Abdul Najeeb N

University of Delhi, Department of History, Graduate Student

Followers

Following

117

Public Views

Teacher, Indian School Al Ghubra
MA, MPhil University of Delhi
Supervisors: Prof. Rahul Govind
Address: Muscat, Sultanate of Oman

less

Related Authors

Tuğba Bayar

Bilkent University

Annapurna Waughray

Manchester Metropolitan University

Kuvempu University

IIT Bombay

Panjab University, Chandigarh (India)

Ravi kumar

Yashpal Jogdand

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi

Sammyh Khan

Örebro University

Suraj Yengde

Harvard University

InterestsView All (32)

Uploads

all
5 Drafts
1 Papers

Drafts by Abdul Najeeb N

AMBEDKAR AND A QUALITATIVE THEORY OF MINORITY

The article/concept note tries to investigate the possibility of a qualitative theory of minorit... more The article/concept note tries to investigate the possibility of a qualitative theory of minority in nation and democracy inspired from Ambedkar's analyses.

DownloadEdit

Community Politics and Minority Politics, a Case for Distinction

DownloadEdit

Ambedkar and the Transfer of Power in Forties

DownloadEdit

Ambedkar and the Thirties Draft of the second chapter of my MPhil Thesis.pdf

In the last chapter we discussed in detail Ambedkar's arguments in favour of political concession... more In the last chapter we discussed in detail Ambedkar's arguments in favour of political concessions for untouchables. Throughout the twenties Ambedkar engaged and re-engaged the question of political concessions, especially in the form of franchise or voting rights for untouchables. The beginning of his political career in 1919 witnessed his advocacy of communal electorates for untouchables which he compared with self-determination of nations. By the tail end of twenties Ambedkar argued for adult franchise for general electorate and reserved seats for untouchables, within a general electorate. He took an about-turn on communal electorates too. He didn't argue for them; in fact he argued against the idea and institution of communal electorate itself. Communal electorates worked against the common spirit of nationality and perpetuated separatist tendencies. In particular, Muslim League's arguments for communal electorates, such as having separate interests and culture to take care of and being the erstwhile ruling classes of India were flimsy and can't be taken as the basis of granting political concessions. The real reason why British Government was willing to grant political concessions to Muslims was different. As Commission reports suggest, Muslims formed an important and loyal political community in India. It was the political importance or 'usefulness' of Muslims that prompted British to appease them. On these bases and more Ambedkar dismissed the claims by any community for extra-ordinary concessions. Despite his attack on communal electorates and Muslim demand for the same the case he was defending, that of untouchables, was itself nuanced. Moreover Ambedkar was forced to argue for communal electorates for untouchables later. How do we explain this shift from one pole to another? Even if we explain them on the basis of changing political context, how do we perceive and justify his earlier arguments, especially in view of the strength with which he advocated them? These are couple of questions we must engage in this chapter. On a more specific note, we will trace his politics and arguments from Simon Commission onwards till his appointment as the Secretary of Labour in Viceroy's executive council. Keeping true to the aim of the thesis we will engage with the question of franchise as tackled by Ambedkar and introduce other activities of his such as religious conversion issue only so far as it contributes to our larger aim. We will soon see that the question of franchise influenced his consideration even on religion more than hitherto accepted.

DownloadEdit

Ambedkar and the Twenties Draft of the First Chapter of my MPhil Thesis.pdf

DownloadEdit

Papers by Abdul Najeeb N

Theory, Experience and Politics: An Analysis of B. R. Ambedkar's Ideas on Caste, Untouchability and Democracy

All About Ambedkar: A Journal on Theory and Praxis, 2022

This paper is an attempt to integrate Bhimrao Ambedkar's ideas on caste system, untouchability, c... more This paper is an attempt to integrate Bhimrao Ambedkar's ideas on caste system, untouchability, caste violence and democracy. It is divided into three sections. The first section includes the critique of B. R. Ambedkar's theory of caste system, the Graded Hierarchy. Through a close reading of Ambedkar's early and later texts the paper identifies two critical components that underpin the generation and operation of castes as a system: generative and ranking functions. It explores how ranking is an essential step in the systematization of castes into a hierarchy. It also explains how and why inter-caste and anti-Dalit violence are an integral part of the stabilization of the caste system as a graded hierarchy. The second section narrates Ambedkar's analysis of the state of Dalits under the caste code in Indian villages which he called the lawlessness of lawfulness. It presents his personal documentation of the discrimination, humiliation and violence Dalits experienced at the hands of caste-Hindus and explains how the punitive complex was tactical in the maintenance of the dominance of latter in the village economy where the former were treated as the hereditary bondsmen of their caste-superiors. The final section explores why Ambedkar pursued political power as a means to solve the problems of caste and untouchability and its larger meaning and consequences to his ideas on democracy as associated mode of living.

Published in All About Ambedkar: A Journal on Theory and Praxis,
Volume 3, Number 2, 31 December 2022, pp. 172-182
ISSN 2582-9785

DownloadEdit

Abdul Najeeb N

Uploads

Drafts by Abdul Najeeb N

Papers by Abdul Najeeb N

Log In