ramdev bharadwaj -ambdker-artical

7/28/2019 ramdev bharadwaj -ambdker-artical

1/36

Ambedkar and social justice: Structural & Functional Understanding

Dr. Ram Dev BharadwajDirector

Centre for Ambedkar Studies

ProfessorDepartment of Political Science

Rani Durgavati University

Jabalpur(MP)

Ambedkar can be termed as the omnipresent organic leader of modern

India. In the era of globalization with the information revolution and

presence of Dalit Diaspora, Ambedkar is revered all over the world and truly

he has become a Global icon. Today Ambedkar is accepted not only as a

Dalit leader or only a Constitution maker but also as a nation builder, a

human rights, champion, and Global Icon. The focus of this key not

address is a humble effort to understand and analyze how Ambedkar

conceptualized the principles of social justice. However, before we analyze

his ideas of social justice let us look at the concept of social justice as

propounded by the different social scientists. Based on the principles

enshrined in the scientific definition of Social justice we will evolve apurposive definition of social justice with principles as envisaged by

Ambedkar.

There are two fundamental types of human nature -creative and possessive.

Creative humans use human intellect for creative endeavors which enriches

human thought; Jotirao Phoolay, Periyar and Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar they

all belong to the great class of Creative knowledge and wealth thereby

contribute to the development of human heritage for the posterity.

Possessive people, on the other hand do not believe in the use of human

intellect for creative purpose. Gautam Christ, Guru Nanak Kabeer, Ravidas,Tukarama, Krantiba humans called as Humanists in Buddha, Jesus Indian

context Ambedkar was one of the most remarkable leaders who played a

major role in Indian politics, especially for the upliftment of the

downtrodden

Understanding Social Justice


2/36

justice is to be considered as giving to each what he or she is due." The

problem is knowing what is "due. Functionally, "justice" is a set of

universal principles which guide people in judging what is right and what is

wrong, no matter what culture and society they live in. Justice is one of the

four "cardinal virtues" of classical moral philosophy, along with courage,

temperance (self-control) and prudence (efficiency). (Faith, hope and charity

are considered to be the three "religious" virtues.) Virtues or "good habits"

help individuals to develop fully their human potentials, thus enabling them

to serve their own self-interests as well as work in harmony with others for

their common good. The ultimate purpose of all the virtues is to elevate the

dignity and sovereignty of the human person. Socialjustice encompasses

economic justice. Social justice is the virtue which guides us in creating

those organized human interactions we call institutions. In turn, social

institutions, when justly organized, provide us with access to what is good

for the person, both individually and in our associations with others. Socialjustice also imposes on each of us a personal responsibility to work with

others to design and continually perfect our institutions as tools for personal

and social development.

The concept of social justice is based on a variety of factors, like political

orientation, religious background, and socialphilosophy . social justice is

concerned with equal justice, not just in the courts, but in all aspects of

society. This concept demands that people have equal rights and

opportunities; everyone, from the poorest person on the margins of society

to the wealthiest deserves an even playing field.Equal rights can be defined

as equal access to things that make it possible for people in any societal

sector to be successful. Therefore, leftist philosophy would support things

like anti-discrimination laws and equal opportunity programs, that help

provide equality for all.social justice, sometimes called civil justice, is a

concept largely based on various social contracttheories. The concept is not

limited to upholding human rights; but concerning more equitable

distributions of wealth and resources. Social justice refers to the overall

fairness of a society in its divisions of rewards and burdens. It stands for the

principle that all persons are entitled to "basic human needs", regardless of"superficial differences such as economic disparity, class, gender, race,

ethnicity, citizenship, religion, age, sexual orientation, disability, or health".

This includes the eradication of poverty and illiteracy, the establishment of

sound environmental policy, and equality of opportunity for healthy personal

and social development.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-philosophy.htmhttp://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-discrimination.htmhttp://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-equal-opportunity.htmhttp://www.wordiq.com/definition/Social_contracthttp://www.wordiq.com/definition/Human_rightshttp://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-philosophy.htmhttp://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-discrimination.htmhttp://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-equal-opportunity.htmhttp://www.wordiq.com/definition/Social_contracthttp://www.wordiq.com/definition/Human_rights


3/36

Plato defined social justice as, the principle of a society consisting of

different types of men who have combined the impulse of their need for

one another and their concentration on their combination in one society and

their concentration on their separate functions, have made a whole which is

perfect because it is the product of image of the whole of the human mind

In modern times the term social justice was first used in 1840 by a Sicilian

priest, Luigi Taparelli d Azeglio. However, Antonio Rasmini Serbasti gave

the term prominence in his work, La constitutione Civile Secodo La

Giurtizia Sociale in the year 1848 . (1)

The notion of Social Justice, is thought to mean the promotion of equality

through comprehensive government action. In practice this intervention has

not often produced equitable results, resulting in favoritism towards classes

of people, restrictions of personal liberty and excessive regulatory burdens.

Many critics regard the guarantee of equal outcomes implicit in many socialjustice movements antithetical to the notion of equal opportunity, as it

frequently requires special, favored treatment to arbitrary classes of people.

Actual justice, they argue, holds all persons to the same standards and does

not penalize success nor reward failure, but holds all persons to the same

standards regardless of their race, ethnic origin, financial condition, religion

or beliefs.

People concerned with social justice hold some or all of the following

beliefs:

(1)Historical inequities should be corrected by governmental action until the actual

inequities no longer exist.

(2)Temporary favoritism towards some classes of people is acceptable if it advances

important public policy goals.

(3)It is government's responsibility to ensure a basic quality of life for all its citizens.

The term social justice is generally so phrased in order to distinguish this

particular concept from concepts ofjustice in law some of which,

according to their critics, are decidedly unjust in a social sense and from

concepts of justice as embedded in systems of morality which may differ

between cultures.People who are critics of this notion may hold some or all of the following

beliefs:

(1)Favoritism as a policy is inherently unjust.(2)Those that succeed should not be penalized by being compelled to support those who

do not.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Justicehttp://www.wordiq.com/definition/Lawhttp://www.wordiq.com/definition/Moralityhttp://www.wordiq.com/definition/Justicehttp://www.wordiq.com/definition/Lawhttp://www.wordiq.com/definition/Morality


4/36

(3)Personal liberty is more important than government's social policies.

(4)Social Justice is just a cover for social engineering, which is expensive and always

fails.

When we analyses Ambedkar,s social philosophy and his views about the

concept of Social Justice it is clear that Dr. Ambedkar in America,

studied the western liberal thought and the humanitarian philosophy

expounded by great thinkers such as Prof. John Dewey, who was also his

teacher, John Stuart Mill, Edmund Burke, and Prof. Harold Laski to name a

few. The impact of this original thinker on Dr. Ambedkars mind is evident

from the frequent quotations one comes across in his writings and speeches.

Whereas the West gave Ambedkar his weapon, the Indian masters gavehim his soul force .Social Philosophy of Dr Ambedkar be enshrined in

three words: Liberty, equality, and fraternity. He said , I have borrowed my

philosophy from the French Revolution. ..I have derived them from the

teachings of my master, the Buddha.(2)

Dr. Ambedkar believed that if he succeeded in his struggle struggle for a

just social order it will prove a blessing for all Indians, not merely any

group or community. He wanted the dominating section of our people to

adopt a strong position against the hierarchical social order. Regrettably, not

many have taken a position. My ideal would be a society based on Liberty,

Equality and Fraternity. An ideal society(a) should be mobile, (b)should befull of channels for conveying a change taking place in one part to other

parts,(c) there should be many interests consciously communicated and

shared. (d)There should be varied and free points of contact with other

modes of association. In other words, there must be social endomosis. (3)

Karl Marx has scientifically analyzed this conflict by applying the principles

of dialectical materialism to the sphere of social phenomenon and described

it as the historical materialism. Slavery, apartheid, gender bias and caste

system are the abominable creations of possessive peoples for the

exploitation of creative people. These are man made evils created by man forthe exploitation of man. Those, who have raised their voices against these

evils and given a relentless fight against the prevailing social order of their

times in order to free the creative peoples from the shackles imposed on

them have become immortal personalities in the human history.(4)


5/36

Mahatma Phule , Periar & Social Justice

Mahatma Jotiba Phule (1827-1890) is regarded one of the pioneer of

social justice and being considered as an activist, thinker, social

reformer, writer,philosopher, theologist, scholar, editor and revolutionary of

the nineteenth century. Jotiba Phule and his wife Savitribai Phule were the

pioneer of women's education in India. His remarkable influence was

apparent in fields like education, agriculture, caste system, women and

widow upliftment and removal of untouchability. He is most known for his

efforts to educate women and the lower castes as well as the masses.

Mahatme Phule was Influenced by Thomas Paine,s books on Rights of

Man (1791), from there he developed a keen sense of social justice, andbecoming passionately critical of the Indian caste system. In 1873, Phule

formed 'Satya Shodhak Samaj' (Society of Seekers of Truth) .with an

objectives to organized and to liberate the Shudras and Ati Shudras to

prevent their 'exploitation' by the upper caste like Brahmans. Through this

Satya Shodhak Samaj, Jotirao refused to regard the Vedas as sacrosanct. He

opposed idolatry and denounced the chaturvarnya system (the caste system).

Satya Shodhak Samaj propounded the spread of rational thinking and

rejected the need for a Brahman priestly class as educational and religious

leaders. (5 )

Jotiba also led campaigns to remove the economic and social handicaps that

breed blind faith among women, shudras and ati-shudras. He subjected

religious texts and religious behavior to the tests of rationalism and

characterized this faith as outwardly religious but in essence politically

motivated movements. He accused them of upholding the teachings of

religion and refusing to rationally analyse religious teachings. He maintained

that at the root of all calamities was the blind faith that religious books were

created or inspired by god.

Phule believed in overthrowing the social system in which man has been

deliberately made dependent on others, illiterate, ignorant and poor, with aview to exploiting him. To him blind faith eradication formed part of a broad

socioeconomic transformation. This was his strategy for ending exploitation

of human beings. Mere advice, education and alternative ways of living are

not enough, unless the economic framework of exploitation comes to an end.

Phule's critique of the caste system began with his attack on the Vedas, the

most fundamental texts of Hinduism. He considered Vedas as 'idle fantasies'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinkerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_reformerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_reformerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosopherhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savitribai_Phulehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Painehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_caste_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satya_Shodhak_Samajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satya_Shodhak_Samajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shudrahttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ati_Shudra&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedashttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idolatryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varnahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinkerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_reformerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_reformerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosopherhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savitribai_Phulehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Painehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_caste_systemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satya_Shodhak_Samajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shudrahttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ati_Shudra&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedashttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idolatryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varna


6/36

as 'palpably absurd legends'. He considered Vedas a 'form of false

consciousness'.(6)

Phule also attacked with on the Vedas for Brahminical orthodoxy which still affirmed

the sanctity and Bhagvad Gita. In fact Phule went on to explicitly reject any

connection with the poet-saints ofVarkari[7]which was very much a part ofBhakti

movement. (7) Quite opposed to rekindling of devotional aspects of Hindu scriptures,

as advocated by Bhakti poet-saints likeChaitanya

Mahaprabhu,Ramanuja,Vedanta Desika,Ramananda,etc., Phule instead calledfor creation of an alternate theology. (8) In this new parallel faith he coined a new name

for God as 'Nirmik' roughly translating as 'Creator'. He rejected all names of God whichhad roots in the accepted Hindu scriptures.(9)

A proper analysis of Phules ideology of universal humanism in a historical perspective beendiscussed by Naik (10) the main features of Phule social philosophy as follows -

1.First, Mahatma Phule, in leading the low caste protest, put himself outside Brahmanical culturesystem, and sought to create a counter-culture based on truth, justice and humanity.2.Second, his fight was against Brahmanism and not Brahmins per se. He had a number ofenlightened Brahmin friends such as Govande, Walvekar, Paranjape and others who shared hisperception of the existing reality and helped him in his endeavors to secure social justice to thedowntrodden.3.Third, Mahatma Phule, as rightly pointed out by G.P. Deshpande, took a remarkably modernand gendered view, which saw gender itself, not Varna, as the basis of oppression that womenfaced. He did not categorize women on the basis of caste and creed; he included all women inhis notion of Shudra-Ati-Shudra and pleaded for equal and common rights for all men and

women. He was the first Indian to do so and, by the same token, to anticipate the U.N. Charter ofUniversal Declaration of Human Rights, the first article of which states: All human beings areborn free and equal in dignity and rights4Fourth , as a Satya Shodhak or Truth Seeker, his sole concern was the human person,with value of truth as a sure guide for human conduct, the test of which lies in the promotion ofhuman welfare, and not traditional values. He was a humanist who developed his own uniquebrand of radical humanism which did not exclude even God or Nirmik. Thus, as a rationalist, hisposition was akin to that of the founders ofPhilosophical Rationalismviz. Descartes, Spinoza,Leibnitz as distinguished from empiricism of John Stuart Mill and Bertrand Russel.5.Fifth, for Phule, social justice was that which assures the dignity of the individual. His view ofsocial justice was akin to the respect-for-person viewassociated with Immanuel Kant (1724-

1804), the famed German Philosopher and his concept ofcategorical imperativewhich isradically different from Contract Theory of Justice associated with Hobbes, Rousseau, and, mostrecently, with John Rawls as also from the Utilitarian Theory ofgreatest happiness of thegreatest numberof Jerome Benthan.6.sixth, Kants maxim enunciates the principle of respect for humanity: the people must betreated as ends in themselves and never merely as means. It places in the people inalienablerights that cannot be contract away, need not be established by contract, and do not dependupon whether they increase the sum of happiness. Later Mahatma Gandhi became the votary ofrespect-for-person view of Social Justice; so did his follower, Martin Luther King, in the United
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagvad_Gitahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varkarihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyotirao_Phule#cite_note-Anti-Bhakti-Vedas-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhakti_movementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhakti_movementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaitanya_Mahaprabhuhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaitanya_Mahaprabhuhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramanujahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedanta_Desikahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedanta_Desikahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramanandahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagvad_Gitahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varkarihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyotirao_Phule#cite_note-Anti-Bhakti-Vedas-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhakti_movementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhakti_movementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaitanya_Mahaprabhuhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaitanya_Mahaprabhuhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramanujahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedanta_Desikahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramananda


7/36

States. And social revolt of Periyar Ramaswami Naicker (1879-1973) and Dr. BabasahebAmbedkar emanated from the same view of social justice.7.Lastly, and most importantly, in its concrete, Phules ideology as explained by Gail Omvedt,was based upon his identification with the peasant masses and an attachment to revolutionaryvalues of equality and rationality. This inevitably led him to reinterpret Indian history and cultureand develop his non-Aryan Theory with the concomitant theory of exploitation of the masses bythe dominant class the foreign Bhatt Brahmans.

Periyar E.V.Ramasamy (1879 - 1973) is well known for his "Self-Respected

Movement" and being regarded as the Prophet of the New Age, the

Socrates of South East Asia, Father of Social Reform Movement, and Arch

enemy of ignorance, superstitions, meaningless customs and base manners.

Periyar wanted to established a new social order in whichall men and

women should live with dignity and have equal opportunities to develop

their physical, mental and moral faculties. To achieve this, he wanted to putan end to all kinds of unjust discriminations and to promote Social Justice

and rational outlook. Periyar's determination to bring about socio-cultural

revolution impelled him to support even his opponents when they

implemented his progressive scheme. Though a Congress leader, he

supported in 1923, the Justice Party's measure to form Hindu Religious

Endowment Board with a view to put an end to the age-old monopoly and

exploitation of the upper castes in the managements of Hindu temples and

religious endowments. It was Periyar's firm conviction that universal

enjoyment of human rights will become a reality only when the Varna-Jaathi

(caste) system was eradicated. Until the social reconstruction took place, hewanted communal representation as a measure of affirmative action to,

uphold social justice. Periyar movement can very well visualized under

following points

1. Periyar's unique contribution was his insistence on rational outlook to

bring about intellectual emancipation and a healthy world-view. He also

stressed the need to abolish the hierarchal, graded, birth-based caste

structure as a prelude to build a new egalitarian social order. It was in this

context, theSelf-Respect Movement, founded in 1925, carried on' a vigorousand ceaseless propaganda, against ridiculous and harmful superstitions,

traditions, customs and habits. He wanted to dispel the ignorance of the

people and make them enlightened. He exhorted them to take steps to

change the institutions and values that led to meaningless divisions and

unjust discrimination.


8/36

2.From the beginning of 1930s, Periyar added the programme of fighting

for economic equality to his original programme of working for social

equality and Cultural Revolution. Along with the veteran communist leader

Com. M.Singaravel, he organised industrial and agricultural labourers to

stand against the exploitation of big capitalists and landlords.

Periyar who opposed compulsory study of Hindi in the then Madras

Province was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.

But he was released after about six months of confinement from 26th

November 1938 to 22nd May 1939. After his release, he announced that he

would continue his agitation against the imposition of Hindi.

3.Periyar's concept of Dravidians was not based on the purity of blood

related to a race, but on values and ways of life. The Brahminical upper

castes who followed the discriminatory socio-cultural principles, practicesand traditions of Varna-Jaathi (caste system) originally enunicated in the

Sanskrit scriptures like Vedas, Ithihaasas, Puraanas, Dharma Sastras etc. are

Aryans. Those who subscribe to the egalitarian Tamil tradition and values of

humanism are Dravidians.

Ambedkar & Reform in Hindu social order

The Hindu society has demonstrated both its willingness and capacity to

reform itself by rediscovering its own foundational principles as well as by

learning from other constituents of humanity. This is due to the efforts of

many modern-day saints and social reformers such as Swami Vivekananda,

Swami Dayananda, Raja Ram Mohun Roy, Mahatma Jyotiba Phule and his

wife Savitribai Phule, Narayan Guru and, of course, Mahatma Gandhi and

Dr B.R. Ambedkar. In this context, Balasaheb Deoras, the third

Sarsanghchalakof the RSS, once said, If untouchability is not a sin, then

nothing in the world is a sin .

Hinduism is the repository of the most exalted teachings about human

evolution and realisation of God. The freedom of thought and expression

that it provides in all intellectual, theological and philosophical matters is


9/36

unmatched. So much so that even Charvaka, who denied the existence of

God, was respected as a rishi(seer) ,TheBhagavad Gita states emphatically

that a mans greatness is determined by his karma and not by his birth.

but, due to many historical factors the Hindu society acquired certain

negative, regressive and thoroughly indefensible features, which it has still

not fully got rid of. The concept of untouchables is the most debilitating

among these drawbacks.

Dr. Ambedkar had rightly said that political freedom is incomplete without

social and economic freedom. WE must stand towards eradicating the evil of

unsociability, untouchbility and caste discrimination in our society. The

mission for social equality and social justice is still incomplete. Indeed,

Hindu society should be based on equality and free from exploitation . weshould recognize that the struggle for achieving this noble goal requires

sustained and multi-pronged efforts.

for Dr. Ambedkars quest for social justice can be visualized in the

philosophy, policy and ideals of the constitution of India. The substance of

justice, liberty, equality and benefiting human dignity of individual are

made more elaborate in the constitution for social revolution the

reconstruction of an egalitarian and classless society. The fundamental rights

as a whole foster the social reconstruction by generating equality,

prohibiting discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place

of birth, abolishing untouchability and making its practice in any form is an

offence punishable by law, and banning trafficking in human beings and

forced labour, which furnished a solid basis for social inequalities and

injustices. (11)

Dr. Ambedkar gave the central slogan of his life: Educate, Agitate and

Organise. This electrifying message truly captures the spirit of the Marxian

concept of praxis, of action, reflection, action. In the Indian context,

education assumes a crucial role because the vast majority of untouchablemasses are illiterate. Further, it is not just literacy that he calls for, but

education; and not education alone, but agitation and organization too.(12 )

(A) Ambedkar & Educational uplift of depressed classes -----


10/36

There is some points which reflect his views about education.In 1928,the

Government of Bombay constituted a committee to enquire into the

educational, economic and social conditions of the depressed classes to

recommend measures for their uplift. Dr. Ambedkar was a prominent

member of the committee. Dr. Ambdekar recommened following points to

the upliftment of depressed classes -

1. Give up the idea that parents give janma to the child and not destiny(karma). They

can mould the destiny of their children by giving them education.

2.Knowledge is the foundation of mans life.

3.Education is as necessary for females as it is for males.

4. If ones education is determental to the welfare of the poor, the educated man is a

curse to the society.

5. Character is more important than education. (13)

Dr. Ambedkars philosophy of education, aims at creation of a liberatingconsciousness, which is not just formal education, but the conscientisation

process of education, agitation and organization, put together. However,

there is much confusion about the order of the slogan Education, Agitation

and Organise. Apparently, the confusion has arisen due to the

imperfection in translation. When agitation is translated as sanghrash, the

question arises as to howsangharsh is possible without organsation, and

thus organise is sought to be put before agitate. But the word agitate not

only means sangharsh, but also the agitation of the mind and then

awareness, which should precede organization. But organise is also

something mistook for unite. These words have different connotations.

Organisation is based on a consciousness of kind, but unity is possible with

a consciousness of a different kind for a limited objective. Further, when

Babasaheb give a call agitate, it should be seen in the light of his

formulation of the pathetic contentment of the Indian mind and the need to

have a divine discontentment. So there should not be any confusion. The

central slogan, then, is very clear-Educate, Agitate and Organise. (14 )

(B)Ambdekar & evils of Hinduism ------

Dr. Ambedkar was a revolutionary, rationalist-humanist, human rights

intellectual-activist, a man who looked ahead of his time. The Hindu

community is set in the steel frame of the caste system, in which one caste is

lower than another in social gradation involving particular privileges, rights,

inhibition and disabilities with regard to each caste. This system has created

vested interests which depend upon maintaining the inequalities resulting


11/36


12/36

divided into sub-castes. The people of the lowest caste are treated

untouchables .In order to preserve the purity of blood, social interaction was

prohibited with the members of the vanquished group.

Ambedkar complained that the Hindu society was just like a tower, which

had several storeys without a ladder or an entrance. One was to die in

the storeys in which one was born. Under the circumstances of such

disabilities and maltreatment, Ambedkar cultivated a spirit of patience.

All such insulting refusals and ill treatments engendered in him a burning

hatred for Hinduism The movement of the untouchables against the

injustice of the Hindu social order has a long history behind it, especially

in Maharashtra. This history falls into two stages. Petitions and protests

marked the first stage. The second stage is marked by open revolt in the

form of direct action against the established Hindu order. Some of the

movments against unjust Hindu social order and untouchability are as

follows -1. Burning of the Manu Smriti,1927 ---The burning of the Manu Smiriti

took place at Mahad on December 20th, 1927. the Cawdar tank. The burning

of the Manu Smriti took place publicly and openly in a conference of

untouchables.It was a deed of great daring. It was an attack on the very

citadel of Hindusim. The Manu Smriti, that contains the Hindu codes, is

insulting to persons of low castes. It deprived them of the rights of

human beings and crushed their personality.

2. Temple Entry,1929---Ambedkar wanted the untouchables to have the

right to enter a Hindu temple. In 1929, the Parvati temple entry

Satyagraha was organized at Poona wherein the unarmed untouchables

and caste Hindu participants were attacked and injured. After this there

was to 1935, but when obduracy of the orthodox Hindu did not relent,

Ambedkar made his resolve before the public that though he was born a

Hindu, he would not die as aHindu. He fulfilled this promise by

embracing Buddhism till his death. The main aim of the temple entry

Satyagraha was to make the entry possible in the temple for the

untouchables.

3. Choudar Tank,1925---His agitational politics started with the Mahad

march to the Choudar Tank. In 1925, the Municipality passed a resolutionto keep open its tank to the depressed classes. In pursuance of the

resolution, Ambedkar led a march to take water from the tank. The powerful

majority of the conservative society was unwilling to part its hold So he

decided not to live any more in the Hindu fold. Though by chance he was

a born Hindu, he did not want, at least, to die a Hindu. Since then he went

on constantly thinking and searching for the most appropriate form of


13/36

religion that touches the heart to the grief stricken humanity. Ambedkar

wanted that Hinduism should be reorganized and Hindu thought should

be revitalized on the basis of social equality, liberty, fraternity, and

democracy, both for the sake of Hinduism and the Indian nation. He

said: Caste has had a bad effect on the ethics of the Hindus. It has killed

public spirit, destroyed sense of public charity and narrowed down public

opinion has respected mans loyalty to his caste, made virtue and morality

caste ridder.

Significance of Buddhism in Ambedkars life

In spite of all the atrocities that he had gone through, Ambedkar was

not against religion. He considered religion as essential for the proper

development of mankind. He did not agree with those who said that

religion is parasite or is an opiate. Religion instills hope in humanbeings and drives them for activity .

After a comparative study of different religions, he concluded that Buddhism

was the best religion from this point of view. In his article Buddha and the

Future of his Religion published in 1950 in the Mahabodhi Society Journal,

Ambedkar has summarized his views on religion and on Buddhism in the

following manner:

1. The society must have either the sanction of law or the sanction of morality to hold ittogether. Without either, the society is sure to go to pieces.

2. Religion, if it is to survive, it must be in consonance with reason, which is another

name for science.

3. It is not enough for religion to consist of moral code, but its moral code must

recognize the fundamental tenets of liberty, equality and fraternity.

4. Religion must not sanctify or make a virtue out of poverty. (16)

Buddhas religion was based on proper reflection and reason. He asked

his disciples not to follow him blindly, but accept him only after testinghis words with reason. Ambedkar felt that modern civilization needed such

a rational religion. He wished to have the religion in the sense of

morality, which remains the governing principle in every society. It must

be scientific. As a social code of morality it must recognize the

fundamental tenets of liberty, equality and fraternity. The most

simportant aspect is that it has to enrich the lives of people mentally and


14/36


15/36

Sangha has been opened for all classes of women, married, unmarried,

widowed and even for prostitutes. All could acquire merit, freedom,

dignity, and equality along with men.Ambedkar says that it is the duty of

every Buddhist to visit Buddha Vihara onevery Sunday and listen to the

discourses. Unless this is done, the neoBuddhists will not be able to

understand Buddha properly. He also suggested his men not to

encourage violence work hard and educate themselves and face any

problem with calm and peaceful way, without fear in mind. The

untouchables have been trying to break up the Hindu social

structure.Though the leading member of the untouchables, Ambedkar is not

here, buthis movements are very much active. As a result, people have

become aware of their rights and they fight for their rights. In the next

chapter, I shall deal with the origin and analysis of the untouchability

according to Ambedkar.

The Concept of Social Justice

John Rawls propounded a contractualist theory of Justice as it applies

to institutions and practices. It is based on the notions of fairness and

reciprocity. Rawls believed that his theory of justice is an improvement over

utilitarian accounts of justice as maximum welfare. Political philosopher

John Rawls draws on the utilitarian insights ofBentham and Mill, the social

contract ideas ofJohn Locke, and the categorical imperative ideas ofKant.

His first statement of principle was made inA Theory of Justice where he

proposed that, "Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice

that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For this reason

justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater

good shared by others.". (17 ) A deontological proposition that echoes Kant

in framing the moral good of justice in absolutist terms. His views are

definitively restated inPolitical Liberalism where society is seen "as a fair

system of co-operation over time, from one generation to the next.". (18 )

All societies have a basic structure of social, economic, and political

institutions, both formal and informal. In testing how well these elements fit

and work together, Rawls based a key test of legitimacy on the theories

ofsocial contract. To determine whether any particular system of collectively

enforced social arrangements is legitimate, he argued that one must look for
http://www.answers.com/topic/john-rawlshttp://www.answers.com/topic/utilitarianismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/jeremy-benthamhttp://www.answers.com/topic/john-stuart-millhttp://www.answers.com/topic/social-contracthttp://www.answers.com/topic/social-contracthttp://www.answers.com/topic/john-lockehttp://www.answers.com/topic/categorical-imperativehttp://www.answers.com/topic/immanuel-kanthttp://www.answers.com/topic/deontological-ethics-1http://www.answers.com/topic/moral-absolutismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/political-liberalismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/social-contracthttp://www.answers.com/topic/john-rawlshttp://www.answers.com/topic/utilitarianismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/jeremy-benthamhttp://www.answers.com/topic/john-stuart-millhttp://www.answers.com/topic/social-contracthttp://www.answers.com/topic/social-contracthttp://www.answers.com/topic/john-lockehttp://www.answers.com/topic/categorical-imperativehttp://www.answers.com/topic/immanuel-kanthttp://www.answers.com/topic/deontological-ethics-1http://www.answers.com/topic/moral-absolutismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/political-liberalismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/social-contract


16/36

agreement by the people who are subject to it, but not necessarily to an

objective notion of justice based on coherent ideological grounding.

Obviously, not every citizen can be asked to participate in a poll to

determine his or her consent to every proposal in which some degree of

coercion is involved, so one has to assume that all citizens arereasonable.

Rawls constructed an argument for a two-stage process to determine a

citizen's hypothetical agreement:(a)the citizen agrees to be represented by X

for certain purposes; to that extent, X holds these powers as a trusteefor the

citizen;(b)X agrees that a use of enforcement in a particular social context is

legitimate; the citizen, therefore, is bound by this decision because it is the

function of the trustee to represent the citizen in this way.(c)This applies to

one person representing a small group (e.g. to the organiser of a social event

setting a dress code) as equally as it does to national governments which are

the ultimate trustees, holding representative powers for the benefit of all

citizens within their territorial boundaries, and if those governments fail toprovide for the welfare of their citizens according to the principles of justice,

they are not legitimate. To emphasise the general principle that justice

should rise from the people and not be dictated by the law-making powers of

governments, Rawls asserted that, "There is . . . a general presumption

against imposing legal and other restrictions on conduct without sufficient

reason. But this presumption creates no special priority for any particular

liberty." (19 )

This is support for an unranked set of liberties that reasonable citizens in all

states should respect and uphold to some extent, the list proposed by

Rawls matches the normative human rights that have international

recognition and direct enforcement in some nation states where the citizens

need encouragement to act in a way that fixes a greater degree of equality of

outcome.

The basic liberties according to Rawls

1.Freedom of thought;

2.Liberty of conscience as it affects social relationships on the grounds of religion,philosophy, and morality;

3.Political liberties (e.g. representative democratic institutions, freedom of speech and

the press, and freedom of assembly);

4.Freedom of association;

5.Freedoms necessary for the liberty and integrity of the person (viz: freedom from

slavery, freedom of movement and a reasonable degree of freedom to choose one's

occupation); and
http://www.answers.com/topic/reasonhttp://www.answers.com/topic/trusteehttp://www.answers.com/topic/governmenthttp://www.answers.com/topic/welfare-2http://www.answers.com/topic/human-rightshttp://www.answers.com/topic/equality-of-outcomehttp://www.answers.com/topic/equality-of-outcomehttp://www.answers.com/topic/reasonhttp://www.answers.com/topic/trusteehttp://www.answers.com/topic/governmenthttp://www.answers.com/topic/welfare-2http://www.answers.com/topic/human-rightshttp://www.answers.com/topic/equality-of-outcomehttp://www.answers.com/topic/equality-of-outcome


17/36

6.Rights and liberties covered by the rule of law.

Similarly taking a leaf from Rawls theory of social justice (20 )

argues that, the fundamental issue in distributive justice is equality; a more

equal or at least a less unequal distribution of the benefits and of social co-operation. He opines that, In that sense distributive justice to go beyond

equality in the purely formal sense: equality before the law, seeks to go

beyond equality in the purely formal sense: equality before the law, the

equal protection of the laws, or even formal equality of opportunity. Its

central concern is, in the language of Rawl to address the bias of

contingencies in the in the direction of equality Any attempt to promote

distributive justice must begin with a consideration of the existing

inequalities in societyit is essential to keep in sight both inequalities

between individual and disparities. Disparities between groups have beenhistorically go great significance in Indian society.

Plato and Ralwas concept of social justice would mean giving every man

his due. The basic aim of social justice is to remove the imbalances in the

social, political and economic life of the people to create a just society. In

terms of culture-specificity, the term social justice has a different meaning in

Indian society. It means dispensing justice to those to whom it has been

systematically denied in the past because of an established social structure ,

Many authors criticize the idea that there exists an objective standard ofsocial justice.Moral relativistsdeny that there is any kind of objective

standard for justice in general.Non-cognitivists,moral skeptics,moral

nihilists, and mostlogical positivistsdeny the epistemic possibility of

objective notions of justice.Cynics(such asNiccol Machiavelli) believe

that any ideal of social justice is ultimately a mere justification for thestatus

quo. Supporters ofsocial darwinismbelieve that social justice assists the

least fit to reproduce, sometimes labeled asdysgenics, and hence should be

opposed. (21 )

Many other people accept some of the basic principles of social justice, such

as the idea that all human beings have a basic level of value, but disagree

with the elaborate conclusions that may or may not follow from this. One

example is the statement by H. G. Wells that all people are "equally entitled

to the respect of their fellow-men.
http://www.answers.com/topic/moral-relativismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/non-cognitivismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/moral-skepticismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/moral-nihilismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/moral-nihilismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/logical-positivismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/cynicismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/niccolo-machiavellihttp://www.answers.com/topic/status-quohttp://www.answers.com/topic/status-quohttp://www.answers.com/topic/social-darwinismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/dysgenicshttp://www.answers.com/topic/h-g-wellshttp://www.answers.com/topic/moral-relativismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/non-cognitivismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/moral-skepticismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/moral-nihilismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/moral-nihilismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/logical-positivismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/cynicismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/niccolo-machiavellihttp://www.answers.com/topic/status-quohttp://www.answers.com/topic/status-quohttp://www.answers.com/topic/social-darwinismhttp://www.answers.com/topic/dysgenicshttp://www.answers.com/topic/h-g-wells


18/36

On the other hand, some scholars reject the very idea of social justice as

meaningless, religious, self-contradictory, and ideological, believing that to

realize any degree of social justice is unfeasible, and that the attempt to do

so must destroy all liberty. The most complete rejection of the concept of

social justice comes fromFriedrich Hayekof theAustrian Schoolof

economics: There can be no test by which we can discover what is 'socially

unjust' because there is no subject by which such an injustice can be

committed, and there are no rules of individual conduct the observance of

which in the market order would secure to the individuals and groups the

position which as such (as distinguished from the procedure by which it is

determined) would appear just to us. [Social justice] does not belong to the

category of error but to that of nonsense, like the term `a moral stone'.(22)

Janusz Korwin-Mikke argues simply: Either social justice has the same

meaning as justice - or not. If so why use the additional word social?We loose time; we destroy trees to obtain paper necessary to print this word.

If not, if social justice means something different from justice - then

something different from justice is by definition injustice

SociologistCarl L. Bankstonhas argued that a secular, leftist view of social

justice entails viewing the redistribution of goods and resources as based on

the rights of disadvantaged categories of people, rather than on compassion

or national interest. Bankston maintains that this secular version of social

justice became widely accepted due to the rise of demand-side economics

and to the moral influence of the civil rights movement.

Janusz Korwin-Mikke argues simply: Either social justice has the same

meaning as justice - or not. If so why use the additional word social?

We loose time; we destroy trees to obtain paper necessary to print this word.

If not, if social justice means something different from justice - then

something different from justice is by definition injustice

SociologistCarl L. Bankstonhas argued that a secular, leftist view of socialjustice entails viewing the redistribution of goods and resources as based on

the rights of disadvantaged categories of people, rather than on compassion

or national interest. Bankston maintains that this secular version of social

justice became widely accepted due to the rise of demand-side economics

and to the moral influence of the civil rights movement.
http://www.answers.com/topic/friedrich-von-hayekhttp://www.answers.com/topic/austrian-schoolhttp://www.answers.com/topic/janusz-korwin-mikkehttp://www.answers.com/topic/carl-l-bankstonhttp://www.answers.com/topic/janusz-korwin-mikkehttp://www.answers.com/topic/carl-l-bankstonhttp://www.answers.com/topic/friedrich-von-hayekhttp://www.answers.com/topic/austrian-schoolhttp://www.answers.com/topic/janusz-korwin-mikkehttp://www.answers.com/topic/carl-l-bankstonhttp://www.answers.com/topic/janusz-korwin-mikkehttp://www.answers.com/topic/carl-l-bankston


19/36


20/36


21/36

more efficient than the savage, and finally, 3) on his own efforts. In all these

three aspects men are undoubtly unequal. But the question is, shall we treat

them as unequal because they are unequal? From the stand point of the

individualistic it may be just to treat men unequally so far there efforts are

unequal. It may to desirable to give as much as incentives as possible to the

full development of every ones power s. but what would happen if men

were treated unequally as they are, in the first two respects, it is obvious that

those individuals also in whose favor there is birth, education, family name,

power connection and inherited wealth would be selected in the race but

selection under such circumstances would not be a selection of the of the

able. It would be the selection of the privileged. The reason therefore, which

forces that in the third respect we should treat men equally demands that in

the first two respect we should treat men as equally as possible. On the other

hand it can be urged that if it is good for the social body to get the most out

and its members, it can get most out of them only by making them equal asfar as possible at the very start of the race. That is one reason why we cannot

escape equality. There is second reason for accepting equality. A statesman

is concerned with vast majority of people. He has neither the time nor the

knowledge to draw fine distinctions and to treat each equally i.e. according

to need or according to capacity. However desirable or reasonable and

equitable treatment of men may be, humanity is not capable of assortment

and classification. The statesmen, therefore, must follow some rough and

ready rule and that ready and rough rule is to treat all men alike and not

because they are alike but because classification and assortment is

impossible. The doctrine of equality is glaringly fallacious but taking all in

all it is the only way a statesmen can proceed in politics which is a severely

practicable affair and which demands a severely practical test (26 )

After Indias political independence for dispensing social justice in the

wake of emerging democracy in a hierarchically arranged society,

Ambedkar discussed the operationalization of principles of equality, liberty,

and fraternity, which were considered to be cardinal principles of any

democracy. He argued, We must notbe content with mere political

democracy. We must make sure our political democracy a social democracyas well Ambedkar went on to define social democracy as well. In his own

words, What does social democracy mean? It means a way of life which

recognizes liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life. These

principles of liberty, equality and fraternity are not to be treated as separate

items of trinity Another significant contribution of Ambedkar in the

process of establishment of social democracy is his explanation of nature of


22/36

three cardinal principles of democracy i.e. liberty, quality, and fraternity. He

opined, They form a union of trinity in the sense that to divorce one from

the other is to defeat the very purpose of democracy. Liberty cannot be

divorced from equality, equality cannot be divorced liberty. Nor can liberty

and equality be divorced from fraternity. (27 )

Finally Ambdekar cautioned the Indians how to eradicate the conditions of

persisting inequality and emerging equality with the dispensation of social

justice. In his own words, On the 26th of January 1950, we are going to

enter into a life of contradictions. In politics we will have equality and in

social economic life we will have inequality. In Politics we will be

recognizing the principle of one man one vote and one vote one value. In our

social and economic life, we shall, by reason of our social and economic

structure, continue to live this life of contradiction? How long shell we

continue to live this life of contradictions? If we continue to deny it for long,

we will do so only by putting our political democracy in peril. We mustremove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment or else those who

suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of political democracy,

whichThe second thing we are wanting in is recognition of the principle

of fraternity. What does fraternity mean? Fraternity means a sense of

common brotherhood of Indians-If Indians being one people. It is the

principle, which gives unity and solidarity to social life. It is difficult thing

to achieve.

Although initially Ambedkar was skeptical of delivery of justice through

government machinery but later on he preferred the same by having the

share of Dalits in it. Going by the then existing Hindu social order

Expressing his anguish on the failure of delivery of justice Ambedkar had

opined It might have been brought that the principle of equal justice would

strike a death blow to the established order. As a matter of fact, far from

suffering any damage the established order has continued to operate in spite

of it. It might be asked why the principle of equal justice has failed to have

its effect. The answer to this is simple. To enunciate the principle of justice

is one thing. To make it effective is another thing. Whether the principle of

equal justice is effective or not must necessarily depend upon the nature and

character of the civil services who must be left to administer the principle. Ifthe civil services is by reason of its class bias is the friend of the established

order and the enemy of the new order, the new order can never come into

being. That a civil services in tune with the new order was essential for the

success of the new order was recognized by Karl Marx in 1871 in the

formation of Paris commune and adopted by Lenin in the constitution of

Soviet communism. Fortunately, the British Government never cared about


23/36


24/36


25/36


26/36

adjusting the claims of individual rights of freedom and the claims of public

good.

Articles 23 and 24 provide for fundamental rights against exploitation.

Article 24, in particular, prohibits an employer from employing a child

below the age of 14 years in any factory or mine or in any other hazardous

employment. Article 31 makes a specific provision in regard to the

fundamental right to property and deals with the vexed problem of

compulsory acquisition of property.

Article 38 requires that the state should make an effort to promote the

welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may a

social order in which justice social, economic and political shall inform all

the institutions of national life. Article 39 clause (a) says that the State shall

secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of

equal opportunity, and shall, in particular provide free legal aid, by suitable

legislation or schemes, or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities forsecuring justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other

disabilities.

Article 41 recognizes every citizen's right to work, to education & to public

assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness & disablement and in

other cases of undeserved want. Article 42 stresses the importance of

securing just and humane conditions of work & for maternity relief. Article

43 holds before the working population the ideal of the living wage and

Article 46 emphasizes the importance of the promotion of educational and

economic interests of schedule castes, schedule tribes and other weaker

sections.

The social problem presented by the existence of a very large number of

citizens who are treated as untouchables has received the special attention of

the Constitution as Article 15 (1) prohibits discrimination on the grounds of

religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. The state would be entitled to

make special provisions for women and children, and for advancement of

any social and educationally backward classes of citizens, or for the SC/STs.

A similar exception is provided to the principle of equality of opportunity

prescribed by Article 16 (1) in as much as Article 16(4) allows the state to

make provision for the resolution of appointments or posts in favour of anybackward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the state, is not

adequately represented in the services under the state. Article 17 proclaims

that untouchability has been abolished & forbids its practice in any form & it

provides that the enforcement of untouchability shall be an offence

punishable in accordance with law. This is the code of provisions dealing

with the problem of achieving the ideal of socioeconomic


27/36


28/36

The Constitution of India has provided two types of safe-guards -general and specific to

safeguard various interests of the minorities. In the first category are those provisions that

are equally enjoyed by both groups. The provisions ensure justice- social, economic and

political equality to all. The second category consists of provisions meant specifically for the

protection of particular interests of minorities.

people's right to "equality before the law" and "equal protection of the laws";

prohibition of discrimination against citizens on grounds of religion, race,

caste, sex or place of birth;

authority of State to make "any special provision for the advancement of any

socially and educationally backward classes of citizens" (besides the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes);

citizens' right to "equality of opportunity" in matters relating to employmentor appointment to any office under the State - and prohibition in this regard

of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.

Authority of State to make "any provision for the reservation of appointments

or posts in favors of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of

the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State;

People's freedom of conscience and right to freely profess, practice and

propagate religion - subject to public order, morality and other Fundamental

Rights;

Authority of State to make law for "regulating or restricting any economic

financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with

religious practice", and for "providing for social welfare and reform"; Authority of State to make laws for "throwing open" of Hindu, Sikh, Jain or

Buddhist "religious institutions of a public character to "all classes and

sections of the respective communities;

Sikh community's right of "wearing and carrying of kirpans" ;

Right of "every religious denomination or any section thereof - subject to

public order, morality and health - to establish and maintain institutions for

religious and charitable proposes, "manage its own affairs of religion", and

own and acquire movable immovable property and administer it "in

accordance with law";

People's "freedom as to payment of taxes for promotion of any particular

religion";

People's "freedom as to attendance at religious instruction or religious

worship in educational institutions" wholly maintained, recognized, or aided

by the State;

Right of "any section of the citizens" to conserve its "distinct language, script

or culture"

Restriction on denial of admission to any citizen, to any educational

institution maintained or aided by the State, "on grounds only of religion,

race, caste, language or any of them";

Right of all Religious and Linguistic Minorities to establish and administer


29/36


30/36

To conclude ---

Today we needed to popularized one slogan more and more in times to

come is: Sab jaati mahaan, Sab jaati samaan(All castes are great and all

castes are equal).

India has three places that have been made holy by their association with the

life of this Maha Maanav. The first is Mhow, which is Dr. Ambedkars

Janmabhoomi. The second is Deekshabhoomi in Nagpur, where Dr.

Ambedkar embraced Buddhism along with tens of thousands of his

followers. The third is Chaityabhoomi at Dadar Beach in Mumbai, where his

Samadhi has been erected. According to LK Advani, all the three places

Janmabhoomi, Deekshabhoomi and Chaityabhoomi are worthy of

being considered as pilgrimage centres.

Justice be achieved How ---

justice is to be considered as giving to each what he or she is due." The

problem is knowing what is "due. Functionally, "justice" is a set of

universal principles which guide people in judging what is right and what is

wrong, no matter what culture and society they live in. Justice is one of the

four "cardinal virtues" of classical moral philosophy, along with courage,

temperance (self-control) and prudence (efficiency). (Faith, hope and charity

are considered to be the three "religious" virtues.) Virtues or "good habits"

help individuals to develop fully their human potentials, thus enabling them

to serve their own self-interests as well as work in harmony with others for

their common good. The ultimate purpose of all the virtues is to elevate the

dignity and sovereignty of the human person.

Defining Social Justice-- Social justice encompasses economic justice.

Social justice is the virtue which guides us in creating those organized

human interactions we call institutions. In turn, social institutions, when

justly organized, provide us with access to what is good for the person, both

individually and in our associations with others. Social justice also imposeson each of us a personal responsibility to work with others to design and

continually perfect our institutions as tools for personal and social

development.

Economic Defining Justice-- Economic justice, which touches the

individual person as well as the social order, encompasses the moral

principles which guide us in designing our economic institutions. These


31/36


32/36


33/36


34/36

10. JV Naik; Mahatma Phule India,s First Social Activist & Crusader for Social Justice,

Bhavan.s Journals, vol.52, nos.18 & 19, 2006.

11 Mohammad Shabir ; Dr. Ambedkars Quest For Social Justice: An Analysis of Contemporary

Scenario, p.37

12. Thomas Mathew ; Ambedkar: Reform or Revolution, p.67

13 .Ambedkars citation from The Legency of Dr. Ambedkar, p.251)

14. Thomas Mathew ;Ambedkar: Reform or Revolution,p.67)

15. Ambedkars citation from Remembering Dr. Ambedkar,p.02

16. Ramendra ,Why Dr. Ambedkar renounced Hinduism?,p.01)

17.John Rawls; A Theory of Justice , Chapter 1, "Justice as Fairness", The Role of Justice, (2005 reissue)

pp. 3-4

18. Ibid

19. John Rawls;Political Liberalism, (Columbia University Press 2003, pp 291-292.

20 Beteile Andre; "Distributive Justice and Institutional Well-Being" in Dipankar Gupta (ed.) Anti-

Utopia: Essential Writings of Andre Beteille,Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2005, p.417

21. S. R. Valentine; John Bennet & the Origins of Methodism and the Evangelical revival in England,

Scarecrow Press, Lanham, 1997.

22. Carey, Brycchan. John Wesley (1703-1791). The British Abolitionists. Brycchan Carey, July 11,

2008. October 5, 2009. Brycchancarey.com

23 Ambedkar ; Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writing and Speeches Vol. 3., Education Department,

Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai , 1987, p95.

24 (Ambedkar ; Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings and Speeches Vol. 13, Education Department,

Government of Maharashtra Mumbai, 1994, pp.61-62

25.Ambedkar ; Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writing and Speeches Vol. 3., Education Department,

Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai , 1987, p.99

26. Ambedkar ; Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writing and Speeches Vol. 1., Education Department,

Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai, 1979, pp.57-58.
http://www.brycchancarey.com/abolition/index.htmhttp://www.brycchancarey.com/abolition/index.htm


35/36

27. (Ambedkar; Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings and Speeches Vol. 13, Education Department,

Government of Maharashtra Mumbai, 1994, p1216.

28. Ambedkar; Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings and Speeches Vol. 13, Education Department,

Government of Maharashtra Mumbai, 1994,p. 1215.

29 . Ambedkar ; Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings and Speeches Vol. 13, Education Department,Government of Maharashtra Mumbai, 1994, p.1218.


36/36

Documents

ramdev bharadwaj -ambdker-artical