It is not that Mayawati is the sole representative of Dalit politics. The reason for her recognition owes to the fact that she was groomed by the veteran leader Kanshi Ram. She was perceived as the new face, as well as voice of dalit politics. Unfortunately, she has miserably failed to imbibe Kanshi Ram’s progressive vision. Instead of providing a new dynamics as well as dimension to Dalit politics, she preferred to be crowned as the caste queen.

Though dalit population is quite substantial in almost all the states, they are decisive issues in Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra. In recent times, not less than two dozen Dalit groups and smaller parties are active in these two states. The recently concluded huge public rally of the Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi (VBA) in Mumbai’s Shivaji Park sent out a strong message that Dalits of the country aspire to have a strong party, which could articulate their aspirations and views.

In the last few years, Prakash Ambedkar, a former member of the Lok Sabha, has emerged as an important face of the Dalit-Bahujan assertion in the state, revitalising the movement with new slogans and fresh ideological impetus. The same is being witnessed in Uttar Pradesh, where Chandrashekhar Azad chief of the Bhim Army has emerged as a new face of the Dalits.

However, there’s still a lack of a clearly articulated dalit political narrative. The leaders are sincere, but have no proper political perspective and imagination on questions like: What should be the nature and character of the Dalit struggle? Whether Dalits should fight be for some fringe economic benefits, material gains or for grabbing their basic rights, or fight for establishing their identity?

Contemporary Dalit politics is caught in a blind alley. The crusaders and activists of Dalit politics are at crossroads. They are not sure of the political and ideological line they should pursue and what issues need to be sorted out for bringing the Dalits on a common platform. Instead of projecting the aspirations and needs of the Dalits, the leaders are engaged in a fight for one-upmanship.

All the groups have been swearing by the name of Babasaheb Ambedkar, but the reality is they do not practice his ideals and are completely detached from his ideological and political lines. These leaders are more egoists. An insight into the functioning of these organisations would find similarity with the followers of Marxism. Like the Marxists, the Ambedkarites have been badly split on the use of and experimenting with Ambedkarism.

Polemically, the rightist forces have been exploiting the prevailing ideological confusion amongst Dalit leaders and taking advantage of the situation. This is quite visible in the manner Dalits have been voting for BJP in elections. They voted for RSS-led Hindutva forces in 2019 and again in recent assembly elections in MP, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh. It may well be argued that they rally behind for empowerment. But it is not the whole truth.

An insight into the voting priorities would show that craving for political power and immediate financial gains motivated them to support BJP. Often, ambition for personal and material gain splits the Dalit community, just like the OBCs. In the process, they literally do not bother to read or practice Ambedkarite politics.

Recently, Udit Raj, a Dalit activist, had claimed: “If Dalits have achieved anything, if you see any diversity today, it is because of the constitution, Parliament and bureaucracy. You cannot discredit the constitution." But the Dalits have been rallying behind saffron ecosystem and RSS, despite being aware that the Sangh remains vehemently anti-Constitution and wants to replace it by scriptures like Manusmriti, which is anti-Dalit, and the Shudras, in its core.

Section of Dalits rallying behind rightist forces led by the RSS, which does not treat them as an independent identity, weighs down on others embracing secular, progressive politics. Some of these opportunist leaders especially in Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh, are espousing the political lines of their rightist friends and going the whole hog to describe themselves as Hindus by aligning themselves with the Hindutva politics of the RSS-BJP ecosystem.

No one can stop the economic empowerment of the Dalits, and they are bound to get the rightful share of the socioeconomic pie. Over the years, a large number of economically strong Dalits have emerged. They have formed their own independent business and industry associations.

Obviously, it implies that a new category of a creamy layer of Dalits has emerged within the Dalit society itself. Creamy layer is a term used in Indian politics to refer to some members of a backward class, who are highly advanced socially as well as economically and educationally. They constitute the forward section among the Dalits.

Sometime back, a Dalit activist had moved a PIL in Supreme Court seeking to exclude “creamy layer” Dalits from reservations. The PIL filed by a Dalit from the Balmiki community, claimed that barely five to 10 communities from the scheduled castes and tribes (SC/ST) have cornered all the benefits from reservations – when there are 1,677 Dalit communities needing those benefits. The PIL urges to exclude the Chamar, Mala, Mahar, Meena, Dusad, Pasi and Dhobi communities from the list of SCs, because they have already benefited from it. A select 5-10 castes among the target group have become financially so strong (as) to be compared with the higher castes of society. But SC did not hear his plea.

In Bihar, Chief Minister Nitish Kumar created “extremely backward SC commission”, which recommended the exclusion of four castes from reservations (Dhobi, Chamar, Dusad and Passi). The rightist forces have been using the reservation to weaken the dalit community. They have projected it as the only criterion for being dalit. Unfortunately, the overall empowerment of Dalits has been pushed to the backburner, with the creamy layer cornering the reservation pie, while remaining inaccessible to the vast sections of the Dalit population.

Ambedkar had cautioned of not getting “content with mere political democracy.” He strongly advocated for social democracy. He had said that political democracy cannot last unless there lies at the base of it social democracy. Social democracy is a way of life which recognises liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life. Some fringe economic benefits, creation of a group of creamy layer, or conceptualisation of a group of political leaders having huge and disproportionate money, are not going to be the ideal way ahead for dalit self-empowerment.

Any dalit politics must have the basic elements of right to liberty, equality and fraternity. Mayawati or other such leaders may lead the Dalits to vote for rightist parties, despite it being ultimately detrimental to the self-emancipation of the Dalits themselves.

While around 10 per cent of the Dalits have attained the status of developed Dalits, the rest of the 90 per cent have to bear the feudal torture of upper castes. Even during the rule of the so-called Dalit-friendly BJP government in UP, the Dalits remain among the worst sufferers. Dalits are angry with Mayawati primarily for the reason that she does not speak out against the feudal and upper caste torture and oppression on them. Dalit honour is of prime importance for them and it must be preserved and bestowed.

In this backdrop, the issues raised by the Rahul Gandhi are of vast importance. Even no dalit leader in recent times have made these issues as a subject of public discourse, at least within the community itself. (IPA Service)