Statues of Dr B. R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of the Indian Constitution and a lifelong campaigner against caste injustice, are playing a significant role in how Dalits living outside India claim dignity, resist caste discrimination and assert their voice, according to a new academic study.
The study, published in a special issue of Transitions: Journal of Transient Migration titled "Resisting Caste in Diaspora: Mobility, Agency, and Activism", examines Ambedkar's statues in diasporic settings. Its authors argue that many people assume caste will disappear once South Asians settle abroad, but that it continues to affect the lives and identities of South Asian groups overseas. The statues, they write, are a strong reminder of this persistence.
The Ambedkar statues paper, “Asserting Dalit identity beyond borders”, is authored by Dr Nookaraju Bendukurthi of the Central University of Kashmir, India, and Dr Vikrant Kishore of the University of Nottingham Ningbo China.
According to the authors, the sculptures are more than memorials. They symbolize an ongoing fight for equality and the assertion of Dalit identity, including during crises or acts of vandalism. Ambedkar's iconography, the paper notes, commonly shows him holding the Constitution and pointing forward, imagery that represents citizenship, justice and the struggle against caste oppression. The authors describe the monuments as places of remembering and action that help diaspora communities feel a sense of belonging and political power, even where caste is erased or denied in their new countries.
The researchers say the article examines how Ambedkar statues function as transnational symbols of Dalit resistance, political assertion and identity formation. It looks at how caste hierarchies persist, adapt and are negotiated within Indian diaspora communities, and how the statues become sites where questions of recognition, belonging and social justice are articulated.
The study also considers how vandalism, contestation and public debate around the statues reflect wider tensions over memory, cultural preservation, assimilation and the visibility of caste in migrant settings. Particular attention is paid to how the monuments are interpreted and mobilized in western liberal democracies, where claims about caste often intersect with broader debates on equality, multiculturalism and minority rights.
The authors state that the statues are approached not only as sites of empowerment but also as sites of contestation, and that the disputes surrounding them show how public space becomes a terrain on which competing understandings of caste, identity and historical memory are negotiated beyond India.
A central concern of the paper is what the authors call "hidden casteism" in the diaspora. They write that overt caste discrimination is easier to identify and fight, whereas concealed casteism relies on denial, silence and public ignorance. It is maintained covertly, they say, through unofficial social networks and unwritten rules governing community life. This makes it harder for victims to speak about their experiences or to ask supporters to organize.
The paper further states that veiled casteism allows dominant-caste individuals to retain privileges while openly supporting liberal or progressive ideas, and that it reproduces caste inequalities without criticism, sustaining exclusion and psychological harm. The authors cite scholarship by Deshpande (2013) and Jodhka (2015) in this context.
The study notes that in western countries, discussions of discrimination tend to centre on race, ethnicity and religion. As minorities in host countries, Indian diaspora groups are more likely to concentrate on fighting racism and promoting minority rights, the authors write. While important, this emphasis can come at the cost of confronting internal hierarchies, including caste. Many in the diaspora, the paper says, worry that acknowledging caste will compromise their claims to respectability and equality in the host community, so caste is often kept to the personal sphere, discussed in subdued tones or rejected outright. The "model minority" image, which presents Indian diaspora communities as successful, upwardly mobile and free of the socioeconomic problems of the country of origin, strengthens this resistance further, according to the paper.
The authors describe avoiding caste discourse as a calculated silence that safeguards dominant-caste interests, and say that selective engagement with discrimination compromises the legitimacy of diaspora advocacy and helps keep Dalit and other oppressed-caste people on the margins.
Against this backdrop, the paper describes rising Ambedkarite activity in the diaspora as a major change. Although the movement is small in numbers, the authors say, it has made notable progress recently. Ambedkar Jayanti celebrations, the erection of Ambedkar statues and the organization of conferences and seminars on caste are now important venues of resistance and community-building.
Student groups and activists have drawn attention to caste prejudice at colleges in the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia, advocating policy changes and the inclusion of caste as a protected category under anti-discrimination laws. The paper says these initiatives have met with both support and opposition, reflecting wider divisions within the diaspora. It adds that statues in cities such as London, New York and Melbourne show that the fight against caste is global.
The article's literature review summarizes a body of existing scholarship:
Persistence of caste abroad. Kumar (2021) describes the adaptation of caste-based affiliations and festivals, including Ambedkar Jayanti, in the United States, where public events and statue erections are important for community identification and visibility. Research on the African and UK diasporas indicates that caste systems may be less explicit but still influence social networks, endogamy and community organization (Pratibha 2021). The authors conclude from these studies that host-society and diaspora politics restructure caste rather than diminish it.
Caste and race. Rawat (2020) and others argue that Ambedkar's anti-caste doctrine aligns with wider struggles against racism, making him a more pertinent figure than Gandhi for African and African-descended populations. In the UK, Dalit activism frequently connects with anti-racist and multicultural groups, blurring distinctions between caste and race (Jaoul 2006). Thorat (2016) stresses that racial exclusion often aggravates existing caste discrimination. Wilkerson (2020) compares racial segregation in the United States with the caste system in India.
Dalit political philosophy. Kancha Ilaiah Shepherd (2018) contends that the diaspora may be a venue for worldwide articulation of anti-caste politics. Anand Teltumbde (2010b) argues that Ambedkarism offers a strong framework for confronting caste injustice in any setting. Suraj Yengde (2019, 2022) documents Ambedkarite organizations, cultural events and public commemorations in western nations, and emphasizes that placing Ambedkar sculptures in places such as London and New York is an act of transnational resistance.
Circulation of ideas. Drawing on Arjun Appadurai's (1996) concept of "global flows", the authors say Ambedkar's image travels through sculptures, books and digital media and becomes a means of building transnational networks of resistance and solidarity.
Invisible casteism. Deshpande (2013) argues that caste operates through unofficial networks, cultural practices and unspoken rules, and can surface in apparently benign settings such as marriage plans, social events and community organizations. Jodhka (2015) argues that caste shapes social interaction in new and changing ways rather than being only a relic of the past, and remains a tool for organizing access to social capital, resources and opportunities.
The paper also reviews developments in how institutions and governments have responded to caste discrimination:
A UK National Institute of Economic and Social Research report (Metcalf and Rolfe 2010) compiled evidence of caste-based exclusion in social life, education and the workplace, and urged that caste be included as a protected attribute under UK anti-discrimination legislation.
The Australian Human Rights Commission (2024) has begun to investigate caste discrimination in Australia in light of increasing South Asian migration. Policy papers highlight the need for greater knowledge, legal protections and community participation.
In the United States, Seattle was the first city to make caste discrimination illegal. The paper also recounts tension in the tech industry when Google cancelled a talk by the head of Equality Labs, which caused a scandal inside the company and led to resignations.
Universities have been at the heart of institutional change: Brown University and Harvard University (described as the second Ivy League school to do so) added caste to their anti-discrimination policies, and UC Davis was the first public university to do so. Colby College is cited as a liberal arts college that has implemented caste protections.
The American Bar Association passed Resolution 513, which the paper describes as part of its advocacy for gender equality worldwide, citing Equality Labs.
Tech workers, including the Alphabet Workers Union, have pushed for caste to be included in companies' anti-discrimination rules.
International news outlets have also reported on the growing awareness of caste problems in the United States and on changing attitudes toward discrimination on college campuses.
The authors say these developments reflect a broader trend toward recognizing caste as a global human rights issue rather than solely a South Asian one.
The study draws on several theoretical frameworks. It uses Michel Foucault's concepts of panopticism and anopticism to understand the statues as tools of both empowerment and social surveillance. According to the authors, the statues make Dalit presence visible in public space, but also place those communities under scrutiny and possible backlash. They define anopticism as intentional erasure or forced invisibility, and use it to interpret vandalism and the suppression of Dalit symbols, which they say support dominant-caste narratives and attempt to obliterate the history of people outside the dominant caste (citing Teltumbde 2010a).
The authors also use Roland Barthes's semiotic analysis (1972) to read the statues as signs that stand for resistance and group identity; Appadurai's "global flows" and "translocality" to explain how Ambedkar's image and ideas migrate and acquire new meanings; and the work of Paul Connerton (1989) and Maurice Halbwachs (1992) on how public monuments hold collective memory and connect diasporic groups to shared histories of struggle. They additionally integrate Foucault's (1980) ideas on power and surveillance. Their overall conclusion is that Ambedkar statues are dynamic spaces for negotiating power, memory and identity, and are both targets of erasure and symbols of empowerment.
The research used a mixed-methods approach combining structured questions with open-ended qualitative prompts. The questionnaire was hosted on menti.com, a participatory digital platform, and contained twelve questions: eight structured, close-ended multiple-choice questions and four open-ended prompts inviting respondents to reflect in their own words on personal experiences of caste, identity and public memory.
The eight structured questions collected demographic and attitudinal data, including respondents' visits to Ambedkar memorials and statues abroad, perceptions of dominant-caste responses and preferred platforms for discussing caste. The four open-ended prompts asked about how Ambedkar's legacy shapes Dalit resistance and identity today (Qualitative Q1), the role of digital platforms in caste discourse (Qualitative Q2), challenges to public expression of caste experience abroad (Qualitative Q3) and strategies for strengthening transnational advocacy (Qualitative Q4). The authors analysed these thematically.
The study received 161 responses from participants across a range of geographical locations and social backgrounds. The sample was self-selected and multinational: individuals chose to take part after finding the survey link through social media and community networks. Participation was voluntary and anonymous, and the study followed the ethical research guidelines of the University of Nottingham Ningbo, China. The authors state that, given the nature of the sample, the quantitative findings are used descriptively rather than for statistical inference, within a predominantly qualitative framework.
Modes of engagement.
Asked which category best described their engagement with Ambedkar's legacy, 24 per cent of respondents chose "general interest", followed by community activism (23 per cent), academic research (21 per cent) and social media engagement (19 per cent). The authors say this shows a wide spectrum of participation combining scholarship, grassroots mobilization and informal digital expression.
Where caste is discussed.
Asked how they primarily engage in caste-related discussions, 32 per cent named social media, 24 per cent community gatherings and events, 16 per cent academic work, 13 per cent cultural or artistic production and 12 per cent political activism. One respondent said digital platforms have given everyone a voice; another said they let marginalized people share experiences, build communities and challenge caste hierarchies. The authors link this to Yengde's observations about Dalit communities using digital spaces to bypass caste-controlled media.
The authors add a caution: such visibility carries costs. They write that digital platforms also subject marginalized voices to surveillance and control, and cite Deshpande (2013) on dominant-caste actors' influence over platform standards, linguistic hierarchies and algorithms. They note that digital access does not prevent trolling, de-platforming or structural erasure.
Most effective medium.
Asked which medium has been most effective in sustaining Ambedkar's legacy in recent years, 38 per cent chose digital platforms, 29 per cent community organizations and activism, 17 per cent public memorials and statues, and 13 per cent documentaries or feature films. The authors say digital visibility operates alongside physical and organizational forms of resistance, and that community events and public memorials retain emotional and political relevance where dominant institutions refuse to acknowledge caste-based injustice.
Open-text answers on digital platforms.
Among 106 responses to the open-text question on digital platforms, several stressed connectivity and global reach. One participant said such tools have great potential in a country like the United States, where many people do not know what caste means. Others said online discussion lets them comment, argue and learn. The authors describe an ambivalence: platforms enable marginalized people to share experiences and build communities, but also expose them to surveillance and trolling.
Geographic spread.
Among 156 respondents who gave their current location, the largest clusters were in Australia and New Zealand (16 per cent), the United States (15 per cent), India (return migrants, 12 per cent), the United Kingdom (11 per cent) and Canada (10 per cent). Smaller shares were in Europe excluding the UK (9 per cent), the Middle East (7 per cent), Africa (6 per cent), South America (4 per cent) and other regions (8 per cent). The authors say this spread shows the global reach of Ambedkar's influence and the dispersal of caste-based experiences beyond the Indian subcontinent.
A UK respondent's view.
Citing Gail Omvedt (2004), the authors argue that caste consciousness among diasporic Dalits gains momentum when confronted with both racial hierarchies in host societies and intra-community casteism, and that Ambedkar is repositioned as a political and moral anchor. One respondent from the United Kingdom said Ambedkar is a central figure for Dalits who mobilized there to demand caste legislation, and that many Dalits prefer to identify as Ambedkarites rather than with a Hindu identity.
Visits to memorials.
Asked whether they had visited an Ambedkar statue or memorial outside India, 36 per cent said yes and 64 per cent said no. The authors note that although most had not physically encountered such memorials, their symbolic relevance emerged in the wider data and comments. They argue that in diasporic spaces the statues mark both presence and defiance, and that in cities such as London, Melbourne and New York they interrupt the symbolic geography of the diaspora and draw attention to histories marginalized even within Indian migrant communities.
Respondents on Ambedkar's legacy.
One respondent described his legacy as so large that it will help unite people across generations and teach humanity about equality and liberty. Another cited his slogan, "educate, agitate, organize", as shaping Dalit resistance and inspiring broader movements for equity and justice.
Of 110 qualitative responses to the question on how Ambedkar's legacy shapes identity and resistance, a significant number referenced his emphasis on education, dignity and constitutional rights. One respondent described his writings and personhood as embodying humanism and a continuing call to action. Several participants saw Ambedkar not only as a Dalit leader but as a leader of oppressed people in general; one pointed to his resignation from the Indian ministry over the shelving of the Hindu Code Bill as evidence of his commitment to marginalized groups including OBCs and women. The authors tie this to Anupama Rao's (2009) argument that his political life cannot be reduced to identity politics.
Respondents also cited practical outcomes, such as growing anti-caste movements, institutions adding caste discrimination to codes of conduct and ongoing campaigns to include caste as a protected characteristic. The authors say respondents view Ambedkar as a "living archive of resistance" rather than a static emblem.
What the statues do.
Asked how Ambedkar statues function in diaspora communities, 36 per cent said they strengthen collective identity, 32 per cent said they raise awareness about caste discrimination and 26 per cent said they are sites for cultural and political mobilization. Only 1 per cent said they were insignificant. The authors write that the statues act as active sites of community-building, public pedagogy and political mobilization, where dignity is asserted, histories are taught and collective action is organized. They also say the statues' presence often produces discomfort, challenging narratives of diasporic success and cultural harmony.
How dominant-caste diaspora members react.
Asked about the response of dominant-caste diaspora members to the statues, 40 per cent described it as oppositional or resistant, 32 per cent as indifferent and 17 per cent as supportive. One participant said that public forums aligned with Hindutva groups have tried to discourage anti-caste activities, particularly in the United States, and that organizers feel these networks monitor and sometimes try to disrupt such programmes. The paper reports this as a participant's account.
Other respondents described subtler resistance, including performative alliances and strategic marginalization. The authors say dominant-caste individuals often reduce Ambedkar to a neutral cultural icon, a tendency they link to what Waghmore and Gorringe (2019) call the "aesthetics of civility". They argue that the statues provoke discomfort because they name caste in public, and interrupt the narrative that the diaspora is caste-free.
Experiences of backlash.
Asked whether they had witnessed opposition to the public presence of Ambedkar's legacy, 10 per cent said they had experienced such backlash frequently, 32 per cent occasionally, and 52 per cent said they were aware of incidents even if not directly involved. Only 7 per cent reported neither experiencing nor hearing of such opposition. Backlash ranged from online trolling and public discrediting to vandalism of physical sites.
One respondent said openly asserting caste identity or engaging in anti-caste activism can restrict access to professional opportunities and social acceptance within upper-caste Indian networks in the diaspora. Another described a persistent fear of ostracization for speaking out, and said news of caste-based atrocities is often suppressed while misleading narratives circulate to discredit those raising the issue. The authors conclude that backlash is embedded in the social and institutional fabric rather than limited to isolated acts.
Barriers to speaking out.
Respondents said denial, erasure and institutional neglect remain significant obstacles to public expression of caste experience abroad. One participant described a defensive response from forward-caste members who insisted, "Caste is a non-issue. No discrimination exists." Another said that simply being Dalit is itself a challenge, because Dalit writings are always viewed through a different lens. The authors cite Kurien (2023), who argues that racialized caste identities in the West are often ignored or misrepresented.
Some respondents also said a fake term, "Hinduphobia", has been invented to shut down discussion of caste. The authors interpret this as an example of how dominant groups use religious and cultural identity politics to deflect or delegitimize caste discourse in favour of religious unity, and note that Baishya et al. (2023) observe anti-caste activism being co-opted, trivialized or repelled in international activist spaces.
What respondents propose.
In response to the open question on strengthening transnational advocacy, participants proposed:
Storytelling and visibility: raising Dalit voices in international platforms and reaching out to organizations and agencies to be heard.
Global coalitions and rights frameworks: building global coalitions, sharing lived experiences, using international human rights forums and digital platforms. The authors link this to Omvedt's (2004) observation that Dalit mobilization gains force when grounded in lived experience and articulated through global human rights frameworks.
Education: developing awareness through digital platforms and providing scholarships to Dalit students for higher education. Education was mentioned many times.
Alliances: building solidarity with different groups, connecting with academics and researchers and creating multilingual content. The authors say this echoes Baishya et al. (2023) on solidarity with Indigenous, Black and other marginalized communities.
Institutional and policy change: demanding caste equity policies in global corporations, creating fellowships for young Dalit voices abroad, collaborating with Indigenous, Black and BIPOC groups, pushing universities to include caste in social justice curricula, building digital libraries of Dalit scholarship and investing in media that tells Dalit stories worldwide.
The authors say these suggestions point to a shift from symbolic representation to material change, and that through storytelling, education, alliances and structural intervention, the communities are both resisting caste discrimination and shaping new discourses of rights and accountability.
Drawing on the 161 survey responses, the authors conclude that the statues are not ornamental but are spatial assertions of a history that refuses marginalization. They say anti-caste engagement among Dalits in the diaspora is both broad and purposeful, taking the form of activism, scholarship, digital platforms and commemorative practice.
The tension the statues produce, they write, is illuminating: the statues make caste publicly legible in societies where it is either denied or naturalized within narratives of Indian diasporic success, and reactions of indifference or hostility from dominant-caste groups show the continuing political charge of Ambedkar's image. The qualitative responses, they say, confirm that for many Dalits abroad, assertion is complicated by fear of exclusion, loss of opportunity and lack of institutional support, and that caste operates as a hidden but active force in professional settings, educational spaces and community networks. However, the authors note, the majority of respondents do not remain within this impasse and articulate strategic ways forward through transnational networking, multilingual engagement, policy advocacy, educational initiatives and digital storytelling.
The article closes by stating that the statue "becomes a demand, not for passive reverence but for the recognition of struggle and a refusal to be forgotten."
Authors: Dr Nookaraju Bendukurthi, Department of Communication and Journalism, School of Media Studies, Central University of Kashmir; and Dr Vikrant Kishore, associate professor of international communications, University of Nottingham Ningbo China. Bendukurthi's research focuses on media, disability and representation, while Kishore's spans Indian cinema, celebrity culture, intangible cultural heritage and casteism studies.
Journal and issue: Transitions: Journal of Transient Migration, Special Issue "Resisting Caste in Diaspora: Mobility, Agency, and Activism", Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 255–275.
Speaking with The Mooknayak, Dr Vikrant Kishore said the two special issues he co-edited with Dr Stephen Goulding and Dr Ratan Lal (Delhi University), both in Volume 10 of Transitions: Journal of Transient Migration (Intellect, 2026), examine how caste discrimination persists and changes after migration, affecting work, community life, media representation and access to justice.
Volume 10(1), “Caste across Borders: Persistence and Transformation in Diaspora” (April 2026), builds on B. R. Ambedkar’s warning that migration does not dissolve caste, with studies from the United States, the United Kingdom and Nepal, and analysis of legal and policy responses.
Volume 10(2), “Resisting Caste in Diaspora: Mobility, Agency, and Activism” (October 2026), looks at how caste is named, represented and challenged through six articles on Australian news and diaspora media, digital platforms, Indian Matchmaking, the film Kabali, anti-caste rap and Ambedkar statues.
Together, the issues treat caste as an active hierarchy with material, institutional and cultural effects, and document how Dalit and anti-caste communities resist it through advocacy, organising, cultural work and Ambedkarite politics. Kishore noted that the Australian media study finds limited mainstream coverage of Dalit lived experience in Australia, while diaspora and digital media often focus on caste-related events in India.
You can also join our WhatsApp group to get premium and selected news of The Mooknayak on WhatsApp. Click here to join the WhatsApp group.
'The Mooknayak' practices democratic journalism. It is a media platform committed to the Constitution, democracy, and social justice. If you also want 'The Mooknayak' to always raise the voices of the marginalized and show the pain of the voiceless, please subscribe.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE US