Wednesday, February 1, 2023
HomeOpinionIn Mayawati-Akhilesh alliance, Ambedkar and Lohia can realise their unfinished agenda

In Mayawati-Akhilesh alliance, Ambedkar and Lohia can realise their unfinished agenda

Text Size:

As Mayawati and Akhilesh Yadav addressed media queries in Lucknow, the poster behind them spoke louder than their words.

Can Bahujan Samajwadi Party (BSP) supremo Mayawati and Samajwadi Party (SP) chief Akhilesh Yadav finally fulfil the unfinished agenda of B.R. Ambedkar and Ram Manohar Lohia: an anti-caste, socialist alliance that can offer a formidable political alternative?

The writing on the wall, quite literally, was hard to miss at the joint press conference of Mayawati and Akhilesh Yadav last week. They formally announced the BSP-SP alliance for the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.

As the two leaders addressed queries from the media in Lucknow, the poster behind them spoke louder than their words. It had a picture of Ambedkar, positioned next to the BSP symbol, and Lohia, placed alongside the SP symbol. Besides, the slogans of ‘Jai Bhim’ and ‘Jai Samajwad’ were printed on it. The two erstwhile rivals’ appropriation of Ambedkar and Lohia’s legacies was on full display.

Joint press conference by Akhilesh Yadav and Mayawati in Uttar Pradesh | @samajwadiparty/Twitter
Joint press conference by Akhilesh Yadav and Mayawati in Uttar Pradesh | @samajwadiparty/Twitter

Also read: If Ambedkar & Lohia met: How history missed a crucial moment in social justice politics


It is indeed strange that Ambedkar and Lohia, the two giants of Indian politics, had never met although they were acutely aware of each other’s work and had deep respect for each other’s ideologies. An alliance of ideas between the two leaders started taking shape through letters in late 1955, and they planned to meet. But, Ambedkar died before it could happen.

One can only guess the political implications of such a meet, but the two had much in common.

Rising from the margins

Both of them received academic training in the western university system. Lohia went to Germany’s Humboldt University to do his PhD in Economics, whereas Ambedkar did his PhD in Economics from Columbia University and also had a master’s degree from London School of Economics. Both were trained in the liberal democratic tradition and had great regard for the cherished goal of liberty and fraternity.

Both Lohia and Ambedkar were modernists and critics of traditional Indian social system of varna and caste. Unlike Gandhi, who believed in the utopian Ram Rajya and Gram Swarajya, these two modernist thinkers wanted India never to go back to some ancient golden era. Their goal was to herald a modern democracy in the country.


Also read: Numbers don’t lie: Why SP-BSP alliance can defeat BJP’s legendary poll arithmetic


In the political arena, both Lohia and Ambedkar had limited success. Lohia won the Lok Sabha election only once. Ambedkar never won parliamentary polls. Their political parties also had almost similar experiences. They never came to power in any of the states during their lifetime.

Both Lohia and Ambedkar were very influential. Their ideological and philosophical impact was disproportionate to their political might. Their influence grew only after their demise. Their collected works are testimony to the fact that both leaders were prolific writers and good speakers.

Lohia and Ambedkar were nation builders in the true sense and saw caste as an issue which must be tackled as problematic.

The annihilation of caste was on their agenda, and they argued against the caste system from the standpoint of economics and sociology.

Though Ambedkar deliberated on class and economic disparity, his primary focus was on the malaise that was the caste system. In his concluding speech in the Constituent Assembly, Ambedkar argues that without having equality in social and economic life, it will be very difficult to sustain Indian democracy. On this issue, Lohia and Ambedkar were on the same page besides espousing similar ideas on fighting patriarchy.

The stark difference between these two scholars stemmed from their differing ideas on the co-relation between caste and religion. It could have been the product of their different positions in the caste system.

Ambedkar had endured caste from the lowest rung, so he had bitter experiences about the whole structure. For him, the ‘source of caste’ were Hindu religious texts. This is the reason he burnt the Manusmriti in public.


Also readThe SP-BSP alliance in UP is rare, formidable and perfect


Lohia, on the other hand, wanted the caste system to go, but for him ,religion was not the origin of caste.

He never campaigned against Hindu religion whereas Ambedkar had said way back in 1936 in his famous treatise Annihilation of Caste that he would not die a Hindu.

In 1956, he finally abandoned the religion. On the contrary, Lohia was a social reformer who used to organise Ramayana Melas to enlighten ordinary masses.

(Those who want to know more about the intersections of Lohia and Ambedkar may read this paper by Pankaj Kumar.)

Both Lohia and Ambedkar came very close to working together in 1956, but Ambedkar’s death denied history that chance. Now, Mayawati’s BSP and Akhilesh Yadav’s SP, who were known to be archenemies till a year ago, have claimed allegiance to their ideologies to fight a common opposition—the Bharatiya Janata Party.

And, they can perhaps achieve what Lohia and Ambedkar dreamed of.

The author is a senior journalist.

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube & Telegram

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

4 COMMENTS

  1. 1. If political parties’ opportunistic alliances can bring about changes like annihilation of castes, there will be a revolution in our country. But it is just wishful thinking that politicians like Mayawati, head of BSP and Akhilesh Yadav, head of SP, can do even a little for annihilation of castes in Uttar Pradesh, forget rest of the country. 2. Alliance of BSP & SP is an opportunistic alliance and it will possibly break after announcement of the 2019 Lok Sabha (LS) election results. This is not my guess but a real possibility. 3. Just consider likely scenario after announcement of LS election results. Both BSP & SP win over 50 LS seats. Mayawati will push forward her claim to be the Prime Minister(PM) and Akhilesh Yadav will push forward claim of his father M S Yadav. There will be other aspirants too for PM post like Sharad Pawar, Mamata Bannerjee and a few others. Only one individual can become a PM. Infighting among all regional parties will compel both Mayawati & Akhilesh to back this or that group of regional parties and there will be chaos.

  2. Only problem here is why Mayawati and Akhilesh came together ? Really to fight a ideological battle ? Or is it just a opportunism ? Because they both came together to tackle political deal? Because in the past both the had been together. If this is an ideological partnership , then ur Okay. But as on today it don’t feel so . Cause There is vast difference in personality , time, thinking & as a political or social leader there status

  3. Author seems to be living in denial,even Mayawati and Akhilesh would privately agree that there are in politicd to realize the dreams of Ambedkar and Lohia.
    I wonder what makes Author believe that Mayawati and Akhilesg are torch bearers of Annihilation of casteism and socialism.Author seems to be living under the illusion….Did these followers of ambedkar and Lohia upheld the probity in public life at least once..who can forget that lavish birthday celebrations of maya and corruption and goondaraj are synonumus with these two parties rule in UP.

  4. Meaning no disrespect, but some things are for the history books. This is pure power play, strong arithmetic, fused by reasonable chemistry.

Comments are closed.