Southborough Commission 27 May 1919-Memorandum by Dr. Ambedkar

(Gist)

The most difficult and the most momentous question of Government (is) how to transmit the force of individual opinion and preference into public action.

No person as such should be denied the opportunity of actively participating in the process of Government.

Representation of opinions and representation of persons.

Persons do not become like-minded by merely living in physical proximity, any more than they cease to be like-minded by being distant from each other.  Participation in a group is the only way of being like-minded with the group.

Like-mindedness is essential for an harmonious life, social or political and, as has just been shown, it depends upon the extent of communication, participation or endosmosis.

The significant fact about the Hindus is that before they are Hindus they are members of some caste. The castes are so exclusive and isolated that the consciousness of being a Hindu would be the chief guide of a Hindu’s activity towards non-Hindu.

Between two Hindus, caste-like-mindedness is more powerful than the like-mindedness due to their both being Hindus.

The real social divisions of India then are :

(1) Touchable Hindus.

(2) Untouchable Hindus.

(3) Mohammedans.

(4) Christians.

(5) Parsees.

(6) Jews.

Proper and adequate representation of interests and opinions.

A Government for the people, but not by the people, is sure to educate some into masters and others into subjects.

It is not enough to be electors only. It is necessary to be law-makers ; otherwise who can be law-makers will be masters of those who can only be electors.

One crux of popular Government is the representation of interests and opinions. The other crux is personal representation. Territorial constituencies fail to create popular Government because they fail to secure personal representation to members of minor groups.

Proportional representation is ill-suited for the purpose in hand.

The new consciousness insists on dividing the touchable group into Brahmins and non-Brahmins each with its own separate interests.

It is in the interest of all that the Brahmin should not play such a preponderant part in politics as he has been doing hitherto. He has exerted a pernicious influence on the social life of the country and it is in the interest of all that his pernicious influence should be kept at a minimum in politics. As he is the most exclusive he is most anti-social.

The word untouchable is an epitome of their ills and sufferings. Not only has untouchability arrested the growth of their personality but also it comes in the way of their material well-being. It has also deprived them of certain civil rights.

The untouchable is not even a citizen. Citizen ship is a bundle of rights such as (1) personal liberty, (2) personal security, (3) rights to hold private property, (4) equality before law, (5) liberty of conscience, (6) freedom of opinion and speech, (7) right of assembly, (8) right of representation in a country’s Government and (9) right to hold office under the State.

An instance at hand may be cited from the school system of the Bombay Municipality. This most cosmopolitan city ruled by a Corporation with a greater freedom than any other Corporation in India has two different sets of schools ... one for the children of touchables and the other for those of the untouchables.,

The Congress has denied communal representation except in the case of Mohammedans and it also denies the extensive use of nomination ; the only way then left, open to the untouchables is to fight in a general electorate. Now this is as it should be if all were equally free to fight.

Congress is largely composed of men who are by design political Radicals and social Tories.

As the Congress is a non-national or anti-national body, its views on communal electorates are worthy of no serious consideration.

To be frank, the untouchables cannot expect much good from the political power to be given over to the high caste Hindus. Though the power may not be used against the untouchables and one cannot be altogether sure of this, it may not be used for their betterment.

Dadabhoy in 1916 in the Imperial Legislative Council. That it was adversely criticized by many who claimed to evince some interest in the untouchables is too well known to need repetition. But what is not well known is that though the resolution was lost the mover was not pardoned ; for the very moving of such a nasty resolution was regarded as a sin. At a subsequent election the mover had to make room for the Honourable Mr. Khaparde, who once wrote in an article : “ Those who work for the elevation of the untouchables are themselves degraded.”

Recently there is brought into the forefront a rival scheme for the representation of the untouchables by the Depressed Class Mission. The scheme is known as co-option. The scheme proposes that the representatives of the untouchables should be nominated by the co-option of the elected members of the Council.

Communal Representation is a device to ward off the evil effects of the divisions. To those who, while agreeing to this particular benefit of communal representation, object to it on the score that it perpetuates the divisions it can be shown that there is another perspective from which it can be said that communal representation instead of perpetuating the social divisions is one of the ways of dissolving them.

begin to have contact and co-operation with one another the resocialization of the fossilized attitude is bound to be the result.

But the existing set attitude representing the diverse castes and groups will be dissolved only if the diverse groups meet together and take part in a common activity.

Statistics will show that the intelligentia and the Brahmin caste are exchangeable terms. The disposition of the intelligentsia is a Brahmin disposition. Its outlook is a Brahmin outlook. Though he has learned to

speak in the name of all, the Brahmin leader is in no sense a leader of the people. He is a leader of his caste at best, for he feels them as he does for no other people. It is not intended to say that there are no Brahmins who feel for the untouchables.

To be just, there are a few more moderate and rational Brahmins who admit the frightful nature of the institution of untouchability in the abstract and perceive the dangers to society with which it is fraught.

The growth of education if it is confined to one class, will not necessarily lead to liberalism. It may lead to the justification and conservation of class interest; and instead of creating the liberators of the down-trodden, it may status quo create champions of the past and the supporters of the

March 1918 in Bombay. Doctor Kurtakoti, the Shankaracharya of Karvir fame, though promised to attend, left for Northern India just a day or two before the conference met, on some urgent business. Mr. Tilak is credited with a short speech at the conference which has for the good luck of Mr. Tilak remained unreported. But this was only lip sympathy shown to hoodwink the untouchables for when the draft of the proclamation removing untouchabilily was presented to Mr. Tilak, it is known on creditable evidence that he refused to honour it with his signature.

A community may claim representation only on the ground of separate interests which require protection. In India, such interests are of three kinds only : either they arise out of religious antipathies which are pretty strong in India, or out of the backward state of a community in educational matters, or out of the socioreligious disabilities to which a community may be subject. Confining ourselves to the Hindu communities there are certain communities who, besides being very backward, are suffering under a great social tyranny.

The untouchable classes must have their own men in the Council Hall to fight for the redress of their grievances. The non-Brahmins as a class are subjected to the social and intellectual domination of the Brahmin priesthood and may therefore rightly advocate separate representation.”