Bhopal- At a seminar held in Bhopal, Professor Ratan Lal, a historian from Delhi University, delivered a thought-provoking speech on the construction of the reserved category and its contemporary role. He expressed deep concern over the current political and social state of the Dalit community, emphasizing the need to shift focus from electoral politics and unrealistic dreams of power to education, research, and intellectual discourse.

Prof. Lal urged the Dalit community to revisit Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s pragmatic approach and prioritize building a stake in knowledge production.

Making of the Reserved Category: A Hard-Fought Journey

Prof. Ratan Lal began by underscoring that the creation of the reserved category was not an easy process. He referenced Dr. Ambedkar’s first memorandum to the Southborough Committee in 1919, which highlighted education and jobs as matters of life and death for the Dalit community. At that time, there was not a single Scheduled Caste graduate in the entire Bombay Province. Ambedkar consistently raised the issue of education during interactions with the Simon Commission, the Round Table Conferences, and through the Independent Labour Party.

In his document Grievances of the Scheduled Castes, he presented data showing that out of 1,056 Indian Civil Service (ICS) officers, only one was from the Scheduled Castes, and only one Scheduled Caste individual was a contractor in the CPWD. The appointment of even three constables was a cause for celebration. Prof. Lal emphasized that Dalits positioned themselves as a minority in national life, akin to Muslims and Sikhs, demanding constitutional safeguards. Until 1942–44, they claimed minority status, and it was on this basis that reservations were secured. He posed a critical question: “Did you get reservations as a minority or as a majority? Think about it.”

Prof. Lal described Ambedkar’s philosophy as pragmatic, influenced by his mentor John Dewey at Columbia University. In 1916, at the age of 24, Ambedkar wrote his first article in the Bombay Chronicle, advocating for a public library over a bust of Firoz Shah Mehta. Drawing inspiration from Buddha, Kabir, and Phule, Ambedkar avoided unrealistic dreams. He was a petitioner who relentlessly demanded rights from the Viceroy, Congress, and government institutions.

In his 1948 Lucknow speech, he called for separate electorates, reservations in legislatures, and government jobs, though only partial success was achieved. Prof. Lal noted that Ambedkar emphasized sustained pressure to secure rights, a strategy rooted in pragmatism. He highlighted that the Constituent Assembly reached a consensus on reservations due to acknowledgment of historical injustices, with no significant debate, as leaders like Rajendra Prasad and Jawaharlal Nehru agreed. However, today, the community has shifted from demanding to claiming it will “give” or rule. Prof. Lal questioned, “What will you give? We have no stake in universities, bureaucracy, the share market, or foreign policy.”

Gains in Poor India, Losses in Rich India

Prof. Lal explained the rise of the Dalit middle class as a byproduct of modernism, industrialization, and colonialism, a phenomenon of the 19th century when urban centers and factories emerged. In Marxist terms, he said, “Without a bourgeoisie, without a middle class, you cannot achieve anything.” In poor India, government schools and colleges charged nominal fees (one or two annas), and stipends and fellowships were provided. Indira Gandhi’s 1973 letter to chief ministers called for cells to address atrocities against Harijans and ensure full appointments in the public sector.

Bank nationalization enabled Dalit officers, land reforms provided land titles, and special recruitment drives under Rajiv Gandhi, along with Navodaya Vidyalayas, offered free education. Reservations in petrol pumps and gas agencies generated crores in income. Public sector units like ONGC saw employee numbers rise from 3,000 to 21,000, with 7,500 from SC/ST/OBC communities, contributing an estimated 100 crore rupees annually to their households at an average salary of 1 lakh. Two generations ago, Dalits lived in shanties; today, teachers sustain families. However, in rich India, these gains are being eroded. Government schools and colleges are closing, their quality is deteriorating, and private education has become prohibitively expensive. Privatization of gas and petrol distribution is reducing opportunities, and jobs are shrinking due to privatization.

Shortcomings of the Dalit Middle Class and Leadership

Prof. Lal critiqued the priorities of the Dalit middle class, questioning why billions spent on movements were not invested in serious research, books, articles, or sending children abroad for education. “Why aren’t our children becoming researchers? Why aren’t they pursuing PhDs or going to Harvard and Oxford?” he asked. Sharing his own journey from a small village in Bihar to a university, he stressed the need to question why Dalit entry into universities remains restricted. Jobs in protocol-driven roles, doctors, engineers, professors, bureaucrats, do not lead to revolution, as they are part of the system.

Public discourse on economic and cultural policies must come from academia. He criticized Dalit leaders for pursuing personal liberation, “Make me a minister, make my son a CM or PM”, instead of collective agendas. At an OBC program in Hyderabad, he noted the lack of gratitude toward V.P. Singh and Arjun Singh. “We are thankless people; we call everyone an enemy,” he remarked. Ambedkar met the Viceroy, Nehru, and Gandhi without using abusive language, yet today’s leaders are dismissed as “Manuwadi” or “chamchas.” The middle class funded movements but betrayed the cause, and those in jobs often criticize the system that enabled them.

'Seek Ambedkar in Books, Not Statues'

Prof. Lal urged the community to seek Ambedkar in books and ideas, not statues. “Vijayawada, Canada, Australia are building the biggest statues, but Ambedkar would have been dismayed,” he said. Ambedkar called devotion a path to dictatorship, yet the community is moving in the opposite direction. In his book Dharmantaran: Ambedkar ki Dhamma Yatra, Prof. Lal condensed 15,000 pages of Ambedkar’s writings into 450 pages with a 50–60-page introduction.

He argued that those who claimed Ambedkar’s political legacy ignored his cultural legacy, Dhamma, research, and publications. In the 1948 Lucknow speech, Ambedkar called for “one party, one leader, one program,” but today, “where is the party, where is the leader?” Current Dalit politics, he said, is contrary to Ambedkar’s vision. He cited the 2018–19 roster movement, where 10–20 people, funded by their own pockets, overturned the Supreme Court’s 13-point roster to reinstate the 200-point roster, ensuring university opportunities. Yet, the community offered no thanks. He mentioned submitting a seven-point Dalit emancipation manifesto to Rahul Gandhi, focused on education, but lamented that education is absent from Dalit seminars.

Prof. Lal highlighted contributions by leaders like Jagjivan Ram, Indira Gandhi, and Rajiv Gandhi. In 1957, Jagjivan Ram introduced reservation in promotions in the railways. In 1966, he supported Indira Gandhi for PM, forgoing his own candidacy to prevent vote division against Morarji Desai. In 1977, despite elections being fought in his name, Jayaprakash Narayan chose Desai as PM. The Emergency was a “golden period” for Dalits, with millions of jobs created. Prof. Lal noted that the middle class funded movements but failed to uphold Ambedkar’s vision.

Prof. Lal concluded that without social and political alliances, the Dalit community cannot succeed. Issues like privatization, vote theft, and unemployment, evidenced by millions applying for Agniveer recruitment, go unaddressed by leaders. He advocated for pressure politics, as Ambedkar practiced, to make education and jobs central issues.