Dr Ambedkar in his life time did not give these kind of ‘communitarian rights’ as he believed in individuals rights and in his interview to BBC, he said that India is still not a society as none care about others. We are not bothered about our neighbors. We are bothered about his caste first and hence how can we become a society when there is no man to man relationship, where we can not shake hands with an individual despite knowing him just because he happen to belong to another caste. He was bitter but he never lost reasoning and sanity. He was deeply influenced from that thoughts of Buddha and that is why believed that we can only be a great society if people follow human values democratically and a changing the heart happens after positive realization.

Many votaries of Marxism feel Ambedkar was the product of  ‘liberalism’ where individual matters the most and his faith was in strengthening democracy and not through the path of ‘revolution’ while the votaries of the ‘Right’ like Arun Shourie felt that he opposed Gandhi and hence was a British ‘plant’ to subvert our ‘freedom movement’.  I am using the terminology of Shourie which he used in his infamous book ‘Worshipping the false God’. I have time and again written that Shourie and his family are the biggest fraud of Indian middle class, a fraud which need to be unearthed by those who believe idealism is important. Shourie’s hatred towards minorities, Dalits and aadivasis is well known to be depicted here but why that is need detailed elaboration of a different article which I will deal at certain point of time. Ambedkar stood for human rights of all and never believed in ‘tit for tat’ theory. He was a ‘communist’ in his action but never believed in ‘communist’ form of ‘government’, which he felt would only perpetuate violence and injustice. His focus was social justice and not in retributive justice. It means he believed in an equalitarian society where human being believed in concept of equality not because of fear of law but because of principle of their faith in equality. This is an important part where Ambedkar differ with Communism and its whole theory of ‘dictatorship of the proletariat” as Ambedkar felt democracy is the only way out where untouchables would be able to get justice and politically united.

Ambedkar believed that State must owned all the land and nationalize it. It is here he had been influenced by the Soviet Module or the Chinese one where he felt that state must distribute the land according to needs of the farmers and those who do not till the land have no right to control it. Ambedkar had appreciated the communist thinking on land. He also promoted idea of cooperative farming for the better results of it in India particularly in the drought prone regions of Vidarbha and Marathwada in Maharastra.

If we just keen aside the differences, Dr Ambedkar’s main thought was the emancipation of Dalits and ensuring that they get justice in the new framework. So, he has definitely playing a double role for the community. One a community leader who is negotiating with the government for their rights and the other role is of a guide of the community telling them what should they do. The role of the guide of the community is very important as it is where Baba Saheb Ambedkar focused a lot the cultural changes in the community as he felt that without them there would not be a change. Hence he thought of ‘Prabuddha Bharat’ i.e. an enlightened India or enlightened world where people share common concerns of humanity and stand for the most oppressed together.

After realizing that the Varnashram dharma is full of hypocrisies, dogmas and rituals, Baba Saheb was unambiguous that Dalits do not need a religion for the sake of it. We must be clear that religion is for human being and not the viceversa.

In Buddha and Marx he mention clearly.

‘ Religion is important fact of life and must relate to it and not to speculation about God, soul and heaven etc.

It is wrong to make God centre of religion or universe.

The purpose of philosophy is to reconstruct the world and  not to explain the ‘origin’ of it.

If we analyse the above statements carefully then it is clear that Ambedkar is a humanist as he has not accepted the ‘supremacy’ of written texts and that he emphasizes on that the centre of ‘religion’ should be ‘human being’. It clearly reflect his mind how he envisaged religion. He did not want to engage with those who wanted to speak of ‘atma’ , ‘paratma’, ‘punarjanm’, ‘avatar’ etc as he felt these are brahmanical construct to keep their monopoly over religion and continue to misguide poor.  Hinduism for him was minus any ‘Karuna’ or humanity as it divide people on the basis of their birth.

It is essential to understand how Baba Saheb look at Buddha and his teachings.

Let us talk of the Eight Fold Path ( Ashtang Marg)

1.     Right view (freedom from superstition)

2.     Right Aims (high and worthy)

3.     Right speech (Kind, open and truthful)

4.     Right Conduct ( Peaceful, honest and pure)

5.     Right livelihood ( causing hurt or inury to no living human being)

6.     Right Mindfulness ( with a watchful and active mind)

7.     Right perseverance in all the above

8.     Right contemplation ( earnest thought)

According to him all the above are meant for the creation of Kingdom of righteousness.

The most important thing is how ‘means’ too are important for Buddha. He will not ‘achieve’ things by ‘any means. It means that you have to have right ‘mean’ to achieve your path.  So, ‘dictatorship of the proletariat will neither lead to democracy and will not be without violence.  The end of the dictatorship is to make revolution permanent but then you have only duties in communism and no right to criticize if you disagree.  It is the biggest point of disagreement of Ambedkar of communism.

He says,’ Buddha was against violence but in favor of justice’ who promoted democracy at every level in his Shakya world. There were 13 monarchies and 4 Republics among the Shakyans.

Buddha’s commune concept was nothing but communism where none of the Bhikkhus had personal possession.  According to Dr Ambedkar, Buddha established communism with out being violent and dictatorial.  So the changes, that Buddha wanted to bring was through mind and attitude. Whatever you do, do it voluntarily. According to Ambedkar, ‘We need religion, as we are human being, emotional and work to satisfy our spiritual need too’ but then his meaning of religion was based on concept of humanism and felt that it was needed to protect human values and should have focus on wellbeing of human being rather than an illusory ‘God’.

The Russians are proud of their Communism. But they forget that the wonder of all wonders is that the Buddha established Communism so far as the Sangh was concerned without dictatorship. It may be that it was a communism on a very small scale but it was communism I without dictatorship a miracle which Lenin failed to do.

The Buddha's method was different. His method was to change the mind of man: to alter his disposition: so that whatever man does, he does it voluntarily without the use of force or compulsion. His main means to alter the disposition of men was his Dhamma and the constant preaching of his Dhamma. The Buddhas way was not to force people to do what they did not like to do although it was good for them. His way was to alter the disposition of men so that they would do voluntarily what they would not otherwise to do.

It has been claimed that the Communist Dictatorship in Russia has wonderful achievements to its credit. There can be no denial of it. That is why I say that a Russian Dictatorship would be good for all backward countries. But this is no argument for permanent Dictatorship. Humanity does not only want economic values, it also wants spiritual values to be retained. Permanent Dictatorship has paid no attention to spiritual values and does not seem to intend to. Carlyle called Political Economy a Pig Philosophy. Carlyle was of course wrong. For man needs material comforts" But the Communist Philosophy seems to be equally wrong for the aim of their philosophy seems to be fatten pigs as though men are no better than pigs. Man must grow materially as well as spiritually. Society has been aiming to lay a new foundation was summarised by the French Revolution in three words, Fraternity, Liberty and Equality. The French Revolution was welcomed because of this slogan. It failed to produce equality. We welcome the Russian Revolution because it aims to produce equality. But it cannot be too much emphasised that in producing equality society cannot afford to sacrifice fraternity or liberty. Equality will be of no value without fraternity or liberty. It seems that the three can coexist only if one follows the way of the Buddha. Communism can give one but not all.

(Buddha and his Dhamma)

Dr Ambedkar was highly impressed with French Revolution and its ideals of Fraternity, Liberty and Equality.  He loved and respected Voltaire and wishes if we had person like him India would have gained immensely in terms of knowledge and democratic spirit. 

He explain his respect for Russian Revolution too as it brought equality but he was not ready for the dictatorship of proletariat and felt that equality without fraternity is not acceptable to him. Society should be equal but not at the cost of sacrificing fraternity and equality, he emphasized. Any changes that the law enforces will be cosmetic and compulsory aversion and India is witnessing that humbug politically and administratively when the love for ‘Dalits’ is not in the heart but because of the constitutional promulgations, which result in falsifications and violation of their rights.  Ambedkar was absolutely clear that we need to change the heart of the people and that is why he embraced the guiding principles of Buddha. You cannot change people through laws but through their mindset and change of heart. We need to understand that Ambedkar was hurt but never bitter at the end as he found right path in the preaching’s of Buddha.

So in the context of today, we need to see what he should have been doing.

He was an iconoclast who demolished any myth woven around an individual. He challenged Gandhi when for every one the later had become a ‘saint’.  He felt that Shastras must be amended if there are things written in them which violate basic principles of civility and modernity. Gandhi for obvious reasons could not tolerate this and questioned of their being ‘Hinduness’ if someone challenges the supremacy and authenticity of Shastras. Obviously, his differences with Gandhi were sharp and ideological and he did not hide in sophistry of words to protect him.

Today, Ambedkar remain an icon beyond boundaries. He is finding his place in the history books among the historians and politicians as well as political philosophers who were the most influential in 21^st century. He will be scrutinized and further critiqued. There will be people who have vilified him because he stood up against authoritarian Gandhi and for whom the ‘freedom’ of Dalits from the ‘servitude’ of caste Hindus was more important than the ‘transfer of power’ in India, as he felt British were far more justice loving people than the caste Hindus.

 There were questions raised as who can write on Ambedkar ? For me, we cannot decide about these things as who should write and who should not as such things cannot be and should not be decided by diktat of a few. As I mentioned earlier, none can seize the place of Baba Saheb Ambedkar from the heart of millions of Dalits in India. They love him, respect him and consider him their emancipator so in that way Dr Ambedkar place remain undisputed and unchallenged among the Dalit masses. Second thing is for the scholars and there are hundreds of non Dalits who have contributed immensely in the growth of Ambedkar literature and movement such as Gail Omvedt, Dr. Eleanor Zelliot, Bhadant Anand Kautyalyayan, Lokmitra to name a few. None can dispute their work and dedication to the cause of spreading Ambedkar’s work and ideals world over.

Now eyebrows are raised when Arundhati Roy wrote a book on Ambedkar or may be, I should say, wrote an introduction to ‘Annihilation of Castes’. I have been asked to clear my stand on this issue which I clearly indicated that those who oppose it are not alone the representatives’ o Dalits nor Arundhati Roy an Ambedkarite material for reference on Ambedkar but then her right to write on Ambedkar cannot be questioned. It is on the publisher as who he deemed fit to write an introduction on the famous work of Dr Ambedkar, which is called ‘Annihilation of castes’. For me, life has moved much beyond ‘annihilation of castes’ as Dr Ambedkar gave us a clear vision for our life and not merely ‘fighting with Hindus to ‘change’ their heart’. Fact is, if the Brahmin change their heart then annihilation of castes mean complete annihilation of Brahmin dharma. Will they do anything to demolish it?

Here, I want to caution every one. People have right to question particularly when someone decides to reproduce the book on Ambedkar and there are number of experts already available. Hence, my advised to everyone is to do you work and not spoil energy on why someone wrote. It is a pure business and publisher knew it well that he need a ‘famous’ name to sale the book. The protests by a few actually helped the publisher only.

Now, Annihilation of caste made a few things clear and we must understand that. That was Ambedkar in 1930, fighting with Gandhi, trying to improve Hinduism but he was disappointed with Gandhi’s approach and learnt his lesson. He moved away and decided that people need an alternative vision, a better one to guide their destiny. There is no time for ‘improvement’ but the best way is to walk out of the system and develop your own system. That is where he revitalized Buddhism in India, it is Navayana, a new way of life, much different than that of Dalai Lama and his superstitious ways of life. Let us see what does Ambedkar learnt from his entire altercation with Gandhi which has been produced in ‘Annihilations of Castes’.

1.     That Dr Ambedkar was not ready to accept the Supremacy of ‘God’s words’ and for that he was not just ready to take on to the high and mighty like Gandhi but also to Pope John Paul. We cannot ignore an important publication of Times when Ambedkar was invited for hearing in Rome by Pope. After initial introduction and the concern of Dr Ambedkar towards the untouchables, the Pope viewed that it will take a few centuries before the caste system is completely ‘eradicated’. Upon hearing this, Ambedkar just walked out of the meeting saying that he did not have time to wait for this much of centuries to liberate his people.

2.     Annihilation of caste was an attempt by Ambedkar to radicalize the Hindu system. He felt that if the caste Hindus change, it would be great. Till that period Ambdkar contended with claiming to be a ‘protestant Hindu’.

3.     The whole debate on the issue of ‘caste system’ with Gandhi made one thing unambiguously clear that the Hindus were not ready to change their attitude towards Dalit a bit. Caste system, as a Ambedkar said was a ‘graded inequality’ and divide oppressed too on the basis of ‘hierarchies’. It has made a false sense of pride among people. Hence the entire edifice of Hinduism is nothing but caste system and if caste system is demolished the entire system of varna will collapse like a castle of cards. No Hindu believing in the Varna system, would like to demolish his faith. Gandhi knew it well and hence created myth around everything so that uncomfortable questions are not raised and if they are then the answer should be wrapped in mysticism.

4.     Dr Ambedkar realized that Hindus are not ready to change. It is no point discussing with them to change when they are not ready to accept the fundamental of the problem. Caste system and discrimination are inherent part of Varnashram dharma and cannot be resolved by propagandist’s statement and patronizing attitude of Gandhi, suggesting that ‘untouchables’ are ‘Harijans’, son of God. Ambedkar considered it a virtual abuse as Harijan was a term used for the children of ‘Devdasis’ who were sexually exploited by the temple priests. Despite objections by Ambedkarites this term continued to be used in India portraying Gandhi as a ‘great’ emancipator of Dalits. It was only after 1991 when BSP’s fire brand politics threatened to agitate and the government finally ordered to remove the word from the government files.

5.     For Dr Ambedkar, saving Hinduism is nothing but saving Brahmanism and as all efforts to change it were countered by Gandhi under the pretext of Shastras, he decided that ‘ though I was a born Hindu, I would not die as a Hindu’.

6.  

    Gandhi was always claiming that untouchability was not part of Hinduism and a blot to it. Ambedkar on the other hand felt that discrimination and caste segregation are inherent part of brahmanical values defined by Manu. Hence, just speaking of untouchability yet protecting caste system reveal the greatest double speak. How can a person ‘condemn’ untouchability and decide to work for its removal but at the same point of time openly advocate work based on caste. Gandhi unambiguously said that caste are based on ‘divinity’ of Shastras and cannot be changed. Those who challenge the supremacy of the religious be text have to leave the ‘religion’ and can’t be called Hindus, said Gandhi. Actually, Gandhi was a deeply religious person who was ‘defining’ things according to his own concepts without challenging the authority of religion to dictate our lives. Ambedkar on the other hand was not ready to accept the ‘authority’ of Shastras if they violate the dignity and human rights of the people. Ambedkar was of the belief that every religion has good things too and bad things too but most important part of them should be to delete those which are wrong and change according to the time and need of human being.

7.     

      Prior to this, Ambedkar had led the temple entry movement in famous Kalaram temple of Nasik and was heavily objected by caste Hindus.

8.     On December 25^th, 1927, along with his supporters, Dr Ambedkar burnt Manusmriti and drank water from Chavdar pond of Mahad, in Maharastra. It need to be reminded to people that Dalits were denied right to drink water from the village ponds and wells. Ambedkar challenged this and led the movement against such discriminatory practice.

Dr Ambedkar realized that Caste is a big ‘political’ power for the Brahmins and bring many privileges hence all their talk of working against it would be just humbug as at the end of the day we all would not like to do away with our ‘powers’ and privileges.

So for the humanists of the world, Dr Ambedkar is perfect example who challenged the religious supremacy and never accepted the finality of religious texts. He suggested that they should be amended as per needs of the time. However, many friends raised objection to his ‘embracing’ Buddhism in a traditional way ignoring the vital factor of 22 vows that he asked his followers to obey before joining Buddhism and in my opinion these are nothing but humanism. One must have a look at them as most of them guide people against superstition perpetrated by the Brahmins in the name of traditions.

I shall have no faith in Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh nor shall I worship them. I shall have no faith in Rama and Krishna who are believed to be incarnation of God nor shall I worship them. I shall have no faith in ‘Gauri’, Ganapati and other gods and goddesses of Hindus nor shall I worship them. I do not believe in the incarnation of God. I do not and shall not believe that Lord Buddha was the incarnation of Vishnu. I believe this to be sheer madness and false propaganda. I shall not perform ‘Shraddha’ nor shall I give ‘pind-dan’. I shall not act in a manner violating the principles and teachings of the Buddha. I shall not allow any ceremonies to be performed by Brahmins. I shall believe in the equality of man. I shall endeavour to establish equality. I shall follow the ‘noble eightfold path’ of the Buddha. I shall follow the ‘paramitas’ prescribed by the Buddha. I shall have compassion and loving kindness for all living beings and protect them. I shall not steal. I shall not tell lies. I shall not commit carnal sins. I shall not take intoxicants like liquor, drugs etc. I shall endeavour to follow the noble eightfold path and practise compassion and loving kindness in every day life. I renounce Hinduism which is harmful for humanity and impedes the advancement and development of humanity because it is based on inequality, and adopt Buddhism as my religion. I firmly believe the Dhamma of the Buddha is the only true religion. I believe that I am having a re-birth. I solemnly declare and affirm that I shall hereafter lead my life according to the principles and teachings of the Buddha and his Dhamma.

Dr Ambedkar’s belief in Buddha was ultimate as he knew it is because of this vision that India and rest of the world would be an enlightened society. He was not taking his people to the path of darkness but to a place where exist the reasoning (tark) with humanity ( Manavta) and it is Humanism of modern day definition where human being is the centre of universe of philosophy.

Through his anti-caste movement, Baba Saheb Ambedkar wanted to change the Hindu society but he realized that it was not possible. As long as you believe in those dogmas and beliefs, you won’t be able to do justice to other people. Baba Saheb knew the futility of a casteless society through ‘reforming’ Hinduism or brahman dharma and that is why he gave a clarion call to embrace the path of Buddha. Therefore, annihilation of caste is not possible without making our way to new path. A debate on annihilation of caste must understand that by annihilating castes we, will be demolishing Varnashram dharma or what we call Brahman dharma. Are we ready for that? Baba Saheb knew it well that Hindus may say that they are against untouhability but as long as they believe in basic foundation of the same, they cannot really fight against it. That is why he called to his followers to leave the varnashram dharma and embrace a new way of life where your universe will be the philosophy of life and where you are treated equally. The Hindus must continue to fight against caste system but those who really follow Dr Ambedkar have really moved far ahead on the path shown by him which is the way of Buddha’s enlightened world of humanism. There is no other way. India and rest of the world cannot progress by fighting against an ideology but the only possible way is to give people a better alternative. Budddha gave to the world a big humanist way of life without engaging himself in ‘critiquing’ the follies of ‘others’. He learnt the lessons and ensures that all the evils of brahmanical value system do not come in his way and that is why Buddha’s way is the way of life for millions of people world over, it is the path of happiness and equality for all. It is a positive idea and Ambedkar knew well that negativity takes a toll and does not take us anywhere except many of us actually start following it. Therefore, it was important to give people a way of life, which was actually Buddha’s path of salvation, where they become decision makers of their ‘destiny’ rather than believing in some ‘Mahatma’ to guide them to ‘liberation’.

·       This lecture was delivered at the inauguration of World Conference against Untouchability, organized by International Humanist and Ethical Union London, on Ambedkar jayanti day, April14th, 2014, in Kathamandu, Nepal.

·        

Vindictive 'Democracy"

Vindictive ‘democracy’

By  Vidya Bhushan Rawat

A priest was found to have ‘sacrificed’ his wife to please the God in Indore, a story revisited the gory tandoori murder of Naina Sahni by her politician husband Sushil Sharma, who is serving life imprisonment in the jail and wanted to spend time with his mother to perform his ‘sonly’ duties. Girls are being hanged to deaths after being gang raped and political class as a whole speak of controlling time and choices. It is not that we suggest here that all the ills of the country began with the current government but there are certain trends. Many of the moralists who have been raising stories and questioning for smallest things are quiet now. The story did not prick our nation as the ‘nation’ did not ‘want to know’ the horrors of it as they did on the two girls hanging from the branches of the tree through ropes. Yes, Uttar Pradesh is the ‘worst’ because a certain person is the chief minister of the state and once you have the CMs according to your fancy it will become the ‘best’. The crime against Dalits and marginalized is highest in states like Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Rajasthan, Gujarat but interestingly they never get reported and if they are found too, media completely ignores them. Why are these not horror stories of our time. If a priest burnt his wife live, shouldn’t our media question the very concept of the ‘puja’ to offer to the God. None ask if he loves God so much why is he offering his wife to him and why not his own self. Problem is, we are a society, a sick one, which does not raise a question and continue to work on age-old traditions in they were clear, the people would always offer their ‘dear’ things in ‘gift’, when they are too happy with God or when they want to please the ‘God’ and remember the ‘dearest’ ‘thing’ in this regard was always a daughter or a wife.

Pramod Muttalick, the self proclaimed moral guardian of Indians in Mangalore wanted that women should be guided and controlled to ‘protect’ Indian culture and a Goa Minister is unambiguously supporting him. In Bengal, Tapan Das, a former film star of Bengali cinema exhorts his supporters to kill the CPM workers and then rape their women at home.  In UP,  Mulayam Singh Yadav says that boys do ‘commit’ mistakes and hence should be forgiven while Shiv Sena in Maharastra and ABVP groups in Madhya Pradesh are already acting as moral guardians of young generations whenever the ‘opportunity’ comes.  Subrahmanyam Swamy says that Valentine day is a foreign festival and Hindus must do everything to protect its religion.

Swamy and others will continue as they throw one questions which are repeated hundreds of time on tweeter and then on radio and TV to convert it into a truth. They know well that India does not run on reasoning and questioning but on ‘perception’ and it could only be built through using ‘corporate’ media and other tools that are available to us in the form of ‘social media’. So, we do not question the wrong but find first the name of the person and his identity, which becomes the decisive factor of right and wrong of any thing.  Hence a rape in Mujaffarnagar or in Gujarat during the riots of the Muslim women is not a national outcry of shame and disgust as that in Uttar Pradesh now. The saffron party has not bothered to visit the Dalits of Bhagana in Haryana who are sitting for the past four months in Delhi against the assault on their daughters by the Jat perpetrators of Haryana. Why cant the party take it an issue and condemn it when it is using media and other things to shame Mulayam Singh Yadav in UP? Is it because the perpetrators of the alleged crimes are Jats and none want to antagonize them in the grand ‘democracy’ of the dominant? So, India speaks political correct language. It makes big laws to change under ‘pressure’ from ‘people’ when the Delhi’s India gate is stormed by the middle class youths .

Western Uttar Pradesh is facing unease at the moment. Some ‘responsible’ people wanted a caste panchayat and blamed that it has not been allowed to happen under ‘pressure’ from the others. Poor District Magistrate had to bear the brunt of violence. Now, one needs to understand, as how will there be peace when the ‘result’ of ‘riots’ is ‘Minister’.  It would be difficult to control them in the coming days as every body who join politics nurture an ambition of becoming Minister. Can we say such an ‘ambition’ is wrong ?

In Delhi, Deenanath Batra is busy establishing his contact with the saffron government asking the HRD Ministry to withdraw the books from syllabus of NCERT, which  ‘denigrate’ Hindus and exonerate the Islamic rulers for their misdeeds in India. Deenanath Batra’s ‘colleague’ Arun Shourie is back in action. After failing to get a birth in the cabinet, he has again started doing things in which he is ‘expert’ in which is abusing the academics terming them as leftists and targeting the Islam.  I was wondering why Arun Shourie so laboriously works on everything that is considered to be anti people. He should have been a lawyer and not a writer because his pieces are of no academic value but a lawyers ‘petition’ which is meant to ‘protect’ his client through ‘offensive’ ‘research’ on the ‘opponents’.

The intelligence Bureau has already ‘informed’ the government that Green Peace is a threat to peace in India and that a huge number of NGOs are engaged in anti Indian activities. The report may look ‘new’ to many but I can bet  Subrahmanyam Swamy can produce a much juicy report than IB. In fact, government must dismantle IB and give the entire ministry to Swamy as his only work remains targeting the individuals and giving certificate to every one as who is national and who is not. The Tamil Brahmin is still sulking for his inability to find a place in the Union Cabinet.

In Telangana we have seen parties have already started glorifying PV Narsimharao, as one of the greatest sons of the soil, a ‘poor’ man who did not have the money to keep his family going though he had enough to purchase MPs to save his government and run it shamelessly. The man who presided over a regime that saw demolition of Babari Masjid and riots subsequently is acknowledged as a ‘statesman’. He did not have the courage to ‘resign’ on this darkest chapter of India’s democratic history. But the identity of Rao suite the people who are promoting him today as a ‘great leader’ and ‘visionary’ is of ‘economic reform’ that he unleashed through his finance minister Dr Man Mohan Singh. Yes, we had a prime minister, who undid everything that the VP Singh government in 1990 did for the Dalits and OBCs through reservation. Narsimharao actually became the biggest hero of middle classes as his policies directly killed the livelihood of millions of Dalits and Aadivasis.  We saw glorification of man who stood before the nation on the evening of December 6^th 1992 promising that the Masjid would be rebuilt but never ever tried to fulfill that promise.

The appointment of the judges in the Supreme Court also saw the same kind of responses and we have people of a ‘particular’ ideology being promoted to the highest court while some one who is considered to be ‘anti’ was shunted out despite the recommendations by the Chief Justice of India.  The cases against Amit Shah and others have been withdrawn and an Ahmedabad court has also rejected any charges against prime minister despite finding him guilty prime facie in hiding his marital status.  The infamous snooping case is now being buried by Home Ministry as it feels that the case is not of ‘national’ importance. Governors are now being asked to resign as the new regime has taken over. It looks that other autonomous bodies will also face the same.

Shankaracharya has already started that Sai Baba was a Muslim by birth and hence worshipping in the temple is against Hindu Dharma and must be opposed. It is a conspiracy against Hindus he says and claimed that Akhadas of Ayodhya will fight battle against such an onslaught on Hinduism. The Ram Temple lobby is now happy and wants ‘constitutional’ mechanism to build a ‘grand’ Mandir at Ayodhya. Prime Minister already said that we must get rid of the mindset developed during the 1200 years old slavery. We normally speak slavery in terms of the British regime but the Sangh Parivar talks of Mughal rule too as part of slavery. Ofcourse, the Brahmins will never ever agree that they also created slaves and justified everything in the name of divinity and religion.

The height of Narmada has increased yet no word about those who will be submerged in its grandeur.  People are agitating in the Madhya Pradesh about the same yet the victory in Gujarat is big and that shows the power of politics. Those who enjoy the fruits of ‘development’ are different than those whose lives are ‘sacrificed’ and it reflect too why people are so insensitive towards them. India as a Republic has actually becoming a republic of self seekers.

A Muslim techie was killed in Pune and many young boys were arrested for posting ‘offensive’ material on Facebook. In the past 10 years, none has published the more offensive and abusive material than those who want to guide our destiny or teach us ‘discipline’. Ofcourse, I support wholeheartedly any effort to civilize the debate among people and throwing accusations and abuses must stop. Criticism must be welcomed but we have to be careful that people will always question as what is the ‘limit’ to it.  Even when it is a very delicate issue between our freedom of expression and a control over it, there is nothing wrong in being gracious even in criticism and with enough proof.

The daily tweeting prime minister had no time to condemn any incident of violence against women as well as the ghastly murder of the Muslim techie by a self proclaimed ‘protector’ of Hindu asmita in Pune.  While all this was not enough when the news came that prime minister wanted that all the tweets in the social media on behalf of different department must be provided in Hindi. It was an indirect call to you Hindi-Hindu-Hindustan slogan which proved quite costly, as Tamilnadu was the first state to officially oppose this move. There was discomfort in the other southern states.

The government has completed a month and it has been very productive for them as well as for the gossipers. The media which was looking very ‘vibrant’ by poking fun at Man Mohan Singh every moment seems to have been just following what the prime minister is tweeting. It has nothing to respond except how ‘great’ he is and what the ‘Americans’ want. During the Bhutan trip, prime minister did not take a big media crew along with him yet media reported that prime minister took a small flight to Paro ignoring the fact that the airport itself is too small.

The way four years courses at Delhi University scrapped by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, asking the Vice Chancellor who remained confident till end by trying to appease the Sangh Parivar through his advise to put  ‘Vaidik Mathematics’ as one subject in the curriculum. The government initially was openly threatening while after the criticism it put itself into the back and placed the UGC in the forefront whose chief Ved Prakash, was an avid ‘admirer’ of the vice chancellor till a few months back.

This government’s minister’s spoke on every issue, which they have been ‘grown up’ under their training in the Shakhas of RSS. They must but they spoke not the language of the government of India but of the Sangh Parivar, where they hail from.  Whether it was the first statement emerged from the Minister of State in the PMO Mr Jitender Singh regarding abrogation of article 370 which provide special status to J & K.

World over organisations fighting for HIV-AID suggest to people in having ‘protected sex’ but our Health Minister actually has virtually demolished the entire ‘safe sex’ theory as he want ‘committed’ relationship. So, through health too we can bring the religious agenda and I can assure the Health Minister, who is an honorable doctor that the Mullahs and the priests in the Churches will be equally happy in this ‘secular’ war against science and reasoning by you. Sangh Parivar can bring all the ‘religious gangs’ together who consider sex as an instrument to produce children and not an act of enjoyment. So ‘Bachhe to bhagwan kee den hote hain’, the children are God’ gift and they make ‘mistake’ as another ‘great’ leader says so the government will have support from all the champions of ‘morality’ in the country.  Obviously, India will definitely surpassing China in population if the government continue to advise ‘moral values’ of ‘abstinence’ like Gandhi did which will only end up in high growth rate in population in the coming years. For religious people, it is the best opportunity to extend their greater ‘vision’ of keeping people further subjugated and their vision truncated.

The retribution is so high that the government and its leader want to undo everything that has happened in past so many years. Interestingly, the poor has voted to the government and what we are hearing today is attempt to scrap many anti poor programs such as Food Security Act and National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme which the government feel has not done anything but actually created labor crisis in agrarian sector as the agricultural labors have now increased their wages. So, the government want that agricultural labors be paid as per the mercy of the ‘farmers’. Is this the way to ‘save’ farm sector or are they killing it further?  How obscene it looks when we are informed of huge pay packages of the individuals proudly on our television screens but at the same point of time people struggling to get even Rs 120/- a day. Is not it a shame that a government which come on huge promise that India will shine for all, is disturbed with even Rs 120/- per day for 8 hours of work for the agricultural worker? And who are these agricultural workers ? Yes, it is they who are the lowest of the low, the untouchables, who did not get land as promised by the Indian state and who continue to be victim of our apathy and hatred.

The modern socio economic order is not interested in addressing the basic issues of the people. It creates a few individuals from the denied identities to project them as ‘role model’. They are fetched well in the new set up but vast masses will continue to perish and remain out of bound for the government schemes. The inflation is already difficult to contain as we have created a system, which is profitable to the powerful, few even at the cost of majority poor and hence just change of the government will not work.

This is a republic of revenge at the moment.  ‘Revenge’ from its own people just because we differ in ideologies, perceptions and faith. The idea of the past was not the greatest and hence the poor of different castes and faiths formed the new government under mountains of hopes so that their expectations are fulfilled. The government must respect diversity of our thoughts, action and political beliefs. Every one who does not agree to a particular thought does not become an enemy of the nation. The attempt to ‘unify’ will boomerang on it and people will resist it. It is time the government does not bring a particular thought in everything that some of its leaders might have been trained during their younger days. India has changed now. It is a young aspiring India of different faiths and no faiths too and that apart, it is an India where millions of Dalits, Aadivasis, OBCs, Muslims too are aspiring high hence to deny them their right under any pretext will be opposed. India must shine for all as it belong to all and the government must be seen belonging to all sections of society. Revenge and retribution will only divide India further and create anarchy in the country. A government must not depend too much on its officials but to the political leadership which include opposition voices too, who are much grounded and will always warn it from doing wrong. The government too much depends on bureaucracy fast become highly unpopular and the example was the last government which every one wanted to get rid off at the end, a government which lost the legitimacy to even command.  The government must not allow the ruffians in the name of morality and culture to disturb our right to live our life in dignity according to our choices. As a citizen of India, I have this biggest right guaranteed in our constitution and government is duty bound to protect us that way.  There are others voices too who are raising their heads as they know their friends are in the government but that is where it need to act harder on them. Do not allow the atmosphere of the country vitiated by such calls against some one. Every citizen of this country need protection and encouragement by the government and if some of the government projects are intended to bring ‘growth’ to the country they too need approval of the local people as government has no right to destroy the livelihood and life of people just to ‘accelerate’ its growth. Therefore dissenters of the current economic models are not enemies of the nation but protector of its wealth and environment which we all will realize after some years when we will have no place to even breathe.  Our democracy must grow and must grow in treating criticism as acceptable norm of it, part of it to improve the life of the people and not consider those who disagree as enemies of the nation and a threat. It is shameful way of thinking.  The counter the activists if they are propagandists, the government must provide more democracy, more support to organisations and not act through intimidating tactics of police and intelligence. Indira Gandhi believed too much in her ‘intelligence’ and the result was complete rout of her party in 1975. Let us not make every one as a threat but learn to deal the issues politically and if people violate law of the land there are so many laws to catch them. Those who do not follow law will not come to the government and fight the battle themselves. Those who believe in constitution of India and all the international treaties will always follow. It is time for each one of us to grow and not give certificate of who is doing ‘great’ work and who is the most ‘genuine’. This whole problem start when we all claim to speak for so many ‘people’. Now these claims and counter claims actually kills everything. If there is violation of rights, we have a right to speak and government must counter it with producing evidences of what it has done. If it violate its own laws, its own traditions then just by intimidating individuals will not act. Government would have countered activists fighting against big project by producing its rehabilitation and resettlement of the affected people. What it did and how many people it got rehabilitated but as we know a majority of developmental projects in India failed to rehabilitate honorably the victims which constitute over 10 millions Aadivasis in the past fifty years. Will the government answer why it failed? Do those who are affected have no right to live with dignity and if they do not get their right than what are they expected to do?

The problem with the authorities is that they try to counter you through legal procedures, which were developed by British in such a way that anybody could be trapped into it. So people have become strangers in their own land, violators of their rights in their own place while big companies are there to grab the opportunity and helplessness of the people. Will the government assure people that they will not be displaced through these mega deals of projects?  Will the prime minister tell the people that whatever happens, all the projects will first have to give in writing and insurance of honorable rehabilitation of people. So those who challenge the entire process do not become anti national because you have not followed the process. So, to hide the weaknesses of the government authorities these intimidation are started and we must not succumb to that. A government must not carry forward the agenda unleashed by Manmohan Chidambaram-Montek team of corporate agents. We hope that the prime minister came on heavy people’s mandate and he definitely owe it to the people that he will not let them down in their expectations and promises.

“The revolutionary people’s movement can only be strengthened with scientific temperament and spiritual experiences of Buddha and Ambedkar.” - Tilak Pariyar, Secretary, Central Advisory Committee, CPN-M

Mr Tilak Pariyar is a member of the Central Advisory Committee of the Communist Party of Nepal. He is a very senior political leader from a revolutionary party with massive social experience. Hailing from a Pariyar community, which is one of the largest untouchable communities in Nepal, Tilakji rose to the highest body of the party. He is very articulate and a thought-provoking political leader who experienced the caste discrimination in his life. He was attached to the revolutionary movement from his student life when he came to study in Delhi in 1960s. He was impressed with the Marxist ideology and started working for the masses. In a wide ranging discussion with activist-writer Vidya Bhushan Rawat on the issue of caste discrimination in Nepal and future of the revolutionary movement in the country, Tilak Pariyar spoke eloquently and in vivid details.

VB: Tilakji, you are the Central Committee member of your party CPN. It is a great        achievement for any one as there are not many leaders from Dalit communities at the highest echelons of the left movements in India. Could you elaborate how and when you were included in the Central Committee?

TP: I have been in Central Advisory Committee of Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist since 2003, during the People's War and now I am acting as the Secretary of that Committee since 2013. There is dialectical relation between ideology and leadership. On the condition of the majority of the communists with the mixed culture of Marxism and Brahmanism in our society, based on the caste system, the development of the leadership for women and oppressed (Dalit) community is challenging. The leaders developed from the Dalit community should be prepared to work hard and satisfy others in the field of ideology and politics.

VB: Nepal has been a traditional society. Caste system and untouchability is being practiced. Did you face anything like that in your childhood? Have things changed ? If yes then how and who changed them?

TP: We initiated the Great People's War with the aim of resolving the contradictions of Nepalese society including political, economical and social ones. By the initiation, Nepalese rulers declared to destroy the movement and finish the Maoists, but failed. That was the result of the dedication of Maoist party struggling to adopt the pro-people policy, solubility with the people, defense of Nationalism and high morale to establish a democracy. During that operation, the Dalits were backward in all sectors of life including economic, political, and social due to upper caste insistence on a caste system with untouchability, which had been going on since thousands of years against the Dalit community. The Dalits were involved in the PW and fought against the enemy. During the practice of proportional inclusiveness and special rights in People's Government, People's Court and People's Liberation Army, the changes over caste system and untouchability culture were among the base. It is essential to run the campaign of economic, social, cultural transformation and to extend it continuously.

VB:  Could you share with us the struggle that you had to do in your childhood? What kind of caste discrimination did you face in your childhood? 

TP:  In the social structure of caste system and untouchability culture, to take birth in the Dalit family means to face the discrimination within the mother's womb. I was born in a very poor family. My parents were ignorant and uneducated. They did have the courage to send me to the school, but the teachers used to discriminate against me even in the school. I couldn't drink the water fetched by the peon. I had to run to the water tap to drink water. We were addressed with offensive words and physical hurt. I have been struggling against it. My sharp understanding is that the Hindu religious rituals are the origin of the Dalit problem which actually resulted in the Hindu hegemonic oppression of Dalits. We boycotted temples and worshiping, burned the Manusmriti and the books abusing the Dalits. Teachers beat me for this but I kept on my dissent. My rebellious nature and progressive thinking inspired me to be Marxist-Leninist-Maoist.

VB:  You studied at the Delhi University and then became part of revolutionary politics. How did you get engaged to the left political ideology?

TP:  I was impressed by the instructions of Com. B.D.Randiwe, an Indian communist leader, when I was studying B.A. in Delhi University and was doing part time job in 1964/65. Then I came in contact with Com. Pusplal, the founder of Nepalese Communist Movement, through him and he introduced me to the party. I am proud of my birth in the Dalit community. I have observed that most of the leaders and cadres from non-dalit background have shown an opportunist character.

VB:  In Nepal despite ideological differences people accept the role played by the Maoists in bringing the Dalit issues to the core particularly the land relations in the village. Unfortunately, the language and idioms that have been used by the movement still avoid targeting the brahmanical value system which subjugated the Dalits. Is it deliberate so that you do not lose the upper castes along with you?  It is important to use the Marxist terminology of class but caste is a harsh reality too in our society. Have you ever given it a thought that without eliminating the caste system, we can not bring equality in society?

TP:  You have asked an important question, it is found true that Economics counts not only the relations of goods but the relations of mankind too and especially between the classes. Caste system is also a product of class divided society. Thus, the fact is roved that the problem of caste system and untouchability is a form of class exploitation and oppression. It is notable that the whole and parts have dialectical relation; the whole gets completeness only after integrating several parts. To talk about pure class liberation or pure Dalit liberation in isolation means to serve the status-quo. Marxism has no relation with it. The dialectical materialist outlook which understands and transforms the Dalit problem and the spiritualist religious ideology which argues the development of the human society as the wish of a god can't be the same. We can't identify the problem until we are not clear on it. If we show recklessness to treat without the diagnosis, it has risk for side effect or there won't be any efficacy. The cause of the acceptance of Dalit agenda and the question of the land to the Maoists is based on a clear outlook and has a correct political line. Humans need food, dwelling and clothing before politics, cultural tradition, rituals, art, and entertainment. We can operate all types of activities of social cultural transformations on the foundation of them. Economic equality, assurances of political access and social combination are integral parts of each other. It is essential to understand it in totality.

VB: How important is Dr Baba Saheb Ambedkar for you and your cadres? As you know Ambedkar now symbolises struggle for dignity and human rights. His acceptance in social movements have transcended beyond India and among huge number of people outside India. Nepal's Dalit movement is also claiming his legacy now. What are the meeting points and where do you differ in perceptions?

TP: Baba Saheb Ambedkar is a respectable and honorable Dalit leader for me. His important contributions to the Dalit movement are rememberable. He struggled for the right to vote. He took a stand for separate electorate system for the Dalits. But he felt obligated to leave it after Gandhi's fast. For the first time in history, a person from the Dalit community was established as the builder of a nation’s Constitution, the Indian Constitution. Despite these contributions, he was not clear on the outlook to identify the problem. As the result, he converted to Buddhism on the last moments of his life. I have a strong view that proselytism can't be the right guidance for the liberation of Dalits.

VB: But Dalit representation in CA is merely 8%. In fact, last CA was much better in terms of representation. Will it not be inadeqate that without fair representation of Dalits in CA, it would somewhere lose its legitimacy? 

TP:  The Article 21 of the Interim Constitution of Nepal accepts the principle of proportional inclusiveness on the question of social justice. The population of Dalits is 13.2% as the Governmental statistics and 20% as per the Non-Governmental one. The number of total members of the Constituent Assembly is 600. So, 78 Dalits as the Government or 120 Dalits as the NGOs have the instinctive right to represent in the CA. But the electoral system of First Past the Post and Mixed system of Proportional List is adopted. Multi-candidate direct election system has made women and Dalits to lose the election as per the system of competition among unequals. The same thing was adopted during the CA election of 2007. At that time, with the influence of 10 years People's War and 19 days People's Movement, 7 Dalits had been elected from the direct election. That was 8.2%. Only 6.8% Dalits are representatives to the so called CA recently. Parliamentarians are active not only in reducing the representation of Dalits but also in dismissing the representation by so called democratic process by vulgarizing the proportional electoral system. The two-third majority of the CA of 2007 was pro-people and now the so called CA has two-third majority who are anti-people. If they move to the process, the past pro-people achievements will be thrown away and the agenda of reconstruction of the state will surely be dismissed. That's why we believe the CA election, occurred on 19^th November, 2013, is without legitimacy. If they are ready to make the Constitution to authorize the people and to protect the national independence, it is essential to make the national political consensus on the essence of the constitution by organizing All Political Conference.

VB:  Where is Nepal's Dalit movement at the moment? We do not see much stronger struggle against land rights and untouchability. Your party raised the issue but never really challenged the brahmanical hegemony in Nepal. How can Nepal be a representative and egalitarian society?

TP:  The problems of right to land and freedom from untouchability are complementary to each other. The New Democratic revolution is inevitable to solve this problem in Nepal which contains the situation of semi-feudalist and neo-colonial society. To defend the nation’s independence and enrich the people with rights is the basic minimum goal of the New Democratic revolution. In the past, we had entered into the process of building equalized society by establishing people's government, challenging the Bramhanical norms and hegemony. But the revolution suffered a setback due to the reactionary forces, both foreign and domestic, and the class and national capitulationist elements inside the party. It will take time to prepare for the revolution but it is essential to organize the revolutionaries, empower the internal side and balance the external powers. It is possible to build an equalized society by forwarding the process of unity-struggle-transformation.

VB:  You have differed with your original party led by comrade Prachanda. What were the points of difference? He is trying to play an important role in democracy and bring change through democracy. It is difficult to go back to the pre-democratic positions after peace accord. If you do not participate in democratic exercise, wouldn’t it be easier for your opponents to blame you for not having people's support?

TP: Prachanda has abandoned the political line of "People's insurrection on the foundation of the People's War", which was passed by the plenum of 7000 cadres, and adopted the so-called socialist revolution saying that the New Democratic revolution is over. This is the result of his ideological deviation. How can one be the leader of the original party who had abandoned the official line of the party? We have nothing to say if it is orginal by the recognition of American and Indian ruling class.

VB:  You claimed that you will go for Janvidroh? How can you reassure the Dalits and minorities that this Janvidroh has a place for them? How many of the Dalits are represented in the highest body of parties in Nepal? I have no issue people claiming to work for the Dalits but you can not sidetrack the issue of the leadership emerging from the community.

TP:  The question of the construction of a revolutionary party cannot be answered by the method of proportional representation. Dalits and backward classes are basic classes for the revolution but all of them haven't developed a revolutionary leadership. Party should prioritize the development of leaders from the basic classes and communities. The leaders and cadres of the concerned communities should be clear ideologically and theoretically. There are 14 Dalits at the central level in our party. All of them are the comrades who had fought the 10 years People's War and had achieved an ideological and political clarity. But the leadership is not developing as expected. The People's War or an insurrection can't be done by subjective method. These can be initiated by the plan-of-action line and action-plan on the basis of concrete analysis of concrete circumstances and other objective situations.

VB:  What is the socio-economic agenda that you want to set for Nepal? How do you propose to bring equality in the society? Untouchability and other traditions like Kumari and Baadi are still being practiced. There is manual scavenging (cleaning human excreta) from Mehtar community but so far these issues have not come up for discussions at the highest level. They have not become part of the public discourse and Dalit movement. 

 TP: First of all, these agenda can't be implemented for the interest of workers, peasants, Dalits, women and the oppressed people without the establishment of a New Democratic Republic. So, political revolution is the essential precondition. After this, the socio-economic agenda, which are related to solutions of the problems of nationality, democracy and people's concerns, will achieve the desired importance and effectiveness. Our party says that the interests and rights of workers, peasants, women, Dalits, indigenous nationalities, Madheshis, Muslims, backward mass and national capitalist class. It says the special rights to women; Dalits and Muslims community should be arranged with compensation until the relative development on social, economic and political equality is achieved. It also says the arrangement of right to preference and assurance of representation to all organs of state power on the basis of proportional inclusive theory should be managed. Our party wants to develop federalism with the identity of oppressed ethnicity, construction and development of independent national economy, termination of feudal land ownership and revolutionary land reform, independent foreign policy, democratic educational policy, democratic judicial system, resolution of basic problems of people's concern including education, health, employment, food sovereignty and residence as well as democratic and scientific culture.

On the question of solving the problem of Baadi, Mehtar and Kumari customs, as you have mentioned are one of the problems of the entire Dalit community. And it should be resolved by the process of ‘Unity, Struggle, Transformation.’  Our party will give these communities special priority within the provisions meant for Dalits.

VB:  Do you support political reservation for the Dalits which ofcourse, is there in your Constitution but there is no reservation for the Dalits in the government services? Without giving them enough representation in the government services, you can not really do away with discrimination. What is your party's view on it?

TP:  The genuine MLM communists don't believe in the policy of reservation because it diverts the issue of proportional participation of all sectors based on the population. This policy depends on the mercy of rulers instead of our own rights. The policy of proportional representation is correct in the form of rights. On the basis of theory of compensation for the historical oppression since thousands of years, additional rights (Special rights) should be given till the relative equality isn't established. These rights can be increased or decreased on the basis of Human Development Index. Because these rights are given to Dalits by deducting from the share of non-Dalits, termination of untouchability and environment of social combination would take place rapidly. The thematic committees of the now dissolved CA had recommended the special rights for the new Constitution.

VB:  Number of people from different movements in India, are going to read your views. What is your message to them? Do you believe Buddha, Marx and Ambedkar converge at certain points and if we bring them together, a revolution will not be a dream but a reality?

              TP:  I would like to pass my message to all Indian oppressed and justice loving people that the liberation movement will obtain the necessary speed by moving ahead including the leadership of the MLM scientific ideology and spiritual experiences of Buddha and Ambedkar. Main focus should be given to the scientific ideology and rational outlook.