What do you think?
Rate this book
India and Communism
Those who think that Babasaheb Ambedkar was against Communism or Marxism are grossly prejudiced. Ambedkar’s relationship with Marxism was enigmatic. He defined himself as a socialist, not a Marxist. But he was impressed by the élan of the Marxist tradition.
However, it is also true that he had serious reservations about accepting certain theoretical postulations of Marxism. Vested interests amongst the Dalits, however, pitch Ambedkar firmly as the enemy of Marxism. The fundamental category of class, through which Ambedkar viewed human society, has therefore been a complete taboo. Communists, on their part, have responded in kind, attacking him and his ideas.
In the early 1950s, Ambedkar started work on a book he wanted to call India and Communism. The book was never finished. The present volume assembles what survives of this book, along with a section of another unfinished book, Can I be a Hindu?
Anand Teltumbde, in his hard-hitting Introduction, charts the course of Ambedkar’s thinking on communism and Marxism, the historical reasons for the rift between him and the communists, and the basis on which a larger unity of Ambedkarites and communists can be forged. This unity, he argues, is an essential prerequisite for the emancipation of India’s poor and oppressed.
This book is an eye-opener and essential reading for people on both sides of the divide.
Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (14 April 1891 – 6 December 1956), popularly known as Baba Saheb, was an Indian jurist, economist, politician and social reformer who inspired the Dalit Buddhist Movement and campaigned against social discrimination against Untouchables (Dalits), while also supporting the rights of women and labour.[3][4] He was Independent India's first law minister, the principal architect of the Constitution of India and a founding father of the Republic of India.
Anand Teltumbde is a civil rights activist, political analyst, columnist and author of many books. He has had a long association with peoples’ struggles, spanning over three decades. Trained in technology and management he marshals his insights of the modern techno-managerial world to sharpen strategies of struggles. His recent books are The Making of the First Dalit Revolt (Aakar, 2016), Past, Present and Future (Routledge, 2016), Persistence of Castes (Zed Books, 2006), Anti-Imperialism and Annihilation of Castes (Ramai, 2004). He writes a column ‘Margin Speak’ in Economic & Political Weekly.
However, it is also true that he had serious reservations about accepting certain theoretical postulations of Marxism. Vested interests amongst the Dalits, however, pitch Ambedkar firmly as the enemy of Marxism. The fundamental category of class, through which Ambedkar viewed human society, has therefore been a complete taboo. Communists, on their part, have responded in kind, attacking him and his ideas.
In the early 1950s, Ambedkar started work on a book he wanted to call India and Communism. The book was never finished. The present volume assembles what survives of this book, along with a section of another unfinished book, Can I be a Hindu?
Anand Teltumbde, in his hard-hitting Introduction, charts the course of Ambedkar’s thinking on communism and Marxism, the historical reasons for the rift between him and the communists, and the basis on which a larger unity of Ambedkarites and communists can be forged. This unity, he argues, is an essential prerequisite for the emancipation of India’s poor and oppressed.
This book is an eye-opener and essential reading for people on both sides of the divide.
Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (14 April 1891 – 6 December 1956), popularly known as Baba Saheb, was an Indian jurist, economist, politician and social reformer who inspired the Dalit Buddhist Movement and campaigned against social discrimination against Untouchables (Dalits), while also supporting the rights of women and labour.[3][4] He was Independent India's first law minister, the principal architect of the Constitution of India and a founding father of the Republic of India.
Anand Teltumbde is a civil rights activist, political analyst, columnist and author of many books. He has had a long association with peoples’ struggles, spanning over three decades. Trained in technology and management he marshals his insights of the modern techno-managerial world to sharpen strategies of struggles. His recent books are The Making of the First Dalit Revolt (Aakar, 2016), Past, Present and Future (Routledge, 2016), Persistence of Castes (Zed Books, 2006), Anti-Imperialism and Annihilation of Castes (Ramai, 2004). He writes a column ‘Margin Speak’ in Economic & Political Weekly.
84 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 4, 2017
24 people are currently reading
430 people want to read
About the author
B.R. Ambedkar
297 books1,107 followersBhimrao Ramji Ambedkar was born in 1891 into an “Untouchable” family of modest means. One of India’s most radical thinkers, he transformed the social and political landscape in the struggle against British colonialism. He was a prolific writer who oversaw the drafting of the Indian Constitution and served as India’s first Law Minister. In 1935, he publicly declared that though he was born a Hindu, he would not die as one. Ambedkar eventually embraced Buddhism, a few months before his death in 1956.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
February 10, 2021
For anyone who had read Dr. Ambedkar’s ‘State and Minorities’ which he wrote in 1946, it was evident that his economic philosophy was no different from Jawaharlal Nehru's economic ideology. Both had their serious reservations on the theoretical postulations of Marxian philosophy, but they defined themselves as ‘social democrats’. Both admired the Marxist tradition, but they detested the violence and the erosion of democracy which came along with it. Ambedkar’s thoughts on Communism were also well reflected in his speech ‘Buddha and Karl Marx’, in which he noted:
“The communists say that there are the only two means of establishing communism. The first is violence. Nothing short of it will suffice to break up the existing system. The other is dictator of the proletariat.”
Politically, both Ambedkar and Nehru detested the Indian communists. At one instance, Nehru called them as "Anti-India, anti-people, anti-progress who are dazzled by Russia and China, but ignorant of India. He further added, “They are without moorings in the land of their birth. They are pledged to a policy of creating mental and physical conflicts. They indulge in a cult of disruption.” Nehru’s antagonism towards the Indian communists was purely political while Ambedkar’s antipathy is more of ideological. However, in this book, in a near to hundred page introduction, Anand Teltumbde propounded various cases and instances when Dr. Ambedkar extended his hands of friendship to the communists without receiving any positive response from the later. Even then, Dr. Ambedkar’s love for the idea of communism once again caught the public eye after his BBC interview in 1953, when he asserted that democracy wouldn’t work in India and if it doesn’t, the alternate should be of communism. In this book, Anand Teltumbde argues that Ambedkar wasn’t irresolute of his ideological standing when it came to communism and democracy, rather he had a minor difference of opinion with the communists and that was with the concept of class and caste.
Ambedkar in very early days of his career, when he presented his paper titled ‘Castes in India: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development’, he explained that,
“To say that individuals make up society is trivial; society is always composed of classes. It may be an exaggeration to assert the theory of class-conflict, but the existence of definite classes in a society is a fact. Their basis may differ. They may be economic or intellectual or social, but an individual in a society is always a member of a class. This is a universal fact and early Hindu society could not have been an exception to this rule, and, as a matter of fact, we know it was not. If we bear this generalization in mind, our study of the genesis of caste would be very much facilitated, for we have only to determine what was the class that first made itself into a caste, for class and caste, so to say, are next door neighbours, and it is only a span that separates the two. A Caste is an Enclosed Class.”
Thus, while the Marxists identified the conception of class only with its ‘economic’ basis, Ambedkar found the exclusion of social and religious oppression to be farcical and postulated that the struggle against class should incorporate annihilation of caste in first place.
My friend once jokingly said, “Applying communism as it is, in India, is like trying to install .exe file in Linux OS.” Lenin, who is considered as the pope of Marxism, who also translated Marxism into practical revolution defined class in a most perfect way than any other revolutionist and it seems that if the early Indian Marxists have read that particular definition for class by Lenin, they would have translated the class struggle into anti-caste struggle, since Lenin’s definition of class would also embed caste as a position or rank in society under the Marxian class theory. Yet, they failed to do so. This book also portrays the many fallacies which plagued the Indian communists in early 60s and 70s who preferred communalism over communism as a political tool. SA Dange and his comrades finding communism in religious texts only revealed the caste consciousness which prevailed among them and though these things happened after the death of Ambedkar, Ambedkar’s annoyance with his contemporary communists was due to the fact that even the stalwarts and founders of Communist movement in India could not leave their mental world of caste and that caste was the sole determinant of authority and power even within the party structure.
In this book, Anand Teltumbde narrates many such instances in which communists came into direct conflict with Ambedkar while Ambedkar maintained his benevolence by participating in strikes and voicing his support for workers unions all through his public life. He had even personally written to his close colleague and follower Bhaurao Gaikwad that ‘I am inclined to think that our people may join the communists if they think that can give them immediate relief’. However, this doesn’t mean that he was positively disposed towards communism. He knew communism was certainly an emancipatory philosophy for poor, but did not have much to offer in direct terms to the oppressed castes of India who were not as much the victim of economic exploitation as they were victims of the oppressive social structure. He ardently believed that unless caste consciousness is wiped out, class consciousness would not germinate. This was further proved from his ‘Annihilation of Caste’ which he wrote in 1936. He observed that:
‘If the socialists wish to make socialism a definite reality, then they must recognise that the problem of social reform is fundamental and that for them there is no escape from it.’
Unfortunately, only two chapters from the manuscript are found and Ambedkar had constructed his viewpoints solely from the social order prevailing in India in form of caste in those two chapters. Though Ambedkar’s ‘State and Minorities’ and ‘Buddha and Karl Marx’ gives us a rudimentary understanding of his views on communism, I really wish that the remaining chapters of this book were complete and just misplaced somewhere in Rajgruha.
“The communists say that there are the only two means of establishing communism. The first is violence. Nothing short of it will suffice to break up the existing system. The other is dictator of the proletariat.”
Politically, both Ambedkar and Nehru detested the Indian communists. At one instance, Nehru called them as "Anti-India, anti-people, anti-progress who are dazzled by Russia and China, but ignorant of India. He further added, “They are without moorings in the land of their birth. They are pledged to a policy of creating mental and physical conflicts. They indulge in a cult of disruption.” Nehru’s antagonism towards the Indian communists was purely political while Ambedkar’s antipathy is more of ideological. However, in this book, in a near to hundred page introduction, Anand Teltumbde propounded various cases and instances when Dr. Ambedkar extended his hands of friendship to the communists without receiving any positive response from the later. Even then, Dr. Ambedkar’s love for the idea of communism once again caught the public eye after his BBC interview in 1953, when he asserted that democracy wouldn’t work in India and if it doesn’t, the alternate should be of communism. In this book, Anand Teltumbde argues that Ambedkar wasn’t irresolute of his ideological standing when it came to communism and democracy, rather he had a minor difference of opinion with the communists and that was with the concept of class and caste.
Ambedkar in very early days of his career, when he presented his paper titled ‘Castes in India: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development’, he explained that,
“To say that individuals make up society is trivial; society is always composed of classes. It may be an exaggeration to assert the theory of class-conflict, but the existence of definite classes in a society is a fact. Their basis may differ. They may be economic or intellectual or social, but an individual in a society is always a member of a class. This is a universal fact and early Hindu society could not have been an exception to this rule, and, as a matter of fact, we know it was not. If we bear this generalization in mind, our study of the genesis of caste would be very much facilitated, for we have only to determine what was the class that first made itself into a caste, for class and caste, so to say, are next door neighbours, and it is only a span that separates the two. A Caste is an Enclosed Class.”
Thus, while the Marxists identified the conception of class only with its ‘economic’ basis, Ambedkar found the exclusion of social and religious oppression to be farcical and postulated that the struggle against class should incorporate annihilation of caste in first place.
My friend once jokingly said, “Applying communism as it is, in India, is like trying to install .exe file in Linux OS.” Lenin, who is considered as the pope of Marxism, who also translated Marxism into practical revolution defined class in a most perfect way than any other revolutionist and it seems that if the early Indian Marxists have read that particular definition for class by Lenin, they would have translated the class struggle into anti-caste struggle, since Lenin’s definition of class would also embed caste as a position or rank in society under the Marxian class theory. Yet, they failed to do so. This book also portrays the many fallacies which plagued the Indian communists in early 60s and 70s who preferred communalism over communism as a political tool. SA Dange and his comrades finding communism in religious texts only revealed the caste consciousness which prevailed among them and though these things happened after the death of Ambedkar, Ambedkar’s annoyance with his contemporary communists was due to the fact that even the stalwarts and founders of Communist movement in India could not leave their mental world of caste and that caste was the sole determinant of authority and power even within the party structure.
In this book, Anand Teltumbde narrates many such instances in which communists came into direct conflict with Ambedkar while Ambedkar maintained his benevolence by participating in strikes and voicing his support for workers unions all through his public life. He had even personally written to his close colleague and follower Bhaurao Gaikwad that ‘I am inclined to think that our people may join the communists if they think that can give them immediate relief’. However, this doesn’t mean that he was positively disposed towards communism. He knew communism was certainly an emancipatory philosophy for poor, but did not have much to offer in direct terms to the oppressed castes of India who were not as much the victim of economic exploitation as they were victims of the oppressive social structure. He ardently believed that unless caste consciousness is wiped out, class consciousness would not germinate. This was further proved from his ‘Annihilation of Caste’ which he wrote in 1936. He observed that:
‘If the socialists wish to make socialism a definite reality, then they must recognise that the problem of social reform is fundamental and that for them there is no escape from it.’
Unfortunately, only two chapters from the manuscript are found and Ambedkar had constructed his viewpoints solely from the social order prevailing in India in form of caste in those two chapters. Though Ambedkar’s ‘State and Minorities’ and ‘Buddha and Karl Marx’ gives us a rudimentary understanding of his views on communism, I really wish that the remaining chapters of this book were complete and just misplaced somewhere in Rajgruha.
April 12, 2022
Much more interesting to think about the premise it sets rather than actually reading it (which in the book's defense was actually an incomplete manuscript). Contrasting the hindu social order and the social order required for revolution for a communist society is an original theoretical contribution that Ambedkar must be greatly credited for. Who else than Teltumbde to write the introduction for this book... hope we do in our lifetime come to witness leadership that can bridge this unholy rift
Read
October 27, 2024"The Hindus are the only people in the world whose social order – the relation of man to man is consecrated by religion and made sacred, eternal and inviolate. The Hindus are the only people in the world whose economic order – the relation of workman to workman, is consecrated by religion and
made sacred, eternal and inviolate. It is not therefore enough to say that the Hindus are a people with a sacred code of religion. So are the Zoroastrians, Israelites, Christians and Muslims. All these have sacred codes. They consecrate beliefs and rites and make them sacred. But they do not prescribe, nor do they consecrate a particular form of social structure – the relationship between man and man in
a concrete form – and make it sacred, inviolate.
The Hindus are singular in this respect. This is what has given the Hindu social order its abiding strength to defy the ravages of time and the onslaught of time."
Sadly, Ambedkar never finished this book. He planned it along these lines:
Part – I. The Pre-requisites of Communism
Chapter 1 – The Birthplace of Communism
Chapter 2 – Communism & Democracy
Chapter 3 – Communism & Social Order
Part – II. India and the Pre-requisites of Communism
Chapter 4 – The Hindu Social Order
Chapter 5 – The Basis of the Hindu Social Order
Chapter 6 – Impediments to Communism arising from the Social Order
Part – III. What Then Shall We Do?
Chapter 1 – Marx and the European Social Order
Chapter 2 – Manu and the Hindu Social Order
But, he only finished chapters 4&5 (included in this book). They're quite good, and supplemented with a strong introduction by Anand Teltumbde on Ambedkar's complex relationship with Indian communists.
A quick read which in its incomplete condition, while interesting, can't help but press home how much of a loss it is that he never finished this book.
made sacred, eternal and inviolate. It is not therefore enough to say that the Hindus are a people with a sacred code of religion. So are the Zoroastrians, Israelites, Christians and Muslims. All these have sacred codes. They consecrate beliefs and rites and make them sacred. But they do not prescribe, nor do they consecrate a particular form of social structure – the relationship between man and man in
a concrete form – and make it sacred, inviolate.
The Hindus are singular in this respect. This is what has given the Hindu social order its abiding strength to defy the ravages of time and the onslaught of time."
Sadly, Ambedkar never finished this book. He planned it along these lines:
Part – I. The Pre-requisites of Communism
Chapter 1 – The Birthplace of Communism
Chapter 2 – Communism & Democracy
Chapter 3 – Communism & Social Order
Part – II. India and the Pre-requisites of Communism
Chapter 4 – The Hindu Social Order
Chapter 5 – The Basis of the Hindu Social Order
Chapter 6 – Impediments to Communism arising from the Social Order
Part – III. What Then Shall We Do?
Chapter 1 – Marx and the European Social Order
Chapter 2 – Manu and the Hindu Social Order
But, he only finished chapters 4&5 (included in this book). They're quite good, and supplemented with a strong introduction by Anand Teltumbde on Ambedkar's complex relationship with Indian communists.
A quick read which in its incomplete condition, while interesting, can't help but press home how much of a loss it is that he never finished this book.
December 31, 2020
A fine essay that traces the history of communism in India by teltumbde is followed Ambedkars unfinished manuscript on Indian society, history, the genealogy of caste society.
Read
August 9, 2021The title is misleading as there is no mention of communism by Dr. Ambedkar. However the introductory essay 'Bridging the Unholy Rift' by Anand Teltumbde lays down the historical reasons for the bitterness towards communists that is common among Ambedkarite circles. The UC communist leadership failed to take into the question of caste and like rote learners tried to reduce the writings of Marx to a fixed doctrine.
The main part of the book is an unfinished manuscript by Ambedkar, out of which only the chapters that describe the Hindu social order had been outlined. Growing up in a caste society turns us into fishes in a well, and noone is able to zoom out better and make the readers understand how detrimental this social system (caste system) is to any semblance of liberty, equality and fraternity in the Indian society.
The main part of the book is an unfinished manuscript by Ambedkar, out of which only the chapters that describe the Hindu social order had been outlined. Growing up in a caste society turns us into fishes in a well, and noone is able to zoom out better and make the readers understand how detrimental this social system (caste system) is to any semblance of liberty, equality and fraternity in the Indian society.
November 7, 2024
The book written after independence, examines the intersection of Communism and the caste system in India. Babasaheb critiques Communist movements and ideology in the Indian context. He argues that Communism while aiming to address economic inequalities, fails to tackle India’s unique social hierarchy based on caste, particularly the plight of the Dalits (formerly Untouchables).
He explains that, unlike class divisions in Western societies, caste in India is a deeply ingrained social institution that restricts social mobility and perpetuates oppression. He asserts that any socio-political movement focused solely on economic reforms without addressing caste discrimination will be ineffective in bringing real change for the marginalized.
With great introduction by Prof. Anand, where he contextualizes, Ambedkar's views and foresight.
He explains that, unlike class divisions in Western societies, caste in India is a deeply ingrained social institution that restricts social mobility and perpetuates oppression. He asserts that any socio-political movement focused solely on economic reforms without addressing caste discrimination will be ineffective in bringing real change for the marginalized.
With great introduction by Prof. Anand, where he contextualizes, Ambedkar's views and foresight.
July 28, 2020
Reading the book and finding it quite interesting. It describes how Ambedkar admired the concept of socialism and communism at a whole, admired the socialistic policies of Soviet Russia and researched and condemned the lack of democracy in Hindutva. The only thing that kept Ambedkar aside from Communism is because he thought that Communism could not include the problems of the caste struggle into class struggle.
But astonishingly he also mentioned the caste struggle itself being a class struggle and mentioned the communists fighting for the class struggle.
In a line - The book explains that he himself though quite an admirer of the policies could not accept the fact that the communists did class discrimination as their primary target instead of caste.
But astonishingly he also mentioned the caste struggle itself being a class struggle and mentioned the communists fighting for the class struggle.
In a line - The book explains that he himself though quite an admirer of the policies could not accept the fact that the communists did class discrimination as their primary target instead of caste.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 29, 2020
This books while a collection of unfinished writings of Ambedkar , highlights the thesis he held with that the idea of communism can never take hold in india until the extreme crudeness and brutality off the caste system is reckoned with. He disagreed with Indian communists who didn't sufficiently adjust their Marxist analysis of class and exploitation to the realities of the Indian context, while believing that the caste considerations will wither away once the economic realities of class operation is taken care of. Ambedkar while fully appreciating the Marxist analysis of society and the economy, through his own lived experience, and his study of Indian society disagreed with the tack of the communists.
August 30, 2023
Excellent read depicting a chronological account of Ambedkar's opinions on Marxism within India. It's humbling to read about the torment and rejection he, and his caste, faced from the Communist Party of India, thereby fuelling his rejection of Marxism overall. It's clear that Ambedkar's vision for the country almost mirrored what other leftists envision today, this book is really great at highlighting the importance of inclusivity and rejection of caste as an important stepping stone to making that vision a reality.
April 21, 2019
In the foreword of the book, Anand Teltumde discusses Ambedkar's admiration towards soviet socialism and his concern for the emancipation of the toiling people. But Ambedkar himself does not speak much about communism in this book as the title of the book suggests. He mainly discusses the lack of democratic culture in Hinduism.
March 7, 2021
Contains the only two finished chapters (plus a section from another book of his which has a similar logical flow) of an incomplete work of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar called "India and Communism", and an introduction by Anand Teltumbde where he debunks claims that Dr. Ambedkar was opposed to Marxist principles.
The joyous intellectual stimulation of reading Babasaheb is unparalleled!
The joyous intellectual stimulation of reading Babasaheb is unparalleled!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 30, 2023
One of the last books Ambedkar wrote (he wasn't able to finish it before his death). I don't think anyone can be South Asian and be politically serious if they are not informed by caste struggle in India. Elucidates the many mistakes made by the CPI and early communists in India in alienating Dalits from their movement. Teltumbde's introduction is a 5/5.
Read
September 4, 2020"Caste is an enclosed class" B. R. Ambedkar
May 24, 2021
Rating is for the Introduction.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 17, 2026
The introduction is particularly interesting, a much more important text than ‘The Doctor and The Saint.’ Depressing.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews