Annihilation of Caste

In the second phase of his criticism Ambedkar zeroes in on three specific areas: the inner drive for each caste to keep the others in their place to protect their own interests; the fact that Hinduism is not a missionary religion; and the role that Hinduism and the caste system plays in destroying public spirit. As to the first, caste intrinsically pushes one toward a zero-sum view of human society and interaction. In other words, the caste system operates on the assumption that there is only a finite amount of resources, jobs, honor, respect, etc. From this point of view, then, the more a rival or competing caste is honored means there is less for one’s own caste. The speech highlights Hinduism as Explicitly Divisive and Rigid here as Ambedkar argues that inherent in Hinduism is the idea that benefit for one group is detrimental to another. The system only wants to enforce divisions. Rather than viewing the world from a perspective where “a rising tide elevates all ships,” as the saying goes, caste rewards a competitive worldview. Ambedkar criticizes caste for taking this view of human relationships and community and points out the inherent flaw: Community requires the mutual aid and care that neighbors and citizens ought to show one another, but caste destroys this very human feeling toward one’s fellow person.

The second major point of criticism Ambedkar levies is that Hinduism is incapable of winning new converts and is in fact the very opposite of a missionary religion. This is curious for a number of reasons, but Hinduism must have been a missionary religion at some point in the past if it is now so widespread. Hinduism absolutely fails in comparison to Christianity and Islam in this regard, he says, as the other religions do not require that its members belong to some specific subgroup within the larger religion. Christianity, for instance, is a religion that specifically demands humility for its members, and it also has a history of being missionary from its very inception. It is not difficult to find one’s place in any of the other major religions, but to find a spot within a caste when one has absolutely no history with the culture or religion would be well nigh impossible. The speech underlines Identity Hierarchies as Oppositional to Cohesion as it explains how inherent in Hinduism is the idea that some specific people are better than and different from others. It is not only a division of labor but is a specific identity hierarchy. There can be no cohesive culture, he argues, if the identity of the culture is based on everyone’s unique identity being different.

Caste even works against converts to the religion since each caste would feel a tension between wanting to win a convert to their own group, wanting to push a convert to a lesser caste if they seem to be less fitting, and wanting to prevent them from joining a higher caste. There is a curious dynamic at work in any conversion since the convert could theoretically pick their own caste, something that a lifelong Hindu could not do. Finally, too, the caste system completely destroys the national party spirit. A society is a thing that is meant to be something shared, but caste prevents this over-arching unity from being achieved since each group is in tension with all others. This is not a thing that is present among other religions and cultures since they seek unity among all of their members. Ambedkar’s insight here shows how caste is going to remain ingrained in the culture, however, since a reform movement would require a unified goal and a unified power to shift the culture in a particular direction. This is impossible for Hindus since the varying desires and actions of the various castes simply cancel each other out, resulting in apathy and resolution to the status quo. Ambedkar suggests the theme of Changing Culture to Unify India and Improve It as he wants to completely reform Hindu culture for the benefit of the nation. He argues that it is the culture itself that needs to be targeted first if other things are going to change. Hindu culture itself is oppositional to unity, in his mind.

Ambedkar brings out the vice of indifferentism in this regard, seeing that there is something more desirable even in cruelty or wrath than in this kind of indifference. At least in the more concupiscible vices there is something that can motivate a person, a community, and a nation to great heights. The indifference caused by caste is utterly undesirable because it means that absolutely nothing will be accomplished when so much is necessary to be done. He wants to completely overhaul the culture; the caste system is oppositional to a unified country because it is based on a kind of cultural selfishness, he argues.